In FrontPage this morning I offer some historical background to current events (news links in the original):
As Hizballah fires its Khaibar-1 rockets into Israel, Kuwaiti demonstrators recently chanted, “Khaybar, Khaybar, ya Yahoud, jaish Muhammad sa yaoud” – that is, “Khaybar, Khaybar, O Jews, the army of Muhammad will return.” (The Kuwait Times rendered this as “Khaybar, Khaybar, O Zionists, The Army of Muhammad is coming,” but this is probably sanitized for Western consumption: it is unlikely that the protestors chanted “Zionists” rather than “Jews” – the former doesn’t rhyme in Arabic as does the latter, and the chant with “Jews” is rather common.) Meanwhile, last Thursday, the Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanon’s leading Shi’ite cleric, praised Hizballah for waging a “new battle of Khaibar.”Reporting Fadlallah’s remarks, AP blandly noted that “at Khaibar, the name of an oasis in what is now Saudi Arabia, Islam’s prophet Muhammad won a battle against Jews in the year 629.” Reality was somewhat different. As I explain in my forthcoming book, The Truth About Muhammad (coming October 9 from Regnery Publishing), Muhammad was not responding to any provocation when he led a Muslim force against the Khaybar oasis, which was inhabited by Jews – many of whom he had previously exiled from Medina. One of the Muslims later remembered: “When the apostle raided a people he waited until the morning. If he heard a call to prayer he held back; if he did not hear it he attacked. We came to Khaybar by night, and the apostle passed the night there; and when morning came he did not hear the call to prayer, so he rode and we rode with him….We met the workers of Khaybar coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets. When they saw the apostle and the army they cried, ‘Muhammad with his force,’ and turned tail and fled. The apostle said, ‘Allah Akbar! Khaybar is destroyed. When we arrive in a people’s square it is a bad morning for those who have been warned.’”[1]
The Muslim advance was inexorable. “The apostle,” according to Muhammad’s earliest biographer, Ibn Ishaq, “seized the property piece by piece and conquered the forts one by one as he came to them.”[2] Another biographer of Muhammad, Ibn Sa‘d, reports that the battle was fierce: the “polytheists…killed a large number of [Muhammad’s] Companions and he also put to death a very large number of them….He killed ninety-three men of the Jews…”[3] Muhammad and his men offered the fajr prayer, the Islamic dawn prayer, before it was light, and then entered Khaybar itself. The Muslims immediately set out to locate the inhabitants’ wealth. A Jewish leader of Khaybar, Kinana bin al-Rabi, was brought before Muhammad; Kinana was supposed to have been entrusted with the treasure of on of the Jewish tribes of Arabia, the Banu Nadir. Kinana denied knowing where this treasure was, but Muhammad pressed him: “Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?” Kinana said yes, that he did know that.Some of the treasure was found. To find the rest, Muhammad gave orders concerning Kinana: “Torture him until you extract what he has.” One of the Muslims built a fire on Kinana’s chest, but Kinana would not give up his secret. When he was at the point of death, one of the Muslims beheaded him.[4] Kinana’s wife was taken as a war prize; Muhammad claimed her for himself and hastily arranged a wedding ceremony that night. He halted the Muslims’ caravan out of Khaybar later that night in order to consummate the marriage.[5]
Muhammad agreed to let the people of Khaybar to go into exile, allowing them to keep as much of their property as they could carry.[6] The Prophet of Islam, however, commanded them to leave behind all their gold and silver.[7] He had intended to expel all of them, but some, who were farmers, begged him to allow them to let them stay if they gave him half their yield annually.[8] Muhammad agreed: “I will allow you to continue here, so long as we would desire.”[9] He warned them: “If we wish to expel you we will expel you.”[10] They no longer had any rights that did not depend upon the good will and sufferance of Muhammad and the Muslims. And indeed, when the Muslims discovered some treasure that some of the Khaybar Jews had hidden, he ordered the women of the tribe enslaved and seized the perpetrators’ land.[11] A hadith notes that “the Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives.”[12]
During the caliphate of Umar (634-644), the Jews who remained at Khaybar were banished to Syria, and the rest of their land seized.[13]
Thus when modern-day jihadists invoke Khaybar, they are doing much more than just recalling the glory days of Islam and its prophet. They are recalling an aggressive, surprise raid by Muhammad which resulted in the final eradication of the once considerable Jewish presence in Arabia. To the jihadists, Khaybar means the destruction of the Jews and the seizure of their property by the Muslims.
That Khaybar is repeatedly invoked today as a historical model for Hizballah should be a matter of grave concern for Western analysts and policymakers. It should play a significant role in discussions of whether and how a ceasefire should be pursued, and how much of a Hizballah presence can be tolerated indefinitely in Lebanon. But because most Western analysts are still dogmatically committed to the proposition that Islam has nothing, or nothing important, to do with the present global unrest, they recuse themselves from considering such data.
The costs of this willful blindness will do nothing but continue to mount.
___________________
[1] Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, A. Guillaume, translator, Oxford University Press, 1955. P. 511.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibn Sa‘d, Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, S. Moinul Haq and H K. Ghazanfar, translators, Kitab Bhavan, n.d. Vol. II, pp. 132-133.
[4] Ibn Ishaq, p. 515.
[5] Muhammed Ibn Ismaiel Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari: The Translation of the Meanings, translated by Muhammad M. Khan, Darussalam, 1997, vol. 1, book 8, no. 371.
[6] Ibn Sa‘d, vol. II, p. 136.
[7] Ibn Sa‘d, vol. II, p. 137.
[8] Bukhari, vol. 4, book 57, no. 3152.
[9] Imam Muslim, Sahih Muslim, translated by Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, Kitab Bhavan, revised edition 2000. Book 10, no. 3761.
[10] Ibn Ishaq, p. 515.
[11] Ibn Sa‘d, vol. II, p. 137.
[12] Bukhari, vol. 5, book 64, no. 4200.
[13] Ibn Sa‘d, vol. II, p. 142.
Why is this new information to me? Why didn't I learn anything about muslim history in school? I'd like to think it was just a case of it not being important enough in the minds of the educational elites but I have to wonder if it's another case of selective revisionism or intentional whitewashing.
FreeBohemian,
This is not suprising because if the truth about Islam was taught, then there would be charges of "racism" because of the teaching of that truth. This is why there is the whitewash.
FreeBohemian,
This is not suprising because if the truth about Islam was taught, then there would be charges of "racism" because of the teaching of that truth. This is why there is the whitewash.
See how the muslims are demanding a stop to the conflict they started,this goes back before Kaybar
Aaaaah we must have the cease fire(Treaty of Hudaibiyah 2)
How can the muslins contiue their 1400 yr war without a treaty to break
Israel is safe at the moment,once the UN ceasfire is in place the blood shed begins.Israel must refrain from a cease fire so that history doesnt repeat it self
Israel should only stop when they reach Mecca and give payback in the market place
Leb.PM wants to send 15,000 of the Leb army, so he thinks Israel will go home... but read that about 40percent of Leb are Hizbollah, Hizbollah have all the roads booby trapped, will they now clear it? Israel is not the same as before, they know arab treachery, and will not stop till Hizbollah are destroyed, defanged.
Khaybar seems to be the first significant victory of muhammad. muslims replicated this in every invasion. The behaviour, I mean. And they also called the Gateway To India the Khaybar Pass. Now it is in afghanistan. It was from this Pass that the islamic hordes invaded the Indus Valley Civilization. Trying to find out what it was called prior to islamic invasion.
Shiva... you said:
"How can the muslins contiue their 1400 yr war without a treaty to break?
Israel is safe at the moment,once the UN ceasfire is in place the blood shed begins.Israel must refrain from a cease fire so that history doesnt repeat it self".
Here is what the Bible says...
"For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape". 1 Th 5:3
Looks like the scriptures agree with your assessment.
Most of Islams military successes have come by subterfuge. One has to only read the history of India to understand this. Even in the recent Kargil war with India, Pakistan was talking peace when it attacked. All the terrorist attacks perhaps derive their inspiration from the battle of Khayber.
The only empire in India that paid back the Islamists in the same coin were the Marathas who employed guerilla warfare and often attacked pre-emptively. The state of Maharashtra in India enjoyed freedom from the Islamists soon after Shivaji formulated and employed this strategy and were never again harassed by the Islamists afterwards.
As Shiva remarks, unless the payback happens in Mecca, this wont stop
Most of Islams military successes have come by subterfuge. One has to only read the history of India to understand this. Even in the recent Kargil war with India, Pakistan was talking peace when it attacked. All the terrorist attacks perhaps derive their inspiration from the battle of Khayber.
The only empire in India that paid back the Islamists in the same coin were the Marathas who employed guerilla warfare and often attacked pre-emptively. The state of Maharashtra in India enjoyed freedom from the Islamists soon after Shivaji formulated and employed this strategy and were never again harassed by the Islamists afterwards.
Islam is deceit history shows it. Islam usually attacks after "negotiating", history shows it. Islams lays waste after attacking, history shows it.
It appears history marches on.
Why do we get the sanitized version of this? We are adults and they can just tell us what it really means. We can handle it.
Why don't the jews demand the return of Medina, and demand that all muslims get out???
Hey, what a novel ides...we can get some good ideas from the prophet(mayheburninhell)mohammed...we hover about a muslim city with laser target pointers and if we hear the sound of church bells, we don't attack. If we DON'T hear church bells...well, we won't call our actions Khaybar, we'll call it KaBOOM.
The muslims started all of this crap; the religious persecution, the taking of property and religious freedom, the conquest of Christianity (THE CRUSADES) by force of arms, in the early 600's A.D.
So far, we stupidly put up with it. It's no wonder they keep trying. Like a dysfunctional child, they will not stop until they are made to.
WAKE UP, BUSH. WAKE UP, AMERICA. WAKE UP, WORLD.
"As Hizballah fires its Khaibar-1 rockets into Israel last Thursday, the Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanon’s leading Shi’ite cleric, praised Hizballah for waging a 'new battle of Khaibar.'
Reporting Fadlallah’s remarks, AP blandly noted that 'at Khaibar, the name of an oasis in what is now Saudi Arabia, Islam’s prophet Muhammad won a battle against Jews in the year 629.'"
-- from an article above
"[W]on a battle"? A formulation that in this case comes from Kathy Gannon, who hasn't had time, just as not a single employee of AP, Reuters, Agence France Presse, nor any other news agency, nor has anyone who reports for The New Duranty Times had a chance to look into, the Qur'an, the Hadith, the Sira. Nor has Nicholas Kristof, nor Tom Friedman, two of the Times's columnists, both winners of Pulitzer Prizes. The first received his Pulitzer for his "coverage" of Dharfur (the coverage where he has been unable to figure out what it is that both prompts, and justifies, for Arab Muslims, their attacks on the non-Arab (black African) Muslis of Darfur, and still has no idea. The second received his Pulitzaer for "From Beirut to Jerusalem," a book of mere reporting that manages to make no sense, offer no explanation, of things reported, because Friedman, then and now, for a full 27 years of making the Middle East his special field of exptertise, the one subject, above all other subjects (yes, he is a World Conqueror and writer of Best-Sellers, yes he has offered platitudes and plongitudes, and then that latest thing about the world being flat, yes he charges $45,000 per lecture mostly to trade groups whose members are eager to "find out" about "what's really going on" and to get the inside scoop about the Middle East, about the world, from Tom Friedman), has never ever studied anything about Islam, knows nothing about it, learned at about the same time Bush did that there were people called Sunni Muslims and others called Shi'a Muslims and this might matter in Iraq, and for the future of Iraq.
Kathy Gannon and the AP deserve to be mocked. But so do they all, right up the food chain. Fauxtographers, reporters, columnists and -- I almost forgot -- those self-assured editorialists presuming to preach about subjects they have no right to have an opinion about, unless and until they take Islam seriously, begin to understand the network of allusions, the basic tenets, the central role played by that division of the world between Believer and Infidel. They cannot comprehend, and they will not do the work, will not take a few weeks to immerse themselves in the matter. How do they justify themselves to themselves?
Khaybar was not a "battle." Muhammad and his army of followers were going in search of loot. They went off to the isolated oasis of Khaybar, where they knew Jewish farmers tilled the land and had, over a long time, created a local flourishing economy (no jizyah, no oil, no raiding parties -- just farming). And they attacked them on their way to the fiels. That was it. It was not a battle but a massacre of the innocent. Or rather, the guilty -- because they were non-Muslims. There was no sound of the "fajr" prayer in the morning. That was enough to condemn them to death, to seize their property, to take their women. That is Islam -- early, and late.
The reason the specific actions of Muhammad and the record of Islamic conquests these last 1,400 years is news to almost everyone is that until oil wealth reanimated their lust for conquest, Islam and Islamic countries were a faded primitive backwater.
The textbooks used in schools and colleges rarely devoted much space to Islam and then only on a superficial level. Most of the people writing about Islam were Islamophiles very concerned with presenting a pretty picture of the civilization, history and peoples they loved and willing to gloss over the grisly, damning facts to do it.
Until very recently, if you went into a book store or to your local library and looked for a biography of Muhammad all you could find were these worshipful portrayals of the religious strivings of Muhammad which didn't find it necessary to include or go into any great detail about all that distracting stuff about the killings, assasinations, executions, banditry and taking the wives of those killed as booty. Books on the history of Islam tended to focus on Islam's contributions to the sciences, beautiful Arab calligraphy, lots of pictures of the Alhambra and descriptions of the fabled golden years in Andalusia where tolerant Muslim rulers presided over a brilliant cosmopolitan civilization of Muslims, and Infidels including Jews; what I like to call the "wise rulers in perfumed gardens" view. How and why Muslim rulers came to conquer Spain and a large part of the world, extinquishing then decimating many formerly Christian countries in the process, and the specific methods they used to rule were not covered in the same depth and given a sort of "soft focus" treatment.
It is still hard to find books critical of Muhammad and Islam and it is only in the last few years that compilations like Bostom's "The Legacy of Jihad," or the works of Bat Ye'or giving a fuller, more truthful and much more ominous picture, have emerged.
ISLAM 123, Survey Course, Post Doctorate level. 3 credits. Special note; Offered only in bomb shelters with adequate security on hand.
This course reveals the progression of muslim crimes since the time of Muhammed; robbery, rape, murder, kidnapping, slavery, international wars of conquest, sexual perversion, and many other hypocricies instigated in the name of a so-called religion, largely made up by a man who, in all probability was crazy, or high, or both.
Prerequisite: just this: a need for truth
The naming of the missiles 'Khaybar' is not without precedent. In Pakistan, the various long range missiles that they have are named not after random Muslim sultans of Delhi, but specifically after Muslim invaders of India - Ghori, Ghaznavi, Abdali, Babar... I believe Nadir, Timur and Qasim are still available, following which they can have Mamluq, Khilji, Moghul, et al.
Similarly, when Saddam invaded Iran in 1981, he called it the second battle of al-Qādisiyyah, even though that falls in present day Iraq itself. It's interesting that Hizbullah named this after Khaybar, rather than al-Qādisiyyah. If the Sunnis want to do a one-upsmanship game on Shia, they can name their next missiles al-Qādisiyyah, if they haven't already.
The naming of the missiles 'Khaybar' is not without precedent. In Pakistan, the various long range missiles that they have are named not after random Muslim sultans of Delhi, but specifically after Muslim invaders of India - Ghori, Ghaznavi, Abdali, Babar... I believe Nadir, Timur and Qasim are still available, following which they can have Mamluq, Khilji, Moghul, et al.
Similarly, when Saddam invaded Iran in 1981, he called it the second battle of al-Qādisiyyah, even though that falls in present day Iraq itself. It's interesting that Hizbullah named this after Khaybar, rather than al-Qādisiyyah. If the Sunnis want to do a one-upsmanship game on Shia, they can name their next missiles al-Qādisiyyah, if they haven't already.
“Khaybar, Khaybar, O Jews, the army of Muhammad will return.”
Today, Mohammed would be ashamed of his 'army'. Instead of conquering Israel, the mohammedans are being defeated while hiding behind women and children in Lebanon and staging fake photographs. Islam's contribution to human civilization -- turmoil, misery and suffering. This cult of death, under the guise of peace, infects prosperous cultures, pillages and destroys, then claims the advancements made by others as its own. No victory or peace until this truth is realized. †
China is fuelling the current conflict via arms sales for oil. They are scrambling for strategic resorces like we are. Cold war anyone?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2302757,00.html
How China's secret deals are fuelling war
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1141822006
Buddha statues blown up by Taleban may be put back together
Israel is safe at the moment,once the UN ceasfire is in place the blood shed begins.Israel must refrain from a cease fire so that history doesnt repeat it self
Israel should only stop when they reach Mecca and give payback in the market place
Posted by: shiva at August 9, 2006 06:42 AM
Exactly shiva! Given the extent to which hostilities have escalated, to retreat with a ceasefire, is only an invitation to more barbarism. Stopping before Mecca is a suicide pact, in short or long run.
Armed attacks such as Khaybar missiles are lethal. But Jihad has many other just as dangerous forms, such as the Jihad of the pen through which many infidel nations were eventually plucked off as ripe fruits from a tree.
Consider as a case in point the latest 'cultural' offensive on filmmakers world wide. Yesterday we saw an appeal by 100 Swiss intellectuals and filmmakers in the Film Festival of Locarno calling Israel a criminal state and renouncing the "idea" of Islamic aggression. (For the translation of this insidious communiqué by "locarnolibanpalestine@bluewin.ch" -what a great Eurabian grassroots name- see the link
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/012594.php#c253092
Now the following came in from the official Iranian INRA Website, suggesting the Film Festival of Anchorage is next in line for being converted to the glorious cause:
An official said cineastes from across the world will sign a petition to condemn the Israeli crimes.
Atebbaei, director of Iranian Cinema Guild Assembly's
International Affairs Department, added that the Iranian cinema industry has also sent a letter denouncing the Zionist Israeli regime's atrocities in Lebanon and Palestine to more than 500 festivals and 1,500 legal and real entities worldwide, according to the English-language newspaper Iran Daily.
The official further said that in response to the letter, the US festival Anchorage has announced that it will dedicate one of its sections to the issue of Lebanon and Palestine, while UCLA University has also expressed its sympathies over the recent developments.
"A number of Japanese distributors have also expressed their support for the Iranian artists' move," he said.
Atebbaei stated that Spain's South Documentary Festival announced that it will take into account the Israeli crimes while selecting films for the event.
The official pointed out that Locarno's International Film Festival in Switzerland has cancelled one of its sections, which was sponsored by an Israeli company.
"Several Israeli artists involved in the cinema sector have also strongly protested the Zionist regime's policies," he said.
If the Khyber Pass was named after the battle of Khaybar, then the word is old British army slang for backside (Khyber Pass - geddit?) as in kick up the khyber. The film 'Carry on up the khyber'- geddit?- (1968) in which the Foot and Mouth Regiment takes on the Khan of Kalabar could be looked upon as an attempt to see the funny side of jihad.
Khaybar Pass, New York Times and Mumbai Mohammedans
There is enough reason to speculate that another blast will happen in India. Mohammedanism, as an ugly, grotesque, political behemoth, had eaten India begining 710 A.D. when Mohammed bin Qasim used to raid the northern parts near Khaybar pass. These raids by the barbarian Qasim happened thru' what we know as Multan (old Sanskrit term: Moolasthana meaning central place.) Multan used to be a central gateway for these invading Muslim hordes. (Multan is now in Pakistan). On a separate note, searching the web (googling) I found an interesting piece of writing (actually it has 5 parts) that states Muhammad was essentially a Hindu. His ancestral faith was that of Hinduism, and the temple at Kaaba contains a Shivalingam Lord Shiva's phallus. The article is written by one Aditi Chaturvedi. I am providing the link here, leaving it to you to cruise the site and see if you find anything intersting in the Vedic origins of Islam.
http://www.kotiaho.net/swordoftruth/vpopia1.html
As a second piece of information, the NYT reports that educated Muslims in India are turning into terrorist activities, inspired by the "recent events" across the globe and seeing the Kashmir and Gujarat issues as one and the same. Of course it goes without saying that Hindus will succumb before the Muslim anger, and may surrender the country to Islamic subjugation, eventually. Make no mistake, India and Israel are different. Khaybar Pass is still proudly recorded as a testament to Mohammedan glory in India.
The NYT link that reports this is given here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/world/asia/09india.html
Happy reading !
Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal
This is precisely why you shouldn't believe everything you read on the net just because it is online. There has been the odd Indian wacko professor who pushed the idea that Mo was predicted in Hindu scriptures. To see a comprehensive refutation of that idea, see here, on FaithFreedom.org, which you rightly acclaim.
Throughout history, Muslims destroyed some 10,000 Hindu temples, which was bad enough. Those are enough reasons to condemn them, without coming up with other inventions, such as PN Oak's Taj Mahal being Tejo Mahalya, or the Ka'aba being a Shiva Lingum (which incidentally was not Lord Shiva's phallus - it was representative of an infinite tower of fire, which had no beginning or end. I won't bore you with more descriptions of this (since that would be hijacking this thread into aspects of Shaivite beliefs), except that the above characterization is wrong.
On a separate note, in the earlier thread of a journalist arrested on Mumbai train bombings, I had come out with a whole list of reasons why countries such as the US and Israel are in some aspects in a worse shape than India, while in other aspects better. I challenge you to refute that, and point out why Indians are as much a lost cause as, say, Sweden or France. I look forward to a good explanation of why I am wrong. If you can't, all I can conclude is that you are just interested in flame throwing exercises like Nariz, and that people here shouldn't expect to read anything useful from any of your posts.
I started reading the post above yours, Infidel Pride, and before got to the end, knew it was the psycho. Won't read history, won't understand religion, nor current affairs, but post stupidity all the same. What's with this phallus thing ? Nutjob does not even know that the word 'linga' does not mean the phallus. It means 'Being'. Just being. Something that exists, but has no shape or form. Nutjob, think 'Streeling' and 'Pulling'. What does 'ling' mean ? And think at least 20 times before you post. You need to.
I might clarify a bit, 'Streeling' means 'female being', and 'Pulling' means 'male being'. 'Ling', in Sanskrit means 'being'.
"This is precisely why you shouldn't believe everything you read on the net just because it is online"
Strange ! Who said anything regarding "believing" ? Why can't someone speculate, and at least state that there could be other possible viewpoints ? At least that's what the website does ! It presents its views, and then its upto the reader ! What's wrong with mentioning those contents ?
And from a previous post:
"So are the Israelis, Americans, Aussies, French, Swedes, Britons all cowards suffering from a Stockholm syndrome hangover, or is that a distinction that only Hindus enjoy? If you do have a good explanation as to why only Indians are dhimmis, and everyone else is intensely fighting the Jihad, I for one would love to hear it."
Europeans have lost their fighting spirit after WWII. Americans and Israelis are somewhat different in character, though they have their own problems with Muslim growth.
The reason that people in those countries are different and probably stand a much better chance to fight the scourge called Islam, is because the countries (most but not all) have confronted openly. At least, in USA, there are weblogs like Jihadwatch and academics (such as Samuel P. Huntington, Daniel Pipes, Bernard Lewis and others) who openly criticize Islam and that too in USA you have sleeper cells belonging to various stripes of Islamic radicals. In USA one can buy Satanic Verses openly. Before 9/11 happened there was a movie starring Denzel Washington and Anette Benning (Warren Beatty's wife), The Siege, which showed how Muslims bombed New York and a bus carrying Jewish people. The movie was made during the reign of a liberal, democratic US president: William Jefferson Clinton in 1999. There has been many Muslim atrocities and shameful excesses in India. Can any Hindu filmmaker make a film like The Siege even if the contents of the film be justified ? The Indian Constitution had been overruled by the Rajiv Gandhi's parliament in the infamous Shah Bano case. A grand incident of Muslim appeasement. The NYT article implies the same is true even today after the Mumbai blasts. Prior to 7/11 there had been blasts in Mumbai at Ghatkopar when 50 people died. But, apathy and the proverbial "communal harnmony" led to lack of concern for tighter security. Why ? Because human rights of Muslims would be at "peril", while Kashmiri Hindus (Pandits) are just canon fodder and live as second class citizens in their own country.
The information thus sifted from these various types of sources indicate that the concept of "appeasement of Muslims" as a "minority" is absent (at least in USA), which is secular and democratic like India. The USA takes all "draconian" (?) steps to confront an ideology like Islam which it believes is an anti-thesis of the 1st Amendment of the US constitution. This confrontation is supported and appreciated by even the most liberal magazines (like NYT) as evidenced in its various op-ed columns. That the spread and growth of Islam in USA could undermine its very existence is something that has caught the minds of Americans quite well. While most Americans do not support George W. Bush on the Iraq War, they are not unwilling to have very strict immigration laws that might unfavorable towards Muslim immigration. (And India has extended its hand of freindiship to Pakistan and Bangladesh which is sending hordes of terrorist Muslims across the border who then conveniently disappear. The number of illegal Bangladeshis in India are over 1 million. India can't do a jack to have them deported.) Despite the NYT's revelation that NSA was secretly spying on Americans talking to each other and hence violating the privacy rights of a citizen, most Americans did not disagree fundamentally with Bush's approach on combating the war on terror. Regarding the Gitmo fiasco, most Americans I have talked to think that such is probably "inhuman" but think that "hard times deserve hard measures". In other words they are behind the US Govt's actions on Guantanmo Bay. That is to say, the feeling is that if you can bomb the twin towers on 9/11 and kill 3,000 people just because you disagree with us, we also would not be ashamed to put some of your folks whom we can apprehend thru' situations that would also not be divine, and we are not ashamed of that.
I do not recall having seen any such groundswell sentiment in India against Muslim extremists. The general feeling is that of apathy. (This was spelt out by an author in the Indian Express just after the Mumbai Bombings, and I had posted the same on Jihadwatch website.) Apathetic people deserve an apathetic government that is mired in bureaucracy and exhibits lack of courage and vision in taking steps to combat terrorism to protect its citizens. I can keep citing incident after incident that would prove the point, starting from mideval history of India. However it would not do good, because to fight an asymmetrical war (such as Islamic terrorism) one needs to ignore all rules (of the gentleman's war) and be ruthless enough to take draconian measures to destroy the enemy.
Islamic terrorism is an ideological war of a stateless/faceless enemy. It's not like US vs. Russia. It's global jihad all over. The very expanse of this phenomenon poses the challenge to human civilization as described by Huntington, Lewis and Pipes in their articles. The enemy has an infinite supply of resources in the war. To win, one has to almost commit genocide.
My bet is that USA and Israel have the most courage to engage in such brutalities, but India (mostly Hindu) does not have the guts. Otherwise, why would India be ruled by Muslims, who in turn lost to the British, and India gained Independence mostly thru' non-violence (basically begged freedom without any bloodshed). I believe that Indians don't know how the use of violence. Wars fought between India and Pakistan, for most part (1947, 1965, 1971, 1998) have been what is termed as "conventional". Modern day combat would need a paradigm shift in thinking. Asymmetrical war: that's a paradigm shift in thinking. India lacks any such mindset.
Hizballah uses women and children as shields and hides behind them to fire their katusha rockets. When the Arab league's spokesman Amr Mousa points this out, Israel makes it clear that it will defend its territories to the last man, and if in the process Lebanese women and childern get killed so be it !
What India lacks in combating Islamic terrorism is, in a single word, guts. Just look at the bureaucratic posturing between India - Pakistan (cat-and-mouse game) on the terrorism issue, and level-headed desis can find out how India would rank in tackling terrorism. Pakistan has flatly denied any involvement by LeT. The NYT has reported that LeT has claimed that it is recruiting educated Indian Muslims for Jihad. Do you think that the Indian Govt. doesn't know this and needs to learn it from NYT and other media ? What has been the response of Indian Govt. so far ? Just make some arrests and then release the terrorists for lack of strong legislation and evidence. Can you believe that if Canada or Mexico were in such a situation with USA, like India is with Pakistan, USA would have only engaged in polemics/rhetorics/hand wringing like India does with Pakistan ?
If you still disagree, then you and your sidekicks are like the proverbial stupid ostritch with the head buried in the sand.
"'Ling', in Sanskrit means 'being'".
Any way one can independently verify these pearls of wisdom ? Any reference one can look up ?
"'Ling', in Sanskrit means 'being'".
Any way one can independently verify these pearls of wisdom ? Any reference one can look up ?
Nutjob mo,
Since you have failed to address my posting, I gather that you understand that you did not know the meaning of the word 'ling', and therefore posted 'phallus' (sic). It is people like you, not actually living here, neither familiar with the language, nor with the culture, nor with religion, but posting merrily on some trash that you read. You don't understand the situation. And how does bashing India serve any constructive purpose ? For all the irrational arguments that you put up, it might be fair to call it 'bashing', though sane people might differ. You did not think 20 times before posting, and look at the trash you have come out with. Most people need to think twice, but for you, the number is easily 20.
You can't get a life. But at least get some sense.
"...that you did not know the meaning of the word 'ling', and therefore posted 'phallus' (sic). "
Provide some credible independent reference to validate your claim. Or, your vituperative remarks are just like a canine (dog) barking.
"And how does bashing India serve any constructive purpose ?"
Since when is Jihadwatch supposed to be a forum to defend India ? Got a clue ?
"For all the irrational arguments that you put up, it might be fair to call it 'bashing', though sane people might differ."
You are right. Sane people would disagree that what I write is 'bashing' - per you. By the way, Mr. RCI (aka: Rectum Cranium Inverted), why do you come across as a total retard ?
Nutjob mo,
I gave a simple example above. That of 'Streeling' and 'Pulling'. Going by your dictionary, it would seem that they mean 'female phallus' and 'male phallus'. This example was elementary, and most kids above 16 will get the meaning. And yes, one can verify these 'pearls of wisdom'. And one need not be a scholar of Sanskrit to do so.
You have hijacked an entire thread by your ridiculous posting. I had to answer since your posting was so preposterous. Lie low, sicko.
"Since when is Jihadwatch supposed to be a forum to defend India ? Got a clue ?"
Nutjob, I am not talking about defending India. I am saying that this does not serve the purpose of JW. India, or America, or Britain, bashing is not germane to the issue. Most posters here get it. You are the one exception. And please, I was the one who said that you were posting from an asylum.
Weblogs don't mean much - there are any number of weblogs in all countries that confront Islam. Look at the ones that were banned in India following 7/11. Also, how does the presense of sleeper cells in the US (which India has as well), illustrate that the US is doing a better job fighting Jihad? One would think that the very fact that they can percolate in is a testament to the pc treatment that they receive, particularly in the context of 'racial profiling'.
The fact that one can buy Satanic Verses openly is more a testament to the fact that the US is a more genuine democracy than is India. This isn't just dhimmitude alone on India's part. In India, try doing a movie or drama denouncing Gandhi or Nehru, or glorifying Nathuran Godse, and see what happens to you. What do you call that - dhimmitude? I call it a quasi-police state.
I saw the movie 'Siege'. A lot of people who did would tell you that the real villain of that movie was the army commander played by Bruce Willis, and the movie did more to bismirch the US military than it did Islam. I also don't see what Bill Clinton had to do with it.Again, it's more an illustration of the fact that the US is a freer country than India is. Then again, while in India, during the Danish cartoon controversy, the media avoided showing the cartoons to avoid a government crackdown (as demonstrated by the arrest of a Delhi editor who did publish it), the US media, with some exceptions, self-censored and chose not to publish them.
Do you read this website? Every day, there are instances of dhimmitude in this country. In CA, there was the case of a public school where for 2 weeks, kids were asked to practise being Muslims, assume Muslim names, follow the 5 pillars, and even wage their own Jihad. If such a thing had happened with the kids being asked to pretend to be Christians, the ACLU would have been all over it. And in the Ninth Circuit Court, the actions of that school were upheld. You think in India, any non-Muslim school could pull that off?
And while the average citizen may be supportive of stricter immigration, there is nothing to suggest that there is majority support for a ban on all Muslim immigration. Also, the reason support for the Iraq war has dropped has been a lack of visible success, and not too many people would view a Civil war in Iraq the way Hugh advocates, or as we'd view it.
You are talking about how people view it. But since you talked about how in India Rajiv Gandhi had the law changed to negate the ShahBano judgement, why not talk about the SCOTUS determining that the Military tribunals are unconstitutional, or better still, how instead of appealing, the Bush Administration announced that they'd apply the Geneva convention to Gitmo detainees?Even Israel/Palestine was ruled by Muslims, starting from the Caliphs, and going right upto the Ottoman Empire. It got liberated at the end of WWI, and Jews from Europe moved in, bought property at several times the going rate, and settled there. The Jews weren't the ones who overthrew the Ottomans, nor did they gain their independence through a war, although they did struggle for it, just like India did.
I just fail to see the asymmetry that you are trying to illustrate.
This is a laugh. If Israel was engaging in asymmetrical warfare, and doing what you describe, they'd be carpet bombing Tyre, Sidon, the entire area south of the Litani, and making no distinctions between Hizbullah and the 'civilians'. Instead, this war has now gone on for 4 weeks, particularly because Israel does what it can to avoid civilian casualities (in which war did India do that?) Actually, this isn't something I completely fault Israel for, although I would if it looked like it's costing them victory. Same thing goes for the US operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq: 9/11 should have justified their nuking Kandahar, Baghdad, Kabul, Fallujah, Samarra, Baquba, et al. The reason the US has some 3000 casualities is that they got into the 'Iraq the model' program. Do you think if India occupied, say, Bangladesh, they'd try to take such pains to spare civilians? Did they do that in Sri Lanka?You are making India and Israel sound very different, when they are very similar. Both have hostile Islamic neighbors. Less discussed is the fact that Israel has its own Arab Muslim minority, which has extra-territorial loyalties to the PA, even though they aren't allowed to travel to the West Bank, just as Indian Muslims can't move to Pakistan. And just as India appeases its Muslims, so does Israel.
Israel is undoubtedly tougher on its enemies than India is. Then again, none of Israel's Arab neighbors have nukes, the way Pakistan does. Also, when did India withdraw its troops from territory that was then used to launch new attacks against it, the way Israel did from South Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza last year?
Like I said, I wasn't arguing that India wasn't displaying a disgraceful level of dhimmitude. However, I was pointing out that Israel and the US both have serious problems. What do you have to say, for instance, about Jews being banned from going anywhere near the Temple Mount? Or their having politicians willing to retreat to the 1967 borders - in India, even the Marxists, treacherous as they are, don't advocate ceding Kashmir to Pakistan.As for your phallic attraction for 'my sidekick', I'll leave you two lovebirds alone, once you've addressed my questions.
I think it is I he was referring to. 'sidekick'. LOL.
Linga means being? - cripes, who'd have thought the Kama Sutra was such a profound philosophical work!
WallyUK,
Yes, linga means being. And Kama Sutra is not a holy book. It is one of the ancient books that survived, like Charak Samhita (medicine), Susrutu Samhita (surgery) among thousands of others on astromomy, mathematics, agriculture, metallurgy, architecture. Kama Sutra was sex education. Get it buddy ? Though I sure don't expect a reply from you.
Well, while taking the risk of being accussed of selective cherry picking, I feel it is worth to point out the incoherence and other infantile inconsistencies in your responses.
Let's examine the crux of of your post on (August 10, 2006 03:12 AM) ignoring your phallic tendencies with your sidekicks from whereever they might creep out.
You are making India and Israel sound very different, when they are very similar....
The preceding cherry-picked line, does starkly contradict the following line:
Israel is undoubtedly tougher on its enemies than India is.
This explains the incoherence in your post. India can make all the academic arguments it wants to show it is "tough" when it is not. Same goes for USA. Yes, many anecdotal evidences can be cited to show that indeed in USA and Israel dhimmitude exists to the disgust of many (and myself included). However that level does not compare (in fact pales in comparison) to the level of dhimmitude shown by Hindus in India. It is similar to equating the crime of a petthy theft to that of the serial killer/rapist etc. To you (and your sidekicks) maybe both are crimes and hence deserve the same level of condemnation without any heed to the degree of severity. To me they are crimes but of vastly different degrees. Similar conclusions can be drawn about USA, Israel and India regarding the dhimmitude shown by the three. Israel, FYI, had shown the guts to bomb the hell out of Saddam in 1981 when Israel suspected him building nukes to use them against Israel. Pakistan has made it clear that because it can not win a very conventional war, it would use nukes against India first. Even to the extent (I read it somewhere ???) that if anyone else bombed Pakistan, then Pakistan would in retaliation bomb India only. That's the level of hostility that is kept alive by Pakistan. What's India doing instead ? Extending the hand of friendship and allowing militants to creep thru' the Wagah borders and bomb financial capitals in India.
However, I was pointing out that Israel and the US both have serious problems. What do you have to say, for instance, about Jews being banned from going anywhere near the Temple Mount?
So what ? Jews in Israel know that their elected government will fight till the last man. Recall the 1976 Olympics fiasco (Black September) ? What Golda Meyer did ? No ? Read history. Recall what USA has shown ? Killing Abu Musab Al-Zarqwai and only yesterday I read on the CNN that Jill Caroll's abductors have been apprehended by USA. That's what makes these countries great. They care for their citizens and are not willing to cede anything. Yes, they (Israel and USA) are not flawless. But, they are superior to India that is manned by majority (coward) Hindus. I used to think that Britain is a gone case. Now that they have thwarted the terror plot (21 arrested), I probably need to rethink. Everyone else is a superior dhimmi when compared to India. How many large scale (like Britain) Islamic terrorist plots has India foiled so far - like a very big massive one that Britain has claimed to do.
Thus, I still contend that India being the leader in dhimmitude would simply crumble before Islamic onslaught, when compared to dhimmis like Israel and USA (and probably Britain).
Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal
Nutjob mo,
Now you are splitting hair to win an argument. Your pattern on this site is, surface, get bashed, go down, surface, get bashed, go down. And you have been bashed 4 times, and each time you went down without replying. I repeat, your points are completely invalid. And if one were insane like you seem to be, one would say that Serbia and France are going down first. Exactly how does that help the anti jihad people here ? Somehow it seems you will be satisfied once we applied the label 'coward' to India. And according to you, that would solve a lot of problems. How will that solve the worldwide jihad ? What is wrong with your head ? Why do you come across as a madman ? To three posters, who know the situation, who are geographically seperated, who don't know each other, but they know the situation well enough to call you insane. Why are you bashed like we three have not bashed anyone here before ? Why are we so incensed by your stupis postings ? It would surprise you to know that thehindu, Infidel Pride, and I, do not correspond by email. And we do not work in groups, you were bashed individually each time. And you never had the counter arguments, except for the garbage that you have come up with right above, that serves no purpose whatsoever, does not even address the valid points that were made before, but somehow it feeds your ego, and that is why you must obsessively compulsively post. Take your prozac, or valium, or whatever the shrink gave you. And go back to sleep. You need a lot of it.
"...How will that solve the worldwide jihad ?"
By fulminating incessantly on JW you think you can solve the worldwide jihad ?
And again,
"Why are we so incensed by your stupis postings ? "
Because cowards can only get incensed and fume with impotent rage, as they cannot deny the fact that they are cowards.
Also,
"Somehow it seems you will be satisfied once we applied the label 'coward' to India."
Yes. Unfortunately, it takes dimwits to realize this long.
No wonder Muslims kicked the behind of Hindus for 1000 years, and given the fact that India is populated by the likes of you Hindus, you have more sorrow to come on you.
Best of luck ! Jai Allah ! Jai (Ha)Ram
Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal
Nutjob mo,
Of the three who saw you for what you are, I think I am the youngest, and therefore given to emotional outbursts. 'Fume with impotent rage' is right since we are not in a place together. I ought to understand, that even though you might be 45, the posts that you made, all that 'coward' stuff, are not only the work of a madman, but also stuff that an 11 year old comes out with. You do not post to inform, you post to incite. And you started with name calling, not resorted to it. And since the others understand that you are utterly irrational, and are not replying, you think you have won an 'argument', and can feel like the eunuch that you are. Can't use the word 'man' by any stretch of imagination here. The errors of your posts were pointed out each time, but you fail to acknowledge the facts, since your ego means much more to you. Like I said, take that prozac, or that valium, and go to sleep. You need lots of both. The prozac, and the sleep.
"Of the three who saw you for what you are, I think I am the youngest, and therefore given to emotional outbursts."
Yes, young, emotional and ignorant as you are. Just like the teenage Muslim radicals apprehended. Just as they don't think, you don't either. Something that your mama did not tell peoplle around you: that you think after you act.
"You do not post to inform, you post to incite."
No, I don't. Its you who gets incited. Maybe your elders must keep you in chains and never let you go out because who knows what you maybe upto ? You don't realize that you do have the freedom to ignore my "mad" posts, and hence remain free from incitement. That means you clearly don't have any sense of judgement, and are certainly too immature to be crusing JW, where by default controversial and inciting postsings will happen. And this JW is not controlled by you, or by your family, so don't lecture others.
Check with a shrink to see if your cranium is empty before you start rambling next time on JW.
Sorry for letting you know the harsh truth. Hope you wisen up, and get a life !
Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal