Western Crisis Intervention Needed

Dr Phil? Oprah? Dawn? Yippie Dawn is here on DC.

Yeah, we all need some housewifely ( if I am allowed to come up with my own adjectives) to put things in perspective along with some quilting and scrapbooking!

Dawn:

Get it together. Your fashion sense stinks, oppressing women is passé, and fear of Western culture is so totally 20th century, man. Light up the hookahs, pass the moussaka and get with the program.

hookahs are passe too...try sheesha!

and write of double standards: why anti-islamic is fair game and say anti jewish is not

and write of double standards: why anti-islamic is fair game and say anti jewish is not

Two reasons. Jews aren't going about killing all and sundry. And they're nowhere as numerous as Muslims.

Yes, and let's face anti-Jewish is totally played out, plus they have that whole Holocaust thing going for them. (seriously, that's not funny).

I am not anti-Islamic on an individual level, but as a whole, if the bombstrap fits, then wear it.

Why's Al Qaeda gotta be frontin' like that anyway. People just wanna have a good time and get their sheesha on.

btw what's sheesha, and where do I get some?

Apparently some handicraft centre in Delhi sells Sheeshas.

One more reason - the Jewish holy books don't have extermination of infidels (such as yours truly) on their statement of purpose.

Dawn:

sheeshas are similar to hookahs in that they use a water filter...there the similarity ends

in sheeshas a very mild and aromatic tobacco is used...it is so mild that i have seen non-smokers enjoy sheesha too...

serious post will follow later

Dawn:

I am not anti-Islamic on an individual level, but as a whole, if the bombstrap fits, then wear it.

..am not sure where you are going with the bomb strap...some of us would stay away from a bomb strap or a noose even if it fits;)

as for the anti- part...hardly anybody is an anti-(insert any religion or system) on an individual level

Fixed the link back to the original post on Blogcritics, was broken

Ambar:

agree and disagree...

i make a distinction between blanket condemnation of an entire people or race...hence would refrain from blanket condemnation of say Jews, Christians, Hindus or Muslims...i'd have issues with zionists not Jews...al qaeda not Muslims...

re: this Jews aren't going about killing all and sundry.

ask the affected ones in the occupied territories...the misery and suffering at the hands of the zionists

and

re: One more reason - the Jewish holy books don't have extermination of infidels (such as yours truly) on their statement of purpose.

if you are hinting at Qur'an i know many muslims who do not subscribe to that interpretation today...who are all for live and let live

Temporal:
ask the affected ones in the occupied territories...the misery and suffering at the hands of the zionists

The affected territories, meaning Palestine? I seem to recall certain virulent statements about "wiping Israel off the map" and questioning its right to exist. In such a scenario, I think the Israelis/Jews have every right to self-defense and termination with extreme prejudice. Plain old war, nothing to see there, move on.
Besides, is there any other instance than the Israel-Arab conflict where the Jews have attacked other peoples and nations?

if you are hinting at Qur'an i know many muslims who do not subscribe to that interpretation today...who are all for live and let live
So? There are also lots of muslims ready to strap on bombs and blow us all to kingdom come. That scares the hell out of me, and the way I see it, these guys are only following the teachings of their holy book. Do you really need a flashlight to identify the source of the problem here? I'm not attacking any race here. I'm attacking the religion, which is represented by its scriptures, which in turn is advocating mass murder.

Ambar:

That scares the hell out of me...
that scares the hell out of me too:)


***

journalist and TV interviewer Hamid Mir...(Geo TV and newspaper News and Jang)...was on CSPN some months back...he is the last known journalist to have interviewed OBL...and he talked of that interview and others he has had with OBL...

...he asked OBL to cite one single quote or illustration from Qur'an that justified taking one single innocent human life ...Hamid Mir said OBL talked on and on without convincingly satisfying him...finally after about three and a half hours an exhausted and visibly tiring OBL turned the question over to his aide abu musa zarqawi...who also failed to cite a single quote from the Qur'an...

***

... and the way I see it, these guys are only following the teachings of their holy book......I'm not attacking any race here. I'm attacking the religion, which is represented by its scriptures, which in turn is advocating mass murder.

speaking for myself (and from personal knowledge this also applies to all my friends) let me say this: am against the violent loss of a single civilian life at the hands of an individual, institution or state

my islam does not incite followers to mass murder...myths and misinterpretations aside

***

I'm not attacking any race here. I'm attacking the religion, which is represented by its scriptures, which in turn is advocating mass murder.

by this logic where do we rest the blame for the carnage under Modi or the Sikh massacre following Indira's assassination?

i for one would not condemn the entire religion for the actions of some of its adherents

rgds

t

Another 'comment of the day' nominee

"None of you (truly) believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself." (Prophet Muhammad)

I wish for my sister to not be blown up, does that make me a believer?

btw - I like desicritics a lot, very interesting group of people.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks Dawn, hope to see you and other BCs around more often:)

Generalization, generalization, generalization.

There's a lot of muslims, so there's a lot of radicals. But they're still a small percent of the 'muslim world'.

I know a lot of muslims who are completely against burning embassies, and suicide bombings, but defend their right to boycott goods. I would defend that too.

And yet, since the radicals are the ones who get all the airtime, people start referring to them as the 'muslim world'. Whole generations in the western world grow up believing all muslims are like that.

It's sad, really.

Of course it's sad, but perception is reality for most people. Most of the Muslim world (and the world at large) think Americans are fat, lazy, greedy, imperialistic hatemongers. Well in fact, some of us are, and that is what is so often depicted.

But we are also the most generous, giving and accepting nation in the world, with the largest cultural diversity on the planet, so clearly we aren't all bad.

The key is to change the perception, so that the reality itself will change.

I have no issue with anyone boycotting anything that they are ideologically opposed to, but I do have an issue with a large percentage of a cultural group of people from around the world having a hair trigger reaction to stupid, insensitive cartoons.

The world is made up of all kinds of people with all kinds of differences. Clearly the newspaper should have thought twice, maybe three times about insulting a religion known for it's sensitivity, but it would behoove the entire Muslim world to chill the hell out and set an example of calm, maturity that a religion that old should have.

If Islam is so wonderful and all powerful, meager crude drawings aren't going to put a dent in that power.

No wonder Buddism is so alluring; reliquishing of all that "self" must be good for the soul.

Aaman uncle, Western Crisis Intervention Needed...???

For a great example I had received in my mail box today morning as under :-

Will you agree or disagree with this argument?

"The season for Indian reporters covering the socialite and gender scenario has never been better. First the infamous Rakhi Sawant kiss
case, and now two back to back cases of women assaulting men for whatever reasons. But the Rakhi Sawant case has thrown up some very
pertinent issues.

It is almost unimaginable to think that an item girl like Rakhi Sawant who herself uses sex, lust and provocation to draw people to her and
visually assault people with her antics should be making such a hue and cry over a purported kiss by a pop star at his party. Suddenly she
has turned into an "Indian Woman" who has this holier than thou attitude. One must then think if there lies a more sinister motive behind her moves. As well proclaimed, she has said that she will teach men not to take women for granted. So hatred and a desire to show her apparent might can well be taken as motivating factors.

Secondly, the media with special mention to the Times of India have gone overboard with it. Several articles have been written about it,
naturally by women, who have said that,
"men refuse to accept women in modern roles. Women have made great strides, but men have stayed where they were. They have not
progressed. They assume sexuality to be their sole and own domain.
They are confused and do not know how to react with the new age woman.

To this my analysis: Women have progressed surely, but as far as sexuality is concerned it remains a doubt. Why? Because what they are
doing with it now, is not very different than what they had done years before.

Namely, in an apparent show of brazenness, they use sexuality to extort benefits by entrapping people.
Also, are men afraid to facethe new age woman? Or
woman afraid to face the new age man?
I think it is the latter.

Because it is women who try their best to keep men to traditional society defined roles, as they were half a century back.

That means being nice and polite and silent and abiding by the wishes of the woman. A man who dared to speak out was instantly not just
impolite, but a rogue. And he who did not abide by his wife's wishes,was accused to mental torture and lack of care.

So, while men have definitely progressed, women have felt ever more threatened and such ever increasing accusations point to that. They want to confine men to a place they think is good for them (men) and beneficial for women.

They are the ones who refuse to accept men in modern roles, unless these suit their definition.

As for the case of the Indian Woman and her piousness, this is a ploy used very often by women to seek shelter and public acceptance. they say that Indian society is male dominated. True, it is, but as far as worshipping female figures and branding men socially are concerned."

Ms. Madhu Kiswar says, Rakhi should not think she is the role Model of Indian women, wonder!!!

this is another fine example of delusional rant and not a 'reader who is commenting';)

Good site! Well.. i like design!

You have an outstanding good and well structured site. I enjoyed browsing through it.

keep up the good work!i