The Truth About Islam: An Alternate View

What crap. You can see the level of self-criticism amongst Hindus and other communities, and the contrasting utter lack of this amongst Muslims. That community has precious few within it who will engage in introspective self-criticism.

You can go on feeling as much despair as you like, but until Islamist violence, agitation and self-centredness go down at the grassroots level, mere activism like yours isn't going to counter the ever-plunging Islamic image, any more than pissing into the wind.

You want to have good relations with other communities? Then interact with them rather than segregating yourselves from them and hoping to span the gap with activist editorial pieces. Hah, what a freakin' joke. He doesn't understand simple physics.

Engagement involves a certain minimum assimilation and absorption of other peoples' views. Engagement can never be a one-way process, Einstein. Pretending otherwise will only lead you to more "despair," genius.

Famous reply: "Ohhhh, but I AM assimilating -- YOU'RE JUST NOT LOOKING HARD ENOUGH!"

What a joke, man.

"I want my driver's license picture taken with me wearing a burkha! I want to appear in court wearing a head-to-toe black covering! I want to be a schoolteacher who veils myself off from my students!"

There are no rules or limits to what practices a religion can adopt or incorporate. So why not allow me to wear a hockey mask and a kevlar blade with me wherever and whenever I please to? I'll just declare it my religion, and you'll have to accomodate me just like Islam. What a freakin joke -- I'm arguing with idiots.

i do agree that there are and i feel will always be religious predjuice. can u suggest what we can do to overcome it?

each religion has its quirks, but if i dont follow that religion and live in a secular country how does it matter what someone else does or says or wears?

eg i (like many others) studied in a christian school and sang a hymn every morning. for us it was a simple song, it did not convert me.

@ Sanjay. Take it easy. The article is a plea for dialogue, for tolerance, in an age where hysteria reigns. I'm sure you would argue Hinduism exemplifies both. I personally am sure it is, based on my (albeit limited) experience in India. I don't see much of it in your rather intemperate rant.

It also describes lived experience of Islam in a Muslim country, and says very little about assimilation. It seems you have used the piece as a hook on which to hang some very familiar prejudices. That's your right, but does it add anything new to the debate?

@ Neville, If only I knew the answer to overcoming the problem! But openness of mind, a willingness to learn, and the insistence on making up one's own mind as opposed to swallowing ignorant prejudice are surely good starting points...

And thanks for your example of your own upbringing. There's something to be learnt from all religions.

Andrew Morris:
A nice one. Thank you, for writing your observations while living in Bangladesh. Your reasons on why we need religion are very valid. Though all these religions seem to be different, and while some people would pledge their lives to defend their's against other's, religion seems to serve a basic purpose which is common to all humans.

In that sense, Islam is just another way of life.

As you correctly described, reference to Allah become daily usage words without actually thinking of God himself.

Andrew,

The title of the article says it all. It says "The Truth About Islam: An Alternate View."

You just present an alternate view and say it's the truth about Islam.

Nope, not very convincing. How about a stay in and an "alternate view" from Saudi Arabia?

Sujai: thanks. Glad the piece resonated with you

Atlantean: Saudi - great idea. You volunteering?

I myself am an atheist with Buddhist leanings. I carry no torch for Islam. I do however carry a torch for open-mindedness, inquiry, and learning from one's own experience rather than solely from the media.

I can see many people would have a problem with these things, as they mean we have to think for ourselves. So much easier to let other do your people thinking for you, and swallow their ideas whole...

Interesting article Andrew but I agree with Atlantean's view - is this an "alternative" version of Islam or the "truth"?
Moreover, I read the piece avidly to find your experiences of living in Bangladesh but found little of them. That may well be your intention. However, the article hardly reveals "Islam" in Bangladesh or even how it appears in the average person's life. Yes, religion makes its way into daily speech, and not all religious education leads automatically to conversion. However, that is hardly an indicator that religion does NOT impact (even adversely) other parts of life.
Seeing your British background, may I remind you that the Sylheti population in the UK forms one of the most radical (and impoverished) groups of the ethnic minorities in the country. ONE factor for this is orthodox religion with links (religious and otherwise) to lack of women's rights. Perhaps in your zeal to counter media "demonization" of Islam, you have chosen to overlook some unpalatable aspects of it?

Anamika

Perhaps I should clarify that the original title of the piece was 'In Good Faith'. That's what it's called on my own website, and I'm not sure how it changed, although I respect the site's right to edit. Anyway, you're right to say that 'truth' is a loaded word

Re Bangladesh - most of my writing is specifically about this country, but in this article I was originally aiming at a wider audience, and presenting one experience of Islam which is in some ways generic. The fact that I am in Bangladesh adds some local detail, but not much more to this particular piece.

To show how religion affects daily like in all aspects would require a book: the basic point I was trying to make here is that it's just a way of life, rather than the ideology it is portrayed as fairly incessantly in the UK. And people here are Muslims by accident of birth, rather than through fervent espousal of dogma.

I take your interesting point about Sylhetis. Very interesting. But again, I wasn't attempting a detailed taxonomy of communities and their various degrees of religiosity in the UK.

Islam, as you know, is a huge topic. My article has 1200 words. Not really enough to address all aspects. But yes, of course there are unpalatable practices. Every religion has its fair share of those. The bible refers to stoning adulterers and to homosexuality as an 'abomination'.

Finally, the issue of women's rights and emancipation goes way beyond one religion. Female genital mutilation, to name but one abhorrent practice, is very common in Ethiopia which is largely Christian. I think the problem in this case is men rather than religion, and perhaps the fact that most religions were conceived, scripted and dominated by men.

Anyway, enjoying this dialogue, now that it seems to have reached a more exploratory and less abusive tone! :-)

Thanks Andrew. The original title for your piece makes a lot more sense and clarified things immediately.
You are right that FGM is not a religious issue and is practised in many African communities regardless of their avowed faiths. Similarly the Muslim-on-Muslim killings in Darfur, and now spreading to Chad etc are obviously about a bit more than just religion.
I agree that most people are born into their religion rather than actively choosing it. Yet, the British experiece seems to show that regardless of some of the most liberal laws in the West, religious extremism has not been checked. And people are CHOOSING extremist forms of Islam actively and consciously.
When repeated surveys show that 10% of the British Muslim community feels that 7/7 was justified, one begins to wonder if there isn't more to the issue than simple "demonization."
I am the first to say that the bulk of the Muslim community is not extremist. At the same time, I watched with increasingly disgust and despair as the British Muslim community justified and argued away the 7/7 attacks. In more than one British media, the youth in Leeds, Dewbury and Luton refused to give their real name and chose Bollywood action stars as their aliases. For one who watches the Asian community closely (and belongs to the South Asian diaspora), I know that this was more than a teenage prank or cover-up. It was a straight forward fingers up to the media and the rest of Britain that was in mourning. Sorry if I seem a bit intolerant then about repeated assertions of "Islam is a peaceful religion" but for me, actions speak louder than words.
The same goes for issues like a full niqab in school, courts etc. (note, I say niqab NOT the hijab!). Or for that matter that there is ample evidence that the family members and neighbours of 7/7 bombers had information regarding their radicalization but chose to do nothing. I realise that it is a difficult decision - to "squeal" on a community member, but when the alternative is 56 dead on the tube, my levels of tolerance run thin.
No name-calling needed. I think an open debate is more useful any day. :-)

Anamika

Interesting thoughts - and I agree of course that failure to condemn terrorism is completely reprehensible. I abhor violence (in words [no names :) ] and deeds) and think it can never be justified. I think there are a lot of confused and radicalised youths in the UK right now who are probably impressionable and getting dubious guidance. I just don't think Bush and Blair are doing much to persuade them there is an alternative. But that's another article...

Niqab - there are plenty of Bangladeshi overseas blogs where issues like this are debated long, hard and loud. I kinda think that's an issue for the community itself to debate. Debate there is never stifled, despite popular preconceptions, and most of the blogs I visit openly abhor the niqab - which is only worn by a tiny number of women of course.

Where in the UK are you anyway?

Andrew,
You want me to take it easy, but far too many Indian lives have been lost to the arrogant marauders masquerading under Islam.

I'm an atheist myself, but the "hysteria" you ascribe to Hindus has nothing to do with theology, and everything to do with the reality of being under attack. The fact is that those Hindus would be reacting the same way even if they were a bunch of Buddhists, Christians or Chinese Taoists.

Can we say the same of the Islamists? Tell me, prior to Islam's arrival in India, was there ever any history of local Indians agitating over events in Lebanon?

So you mean because of Islamist self-centredness, the rest of us have to be held hostage in perpetuity over any event that occurs in the Middle East or Chechnya or Sudan? When Dutch cartoonists exercise their freedom of expression, then Indians have to be held hostage to riots?

Nah, I think that these hair-triggered initiators of violence need to themselves be the recipients of violence, in order to instill within them an appreciation for the need for peace. Those who themselves demonstrate the biggest egos and the most intolerance need to be made the recipients of intolerance in order to instill within them an appreciation for the need for tolerance. Those who support locking people up behind veils and bukrhas should themselves be locked up behind veils and burkhas, in order to instill in them an appreciation for not imposing regressive repression upon others.

I think the loud-mouthed Deepti Lamba in particular should be forced to live under a burkha, and to suffer the full brunt of Taliban harassment and deprivation, in order to instill within her an appreciation for why regressive 7th-century medeivalism should be opposed.

The price of freedom is vigilance, and they who take freedoms for granted can't bring themselves to understand that.

andrew:

aren't you bedevilled by the time-span defying display of reason by the resident saffronazi from brampton, ont.?

;)

Tell me, prior to Islam's arrival in India, was there ever any history of local Indians agitating over events in Lebanon?

Sanjay

Some ground rules. If you want to take issue with what I say, read it carefully first. I saif Hinduism exemplified dialogue and tolerance. I wouldn't dream of accusing a whole religion of hysteria. That kind of thinking is for pea-brains.

I don't think inflammatory language takes us very far. Are you seriously saying that all Muslims are arrogant. That they are all marauders? And how does one masquerade in a religious context?

I have said above I am not a Muslim, nor do I wish to convert. All I am saying is that tarring an entire set of cultures and races with one brush is shallow, intellectually lazy, and potentially dangerous. Surely you'd agree?

And what's the point of trading historical events? All religions - yes ALL (with the possible exception of Buddhism) are incredibly bloodstained. But hey, we're in the 21st century now. At least I am. Not sure about you.

"Islamist self-centredness". What, again all of them? Do you know my driver, for example? And my colleagues? No, you don't. My entire piece was based on the people I know. It does not purport anywhere to describe every Muslim, but to characterise my lived experience in Bangladesh. Unless you are me I don't really see how you can deny me that. Or perhaps I have entered a new space-time dimension and you ARE me?

If you feel that you are being held hostage, I am sorry. I live here in Dhaka and have never felt that for a second. Not even amongst devout colleagues. I have been welcomed, shown kindness, friendship and tolerance. I've seen generosity and love. That's my experience. That's what I write about. Why don't you write a long article detailing what Muslims have done to you personally? They've clearly upset you greatly.

Your ending is delightful. Having spent many paragraphs decrying Muslim violence, you state: " I think that these hair-triggered initiators of violence need to themselves be the recipients of violence, in order to instill within them an appreciation for the need for peace".

This is quite possibly the most tortuous logic I have ever come across, and would be funny if it weren't so dangerous. I will nominate you for the Nobel Prize for Inconsistency.

You go on though, even more wonderfully, about locking people behind veils. I've seen many veils, but never one with a key. Are we really on the same planet? And most Muslim women (there are quite a few in Bangladesh) decide what to wear.

I don't know Deepti, so wouldn't presume to comment on her. Everyone in my book is wonderful until they prove themselves otherwise, as you are trying to do. I thought it said - yes I can see it right here - that personal comments are not allowed.

Oh, I'm getting tired now. Your violence is quite wearying. But let me just comment on your final Orwellian observation: "The price of freedom is vigilance"

Yes, and the price of peace is war. Just love it. Keep it up.

Oh brilliant turnabout. Vigilance is automatically Orwellian, when it's the infidel, is it?

No, Orwellianism is the Ministry for Prevention of Vice and Promotion of Virtue. Orwellianism is banning the flying of kites or the wearing of white socks.

Orwellianism is when cartoonists have to cringe in fear that what they publish will earn them death. If you can't see where the most potent Orwellianism is, and instead choose to pick at what I've said as Orwellianism, then I think it reflects more upon you than on the subject you're commenting upon.

Religions, like philosophies, have political characteristics and promote certain modes of behaviour. That those modes of behaviour aren't practiced by each and every last member isn't a clean chit to the religion, but more of a testament to the fact that the human spirit is much older and more fundamental than religion, which is an artificial construct of the imagination. If your driver is a nice guy, then good for him.

I've met US servicemen who were terrific guys, but that doesn't stop most Muslims from berating the whole lot of them (even as they desperately apply for that immigration visa to the land of milk and honey whose wealth they crave, but whose values they loathe)

"Tortuous logic" - heh. You'd have been great as Neville Chamberlain's press secretary. "Look dear fellows, I don't care if they're crossing the Rhine, I simply find the idea of any reciprocal response on our part to be tortuous logic"

Thanks for that insightful commentary, Neville.
Can I put on my hippie headband now, and my tie-dyed "Make Love Not War" T-shirt? Then we can all get stoned, since euphoria is the best way to avoid hostility.


You go on though, even more wonderfully, about locking people behind veils. I've seen many veils, but never one with a key.

I'm reeling under the barbed wit, here. Well kudos for you then, Neville. I've never actually seen a "jack-booted thug" who wears jack-boots, but hey, why ignore semantics, right?

I think you need to be aware of a little history, which started under the Carter administration and then continued under the Reagan regime. It was called the Afghan War, and this war involved heavy Western cultivation of Islamic fundamentalism. I know, I know, you'll ask me why such silly minor footnotes of history are really relevant to Islamic-nonIslamic relations today. But, being the petty, frivolous fellow that I am, I'll have to mention that we live right nextdoor to this place where you Westerners had your little party, and created this nice mess for us to deal with.

[no personal attacks]


I know, I know, I'm just being petty and mean-spirited again, because I'm not feeling the love radiating from Andrew's overflowing bosom.
But I'll tell you what Andrew -- you first take away the jihad menace your people created to fight the Soviet enemy to preserve your quality of life (at the expense of harming ours) and then I'll decide whether or not I want to show you my cheery smile.

So how about it? Do you think you and your driver can run that small little errand for me, please?

Sanjay

Oh can't be bothered any more. You seem consumed by anger and bitterness, and I thank Temporal for introducing me to a new word: 'Saffronazi" Didn't know it before tonight, but seem pretty well acquainted with it now.

The only observation of yours in your diatribe that I agree with is that yes, you are both petty and mean-spirited. You don't have to radiate love, but neither do you have to radiate hatred. Given a choice between the 'euphoria' you dismiss and hostility, most people I know (and yes, that includes most Muslims) would opt for the former.

At least you have begun to say 'most Muslims' now in your sweeping statements. It's still wrong, but I suppose an advance on 'all Muslims'.

By the way, my people are Welsh, in as much as I have a 'people' at all. I don't recall us ever creating a jihad menace. But I was totally against the US/UK support for Afghan mujahadeen. On that at least we agree. I am totally against the Iraq war. Let me repeat: I reject violence. You advocate it.

Oh and by the way, jack-booted thugs often wear jackboots. Inspect your footwear...

And until you retract your assertion that we need to resort to killing to teach peace, I have no further wish to communicate. This will turn into a Sanjay monologue. Which it kind of has been all along anyway.

Even if human race agree that western devils and USA
are enemies of Islam.

But why Muslims attack in India, a docile community with
no imperialist aspirations and home to the second largest
population of Muslims.?
Can Muslims explain this?

Why the Islamic invaders super imposed their mosques
on temples while Britishers and other rulers like Portuguese
never did it?

Why Muslim youth ask other religion's partner to convert to
Islam for marriage and not vice verse?

Why is it that a Muslim flares up on reference to Koran or
any other dictates of mullahs by any non Muslims?
Why Muslims cant bear criticism like other do?

Why is it that the unrest is always linked to
Muslims in the world?

Can Muslims deny that in Koran, sunna and Sharia
or whatever by correct name these are called ,there
is clear mention for treating women as filth and treating
non Islam world as non believers and deserve to be
eliminated? It is exclusive and sick mind's attitude.

The fact is that most of Muslims who are illiterate are
brain washed by mullahs and fanatics in Islamic community
to wage war in name of Jihadwhich itself is foolish and
uncivilised word.

Muslims capture or crush non Muslims and their property?
It is time Muslims reform their medieval and obsolete thinking,
intolerance to criticism to their holy books and practises,and
self praise of Islam and degrading other religions.

Muslims are restless lot with self assumed chastity and purity
and frog eyed vision about their religion.
They must update and open up themselves and learn to respect
all humanity and remain in their limits.
No race on earth can be assumed to be infinitely tolerant to their
violent and vociferous means and noise and should not therefore
be taken for granted
It is historical fact that Muslims have never lived in peace in their
history since inception.
It is time Muslims start behaving and mind their own religion and
business.

Hi Andrew,
I've been away from Dc for awhile, busy moving continents. Now in Egypt. Been here for almost a month now. Your piece touched a chord.

Yes there are the fanatics, but the majority of the population just wants to be allowed to live their lives in peace. Their concerns are the same as people everywhere no matter what religion. Job security, enough money to take home to keep their families in relative comfort & their families itself.

The western media does tend to demonise Islam & paint every follower with the same brush.

I loved the comparison to Ian Paisley & Pat Robertson.

Thanks Kim. Great that the piece speaks also to your experience. Enjoy Egypt!

Seems you are getting shelled here Andrew, and not surprisingly since there is a huge amount of anti-Islamist anger building up which unfortunately does spill over to the entire Islamic community.
While I agree that Bush/Blair have made things worse, the radicalization of British Muslims goes farther and deeper than 9/11 or the invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq. The recently convicted and sentenced British terrorist with Al Qaeda was actively violent in India (Jammu and Kashmir) back in mid-1990s). I remember when radical groups would openly recruit students for jihad overseas and collect funds on UK university campuses. That practise was not curbed until 1999. The logic was that it was okay to destabilize other countries via jihad funded and fomented from the West (something that another poster referred to but his anger rendered him inchoate). For over two decades that was an instrument of state policy for the UK and UK which has now turned against these states.
I take your point about the niqab being under discussion. However I believe in a basic principle of rights as applied in a democracy - they are not absolute. So when the rights of one community interfere with those of another, there has to be an acceptable compromise. So debating it within the community is fine as long as it is an Islamic country but in nonIslamic countries like the UK, this has to be debated between various communities.
I live in London btw. And at my university we have a small group of extremely radicalised Muslim students. We had an interesting case recently of a young woman joining class with a niqab. She could not be heard clearly. Most students felt uncomfortable working with her (and these are no BNP thugs, but included a really racially and culturally diverse lot); even the professor felt awkward and wasn't sure when and how he could address her or indeed touch her (this was a theatre - acting and bodywork class). Now we can turn around and say it is her RIGHT to join a theatre class. But then isn't it her teacher's right to point out that there is an obvious problem with not being able to see her face or touch her shoulder or back or hands which are inherently part of teaching the discipline?
It gave us many a nightmare, I can promise. At the end she passed the class with bare minimum grades mostly because I think the faculty wanted to get rid of her. She was heavily backed by the Islamic Students Society on campus and it appeared to have been a political stand rather than a personal one.
Unfortunately it left a lot of students who were/are very liberal and open with a bad taste in their mouth. And these are not students who are "white British" but from the Congo, Nigeria, Mexico, Poland where "British values" stand for a lot of positive things. I am glad we handled it with caution and delicacy but I too was left angry and aghast that there was no sense of compromise from the Islamist side even as they pushed for the university, faculty and students to compromise to fit their values and needs.
A lot of the anger is rooted in this sort of behaviour. It has now emerged that the Dewbury school teaching assistant was following a fatwa rather than choosing to wear the niqab on her own.
Am not arguing with your ideals of tolerance, just explaining why there is anger and a growing sense that when it comes to Islam, all compromise and tolerance is demanded from the nonIslamic side. Cheers

Andrew:

I think Sanjay's posts serve a good purpose of showing what Islam's PRACTICE has sowed in a lot of people. What you are doing is to show what Islam's "devout" side is.

The question is what is the "real" effect of empirical side?

If for a moment you take away the Allies-led campaign against Hitler - and if Hitler was an Osama with actually a religion with large following.. I can assure you that there would be enough justification to take seat with him and discuss the many artistic flavors of his personality! (btw, his only aspiration as a youth was to go to Art School in Berlin).

The question is - is that what we look for?

Should we ALWAYS look for the other side? Why? People are dying everyday in Iraq and in the rest of the world because of two reasons:

- the fanatic of Islam can see no other way but to swear by Prophet and Allah and denounce, or better kill, those who dont!
- the fanatic of Christianity can see no other way but to swear by Jesus and kill in his name .. well, ok in an obtruse manner.. but in his name nevertheless!

Until we all understand this basic thing.. and the ROOT of why the DEVOUT end up killing in the name of its Prophet and Allah and why Jesus provides inspiration for some to hate .... and take these bulls squarely by their horns.. rather than pussy-footing.. believe me.. nothing peaceful will be there!!

In the entire cycle of "Cradle" to the Present, both these faiths have been contaminated and made hateful in many ways .. which - even though you may have arguments to the contrary from your current connections - is having a FAR MORE TELLING EFFECT than I would care for! So, when there is an EMPIRICAL effect of mass killings from both the sides.. I almost want to say "HOW DARE you argue the peacefulness for ANY OF THEM!!?

.. do you blame me for that?

If you do.. please go to the kid in Iraq who is maimed either by a Bush bomb or that of an Islamic terrorist.. for BOTH the bombs had implicit sanctions from either Jesus or the Prophet!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Oh lookie -- Andrew can't be "bothered" by what his happy band of Wester civilizers have done to us.

We've suffered hundreds of thousands of dead because of what Andrew's friendly Cold Warriors did, and he turns up his nose at our being "consumed by bitterness."

Oh, and it makes us all "Saffron-nazis" of course.

Well, gee Andrew, that's mighty white of you. Really, so glad you could be bothered to put on your white hat for the rest of us black-hat people, to civilize me by letting me know that I'm a "saffron-nazi" because I banged on the wall to complain about your little Cold War party going on next door.

I'm so glad that the white people are around to set us silly third world people straight when we err. My goodness, here I was being consumed by bitterness and spewing saffron-nazi propaganda, but you really put me in my place and showed me what good ethics are all about. Damn, I can now hang my head in shame at your awe-inspiring moral highground.

Yes, please do take advice from the highly intelligent Temporal, and please do draw upon his great mind for seminal phrases like "saffron-nazi" and "let's grab a cuppa"

When great minds like yours come together, the rest of us nazis had better run for the hills. :P

Anamika. Enjoyed your comments.

Don't worry: I expected to be' shelled'. 'Cluster-bombed' might be a more contemporary analogy. That's fine - and what happens when you go public with ideas of any sort. You must be familiar with Comment Is Free, where there are always nutters in the wings ready to pounce.

But you also learn too (from some commentators more than others), which is always good. I've learnt a lot from the responses here: it's opened my mind not least to how far there is to go.

Would like to discuss further, but perhaps not here. Drop me a line? The URL to your site didn't seem to work.

And this just in:

"But nearly everywhere in Muslim lands, Christian populations are in decline."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061111/ap_on_re_mi_ea/christian_exodus

Gee, I wonder why that is? Maybe they all got the wrong driver. Good help is so hard to find...

Andrew, whether we are white, brown, black, yellow or gawd knows even orange if you are a liberal/democrat, in whichever part of the world, the right/conservatives behave in the same aggressive, obnoxious, irrational manner towards the 'dialogue oriented' liberals.

It takes only a handful of terrorists to scare them shitless in their insecure cowardly panties and fantasize the decimation of Muhammadans in every nook and corner of the world.

Sanjay sounds a lot like Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilley.

Sanjay, pipe down dude you might burst a nerve or something. And how about doing something to match your words? Perhaps join the fight in Iraq, be a spy in Pakistan against the regime or become a soldier in India?

No? To big a price to pay?

andrew:

saffronista

and

insecurista

two more words for you:

a few of them you have seen here....there are a few more lurking who will take up the slack later

they use broad strokes and paint with one brush

pretty soon you will be asked to accept responsibility for the black hole of calcutta

:)

Cheers Maneesh. Appreciate it.

Temporal. Two new words today, and it's still only 9am here in Dhaka. Thanks!

I will await the lurkers and the slackuptakers with glee. And yes, I will singlehandedly, if required, apologise for the Raj, the Black Hole, the Big Bang, the massacre of the Native Americans and the extinction of the lesser-spotted aardvark.

heh

while in this generous streak andrew would you mind taking the blame for couple of minor irritations?

* 498a (don't ask me and i won't tell)
* kashmir

ok i said a couple but can i throw in eyeraack too?

Those too. Why not? Even though I don't know what 498a is (and promise not to ask you) I will say sorry for it. After all, are not words cheap?

But I will draw the line at apologising for George Bush. Simply a step too far.

thanks

dick cheyney?

;)

OK, I'll accept a Cheney OR a Rumsfeld. But only if you will apologise for Genghis Khan (we're all global citizens so have to accept responsibility for people we never knew or supported).

Or would you prefer someone more contemporary? If you will apologise for Reagan, I'll do you a Cheney and a Rumsfeld with 35% of Wolfowitz thrown in.

genghez yes
halagu yes
begin yes

hmmmmm

let us see where i can draw a line too

britney spears no
nathuram godse no
foley no
that bavarian chap whatzhisname no

Andrew: excellent article, I am bookmarking it.

For the first time on desicritics(sorry for being harsh), you have also made the comment section as interesting to read as the article itself. Eagerly waiting for more articles from you. Surfing through your personal blog posts right now.

temporal's comments, as usual, are hilarious!

Why, thank you Sami. You are obviously a person of great intelligence and discernment.

And yes, I will be back with plenty more articles, though not all as controversial :-)

Look out for "Bangladesh Diary"

Temporal.

Britney Spears. Totally agree. Like Sami you are obviously a person of wit and panache.

But intrigued by your Bavarian chap. Don't know any, apart from Franz Beckenbauer...

(Three minutes later...)

Oh bugger. It's just dawned on me who you mean. Sorry, I'm not half as intelligent as I pretend to be.

I'll be honest--; meaning no disrespect for you, I must say that when I read something like your "truth about Islam " article I experiance a sick, nauseous feeling. It's just people with your attitude who will screw up any little headway we manage to make to tell the REAL truth about Islam and it's threat to the free world.

You're a dreamer ! Now's the time for you to start saying "Well--not ALL Muslims are b-a-d you know ! Muslims are mostly just peace-loving people , every bit like you and me ! " Don't judge ALL Muslims who practice Islam by a few bad Muslims !" Yada Yada Yada yada !!! You know what ? Who gives a nickle's worth of horsemeat how many "nice" people of Islam there are ? All it takes is a very few of the radical kind to kill thousands of people and all it takes is one radical, driving, determined,fanatical,tyranical , barbarian religion, and it's passionate "believers" on a mission to convert the world , to suck all the life out of the freedom of the free world and rights out of human rights.

The trouble with most of the world today is not that it is so prejudiced or unfairly passing judgment, but that it is hyper-tolerant, and apologetic to "Islam " and it's bullying because Islamics explode at the least hint of anything halfway offensive to " Islam" .

All the world will pay a price for that hyper-tolerance, and it will throw the free world back into the dark ages . WAKE UP !!

temporal and andrew,

you are guilty of personal attack.

please cut out the word "Saffronazi."

let us end the name calling.

please maintain decorum and decency.

There is one (of many) major problem with islam;
there is no god.

Good job Sanjay, you just echoed the thoughts of millions of Hindus who are fed up with the violence of Islam. Ironically, this very behaviour of Muslims (few, many, all.. I couldn't care less) has directly/indirectly compelled Mr.Andrew to present an "Altenative truth" to us thru his lengthy rants.

Mr.Andrew, if you can (or will), please extend the compassionate and liberal critique in you to scan the following subjects while you are still in Bangladesh.

- Plight of Buddhist Chakmas in CHT who are being "encouraged" to part away with their ancestral lands to peaceful Bengali Muslim brothers

- Plight of Ahmediya sect who are "encouraged" to accept the finalhood of Prophet by Khatm-e-nabuwwat gang (aw, sorry, peaceful soldiers of Islam)

(Mind you, you will be solely responsible for your own life for taking my words ;-)

And there are about 10 million Hindus left in Bangladesh. Less said about them is better for the image of Islam which you trying hard to sell to rest of us.

Krishna

With these words: "few, many, all.. I couldn't care less" you have made my point for me better than what you term my 'lengthy rant.' If I believed in god, I'd ask her to bless you for that.

I don't deny there have been injustices here in the past, and the Chakmas and Ahmediyas all have legitimate grievances about oppression. As do the Irish, the Palestinians, the Kosovans, the Karen Tribesmen, the Hottentots, the Aborigines and the Maoris. These oppressions are often complex and relate as much to territory, culture and language as to religion. As this list implies, I don't think any of the religions in this part of the world (or elsewhere in the world) is entirely free of blame.

I am certainly no expert on this history of the subcontinent, but my knowledge of the world, my understanding of ethnic and religious conflict, and my observations on humanity all suggest that there is never 100% guilt on one side. To read many commentators, the world really is black and white. It is this kind of thinking, shared by many including Bush and Blair that leads to more conflict.

Yes, you are right to suggest we extend compassion to all victims of religious or other persecution. I have no problem with that, and there is no limit on compassion.

BTW, my dictionary offers the following definition for 'rant': Speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way. Would you mind pointing out any excerpts from my piece which are wild?

I am not trying to sell any image. I am trying to fight prejudice and shed a little light (it's only an article after all) on a debate which often spills into hysteria. I'm scratching my head, but can't really see the harm in that.

What's the alternative? Where do Rose's arguments for example lead us? Wake up and do what? Arm ourselves? Convert them all? Kill people? Are we actually talking about trying to cleanse the world of Muslims here? Put your cards on the table. Sanjay openly advocates violence. Is that really the solution in your opinion? It's been tried before. It's never worked.

Andrew, thanks for responding back in kindness, though I was not too generous in my comments about your initiative.

We (I mean non-Muslims) need not go too far to find a bunch of "normal" Muslims going about their usual business peacefully. Big deal? So, am I now to say that most of them are still "normal" and doing me a favour?

Why a Bangladeshi version of Islam could seemingly be more liberal? Was it due to their Hindu past? Why this cannot be attributed to the Islam practiced by their Wahabbi and Deobandi half brothers of Pakistan? Was is it due to the fact that Bengali Muslims are still somewhat disconnected from pure Wahabic terror philosophy, may be due to the language disconnect?

A bunch of questions to mull over... I have not seen any "normal" Muslim asking or answering the above. Even they do, they can't hold the arguments without bringing the "revealed truth" into the picture. Worse, sometimes even such questions are not allowed to be asked. If some of us do ask them, we are denounced as "Saffronazis".

I think its plain wrong to suggest that Sanjay or me were advocating viloence. He is only trying to point out that, you (a liberal westerner), somewhat "struck" by an "alternative" view (from your experiences in a Muslim environment) is trying to project it as something quite mainstream and normal. Yes, some people may not have actually seen the "Wolf" but still crying. That doesn't mean that there is no Wolf at all.

Call it my (or Sanjay's) prejudice (which is also cultivated out of OUR REAL experiences with Islamic society within our own environment), we both find your opinion a little "obliging to the hosts", which could be due to many reasons. Major one being may be that you expected the contrary to be true to begin with OR that we have seen enough of Islam's genorisity that we don't have tolerance for more "proof", albeit from a western liberal.

Good luck.

My issue is simple...Muslims get enraged at the drop of hat on any religious issue (presumably show little tolerance)...an issue which otherwise for us belonging to other religions is mostly a non-issue. Why after all ...why does this happen only with Muslims. Makes other believe that Muslims are fanatics and as a result promotes opposite polarity to develop.

Thus Muslims are the driver of this polarity. Why does not it become clear to Muslims and some pseudo liberals, irrespective of it having been repeated so often of late.

Krishna, as an Indian, and not as an apologist, I have had enough positive experiences with Muslims in and out of Islamic society to recognize the aberration for what it is, an aberration, albeit a virulent and conspicuous one. Such is the nature of ideologies at threat from modernism, as most Islamic and non-Islamic scholars will aver.

There is no one truth, after all, and cause and effect are interconnected by the web we all jointly weave. Islam does need a reformation, and perhaps they are in the midst of one, as history will tell. Of course, post-reformation or post-revolution societies are not exactly a congenial environment, and in our interconnected world, a revolution is not something that happens across the pond or in antique lands alone. Furthermore, for these same reasons, a reformation in Islam might mean changes for us dhimmis too.

It through dialogue, however, and open fora, perhaps like this one, that the facets of occlusion will be revealed to the seeing eye, leading, one hopes, to the reformation we collectively wish for.

Krishna: I appreciate the temperate tone of your arguments even though we disagree fundamentally. However, when you say "I think its plain wrong to suggest that Sanjay or me were advocating viloence" I have a slight difficulty reconciling it with the following choice quote from Sanjay:

"Nah, I think that these hair-triggered initiators of violence need to themselves be the recipients of violence"

Could you help out?

You're entitled to find your experience of Islam more real than mine. These are deep epistemological, perhaps even ontological claims, for which I can't really see a justification. We have Muslims too you know. And I have spent years here and in Turkey as a teacher, moving among ordinary people (and speaking both these languages fluently).

Not sure how a western liberal differs from an eastern liberal. I know liberals, and I know bigots. Geography is pretty immaterial.

Hardy, thanks for the term 'pseudo liberal' It's a new one for me. Could you explain it?

Aaman - spot on. Particularly in your recognition that Islam is, like every religion a process, not a static fact. Just look at the different expressions of it here, in the much-mentioned and unattractive Saudi model, in the UK, and in its moderate forms as found on www.theamericanmuslim.org to name one example.

I'm all for dialogue. I'm enjoying this one. Even the nasty bits...

Desigirl

You are my friend for life. I am aware of my newbiehood, and treading on tippytoes. But my initiation has made easier by some of the comments from the numbskull end of the spectrum, whose obvious inconsistencies make easy targets.

Anyway, so glad the BD Diaries are interesting you. I'm guessing I can count on you to buy my book (when it gets written). As we like to say in Dhaka: Sista, I geev you good price. That'll then make two of us, plus my Auntie Ethel. Perhaps.

Not sure what 'leeking like the Welsh' means. Leaking? Most abusive comments about Welsh people tend to revolve around sheep. So no, I'm not insulted - more bemused.

"t", I did my homework: popped over to another thread and found out all about 498a. That too seemed to generate a few excitable comments. I can see a few familiar names. Interesting how some of the people up in arms about women getting any power are the same ones to be threatened by other religions/cultures.

PhD thesis anyone?

Aaman, you're completely missing the fact that it only takes one bad shrimp in the dish to send you to the hospital.

What you're proscribing is some sort of "Mind-Reader's burden" that the rest of us Infidels are supposed to assume. So according to your logic, I am supposed to become a mind-reader to tell who is the next candidate to erupt in violence versus who is just going to remain a peace-loving normal fellow. Sorry, but I wasn't born with any mind-reading skills, and I suspect that you don't have any either.

Your actual outcome is appeasement, whereby we all have to go walking on eggshells for this one community. If there's strife going on Iraq or Lebanon, then we have to become automatic cheerleaders for these extra-territorialists in our midst who want to howl and bay at the moon whenever they get into a frenzy. As you know, being a Muslim means never having to say you're sorry. It means that the entire rest of society has to go on bended knee to perpetually seek your forgiveness and approval.

I don't really see any future in that, and am not inclined to engage in that kind of appeasement.

Yes, temporal, do tell us your great love for other ethnicities, by labeling them 'saffronazis'. Do seek to cultivate your own little appeasement lobby, who will mortgage the future of others around them just to suck up to you.

And then Andrew can write for his next piece:
"I watch with increasing despair the portrayal of Hindus as mainstream in the Western media, when they are really saffron-nazis. Armchair commentators, many of whom have never lived in a Saffron-nazi culture, fulminate about the Muslim threat, basing their entire conception of the religion on a few cardboard cut-out figures."

why should saffronazi burn you sir?

aren't you the great brampton atheist?

Oh, but according to you, even atheists can be saffron-nazis. Nobody can escape your Nazi label, not even Godwin himself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

speak of doublespeak!

saffronazis can use islamofascists?

;)

Some comments seem to be disappearing on this thread. I wrote a reply to PAP (Personal Action Police, aka Partisan Attack Police), which got scrubbed. Then around no. 44 a message from Desigirl. Same again. Which makes my reply to her kinda look like I am talking to myself.

Is this a covert campaign to make me look bonkers? Sanjay may not be able to read minds, but does he have the power to delete messages?

BTW Sanjay old chap. Talk of shrimps in dishes shows good culinary taste, but bad talent for analogy. The last time I heard a group of people being compared to some kind of animal life it was in Rwanda, when one side called the other cockroaches. Howling and baying, it would seem to me, are also words which might just be used to dehumanise people. Dangerous territory.

But maybe that's your intention.You reject appeasement. Are you calling for war, from the safety of suburban Canada? The Battle of Brampton? Again, cards on the table please. Or is this more to do with machismo?

One more thing - if I noticed the kind of attacks on Hindus in the media which I've written about in my article (and may I say how pleased I am that you have devoted a considerable number of precious minutes from your life to debating my thoughts), then you bet your bottom rupee I would write about it. This is not about taking sides, it's about developing people's critical ability to see through what they are perpetually fed in the media. Let's not forget that huge swathes of the western media belong to very few powerful individuals.

there is a ongoing spam-attack

and there is a problem when we delete them

please be patient - the whiz kids are working on a solution so the innocent bystanders do not become collateral damage:)

Andrew, count another buyer for your book. :) I noticed you said "when", not "if". So when?

Wow. 3 buyers! You've made my day, Sujatha.

I am currently putting together a book proposal. Just securing an agent in the UK market is an ordeal, bit like an audition. Sure, they are sort of working for you, but you have to make them feel it'd be worth their while to represent you. Part of my pitch to the posh agent in London is that there is an audience of people out there both in the Diaspora and in the subcontinent itself who would be interested in reading this kind of writing.

Then the agent has to secure a publisher. And the publisher has to secure some customers. So we're still in early days. Probably a year before it's complete.

Any advice on how the process works in India? That might be another avenue to pursue.

Anyway, thanks for the positive comment. One day when (perhaps 'if'?) I am rich and famous, I will remember that.

Am clueless about the publishing industry - in India or elsewhere, but there was an article in one of the magazines here about a UK publisher that is handling a lot of Indian authors. Will try to dig it up for you.

Kiran Desai apparently had a tough time finding a publisher for Inheritance of Loss - should give you an idea just how tough this process is.

Thanks. If that's Kiran Desai's fate, then I may be someway back in the queue. Anyway, would appreciate the link.

Meanwhile, where were we? Oh yes, the battle for civilisation...

Hmph! Looks like my comments have been victimised by the spam patrol - again! :p Why ME? *wail*

Andrew,
So you found out all about 498a, eh? Bet you never knew the meaning of the word 'spirited discussion' till you tumbled into DC-land! Loved your turn of phrase 'numb skull end of the spectrum' - you and the Boss should get along famously then. He's the only other one I know who uses words like 'parsiflage' as a matter of fact - the other one being the great master, Plum!!! Like I said, good to have you here to give us the 'alternate' viewpoint.

Desigirl. Your hmphing is justified. Perhaps your comments can be recovered from the ether? But your comment remains ringing in my empty head, so it is not really gone

Parsiflage is a fine and much underrated word. I also enjoy "borborygmic," "eidetic", "gallimaufry" and "badinage", not to mention "braggadocio". If you like words like these, try the Irish novelist John Banville, who is a master of painterly prose.

Anyway, I am glad to be here. And always happy to be alternative.

Hi Andrew,

I am curious to know what do the Bangladeshis think of Dr Taslima Nasrin. She'd got a fatwa on her head for writing a book titled "Lajja" (Shame) in which she described the atrocities on the Hindu minority by the majority fundamentalists in the wake of the Babri mosque demolition in India in 1992. She was banished from Bangladesh and now lives in exile in Europe and India.

Here's the link to her site:

http://taslimanasrin.com/

Regards,

Sanjeev

Hi Sanjeev

Thanks for the link, although I am well aware of who Taslima is.

Everyone I have spoken to is against the fatwa, although many disagree with her portrayal of Bangladesh. As this site shows, you will never get everyone to agree on history, and people's mild reaction to her is to be expected. Like many nations, including, I suspect, India, people are sensitive about how they appear on the world stage.

I hope this answer satisfies you, although I suspect you would like me to say they are all howling and baying for blood. Sorry. As I say in my article, they are getting on with other things. My article asks all not to make the error of confusing the conspicuous and volatile few with the peaceable many.

And yes, in case you are wondering, I have read the book - it's an important work.

A coda, from Taslima's own website:

'Humankind is facing an uncertain future. The probability of new kinds of rivalry and conflict looms large. In particular, the conflict is between two different ideas, secularism and fundamentalism. I don't agree with those who think the conflict is between two religions, namely Christianity and Islam, or Judaism and Islam. After all there are fundamentalists in every religious community. I don't agree with those people who think that the crusades of the Middle Ages are going to be repeated soon. Nor do I think that this is a conflict between the East and the West. To me, this conflict is basically between modern, rational, logical thinking and irrational, blind faith. To me, this is a conflict between modernity and anti-modernism. While some strive to go forward, others strive to go backward. It is a conflict between the future and the past, between innovation and tradition, between those who value freedom and those who do not."

You may disbelieve me, but I can state with some confidence that I don't know a single person in BD (from my own circle of educated friends, colleagues and employees, or from the people I know only virtually on the net) who would disagree with this.

This series of comments has revealed that there are fundamentalists on every side, whereas the debate over at 498a has unearthed a whole slew of anti-modernists. I am glad you are so concerned for Taslima - she speaks a lot of sense, and her ideas in this quote transcend religious boundaries.

I would prefer you to know what 498A and likes are and also become aware of difference between two sections in India namely the urban and the rural section...before concluding anything...which alas I guess you have already done.

I will not digress into pro/anti islam stance here, but would like to tell you that
I used the word pseudo liberals, because there are some who think that pleasing minority by punishing majority is perhaps the hall mark of democracy and liberalism...there are some who think being rich is bad...being male is bad...not favoring Islamism is bad...and that poors are generally good human beings...females are always good...islamists are generally good....
What they do not realize is that being good has nothing to do with being rich or poor, male or female?

I would not want to convert this post into any 498A discussion, but would invite(and encourage) you to contribute of other live threads on this forum about 498A and related maladies..

Andrew ...you probably did not my answer the quesiton about polarity...

I am with you on the fact that there are fundamentalists on both sides...however i feel there are more islamists among them than others...

I also agree that fundamentalism is probably not good for overall healthy growth of society...

but fundamentalism breeds fundamentalism and any polarity promoted by one side will always result into opposite polarity...it is but natural...you can not live in a world where there are only one type fundamentalists...such an society can not exist and if it exists is nothing but a autocratic regime...as for Hinduisms(I can speak only for religions originating from India) I guess we indians had evolved such that we always had check on fundamentalists until islamic fundamentalism came...

I so much want to believe you. I honestly do, but how can I really believe Islam today has progressed like Catholicism has? Catholics once hated Jews too. But now they embrace their own Jewish heritage. And Muslims???? How long will it take for Islam to give up the sword against their forefathers' people. There are only 14 million Jews but 1.5 billion Muslims. Who will stand up out of all those human hearts, even one Muslim, who will stand up publicly to the hatred of Ahmadinajad. Pope Benedict has a courage that as of yet no Muslim leader shows even a pale similarity. Oh you have no idea how much I want to believe you. But I do not.

Hardy

You say. "What they do not realize is that being good has nothing to do with being rich or poor, male or female?"

Why my dear chap, we agree. If you were prepared to add also "and nothing to do with religion" then we would indeed be singing, to use an appropriate image, from the same hymnsheet.

But I'm afraid you want to have your cake and eat it, because you sneak in a little afterthought:

"I am with you on the fact that there are fundamentalists on both sides...however i feel there are more islamists among them than others..."

Is it really a numbers game? All you need is two Christian fundamentalists such as Bush and Blair to destroy an entire country, such as Iraq, These two have between them wrought more havoc than all the fundamentalists you could summon up. Do the math. It's power that matters.

Anyway, you still don't answer my basic question. You, Sanjay, Rose and the entire bunch are very good at pointing fingers. Rose, having told me to wake up, has dozed off. Sanjay is busy plotting WW3 in his suburban semi (I imagine him with lawn sprinklers and an electric garage door). So what's your solution? You can't wish an entire community away. Been done before in Europe but didn't work.

What exactly do you propose to do to achieve a more peaceable world? More shouting won't really get us anywhere.

> Back on the subcontinent, I admire your rosy
> view of Indian history.
> Basically you seem to be saying that India
> lived through an age of harmony and reason
> without any

I did not say that there were no fundamentalists ever in India before. However fundamentalism was always kept under check in our Hindu culture, because in India religion actually defined not just your faiths but also your social life.
It is not eradication of fundamentalists that is the ultimate goal, but strike a balance and keep them in check. Fundamentalists in their positive role keep us to our roots, our culture and tradition which if it were to be left to some of the "so called day modern liberals" will go for a toss. Pure liberals want any and all norms to be built up form first principle and in their enthusiasm may miss out on a lot of constructive things we may have achieved in the past.


> What are you prepared to do to bring about peace?

As for my solution...no I am not posting a final workable solution...that I know of...all I am saying that e.g. probably for us Hindus we had great leaders and people in the past who from time to time gave proper directions to the way Hinduism evolved and kept an eye of any distractions that may become destructive...

Similarly for Muslims I think it is high time that some good people with liberal mindsets come forward and provide a proper direction to where islam may be going...they need to take control of reins from those Mullahas and fascist people who on the drop of a hat issue fatwas and want to cling to what was once defined as static for ever and dictate it to others. There rigidity has to be displaced by the grace and fortitude of liberal Muslims. The onus is on the liberal Muslims to displace those Islamic fundamentalist form the position of power they currently are in. I know it may be challenging for liberal muslims but it would be even more challenging for people who are not Muslims.

Liberal Muslims will have to give up/sacrifice something to achieve something better for the progress of Islam.

I also understand that "time takes its own course" and in this fast paced world every body is looking for quick solutions, which worsens the ambiance in which any such required/expected reforms may happen.

Carmine.

It's an interesting one, but your picture is, I fear, too simple. Anti-semitism is still rife in deeply Catholic countries such as Poland, despite the fine and sincere gestures of the Pope. That's just what people are like.

And there are plenty who abhor Ahmadinajad. The debate is much more nuanced and less monolithic within Muslim communities than you make it out to be.

What the media fail to show us of course (to return to the point of the article), is that Ahmadinajad has very little power in Iraq. he's a figurehead. The real leader is Ayatollah Khamanei, who has a much more scholarly take on things, and yes, accepts the existence of Israel. But of course he isn't as sexy, and the media don't like his subtler arguments.

Make no mistake, Ahmadinajad is being paraded before us now as Saddam was before him. I've got no time for him myself, but don't think he's the monster he's made out to be either. He's just a convenient hook for pre-war preparations.

Nowhere have I said in the article or the subsequent comments that all Muslims are good. Or that they are better than followers of other faiths. Or that there is no need for reform. I have said only that it is a mistake to condemn an entire faith and its adherents on the basis of the actions of a few carefully selected hotheads.

Even after all this dialogue, I can't see the slightest rationale for reversing that position. Life just isn't that simple.

Hardy

When you say "It is not eradication of fundamentalists that is the ultimate goal, but strike a balance and keep them in check." Once again I agree. I have no truck with fundamentalists. Again, to return boringly to my original argument, I never said anything to support fundamentalists (of the bad kind. I accept your positive role for them). The article was simply about not conflating a faith's fundamentalists with the majority of its adherents.

As for not positing a solution. I'm not talking about a final workable one. That would be impractical. But surely breaking down prejudice and trying to see more shades of grey is a start. That's what Bush and Blair lack, and look where it's got us.

The very fact that you refer to liberal Muslims is a start. We've come a long way since the early comments, in which there was precious little nuance. And I think you'll find those arguments between liberal and ultra wings ARE going on, in just about every place where Muslims live. In Turkey, it is an ongoing debate. Here too. It's open, it's in the press.

Of course it doesn't help that Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, Lebanon are all recruiting sergeants for those who DO offer the quick solutions. Me, I'm a slow-solution kinda guy. And this piece is a contribution to that process. Nice to be talking to you.

Good Lord! Someone's been busy, commenting away!!

Oooh, tell all about this publisher in London, Andrew - maybe you can show me the ropes!! ;) I think first step (for moi) is to change my name - when they did not allow a Joanne Kathleen, what fate awaits me, I wonder!
(Oh yeah, there is the tiny matter of getting the material for the book first)

Mr. Morris:
And so while the gentle Muslims of Bagladesh go about their lives saying "Peace be upon you" and "God-willing" whenever they meet, some other creatures from that part of the world (and of a similar religious background) far from their "Dar-el-Salam" blow up innocent people to bits screaming "God Is Great!" And when that happens - all too often lately - the gentle folk of Bagladesh, and Egypt and Iran and Indonesia, ever so far from the scene of the slaughter partake of not-so-gentle demonstrations in which they foam at the mouth, scream themselves hoarse and burn other peoples' flags. Were the objects of their "strong feelings" available, they would gladly do the same to them.
The fact that your own experience is rather idyllic does not deminish the ugly reality of the Islamic world and the terror it represents.
Scorpio

Desigirl

You are right, and very soon I will leave this commenting page and get a life again.

Re publishing, can't share my secrets here. Drop me a line. But don't change your name! Desigirl is a fine name.

But yes, an excellent first step in trying to publish a book is having a book to publish. Unfortunately, there are many many steps after that! I will reveal all

Scorpio

Your hatred is wearisome. It is boring. It does nothing to move the discussion on, or to acknowledge any of the points I have made either in the article or in the subsequent comments, and which I can't be bothered to simplify or repeat for you once more.

From your name I have no idea which religion or philosophy YOU espouse. But from the way it manifests itself in your thoughts and comments (though hopefully not your physical actions), I am fairly sure that I would want no part of it.

Like so many other tiresome hatemongers, you are prepared to unleash invective, including quite alarming dehumanising language (such as 'foaming at the mouth) without offering a single solution for achieving a more peaceful co-existence with other faiths.

The great journalist John Pilger writes in one of his books that the challenge as an individual human is either to add to the world, or to subtract from it. Through your tired diatribes, your loud jeremiads, your hackneyed hysteria, which of these two options do you think you are pursuing?

Enjoy your day.

Hmm, I'm intrigued now!! Am working on a longer-than-short-story at the mo' but keep getting stuck at some point or the other. I need some hooks, I'm reliably told. Shall try this weekend at Wilkinson's!
Kidding!!!

Andrew

Interesting post. A few observations though. Bangladesh has oppressed its Hindu and Buddhist minorities. I respect the Awami League and the traditions of the Mukti Bahini. And I defer to the concept of Grameen.

But there is another side - one that is intolerant. The Hindu percentage in Bangladesh has steadily declined since partition (when it accounted for one in three East Bengalis) illustrating a sustained poliyc of ethnic cleansing and pervasive institutionalized discrimination. The Buddhist population in their native Chittangong Hill Tracts has been subject to intense persecution. In both instances, there has been a land grab by Muslims of non-Muslim land. The police looks on. Much of this is done under the law - there is provision to acquire enemy property.

The Islamic fundamentalists (to use Temporal's as usual cynical term - Islamo-Fascist) have grown strong under Khaleda Zia attacking Hindu places of worship. This is hardly tolerance. This is hardly exemplary. It is institutionalized violence directed at a hapless minority or two.

Islam today is associated with violence, sexism, intolerance of the non-Muslim and a refusal to see another point of view. Each religion has had its extremists. But this beats them all.

No wonder Bangladesh remains steeped in poverty, in illiteracy, in backwardness forcing many of its Muslims (not to mention Hindus and Buddhists) to illicitly immigrate to India for a better life. It is the cesspit of South Asia today despite the glorious inheritance of its independence movement, of Rabindra Sangeet and Nasrul Islam.

And please, please - do not reduce the Bengali identity to Islam alone - it is that and much more. You sound like Khaleda Zia and her corrupt family!

[quote]You sound like Khaleda Zia and her corrupt family![unquote]

To me, morris sounds like a sad guy who, instead of analysis, offers only caricatures. Dont make silly equivocations [there are fundamentalist in every blah blah]. Try to understand what is Happening. Move around. Listen. Read. Hear. and then put pen to paper.

For a change dude, go out tommorrow morning and buy a doughnut.

Thanks.

A small note to the sad poetry spouting guy called "temporal" here.

The colour Saffron personifies pride, courage and valour. It has been so millions of Indians for centuries. And when the idea is freely used here, by moderators no less, clubbed with Nazism, it does represent the worst form of abuse.

I think temporal is incensed at the frequent use of the word "islamofascism" and "comes back" at the infidels with an abuse of his own to assuage himself.

I can hear that abuse from commies, they disown there own past heritage for their stupid ideology. But i cant bear listening to a chhilka calling us "saffron-nazis". When [EDITED:NAME CALLING] like temporal used the word saffron nazi, it leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

I am glad you remain anonymous and far away temporal. [THREATS EVEN IMPOTENT ONES PROMOTING BODILY HARM NOT TOLERATED]

Ram all this in your head and STOP USING THE WORD SAFFRON-NAZI.

Durgesh

Saffron is the color of piety and religion in Hinduism, Buddhism and Sikhism. The likes of Temporal can not detract from its sanctity. He personifies the intolerance of Pakistan and explains why we seceded from them to begin with! Joy Bangla.

Mrinalini

I respect your comment, as at least you are here and can speak from experience rather than bigotry. I have learnt a lot from your detailed examples, though I would still not want to retract my basic point that it is wrong to extrapolate from the few to the many. That is the basis of all racism and intolerance. I did not mean to imply that Bengali identity is solely Muslim. In fact, I never said that, but am sorry if you inferred it.

But to your other points: is it only in Bangladesh that you find intolerance, sexism and poverty? What, none of these exist in India? Or in Sri Lanka? Or in Nepal? I have seen a bucketload of intolerance on this thread alone, and a shedload of sexism on some of the threads relating to women's rights, and very few of the commentators are Bangladeshi. I think you'd find all those qualities in the UK too.

As for you, Durgesh the Doughnut, I'm afraid I tried hard but failed to learn anything from your measly contribution. You ask me to move around. Have you even been to this country?

You seem to be yet another person screaming 'wake up!' Lots of bluster. Lots of noise. Short on solutions. Funny that none of the people so fond of mouthing off can come up with even half a strategy or a way forward. Apart from buying a doughnut that is.

Someone once wrote that no two countries with a MacDonalds have ever been to war. Are you, Durgesh, suggesting that Dunkin Donuts is the new MacDonalds?

Only just read the following fragrant contribution from Durgesh, directed at Temporal

"[EDITED]"

And there we all were, thinking that Islam was all about intolerance and violence. Durgesh, baby, you're making my points for me more eloquently than I could ever do. Are we now to conclude that all Hindus advocate personal violence and cannot take criticism?

Now where have I heard that before...?

This article was published at BlogCritics Magazine as well, where it has provoked far less commentary. There, one fellow quoted Omar Ahmad, co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as saying the following.

""'Those who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping Mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver the message of Islam ... Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.'"

He asked the author to please not piss on his shoes with his portrayal of Islam which we can all read above. In the context of Blog Critics Magazine, Mr. Morris' portrayal of Islam seemed sympathetic, but fair.

My own response followed on the comments by the co-founder of CAIR.

"This is an example of different streams of Islam being dominated and taken over by the false messages of the Wahhabi upstarts who seized Mecca and Medina from the Hashemi family, its traditional protectors. It is this philosophy that is pissing on Andy Jarmoc's [the previous commenter] shoes.

While Mr. Morris' article articulates well the living Islam in Dar al Islam (the parts of the world where Islam is normative), Omar Ahmad accurately represents the philosophy of 'my way or the highway' that the Wahhabi upstart fake 'Islam' puts forth as its philosophy for world domination.

The unfortunate fact of the matter is that Saudi oil money more and more causes the piss of this fake Islam to dominate and pervert the real streams of the real Islam. We see this in Iraq, we are seeing it in the proposed coöperation between HizbAllah (Shia), Al Qa'eda (Wahhabi), and Hamas (Sunni Islam perverted by Wahhabi propaganda) in this neck of the woods.

There is indeed a war of ideas within Islam, and the annoying habit of the western media of misnaming everything and misrepresenting everything (what the hell is 'Islamo-fascism' but another name for the Wahhabi philosophy espoused by CAIR in America, Al Qaeda and the Saudi royals here, and the Taliban in Afghanistan?) confuses the issue entirely, and hides the real war of ideas, the one going on in Islam itself."

What I said at Blog Critics goes in spades here.

But there is more. Let's go to the text of the article to find out that more.

"Living here, you first notice the impact of Islam on people's names: the same given names that are used by the Muslim Umma or community throughout the world. And then of course in the language. Arabic or Persian greetings such as Assalamu Aleikum (Peace be with you), for hello, and Khoda Hafez (May God be with you) for goodbye. But there again we have those in English, and most of us probably don't really mean God be with you when we casually say goodbye, any more than we really want to offer divine blessings to people who sneeze.

For any event which involves even a tiny degree of uncertainty, the word Inshallah (if God wills) is essential. Evidence of the attention the Almighty pays to even the smallest details. As in 'So, we'll be leaving in five minutes?' 'Inshallah'. And the more devout you are, the more gravely you intone this. My driver can make it last a good three seconds. Or if you want to celebrate something amazing, for example the birth of a child, there's always Maashallah (God has willed it!)

Another key phrase is 'Alhamdalillah' (By the grace of the Almighty') which will do nicely when asked how you are today. Or indeed to wish you well when you sneeze. Meanwhile, the same Allahu Ekbar (God is great) so often provided courtesy of the rent-a-crowd on TV is just as often heard here as a kind of world-weary sigh. My driver is more inclined to utter it when he stretches with a yawn, or sees a traffic jam ahead, than in moments of revolutionary fervour."

All this is just as true in Israel where one sees the origin of all of these phrases in the Hebrew that influenced Mohammed.

Barukh haShem (blessed in the L-rd) is just as much an answer for how you are doing as it is for blessing the Almighty. B'ezrát Hashem, (with the help of G-d) is what I might say in describing what I plan to do in a few minutes. B'ezrát Hashem, I plan to visit my neighbor after I'm done writing this coment. What is the point? Islam in its dominant condition flavors the language much as Judaism flavors the language here in Israel.

That doesn't make the vile attitudes, thirst for blood or willingness to kill found in the Wahhabi knockoff of Islam any nicer, nor does it make someone like Ahadinejad any more of a nice guy for wanting to exterminate my people.

The enemy is still the enemy, no matter how many times he "blesses" G-d in his speech.

Andrew

I can not speak for India, Nepal or Sri Lanka. I suspect neither can you. (I could be wrong though). But we both can speak for Bangladesh :-) So let us limit the discussion to the country we both live in.

East Bengal has had two streams - the tolerant inclusivist one and the fanatic Islamist one. I choose the former since it allows me freedom to be myself i.e. a Bengali Hindu.

Have you been to the Mukti Yodha museum in Dhaka? Please do to see how the Pakistani forces targeted Hindu women in the genocide of 1971 since Hindus fell out of the pale of human rights in Koranic injunction. 90,000 Bengali women were reportedly raped as a matter of policy much like the sex camps in Bosnia in that country's civil war. Most of the women happened to be non-Muslim. This legacy lives on beneath all the Insha-allah's and Masha-allah's that you refer to with such eloquence. And it is an ugly one. 2,000,000 Bengalis were killed in our war of independence - with Hindus targeted by Pakistan because we were Kufr. This is Islam too. I remember as a child of 5 when Jagganath Hall at the University of Dhaka was raided by the Pakistani forces and all Hindu professors, lecturers and students lined up against the wall and shot dead! Their only crime - their religion. This too was done in the name of Islam - albeit a Pakistani one.

Let me post this piece on female circumcision in the next comment. I shudder at the ideology that promotes all this. Qazi Nasrul Islam and Taslima Nasreen speak for me. They transcended religion. That to me in vintage Bengal - not the Islam that you claim represents our identity and ethos.

Have you been to Dhakeshwari temple - the temple to the Goddess - the primeval energy that Dhaka is named after? That old temple had been razed several times since 1989 - only to be rebuilt over and over again. In 1992 December, 100,000 Hindus were left homeless in an orgy of violence that was directed at us.

Sorry, my lived reality is very different from yours - yours is something good for a tourist brochure. Andrew, I do not mean to insult. It just is that there is a lot of anger at the discrimination and prejudice that I confront - not from ordinary Bengali Muslims but from its Islamist segment that you celebrate.

The Bengali New Year on April 14 or Poila Baisakh is a shared event. That to me is the real Bengal - the one that conjures up images of the Jumna and the Padma with the bright green paddy fields and lilting melody. May that Bengal and not Islamist terror prevail. Joy Bangla

Yours sincerely

Andrew

As promised

Mrinalini

----------------------
Mosque: girls must be circumcised
8 April 2004

http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=19&story_id=6458

AMSTERDAM - For the first time in the Netherlands, a mosque has come out in support of female circumcision, according to a newspaper report Thursday.

The highly controversial statement on circumcision comes from a pamphlet "Fatwas of Muslim Women" provided by the El Tawheed mosque in Amsterdam for its open day. A fatwa is an official statement or order from an Islamic religious leader.

The pamphlet says that women who lie deserve 100 blows and the husband's duty of care for his wife is negated if she refuses him sex or leaves the home without his permission, newspaper Trouw reported.

There have been many claims in the media in recent years about "imported brides" who are forced by their husbands to stay in the family home - unless accompanied outside by a male relative. Some of these women, it is claimed, live in total isolation from Dutch society.

The call for girls to be circumcised - removing part of the female genitalia - is likely to cause the biggest outcry so far. If done right, the mosque's pamphlet claims, circumcision is healthy for both boys and girls.

But unlike male circumcision - in which the mosque claims that for reasons of hygiene, the male's foreskin can be circumcised - there are absolutely no medical grounds for female circumcision.

Nevertheless, it urges that the foreskin of a girl's clitoris should be removed, but not the clitoris itself - as is often wrongly assumed to be the case. Removing the foreskin would help the woman keep her feelings of lust under control, the pamphlet says.

In recent weeks, politicians have called for the Dutch government to do more to stop the practice among immigrant communities. To date, the Health Ministry has ruled out compulsory checks on girls to make sure they have not been circumcised.

The Pharos health centre for refugees said never before has a mosque in the Netherlands come out publicly in support of female circumcision.

Ironically, El Tawheed Mosque organised the open day to counteract negative publicity caused by previous controversial statements made by one of its imams which were condemned as fostering anti-western and anti-woman bias. On one highly-publicised occasion, an imam referred to non-Muslims as "firewood for hell" and he forbade Islamic women to leave the family home without the permission of their husbands.

"Fatwas of Muslim Women" continues on this theme and states that science has proved men and women differ in "biological nature, physical capabilities and mental capacity". It says it is unjust to give women the same "responsibilities, rights and duties as men".

The pamphlet, written by a "prominent imam" and published in Egypt in 2000, was one of the many booklets available at the open day.

Trouw noted "Fatwas of Muslim Women" lacks any biographical information about the author, Mufti Ibn Taymyah (or Taymiyya). He lived in the 14 century and has been described by Arabism scholar Hans Jansen as an "influential ideologue for militant Islamists". Jansen has drawn comparisons between Taymyah and Osama bin Laden.

Mrinalini Sarkar #77:

to the best of my knowledge we have not interacted before...therefore please let me clear something up...

saffronazi, saffronista, insecuristas, etc. are only directed at imbecilic bigots here...read those who breathe in and out hatred all the time

in my personal belief and practice i believe we are all equal regardless of religion or lack of it...and (i also believe) in speaking out against hatred and bigotry and violence of all shades

if there is something inherently repulsive it is blind hatred - life is too short to fret and hate

***

on another note...like you i was too young to participate in the army atrocities

but

i was one of the first ones to publicly write and offer my apologies for the injustices perpetrated by the occupying army


ps: GM is not a religious injunction - it is cultural and regional bidaa that has crept in some muslim societies

Couple of observations:

I agree with temporal here. I think this is going to be my last comment though, as I ought to get a life again.

I take your point about the tourist brochure element, Mrinalini. Although the article is quite clear about sharing my lived experience here. I don't say 'in my experience' at the start of every sentence, it's true, as that would be extremely boring, but you get my point. You want to describe your perspective, you go ahead and write an article for yourself. You virtually have anyway in your comment. :-)

But I could also level that your approach seems taken from a partisan tract. I can't believe, for example, that you have omitted to mention countries like Ethiopia which widely practise FGM, but are mainly Christian. Why is that? You can't leave a whole country out and focus on mosques simply because that suits your argument. Temporal is closer to the truth in ascribing this to culture, (and, I might add, to male domination).

Maybe that could be the subject of another piece: why it is that men are quite so good at screwing things up...

And to end, not a comment but a word of thanks...

It's clear that this debate will run as long as the religions do, and furthermore I can see that many people are entrenched and unprepared to leave the safety of their received opinions, On the other hand I have been grateful for all those who have been prepared to share and inform (and maybe even learn) without shouting.

I thank everyone for being so vocal, both those who agree and disagree with what I've tried to say. And yes, even those who rant. The screamers in particular have proved to me that no one religion or country has a monopoly on hotheads and nutters.

I've gone through my whole life looking at people and, when I see people are fulfilled and contented, wanting to learn from them. I've been able and willing to change my views and move on. Some people in this thread have already helped me do that. However, when I look at people who seem twisted with rage, I find it easier to discount what they claim to believe in, because it clearly has no impact on their behaviour, and what good is a religion which looks good on paper when it has zero influence on how you live your life?

Anyway, it's been an interesting and fun induction to Desicritics. Next time I might play safe and write about the art of growing tomatoes, or the secrets of origami, but I suspect not. Good night and good luck.

Temporal,

Thank you. I hear you.

I think Female circumcision is a complex phenomenon - there are obscure Hadiths that appear to advocate it just as Saudi Arabia banned the practice in the 1960s. So differences in interpretation exist. There are medieval jurists like Ibn Taimiya who supported it like certain fundamentalist groups in Egypt. But others in Riyadh condemn the practice. It is unfortunately universal in Somalia.

Andrew,

I think you are just as partisan as me - the word applies to us both. I was questioning your depiction of Bangladesh. Look at the events this week surrounding the elections commissioner. That alone should say that this is a country in deep turmoil. But do visit the Mukti Yodha museum and Dhakeswari temple. It would complete your travelogue.

A quick correction - Ethiopia is not predominantly Christian. It has more Muslims than Christians with a large animist segment that makes up the remainder.

On a different note, I was intrigued by the hidden conversation between Desi girl and you. Good luck

Let me end too but with an ode to our Bengal

'Shubrajyothsna pulakitayaminim
Phullakusumita drumadala shobhinim
Suhasinim sumadhura bhashinim'.

'Her nights rejoicing in the glory of the moonlight, her lands clothed beautifully with her trees in flowering bloom, sweet of laughter, sweet of speech'.

This is our land - Amar Sonar Bangla.

Andrew,
Wise words! This agrument will go on like the infamous 'coffee - toffee' debate, don't you worry!!

Mrinalini, read your comments with great sadness. Very long ago, as a child, I had the opportunity of meeting the Mujib Bahini people, who were closer to the Taslimas of BD today than the fundamentalists. Perhaps things in BD would have been different under a secular government or perhaps that is too much to hope for.
At the same time, I guess some forms of ethnic cleansing are more "tolerable" than others - and Hindu ones, all through the subcontinent seem to be more palatable to the Western mind than others. I am not too sure why but then all explanations I could offer would qualify me for that infamous tag of a "saffronazi" or "Islamophobe."
I am saddened though that your post was brushed off with such panache by the "secular" and "liberal" posters here as well as the author.
I was reminded by your post of a friend who lived in Sarajevo after the dissolution of the Yugoslavian state and worried about her daughter growing up. As she said: "how do I let her date men when every teenager has either witnessed a rape or performed one?"
Shocking that your account of the women raped in BD was quite comprehensively ignored. Temporal did respond but with a rather standard (and terribly facile - sorry Temporal but i cringed when i read that) "I was too young" line. Yes, but Temporal, perhaps, many of the men in the Pakistani army that you love and respect now may well have been involved. May I point to the German example where the horror of what was done in the Holocaust is passed down to the future generations? How about pressuring Pakistan's government for restituton and compensation? Or even a national apology from the President? (Again all things that Germany has done). How about an enquiry and a war crimes commission based on Nurnberg model? Something concrete that acknowledges the suffering that Mrinalini expressed?
On the other hand, Mrinalini, as the very same poet of Bengal wrote: "Ekla Chalo, Ekla chalo, ekla chalo re...." Perhaps that too is a song that nonMuslim Bengalis in BD should remember. Best of luck...

Anamika:

my #83 was a specific response to Mrinalini Sarkar's #77 where he alluded to my intolerance...i wrote:

in my personal belief and practice i believe we are all equal regardless of religion or lack of it...and (i also believe) in speaking out against hatred and bigotry and violence of all shades

i am against the loss of a single civilian life at the hands of an individual, organization or state

Anamika,

Thank you very much. The traditions of the Mukti Bahini and of the Nutun Bangla that it strove to achieve remain in our land though muted in recent years. Andrew has not grasped that since he is but a sojourner. He did not address the core issue I raised i.e. the predicament of the Hindu and of the Buddhist (in the Chittagong Hill Tracts).

The upsurge in militant Islam took place with the Khaleda Zia administration in 2001. Two Islamist parties, i.e. the Jama'at-e-Islami and Islami Oikya Jote, were part of her administration.

Her administration witnessed terrorist attacks directed at the opposition Awami League, judges, lawyers, journalists, developmentalist NGOs and theaters. In short, the secular intellectual space was under attack - all conveniently ignored by Andrew. The intent was to transform Bangladesh into a rigid Islamic state on the lines of the Taleban. Another objective was to replace the colonial era legal code with the Shari'ah.

There were bomb attacks on Grameen Bank and BRAC in February, 2005. 459 near simultaneous bomb explosions took place in 63 of Bangladesh's 64 districts in August 2005. Two judges were murdered in November, 2005. There was an attempt on the life of a third judge.

The foremost terrorist group in Bangladesh is the Jama'at-ul Mujahideen. It is reported to have a full-time cadre of 10,000 and a part-time cadre of 100,000. The presence of Islamist parties in the cabinet had provided a conducive environment for the increase in fundamentalist activity. Whereas there were just 1,500 registered Madrassahs in 1970, there are 8,000 registered Madrassas today. This excludes the tens of thousands of unregistered religious seminaries.

So the namby pamby wishy washy analysis provided by Andrew - all this is conveniently forgotten.

Having said all this, I respect Temporal. We need to hear him. There is an underlying humanism on the banks of the Indus - one that needs to be acknowledged despite the strident militarism in that country. That voice has been suppressed for too long.

But regardless, Dhanyabaad. Anamika - keep up the good analysis in all your comments. And thank you Temporal for the lovely Rabindra Sangeet.

I agree, Temporal, with Mrinalini that your is a voice of humanism and must be heard. So here goes once again -

"the reference to occupying army was an after thought to #81 and my intent was to respond to the mention of his age circa '71...sorry it made you cringe"

No worries but Mrinalini mentioned specifically that she was not too old to have known of and lived through the Dhaka university killings (she was 5) - an incident widely reported by the international media. She was fortunate to not directly be a victim of the atrocities. To equate the victim - and the subsequent lack of power - to the victimizer who has the POWER to choose his/her course of action is surely unfair and wrong? So slightly false comparison there in terms of age - and my reason for cringing. Imagine a German saying "well, I wasn't old enough to have been Nazi."

"even though you prefaced with a perhaps, i'll attribute to malicious conjecturing...perhaps you were not thinking?"

No that was not malicious conjecturing or written in error. Given the number of people who are directly or indirectly linked to the military in Pakistan, especially of the middle class backgrounds, that was a simple statement. We all seem to assume that all history dies with the participants when the consequences - explicit and implicit - live on. Similar things happened in Germany, or Yugoslavia, are happening in the US. Loved ones ARE involved - whether its rape camps in BD, or Abu Ghraib or the Sabra-Shatila massacre.

To face your own personal history - or an extended one is the final test of one's "humanist" beliefs. As a teenager, I remember asking my grandfather if he had been a collaborator (he was a police officer) during the Raj. It took a long time to forgive him for being just that and probably repressing the freedom fighters. Funny that my grandmother (his wife) was one of the latter.

So when I ask you that, it isn't malicious. I am asking you to rethink the popularly "easy" version of liberal human values and apply them with the rigour they deserve.

I am glad to know that you were one of the first to write about the atrocitites. Yet the Rehman report disappeared after a few weeks of kicking about. It is also telling that it was only dealt with in Pakistan once it was released in the Indian press by activists.

Moreover, asking some of those who served in BD during the war would be another source of information - no matter how painful. I also go back to legally pressuring one's own regime to try the people involved. That is a right, duty, and privilege that you have as a citizen of Pakistan

As an Indian, I would much rather concentrate on real matters like economic growth, battling poverty and asserting political power in international fora beyond the WTO. But I am left little choice when Pakistani bombs explode on our streets and Pakistani provided guns kill our civilians.

Same goes for Islam - I studied the religion for three years (in Islamabad incidentally) and continue my studies basically because the largest number of acts of nonstate organised violence are being perpetrated in its name. To discuss those issues on the basis of FACTS not random opinions is not "obsessive." Should we live in a world where the Catholic church takes up its crusades again, I shall discuss that with the same detail.

PS - hope the spaces make the reading easier :-)

PPS: I assume you are not happy with Islamo-fascists as a term? In the interest of discussion, may I suggest a mutual refraining from snappy but useless terms including the one above and "saffronazi" etc?

Dear Mr. Andrew Morris,

As regards your comment 79,

[quote] And there we all were, thinking that Islam was all about intolerance and violence. Durgesh, baby, you're making my points for me more eloquently than I could ever do. Are we now to conclude that all Hindus advocate personal violence and cannot take criticism?

Now where have I heard that before...? [unquote]

May i inform you kind sir, that we Hindus, share, what one can call in gangsterspeak, a "History" with muslims. In the midst of a great deal of bhai - bhai nonsense pioneered by Mr. Gandhi, there is a "History" which cannot be wished away. This abuse "saffron - nazi" as i said, is welcome from you, the commies of the world, But NOT, NOT from this particular gentlemen moderator [he off-course has got back with an "imbecilic bigot"].

Saffron-%$#, being uttered by muslims, is quite inflammatory to Indians. People like gentlemen moderator uses there anonymity on the web. After all what is he. A faceless person with a handle like "temporal". But i dont think he will dare use it in the presence of Indians. Or on a public platform. People who do so will feel the heat.

Hindus are a tolerant. But they are not tolerant to facile bullshit.

Now, to the chummy Islamic fascist here who calls himself temp - Oral.

Well, to begin with, taking issues with you on this platform can be quite a one-sided affair. If things get heated for you, one can always get red-carded.

I understand that your kind simply hates and cannot bear to hear the inconvenient truths. Maybe there is a primeval fear lurking behind every muslims heart. What if history finally catches up with our crimes.

Until that happens, Mr. Temp - Oral, you are allowed to use abuses like imbecile and bigot; and your disingenous, patronising smilies [ ;) ], to your hearts content. You are also allowed to build muslim "revenge" stories, like you do here in India.

As for me. I can wait. I know history will finally catch up with you guys. Until then bro, you are allowed to be like a nazi who has escaped punishment and who now heckles us with glee.

Anamika:

many thanks for the new formatting ..much easier on the eyes:)

oops...me bad!....sorry Mrinalini:(

we still do not know enough about each other...here again you have brought forth some more conjectures...viz. my beliefs, religion, nationality etc...

khair

i'd rather be judged on what i say here (or elsewhere in the public domain) and would extend the same courtesy to you (and others)... unless you are rooming with an ex and she is feeding you misinformation;)

and for much of the same and similar reasons i try to avoid labels...hindu, muslim, atheist, humanist are all labels in a cyber world...words and actions speaks louder...so if you have to make an observation please do so on the basis of the written words here only...

history spans millennium...and we tend to apply current values and sensibilities (both individual and collective) to past events...i am not so generous with assigning blame or guilt

a german kid born today should be guilt free of his ancestor's nazi past

yes we should not forget history - and continue to learn from it - but at the same time we should refrain from assigning collective blame and guilt

this guilt business is an inheritance from the biblical values that have penetrated some conscious thinking (jesus paid for our sins etc)

as for the terms saffronazis etc... if you care to note...i never bad mouth any religion...it is them bigots and imbeciles i target...and since you are not one would only beg you (and other kind folks who are caught in the crossfire) not to be offended by any future use

good luck with your studies re: islam...have read about it for years but know so little... yet these days we come across 'experts' on islam everywhere

:)

Know what, it is really not funny the way everyone gangs up against Temporal (and any other Muslim DC) if an article is posted on Islam. Let's face it, 6 out of 10 posts fall under this category and every time, the comments section becomes a battleground with righteous Hindus vs. the infidel Muslims.

What prompts this all? Why should a Muslim be forced to defend himself and his religion every single time? I wonder how many of us pious Hindus would join a predominantly Muslim community wherein we are forced to defend ourselves, and our religion, on a regular basis. It is infinitely weary, surely? Just because there are some people who take great pleasure in striking terror in the heart of millions, why should we make enemies out of friends? Shouldn't we have a demarcation between friends and enemies? Why should a regular, non-violent Muslim with no homicidal tendencies be an anachronism?

And, why are we so vile to each other while expressing our comments on a topic? True, one needs to have a thick skin to protect oneself against the odd abusive commentator. But here, abusive comments are fast becoming the norm, rather than the exception. One should be able to express his opinions without worrying about the thousand acidic remarks that will be flung in his direction, surely?

DC is a forum for people to express their viewpoints on whatever affects them in the world. I find there the actual number of people who pass their judgements on others' posts vastly outnumber the actual writers, who take pains to put their ideas into words and publish them. All those highly spirited people who feel so strongly for their cause, why can't they actually write articles, putting their viewpoints across?

Why should every debate end on an acrimonious note? If we are going to keep baying for blood at the drop of a hat, pretty soon we are going to have a bloody battle at our hands. Tad unnecessary, don't you think?

Huh? I thought the exchange with temporal was quite civilized. And he seems quite capable of handling the thoughts thrown at him. It even ended with smiles. Did I miss something Desigirl?

Anamika,
Sorry - this issue has been circling in my wee brain for a good while. So while I wrote something about it, I needed a place to park it and this one had a latest comment, so I posted mine here too! Should have clarified that - but thot I had waffled enough for one day!!!
Anyways, my comment wasn't just re t but in general.

The whole thing is hogwash. Islamists follow their Mullas implicitly. {I mean agreat majority of them} It is a religion based on Hatred,
Only very tolerant Christians,{ should I say Protestants} helped themto grow to be world terroists,along with the most coward Hindus.

"the most coward Hindus."

And that's why there are a billion of them still alive eh?