Taj hotel cleared of militants [terrorists] - Mumbai Terror Attack Appears Over After Three Days

Sify.com ^ | Saturday, November 29, 2008

[HollyB]

Good post, thanks for all of your clarification. I really don’t like to get mean spirited. By the way, I’ve read verses, bits and pieces - online, ususally as a means of referencing. I’ve never read the entire book and honestly, I’m not that interested in doing so. I remember as a teen, my father came very close to moving us to SA. Life as a teen girl in SA would have been difficult. I’m glad we didn’t go, although I know why he wanted to go - big bucks were being made there at the time.

[Cronos]

By the way, I’ve read verses, bits and pieces - online, ususally as a means of referencing. I’ve never read the entire book and honestly, I’m not that interested in doing so

That's the key thing. If you read bits and pieces you may not get the entire grasp of things. For instance, if you read the Mein Kampf in it's entirety you realise the scary truth that Adolf wrote down exactly what he was going to do and you also realise that he was a madman with his incoherent, disjointed writing. And that's true about the Sunnah and Hadiths.

[Cronos]

interesting -- I take it that you are European-American? SA is horrible, truly horrible place to be. The rest of the Gulf is actually pretty pleasant -- I liked Bahrain a lot but it's gotten too modern now for my taste -- like Dubai which I find too crass. I really like Oman. however, the Sauds are truly despised by other Arabs and SA is bad. Ok, in the expat enclaves you can do what you want, but outside there, you as a woman would need to cover every inch of skin and even your eyes shouldn't show. You cannot drive a car or even leave the house without a man to escort you about.

I really despise the cult for having destroyed the glory that was Persia though (and I'm talking about Sassanid and Achaemanid Persia, the Iran or Arya-stan of Cyrus the Great and Darius the Mede)

[Cronos]

Yes, I know it can be hard to be civil on these forums. And, I know where both of you are coming from — people are at heart people and decent no matter where they come from. Philosophies can be evil, not people. I’ve learnt through reading through the histories of the ME, Iran, India, the Balkans etc. that the only way is conversion. The “religion” is incompatible with living with other folks. Just wikipedia “Moghals” — you’ll read about how the 3rd Mughal Emperor, Akbar was beloved of both his Hindu and M subjects and how he was a fair, just ruler who ended jaziya. His son Jehangir and grandson Shah Jehan too were secular largely, but his great-grandson, Aurangzeb was a fanatic who went on a rampage against Hindus and inevitably turned them against him. What does that tell us? That Akbar and Jehangir would probably have been the decent sort that your friends probably are, but the philosophy twists people down the line. Ditto for the lot that conquered Coptic Egypt

[dools007]

Al Queda was probably not involved directly. It merely provided the assassins. I suspect it was a dissident Indian group and/or a Paki group that used them. I do not believe, given the available info, that Paki government was involved.

[BunnySlippers]

President-Elect.

[Cronos]

You’re right — AlQ would be indirectly involved, but they were involved int he planning and training that is there, no other group is capable of this. The assasins however, were from Pakistan, that’s pretty much proven. And quite definitely recruited by Lashkar e Toiba. They were not Indians and not even from Pakistan occupied Kashmir — they seem to have been from Pakistani punjab

[Paul R.]

Now, wait a minute, and don’t flame me yet — that’s a lot of very pertinent information. BUT, Islam has NOT given the world “every single terrorist attack this century”. (Unless you are starting in 2000?) You have forgotten the IRA, among others. Radical Islam is the largest present source of this evil, but it is certainly not the ONLY source of the last 100 years.

[Paul R.]

I disagree with your statement: “Islam must have its reformation as well if the West is to survive another 100 years.”

For one thing, I suspect Islam (or at least part of Islam) is planning on “taking down” the West over a longer period.

More to the point, though, the more radicalized factions want to do it faster, and, yes, they might be able to do it, but if they go too fast, the West (possibly with aid from India) will still have overwhelming technology and arms, and pushed too hard / damaged too painfully, will react by destroying most of Islam. Yes, I am talking about a nuclear WW3, and, perhaps it is the most likely scenario.

I think Bush’s long term intent has been to both try to avoid an eventual capitulation of the West AND try to avoid WW3, by sewing seeds for a hoped for something of that reformation you speak of.

[Cronos]

Actually I thought I did specify that "Islamhas given the world every single terrorist attack this centur" Since 2000 was the start of this century, yes I AM starting in 2000 :)

For the past 100 years yes Islam was not the major threat TO THE WESTERN WORLD. it was still potent against the Christians, Zoroastrians in the M-E, against the Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Christians in India and against the Hindus and Buddhists in Malaysia/Indonesia and agains the Christians in the Philippines.

In fact, the US was merrily blind to this enemy for a long time while India faced it first hand. 9/11 was a wake-up call

If you take back the time span to the last 1000 years, you will find that the cult has been THE source of evil -- ranging from the massacres in the Balkans, Armenia, India, Cenral Asia, sub-saharan Africa, to the attacks on the West (Spain was only completed liberated in 1490 while Vienna was being besieged as late as 9/10/1661.

[Cronos]

Note that the "reformation" in Christianity was fundamentalism like the Puritans burning down Churches, icons, etc. Isl has had it's reformation -- the Wahabbis and the Taliban.

christian reformation only led to more wars, more fundamentalism and more extremism. Only the industrial era and the liberal age destroyed that (when was the last time you heard of puritans, while the Presbyterians and other Protestant Churchs are nearly defunct (only the new Evangelicals are there along with the Catholic, Orthodox, Oriental and Assyrian Church).

What you're looking for is a weakening of religious fervor.

[foobarred]

What you're looking for is a weakening of religious fervor.

Actually, I think just giving them jobs would be enough. I don't mean a jobs welfare or anything, but free countries generally do now war with each other.

Radical ideology seems to suit those that are resentful and jobless. What is it about idle hands being the devil's playthings? Jeremiah Wright is doing the same thing in this country: preaching Marxism in the guise of Christianity.

I haven't read the Koran, but I've got to believe that not all Muslims want to kill us. My wife was stationed over the Middle East (Bahrain), and most people she met were very nice to her. That said, if 23% of European Muslims sympathize with the 9/11 terrorists, that's saying that those are a minority, but certainly not a fringe group.

I believe that the long term strategy has to freedom. The only other alternative is creating a glass parking lot, something nobody wants. Like Christianity, I think the way the religion is practiced will adapt to the conditions on the ground. The way that Christianity has been practiced has changed throughout the centuries, and even now, Christianity is practiced differently depending on the locality. Of course, the good news is that most of our "radical" Christians are dead now. They've been dead for centuries. The bad news is that radical Muslims are heads of state.

[Cronos]

That's a noble intention and I did think that poverty was the cause of a lot of this, however, I was wrong. The AlQ and other groups have a lot of engineers, even doctors.

Also, many of the educated lot in the WEst 9Britain comes to mind).

Free countries do NOT war with each other, but whichIslamic country IS a free country?

The thing you say about Radical Ideology is valid, but allIslamic thought fits in with that definition (don't believe me, read the Koran).

Not all M's want to carry out the deeds in the K (people are people and decent by default) -- I've lived in Bahrain too for a long time and yes, nearly all the Bahrainis are very nice and good people (Sauds on the other hand... :)

Like Christianity, I think the way the religion is practiced will adapt to the conditions on the ground

The only cases where that happened was Twelver and Sevener Shia's -- especially Ismailis and Bohris whose ideology arose out of a reaction to Arab dominance by the Iranis and Berbers. Sufi-ism or a mixture of Islamic mysticism and Hindu spirituality is also a peacable group, but they are considered heretics by the 80% Sunnis.

[Cronos]

Actually, our “radical” Christians are still alive — the Rev. Jeremiah for example and many of the fringe evangelical groups. Radicals like the Puritans and many of the Church burning Calvinists etc are dead thankfully. However, our modern radicals have eschewed violence mostly (exceptions like the Waco guys remain of course). M reformers are the Wahabbis and the Deobandi schools which preach violence and a return to 7th century norms

[BlackVeil]

The only cases where that happened was Twelver and Sevener Shia's -- especially Ismailis and Bohris whose ideology arose out of a reaction to Arab dominance by the Iranis and Berbers. Sufi-ism ...

Also the rather small Ah-Mahdiah sect is of the same sort. However, all of those groups whom you have mentioned are fiercely persecuted in Pakistan - they are victims of constant sectarian violence, largely unnoticed by the outside world. It is not the Pakistani govt but the Deobandi radicals, etc., but they operate with impunity.

[Cronos]

I’ve never heard of the Al-Mahdiah’s. Are you referring to the Ahmadiyyas? however, Ahmadiyyas are in a way similar to Bahai’s in the common point that both had prophets who say they superseded Mohammed just like M superseded others. And, since Izz says that M was the last prophets, hence these are blasphemous words and so they need to be killled

[BlackVeil]

I’ve never heard of the Al-Mahdiah’s.Are you referring to the Ahmadiyyas? however, Ahmadiyyas are in a way similar to Bahai’s ...

Yes, that is who I meant, thank you for the clarrification.

As you say, they have some features in common with the Bahai - they are also have pacifist beliefs. They do count themselves as part of the official Islamic faith, although this is not a claim recognised by the mainstream - in that sense, they are similar to the Mormon's relationship to Christianity. They have some shocking times in Pakistan, with attacks and persecutions.

[Cronos]

a very good analogy of Ahmaddiyya beliefs vis-a-vis Muslim beliefs -- yes, since they acknowledge a prophet AFTER Mohammed, they violate the Islamic belief that Mohammed was the last and greatest prophet. Islam tends to turn on itself every now and then.

Interestingly, most of Islam's sects are based not on theological differences but rather on political differences -- for example the Shia's say that after the first 4 Caliphs, the 5th should have been the profit's son-in-law Ali (since Muhammed's family is the "holy family") and so they broke away. the Ismailies, Bohras etc. broke away because they supported different caliphs