Posted on 09/06/2005 10:40:45 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
Countrywide elections for local governments, which were held on August 18 and 25 in over 100 districts, reversed the gains made by radical Islamists who came to power in two out of the country's four provinces in 2002. They had played a strong opposition role in the federal parliament and posed a formidable challenge to President Pervez Musharraf's vow to bring "enlightened moderation" to Pakistani society. The absence of full elections at the federal level has enhanced the importance of Pakistan's local and city government as a political bellwether... The unexpected defeat of the Islamists came in the North Western Frontier Province (NWFP), which neighbors Afghanistan. The province had been ruled since 2002 by the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), an umbrella group of six religious parties, including the vanguard radical party Jamaat-e-Islami... the religious parties lost their majority to the Awami National Party (ANP), a secular Pashtun party.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
FR Lexicon·Posting Guidelines·Excerpt, or Link only?·Ultimate Sidebar Management·Headlines
Donate Here By Secure Server·Eating our own -- Time to make a new start in Free Republic
PDF to HTML translation·Translation page·Wayback Machine·My Links·FreeMail Me
Gods, Graves, Glyphs topic·and group·Books, Magazines, Movies, Music
Great find -- thank you!
BUMP
Very interesting!
You're most welcome.
Hmm, maybe they might not want to get nuked after all. Will wonders never cease?
Hmmmmmm. Time will tell if this really sticks.
"maybe they might not want to get nuked after all" -- thoughtomator
I think they've been considering the consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran.
Will it stick? It will, off and on, with emphasis being "on". Pakistan is in a civil war right now, has been for a while, but it's very low key. We'll see some real **** before it's all done.
Great! One more piece of evidence that the terrorists are losing.
The Christian Science Monitor's cover story was about the possibility of Shiite civil war in Iraq. Then I got back to FR, and found the story about the "shot while trying to escape" expedient being used on the terrorist 'holes there, and figured A) the CSM article was party spin, and B) in addition to killing Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Bahai, and Zoroastrians, Moslems also lust after shedding the blood of their lifelong enemy -- other Moslems. IOW, saying there might be a Moslem civil war isn't exactly a "man bites dog" story. ;')
The Weather Is Cooler -- For How Long? (Quick Justice For Iraqi Terrorists)
American Spectator | Published 9/9/2005 12:09:31 AM | By John Connly Walsh
Posted on 09/10/2005 3:45:25 AM PDT by shrinkermd
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1481635/posts
I'm gonna go with A.
in addition to killing Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Bahai, and Zoroastrians, Moslems also lust after shedding the blood of their lifelong enemy -- other Moslems.
Not like Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Bahai, and Zoroastrians, who never have done anything like that.
Riiiight. That's why we see the streets of Flint running red with blood. That's why we see Sunnis in Lebanon slaughtering Christians by the thousands.
(as I keep pointing out)
The problem is some here take the most bloodthristy xenophobic verses from the Koran, apply the most bloodthristy xenophobic interpretation to them and say this is the heart and soul of Islam. Now if it were don't you think we'd be seeing a lot more incedences of terrorism in the world? (by "a lot" I'm talking 100s-1,000s a month) That we don't see this leads me to a different conclusion..That the vast majority of Muslims in the world do not buy into the jihadist fantasy. That's not to say those verses aren't there...they are, and they are used by the terrorist to justify their actions,but this is also why they are losing.
"The problem is some here take the most bloodthristy xenophobic verses from the Koran, apply the most bloodthristy xenophobic interpretation to them and say this is the heart and soul of Islam.'
Of course that's not a problem. It's the only sensible approach. Were it not for the fact that A) most Moslem immigrants are fleeing oppressive Islam and B) that most Moslems live in predominantly Moslem countries (something that didn't happen because of a lack of terrorist violence from the very origin of Islam), the 1000s of terrorist Moslem acts that do indeed take place each month would be 100s of 1000s.
And unless Islam is obliterated, that day is indeed coming.
It's the only sensible approach
Sensible? To tar with a broard brush those Muslims that are fighting and dieing along side us?
Sensible? To say to the 1.3(?) billion Muslims in the world OBL and the terrorists are right and America is your enemy?
Sensible? I think not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.