Sounds kind of un-American. If people are Muslims, why do we need to quash everything Islamic in their lives, especially if they are in such a small minority? Seems like it will only result in resentment and social schism. Tell me again why they aren’t entitled to freedom of religion?
Quash violence and abuse, sure. But reading books? C’mon.
I am sure my religion is as relevant to my highlighting your hypocritical approach as yours is to your hypocrisy. I know what I see in this thread. It is enough
As for our indian bigot who writes this
and then this.
It is recognisable as the discourse of the hinduvata, the hindu supremacists who also seek to suppress the budhist and the christians. (of course it is also not historically true, the ‘facts’ but this is not of import to this supramacist bigotry).
But here another mask is put on, but the objective of the supremacy and the suppression of the others:
No the reason you keep posting is an agenda of bigotry. We might as well have someone boring to post the examples of the attacks on the christians, the budhists and yes the muslims… It will be as usefull.
I meant they voluntarily dissociate when living in a secular country which is the wish because Islam is poison . Not proposing banning.
The Religous bigotry is poison. As is yours.
Religious bigotry is the integral part of Islam.
Muslims as human beings are equal to followers of other religions or to Atheists etc. But Islam is pure poison.
Et voila, again the proof of the bigotry…
Your bigotry is no better however you dress it up in pretensions of care, the supramacist ideology comes out.
Sure seems relevant to me. And sad too.
You see a lot of things. Very impressive. What is the hypocrisy? You mean this that you just made up because you are so sure?
It’s stupid. And you saying the DAESH is not uncivilized tells me a lot about you.
That’s not what she’s saying. Of course they’re “uncivilized” when they throw their victims in a ditch, that’s precisely her point : that denying OBL’s earthly remains any respect and treating them without the simple, non-onerous, downright basic human decency of a token burial rite would have been just as barbaric.
It doesn’t matter who he was, which side he was on or how much of an asshole the guy was : burial rites are fundamental to humanity (the word being used both in terms of species, and the moral concept), and some protohistorians would even tell you that it is at the precise point that we started to care for our dead that we stopped being mere animals. Conversely, deliberately denying someone these rites is a fundamentally transgressive and morally violent action. Not to mention, it implicitly gives anyone else carte blanche to disrespect your dead so there’s some pragmatic strategy to it, too.
I would personally agree that there’s some silliness to it, as with any religion or religious rite, but that’s besides the point : it is what Is Done.
The blanket statement that thowing victims in ditches is uncivilized is kind of meaningless without context. I wouldn’t expect ISIL to hold a ceremony to respect the dead after beheading them. That’s just odd.
I really didn’t think what I said about OBL’s sea burial was controversial. Religious rites are not “fundamental”. Not for executed terrorists nor for anyone else. Of course burial ceremonies are an important element of human culture, etc. Furthermore this was political theater in my opinion. They probably just dumped him in plastic bags in the ocean. Who cares anyway. My point was “we [White House] must think of all those poor US flags being burned around the world”. Maybe they really do need to do that. For internal consumption or just security concerns. I wasn’t present for that briefing. I find it obnoxious anyway.
Considering that the current Prime Minister of India is a virulent Hindu nationalist responsible for the anti-Muslim Gujarat massacres, I would think you’d want to be a little more careful throwing those stones around in that glass house of yours.
2002 riots: Modi clean says SIT | Ahmedabad News - Times of India?
All this while, Opposition party’s Govt. was in power in India which could do anything to have Modi convicted.
59 Older men and women who were Hindus were burnt alive in a coach of a train by a mob of Muslims is what prompted the riots. This was not the first time the Muslims instigated riots. As per govt. numbers, abt 1000 people were killed (250 Hindus, 750 Muslims) in the riots that followed which were perhaps the worst Hindu-Muslim riots in independent India
You continue to display your distorted reading. I said of course th opposite.
Yes and it is the
As you can see, the supramacist has ready excuses how it is really the other sides fault. they made us do it…
There is identity between the language this “truthseeker” uses and that of the genocidaires of the Balkans including the ridiculous (he has done it several times) evocation that somehow the local muslim is really another religion of far away grandparents and the hate filled language of poisoning - while being careful to pretend for concern of the individual muslim - like I think the good negro that the american klan was ready to notice…
This is the polite cover to the steps to oppression and genocides.
Oh, look. You’re an apologist for Hindutva violence.
Yes, Modi himself managed to escape justice, but some of his fellow Hindu nationalists who worked for him were held to account for what they’d done in Gujarat.
…which is the false story pushed by a commission appointed by the Gujarat government (which was led by Modi) and chaired by a Modi crony. Actual independent investigations have shown the fire was an accident, and Modi’s nonsense conspiracy theory that it was a targeted terrorist attack by the Pakistani ISI are straight-up bullshit.
An admirable job of victim-blaming. And it seems the Muslims don’t need to “instigate” anything in order for Hindu nationalists to riot and commit religious violence against non-Hindus in India. Just ask the Sikhs in Punjab and the Christians in Karnatka.
Yes, it was a horrific anti-Muslim pogrom. Apparently religiously-motivated murders aren’t a problem for you as long as the right people are the perpetrators.
I consider myself mediocre in most things (compared to both Muslims or non-Muslims, doesn’t matter:)), no so supremacist. Like I said, its Islam which is unadulterated poison and the cancer of 21st century.
Killing fellow human beings in rioting is a horrible crime against humanity, perpetrators should be severely punished as per law, be them Muslim or Hindu. Those Muslims who prompted the riots by burning 59 people alive in a train deserve the worst punishment.
Of course he is. He also uses the code words of the hindutva and like the Balkcan genocodidaires, uses the double language… making excuses and of course lies, pretending moderation but actually promoting the suppression (voluntary…) of the religious minority, using the language of pure hate with a thin deniability…
Of course in each case it will actually be their own fault… instigating…
So the Hindus should be punished, and the Muslims should be punished. But Islam should be stamped out because it foments violence, and Hinduism… apparently shouldn’t, even though Indian Hindus are just as violent as Indian Muslims.
How does that work, exactly?
OK. So I misunderstood you. In that case I apologize. Can you explain what that brilliant piece of wisdom meant?
You see how this works?
Except that I have already decided you are a waste of time and I don’t give a shit about what you think you see.
This makes your reply to camille about the butthurt all the more funny for its hypocrisy. Kobol understood me well enough.
Aicha already has said how it works.
He repeats the story again.
how it works is there is the false ‘tolerance’ language for the individual but only if they suppress their identity and practice. And of course there is the usage of the hindutva discourses not even disguised. And all this is nearly identical to the language and structure of the discourses used by the genocidaires of the Balkans (mostly the serbs in the last round), with their discourses about the true origins of the other religious practitioners, the implications of the treachery by not being of the right religion, the make-up on the face of hatred by pretend tolerance of the individual (catholic, muslim)… and the pure hatred of the identity (poison, etc.).
The real problem is the bigotry and the human behavior, not which religious bigotry, the fact of it. There is an expression in the arabic for this reality: Beni adam beni adam. the children of adam are the children of adam. It means that people are people, and their bad and good faults go to their very origin.
WTF? Ok, I’m out, I really am. I don’t want to get really nasty and cause a poor impression on camille again.
Go talk to your oracle Kobal please. Peace.
I have no idea what any of this fucking means. It’s clear that English is not your first language and I’m sorry but it’s not doing too well as your second one either.
The U.S. intervened to protect Bosnian Muslims from the Serbs twice. The same leftists who are in a marriage of convenience with Islamism now were decrying it and apologizing for the Serbian genocide-mongers. Noam Chomsky still denies the Bosnian genocide even happened and he’s not the only one.
When Muslims are the victims, as they were in Bosnia, reasonable people see that. When Muslims are the aggressors, as they are in too many places today, reasonable people see that too. Not everyone is permanently on some “team” where they can’t see the differences between different types of Muslims in different times and places.