Such an article would not have appeared on the pakistani press.
But the US still considers Pakis "allies in the war on terror."
It is time for the US to join India in the war against Pakistan.

Posted by: rocky at September 17, 2006 7:41 AM

We all agree the Pope is right.
He represents so many of the world's citizens.

What do we make of this article? It is certainly carefully worded.

Pope says sorry to MuslimsBy Stephen Brown in Vatican City

September 17, 2006 09:22pm
http://www.news.com.au/sundayheraldsun/story/0,21985,20429129-5005961,00.html

Posted by: Gramfan at September 17, 2006 7:43 AM

But even here they are making demands. I hope no more press releases leave the Vatican, especially about the last sentence.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20428079-1702,00.html

Aust leader 'disappointed' with Pope
September 17, 2006
THE head of the Federal Government's Islamic advisory committee, Ameer Ali, says he is disappointed with Pope Benedict XVI for linking Islam to violence.
In a speech last week, the pontiff spoke of a link between Islam and jihad, or "holy war", and quoted a 14th century Byzantine emperor who said innovations introduced by the Prophet Mohammed were "evil and inhuman".

But he has claimed his comments had been intended as a rejection of religiously motivated violence from any side.

Despite this, his words have still sparked widespread outrage across the Muslim world.

Dr Ali said Muslims in Australia felt disappointed by the Pope's comments.

"We expect the Pope to follow (in) the footsteps of his predecessor who had been a great builder among communities for the last so many years, and not a Pope of the crusades," Dr Ali said.

"So, I would ask him to follow the footsteps of Pope John Paul II."

Dr Ali urged Australian Muslims not to react with violence to Pope Benedict's comments.

"But I think the Christian community will understand the feelings of the Muslims," he said, adding that the Pope should give a full explain for his comments.

Posted by: Gramfan at September 17, 2006 7:51 AM

I am so glad that such a great mind identifies self hatred as one of the main causes of Europe's inability to defend itself against the aggression of Islam.
This is what i have believed for a long time.
Fortunately America is not as yet rofoundly infected by this disabilitating disease.

Posted by: chevalier de st george at September 17, 2006 7:57 AM

the Pope is right to state that Islam is aiming to convert at the point of a sword.
I now feel a minority of posters on this site profess a hate of Muslims / Islam that would only be quenched with Islam's complete destruction. When Islamic moderates declare they are given no room by recognized authorities like Robert Spencer to call for and promote a reformation of Islam, the posters here slam that person down with increasingly shrill calls for them to submit and recognize that Islam is evil. It seems to be a group of right wing Americans who are calling for this.
Call me a Troll, call me left wing....but I will call you this...politically hopeless. You have no plan to deal with Islam beyond 'not in my back yard'. You have no strategy about what to do with the 1.2 billion Muslims globally. When you do act politically, all you can do is copy the stupid tactics of the radical islamics, and burn an effigy outside a culver city mosque. An act guaranteed to evoke ridicule and alienate the public.
So, I get the Koranic verses that incite the Muslim masses, now how are you going to make sure every American and European citizen knows those same verses?
Next time you slag someone off for not being anti-Islam enough, suggest an alternative strategy. (bet you can't)...key point, that the voters would support.

Posted by: protectalbion at September 17, 2006 8:09 AM

Congratulations to Swapan Dasgupta for showing courage. It appears that few Indians are coming out of the fear of Islamic street voilence.

Posted by: iqbal at September 17, 2006 8:19 AM

Excellent article. Nice background work, too. Can one imagine in, say, in the NYT?!

Posted by: george_rem at September 17, 2006 9:08 AM

"You have no strategy about what to do with the 1.2 billion Muslims globally". protectalbion - You think there actually is an answer? Is there any sane answer for the madness of Islam? The more we give, the more they want!
As ugly as it may seem, perhaps the best solution is to send them all home and leave them to wallow in their own hate and paranoia. Maybe in 200 years they will begin to act more civilized. Perhaps, really, the time is not right to mix our cultures.

Posted by: Timbo at September 17, 2006 9:48 AM

"I now feel a minority of posters on this site profess a hate of Muslims / Islam" - protectalbion

I do hate Islam, and no apologies, period.

"that would only be quenched with Islam's complete destruction"

I would settle for suppressing Islam definitively, then I could lay it off my mind.

"increasingly shrill calls"

I don't think anybody here comes even close to the shrillness of the loony zombie Arab street.

"recognize that Islam is evil"

It is evil, for the very reasons that Robert and Huge point out here. Just like Nazism was evil.

"It seems to be a group of right wing Americans who are calling for this."

I'm Eurotrash, and not particularly ideologically minded. A frustrated former leftie.

"Call me a Troll, call me left wing"

Oh, this is really beyond leftism, although they may be the worst. There are useful idiots in all segments of society, such as the retired military officer Carl Peters.

"but I will call you this...politically hopeless. You have no plan to deal with Islam beyond 'not in my back yard'."

Which is based on what knowledge you have ...? I wouldn't claim to have any solutions, that is correct. However, the first priority right now is making it commonly acknowledged that we have a huge, growing problem, and making this a topic for open discussion in the mainstream media. And then agreeing on a willingness to do something about the problem, as the lesser evil by far, even if this may entail civic unrest for the remainder of our lives.

But thank you for allowing me to rant! Possible pieces of a solution would include, IMHO:

Withdrawing from international treaties preventing us from expelling subversive elements.

Expel, expel, expel. And then some. Better safe than sorry. Nobody should have the right to enjoy our freedom and welfare if they seek to destroy us, no?

Stopping the payment of jizya to the Muslim world.

Stand by our values, never apologize for using our freedom of expression, never apologize for denouncing Muhammed.

Banning madrassa in our countries (as suggested by the right wing white American Ayaan Hirsi Ali ... er)

As suggested by Hugh here, exploiting divisions in the Muslim world internally, to weaken their ability to wage jihad.

That was just some points I could come up with here. Oh, of course there may be a "solution" which is basically non-violent: the "Carthage" option. Know what I mean?

Posted by: anti-uffe at September 17, 2006 9:48 AM

Protectalbion:

I'm not a rightwinger. I'm a socialist, and probably quite a bit more to the left than you might imagine. Why then am I here?

I agree that a proper strategy is needed, however. Anti-uffe's suggestions strike me as quite appropriate.

Prophet Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at September 17, 2006 11:14 AM

The incident concerning the Pope's comments demonstrates for all to see that reform in Islam is impossible under current conditions. During this revolting ideological circus, there has been not one bit of introspection by the Muslims, not one ounce of respect shown toward other regliions, not one scrap of tolerance or good will shown toward things non-Muslim.

In the long run, there are only two choices open to the civlized world to defend itself. Either we rampage through the Islamic anti-world with unremitting violence--in other words, inflict massive casualties in the millions--until total surrender and contrition, or, we quarantine the Islamic anti-world--make them live in their own self-inflicted hell until, probably centuries from now, if ever, they find a way to internally reform their vile and uncompromising belief system.

This nasty choice is forced upon us by the doctrines of Islam itself, because it will not and cannot accept criticism or adaptation.

I support the second approach. We should respect the immutable Islamic doctrines by banishing Islam and Muslims absolutely from the civilized world--they are demonstrably unfit to live beside and amongst free men.

Muslim immigration should be stopped cold, and all Muslims currently here interned and deported to an Islamic sharia state of their choice. In future, no Muslim should be permitted to set foot on the soil of the free world--ever. All transfer of technology, goods, and services must cease. And within the public discourse of the free world, we must never stop letting the Muslims know why they are banished. If the truth of their merciless hate, intolerance, and violence makes them stew, all the better to motivate in them toward some kind of reformation.

The Muslims are the only ones who can reform Islam--if that is even possible. Today, they have zero motivation to do so, as the west capitulates to their every outrageous demand, in a spirit of compromise which is never, ever, reciprocated. It is time to show these unwanted, disgusting house guests the door.

Posted by: Stendec at September 17, 2006 11:32 AM

protectalbion writes:
"Next time you slag someone off for not being anti-Islam enough, suggest an alternative strategy. (bet you can't)...key point, that the voters would support."

Restrict immigration from all Muslim countries to
effectively zero.

No more students from Muslim countries either.

Those could be supported by a large number of
people. Soon, more restrictive measures,
including

Expulsion of dangerous Muslim communities. In
America, this may require removing citizenship by
birth, or not, depends on how implemented.

Beyond political measures, a relentless campaign
of honest discussion of Islamand it's vile
founder, including comedy, would go a long way
towards making Muslims feel less comfortable
here.

There you go, no killing either. Now, since you
fancy yourself the master of realpolitik, why
don't YOU tell us YOUR proposals. Bet you don't
have anything, neener, neener!

Posted by: root_cause at September 17, 2006 11:56 AM

"Political correctness necessitates debunking the clash of civilisations but realities on the ground are beginning to suggest otherwise."

So true.

The Indians show true class and courage again.

Posted by: Foehammer at September 17, 2006 12:41 PM

Bravo for the article Mr. Dasgupta. But you don't understand a simple point "Only Muslims can understand what jihad means and what Islam means." So they can't have any dialogue with the non-believers....you see, so first convert and then try to talk!!

Posted by: vonbueren at September 17, 2006 1:04 PM

Brilliantly put, Swapan Dasgupta. We need more of your courageous kind. May your tribe increase in the abysmally ill-informed Bedouin wastelands of MSM.

Posted by: Dunk at September 17, 2006 1:39 PM

Re: "any debate on Islam based on critical scrutiny is bound to be accompanied by threats and intimidation."

Islam is not a rational faith that is based on a sound philosophical foundation- as the Pope correctly pointed out in his lecture.

Islam is violent because Muhammad was a violent man who promoted using religious violence to achieve his objectives.

The following are only some of the verses in the Qur'an that can and have been used in the history of Islam in support of violence in the name of God and the glories of martyrdom in a holy war.

2:190-193 "Fight in the cause of God those who fight you ... And slay them wherever ye catch them ... And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression and there prevail justice and faith in God ..."

2:216 "Fighting is prescribed for you and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But God knoweth and ye know not."

2:224 "Then fight in the cause of God and know that God heareth and knoweth all things."

3:157-158 "And if ye are slain or die in the way of God, forgiveness and mercy from God are far better than all they could amass. And if ye die, or are slain, Lo! It is unto God that ye are brought together."

3:169 "Think not of those who are slain in God's way as dead. Nay, they live finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord."

3:195 "... Those who have ... fought or been slain, verily I will blot out from them their iniquities and admit them into Gardens with rivers flowing beneath; a reward from the presence of God ..."

4:101 "... For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies."

4:74, 75 "Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of God whether he is slain or gets victory, soon shall we give him a reward of great (value). Those who believe fight in the cause of God and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil, so fight ye against the friends of Satan, feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan."

4:89 "They but wish that ye should reject faith as they do, and thus be on the same footing as they. But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of God. But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them…"

4:95 "Not equal are those believers who sit at (at home) and receive no hurt and those who strive and fight in the cause of God with their goods and their persons. God hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than those who sit (at home).

5:36 "The punishment of those who wage war against God and His apostle and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land. That is their disgrace in this world and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter."

5:54 "O ye who believe. Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily God guideth not a people unjust."

8:12-17 "Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you. Give firmness to the believers. I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips off them. This because they contend against God and his apostle. If any contend against God and his apostle, God is strict in punishment ... O ye who believe. When ye meet the unbelievers in hostile array, never turn your backs to them. If any do turn his back to them on such a day, unless it be a stratagem of war ... he draws on himself the wrath of God and his abode is Hell, an evil refuge (indeed)."

8:59-60 "Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly). They will never frustrate (them). Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of God and your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know ..."

8:65 "O apostle! Rouse the believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred. If a hundred they will vanquish a thousand of the unbelievers, for these are a people without understanding."

9:5 "... fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) ..."

9:14 "Fight them, and God will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame ..."

9:29 "Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and his apostle nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth (even if they are) of the people of the Book, until they pay the Jizya [religious tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

47:4 "Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks, at length when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them) ... but if it had been God's will, he could certainly have exacted retribution from them (himself), but (he lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the way of God, he will never let their deeds be lost."

61:4 "Truly God loves those who fight in His cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure."

The following are a few examples in the hadith collection of Bukhari, the most authoritative book in Sunni Islam, second only to the Qur'an (Sahih Al-Bukhari, 9 vols. translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Al Nabawiya: Dar Ahya Us-Sunnah, n.d.).

"Allah's Apostle said, ‘Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords.’" (vol. 4, p. 55)

"Allah's Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ and whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ his life and property will be saved by me…" (vol. 4, p. 124)

"It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he has made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land…" (vol. 4, p. 161)

"Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him." (vol. 9, p. 45)

"An infidel spy came to the Prophet while he was on a journey. The spy sat with the companions of the Prophet and started talking and then went away. The Prophet said (to his companions), ‘Chase and kill him.’ So, I killed him. The Prophet then gave him the belongings of the killed spy." (vol. 4, pp. 181-182)

"Some people from the tribe of Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milk) camels of charity and to drink their milk and urine (as a medicine). They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophet ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die." (vol. 8, pp. 519-520)

"The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." (vol. 4, pp. 158-159)

Read it all here:
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Terrorism/islam_and_violence.html

Posted by: Johnathan at September 17, 2006 1:42 PM

What about strategy?

Quote, India's Daily Pioneer, by Swapan Dasgupta: "Political correctness necessitates debunking the clash of civilisations but realities on the ground are beginning to suggest otherwise."

Realities on the ground is what this 'clash of civilizations' is about. No apologies from the Vatican (none heard from Islamaland) are going to change that reality. The words had been spoken, understood, tested on the streets of Islamaland, and the response was violence. There is no way to make this look 'politically correct' though western media tried. The people who see this media are asking questions. They see the bombings of Christian churches, murder of Christian priests and nuns, and the hate filled speeches by higher clerical spokesmen for Islam. What are they to think? Should they continue to believe the PC debunkers, or will they understand the 'realities on the ground'? This may be the one most important defining moment for Judeo-Christian based western civilization, morphed into the post-Enlightenment of social freedoms and secular government, as opposed to dogma based theocratic government, that we face the reality of what this Islamic violence is about. We are at a historic moment in our civilization testing the limits of cultural tolerance for institutionalized religious violence. The people are quick to understand this, while the PC crowd is still hugging its ideology of denial of this reality. What should be their strategy?

We vote, we write, we talk, and we understand. This is how it starts, how to fight Islamic violence against us and our culture of freedoms. If this fails, push back, in every legal way we can. Expulsion of troublemakers, closing down hate-mongering mosques and madrassas, monitoring of anti-freedom violent activities, and restricting immigration to our lands from countries that hate and fear our freedoms. Then if this fails, we step up closer to Islamic violence and go in their face, with violence if necessary, while at the same time calling for Reforms within their Ulema to guarantee equal rights for all their members, both men and women, to eliminate all forms of persecution, of slavery, especially child slavery, and to respect all religions within their borders equally. This means rebuilding churches in Egypt, and all Muslim countries, rebuilding Jain and Hindu temples in Asia, and granting safety for all religious figures, priests and nuns, within those lands. Then we press for apologies for past crimes committed against these, as well as apologies for crimes today against humanity globally. The strategy is one of steady pressure, applied equally on all Muslim lands and their religious theocratic governments who had politicized religion for their own advantage, as well as on Islamic organizations within our lands. Finally, we demand an Ulema wide, worldwide, apology for threats on Pope Benedict XVI's life. We must do this relentlessly, apply pressure on every Islamic pressure point we can find, until they back off. And when backing off, we must continue the pressures to such an extent that they will either accept defeat, or realize that this is not a 'ten year truce' as allowed by their religion, but a permanent truce. Only then can the 'clash of civilizations' be controlled, when they are truly subdued. The Pope had spoken, and this is the result, that now we all unite and become "Papists" in spirit, though we may not be of the Catholic faith. Islam has to understand this, that their violence is no longer acceptable by us, and that in this fight against their violence we are united.

Watch for voter results both in Europe and the US. This will be the first clue. We had been thrown into a war not of our doing by politics within Islam, by their Jihad. Our response should be reasoned and tougher than anything they ever anticipated. Reason they do not understand, but toughness they will. This is a war, the truth must win this one. Thank you Pope Benedict.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at September 17, 2006 2:45 PM

"Finally, we demand an Ulema wide, worldwide, apology for threats on Pope Benedict XVI's life. We must do this relentlessly, apply pressure on every Islamic pressure point we can find, until they back off." Battle_of_Tours

Brilliant. This is the first thing that should happen: we start making demands, we seize the initiative, rather than backing off in face of the infantile temper tantrums of the street, and their thuggish leaders. An absolutely crucial point.

Posted by: anti-uffe at September 17, 2006 3:48 PM

This is the first thing that should happen: we start making demands, we seize the initiative, rather than backing off in face of the infantile temper tantrums of the street, and their thuggish leaders. An absolutely crucial point.
Posted by: anti-uffe at September 17, 2006 03:48 PM

Yes, it is indeed time that we lay the terms of engagement with muslims rather than the other way around. The only question is can the collective 'we' for once shed our mutual differences & distrusts to act in unison?

Posted by: Razdan at September 17, 2006 4:19 PM

actually, I think the comments from root_cause, anti-uffe and Geoff represent some excellent ideas (that the voting public could be encouraged to accept). Beyond the comments that state that the Koranic / Hadith verses encourage 'conversion at the point of a sword' and that Muslims represent a 5th column in our western societies, the debate on these postings had not progressed very far. The comments by the folks mentioned do represent political actions we could take / vote for.
Thanks also for pointing out some left-wing credentials.
However, our attempts to isolate the Muslims within their existing umma will not succeed because of our dependence on oil. So actually, in order to break radical Islam, we have to break our existing relationship with oil (or occupy the countries producing oil).
Geoff: as to policies of my own, I have previously posted the following:
Use Banksy style graffiti to promote ideas
Vet all colleges in UK to make sure they're not offering degrees in Islamic studies using radical interpretations
Join with / form a group that intellectually confronts Jihadists at colleges and Mosques
Join with a group that can offer flash counter-demos to the abhorrent islamo-fascists demonstrations.
Join with group applying multimedia more in fight of ideas
Repeal the Human Rights act in UK and apply mass deportation of all convicted sympathizers of radical Islam (3 judge court as used against IRA)
Politically vet all Imams registered in EU
CCTV all Mosques in EU
Ban all forms of Wahibbism in UK

Posted by: protectalbion at September 17, 2006 6:19 PM

To add to the suggestions of protectalbion, how about a boycott of all Western companies offering Sharia-compliant products and services?

Posted by: AndyGill at September 17, 2006 6:46 PM

I agree with Battle_of_Tours. I think the most important battles that we will fight against Islam will not take place on the battlefield but in the arena of ideas, in the press, the schools, in the courts, and in the marketplace.

Posted by: lakeside at September 17, 2006 7:26 PM

Timbo posted: As ugly as it may seem, perhaps the best solution is to send them all home and leave them to wallow in their own hate and paranoia. Maybe in 200 years they will begin to act more civilized. Perhaps, really, the time is not right to mix our cultures.

I would go along with that. There are two problems

1. It would be considered ethnic cleansing

2. Christians in Muslim countries will be slaughtered.

It would be better to have an exchange of populations. It takes care of both 1 and 2.

Posted by: DP111 at September 17, 2006 8:47 PM

I would be a papist had no B16 apologized, spin it as you will, he did in fact apologize, and that is how it is perceived around the world, of course the apology is in vain, as Muslims will do that which they do best and know all too well how to do.. emulate the perfect model of a man, threaten and terrorize the Pope and the Catholic church into submission.

Screw them all, phuq Islam and Muslims, do unto them as they do unto us..bestow upon them the same favors they bestow upon atheists and pagans.

Posted by: Nariz at September 17, 2006 11:34 PM

Protect Albion wrote:

I now feel a minority of posters on this site profess a hate of Muslims / Islam that would only be quenched with Islam's complete destruction. When Islamic moderates declare they are given no room by recognized authorities like Robert Spencer to call for and promote a reformation of Islam, the posters here slam that person down with increasingly shrill calls for them to submit and recognize that Islam is evil. It seems to be a group of right wing Americans who are calling for this.
...............

Probably like a lot of people here on list, I came to a reaiization of Islam as an organized threat to the non-Muslim world slowly and reluctantly. I grew up Protestant in a largely Catholic neighborhood (it was a rough area, but there was very little religious intolerance). My best friend in grade shcool was Chinese-American, and her Grandmother was a practicing Buddhist.

In college, I was the only Gentile on a Jewish publication. One of the main themes of the paper was Israeli-Palestinian dialogue.

Of course I knew about Muslim violence--the highjackings, the bombings and kidnappings--but for years I just generally considerd this Third-World violence. I thought, like so many Liberals, that a mix of education, economic opportunity, and less authorian government would fix these problems.

It is only after years of observation that I realized how much Islamic violence was actually justified by religious precepts--I think I started to really put things together after the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. The bombing of the Cole, the barracks bombings in the Middle East and Africa, Muslim violence against other non-Muslims were all things I found increasingly disturbing. Actually listening to the words of Bin Laden, Yasser Arafat, and various Imams grew increaingly disturbing. Like so many other Westerners, though, it was 9/11 that really woke me up. In retrospect, I am embarrassed that it took me so long to see the pattern.

Some few people on this site may welcome a bloody clash with the Muslim world. I think these are *very* few. Most people, I believe, understand that this clash has been underway for some time, and that it was *not initiated* by non-Muslims.

Most Westerners, certainly most Americans, knew very little about Islam a few years ago (many still know next to nothing). More importantly, though, I don't think that we were at all pre-disposed, most of us, to view Islam negatively.

As for moderate Muslims, I think most people here enjoy hearing from them, as long as they honestly confront the violence in Islam. Just saying there is no violence in Islam, or that you are Islamophobic for being concerned about it, is not useful. It just serves, intentionally or not, to lull non-Muslims into thinking that there is really no problem with violent Islam. I, for one, would *love* to see a genuine Islamic reformation that results in a more peaceful and tolerant faith.

Certainly, there are some posters here who slam others. I have been slammed myself once or twice. But I have never known a site where this doesn't happen from time to time. I belong to Yahoo groups of children's book writers and illustrators (what could be more gentle, right?) and you would be surprised by some of the heated discussions.

When you consider the diversity of posters on JW it is rather surprising that there is not *more* friction. There are Fundamentalist Christians, Socialists, Secular Humanists, Hindus, Atheists, occasional Muslims, Liberals, men, women, Red-and Blue staters, Catholics, college students, retired military personnel, people from England, the US, Australia, India, Canada, various European countries, etc, etc.

I *have* read a few ugly comments on JW--calls for violence against the Muslim world, and I do not condone them. As for the concept, though, that JW posters call for dissenting posters to "submit" to a certain view of Islam--well, the main people calling, violently, for a "submission" as regards Islam are radical Islamists, not their critics.

Posted by: gravenimage at September 18, 2006 12:14 AM

"Congratulations to Swapan Dasgupta for showing courage. It appears that few Indians are coming out of the fear of Islamic street voilence. "

Unfortunately Swapan Dasgupta is one of a minority and the Pioneer is not as widely read as the mainstream newspapapers which are all PEECEE/leftists/pseudo-secularists(meaning pro-muslim). It is only the BJP which can counter Islamofascism - unfortunately the West shuns them as "Hindu nationalists" !

Posted by: bilrak at September 18, 2006 2:34 AM

'It is only the BJP which can counter Islamofascism - unfortunately the West shuns them as "Hindu nationalists" by Bilrak ...

Which cave did you crawl out of? Sikhs were the first to stop Islam in India. Hindus always caved in to the threats. That is the reason there are about 350 Million Muslims on the sub-continent. Just a reminder to the Hindu Party worshippers – do you recall Air India 814 hijack on 30 Dec 1999? Who gave in to the demands of terrorists? They were Hindu Nationalists.

There is a strong link that the 9/11 plot was financed by one of the released terrorists of that flight.

I think Muslims need to apologies to us bringing terror into our daily lives. Islam is evil and inhuman. It is obvious to the rest of us. It is truely amazing why don’t the Muslim see it that way!

Posted by: OneEyedWink at September 18, 2006 6:23 PM

"Hindus always caved in to the threats. That is the reason there are about 350 Million Muslims on the sub-continent."

OneEyedWink,

Agree with you. Be it any party, indians have got so used to self abasement,would never shy away from muslimes appeasement.Power hungry and unscrupulous indians have always ensured safe havens for many jihadists and their sympathizers.

Posted by: Crows&Cows at September 19, 2006 2:24 AM

..It is only the BJP which can counter Islamofascism - unfortunately the West shuns them as "Hindu nationalists":Bilrak

You have got to be joking. The self-styled "Hindu Nationalist" BJP turned out to be the wishy-washiest party of them all, big on talk, low on delivery. They have conveniently tried to explain this away as compulsions of coalition politics. But the sorry capitulation at Kandahar had nothing to do with politics, it was just an example of lack of any vision, any thinking, any character, even more than just a lack of guts.

At the same time, I do not subscribe to the view that Hindus are muslim appeasers. Quite the contrary. Given savvy leaders like Shivaji, Chhatrasal and Zorawar Singh, they have historically been quick to put the muslims in their place and crush the islamic expansionist hordes. In modern India, there are few Hindu leaders with a grip on the situation who do not care for the insanely, naively, self-destructively PC Indian politicians and media.

Narendra Modi, an unusually upright and intelligent politician at the helm of Gujerat is one of those exceptional leaders. Unfairly, but cunningly stigmatised by the Indian media for the spontaneous public anger and riots in Gujerat following the burning alive of Hindu women and children pilgrims by muslim mobs in 2002, he is arguably the most hated politician in the subcontinent. He is detested by all muslims (except a surprising and remarkable number of Gujerati muslims, who know the ground reality first-hand), despised by most Indian politicians and media, as well as by the media-opiated urban westernised ultra-PC Hindus.

India's hope lies in people like Modi, the large number of non-media-sedated, non-westernised Indians especially the Sikhs, who have preserved the memory of their past history and understand the deceitful muslim far better than the PC fools who run India currently from their Ivory Tower.

Posted by: Dunk at September 19, 2006 3:21 AM