Actually Pakistans History starts from 1947 .

Posted by: tiger at February 22, 2007 5:24 AM

tiger,

Actually Pakistans History starts from 1947.

Yes, involving no less than the allotment of the lands of another (the Hindus) for it and the mass dispossession of the indigenous peoples (the Hindus again). Injustices which, when Israel is charged with them, are the basis for saying Israel has no right to exist. Unless you're weary of life, don't hold your breath for the Left to make the same statements for Pakistan, for it does not serve their interests of bashing Israel.

There's a difference, of course: what I said about Pakistan is true, while it is false for Israel, for Israel is not "the lands of another" (it belongs to us, the Jews, given by the One of Whom all the world is property), and the "Palestinians", but not all of them, left of their own accord (goaded by their leaders) in the heat of the war they started.

As for the article: unless you're weary of life, don't hold your breath for the Left to decry the cultural imperialism here, for it does not serve their interests of bashing the West.

Posted by: ZionistYoungster at February 22, 2007 6:16 AM

Of course, the history of Europe’s cathedrals would be worthless trash. Should Muslims ever come to power in Europe, they would no doubt convert every church and synagogue they could get there hands on into a mosque, as they did most famously to St. Sophia.

It is not only the “religious parties” in Pakistan who believe that pre-Islamic history is ignorance, nor is it new practices to not only not teach pre-Islamic history, but to endeavour to destroy any and all history that is pre-Islamic or non-Muslim.

The Muslim gangsters took six month to methodically destroy all the contents of the library at Alexandria, Egypt. One of their successors tried to destroy the temples at Luxor and Aswan… and even tried to destroy the pyramids. All of the great monuments (Sphinx included) were in a hell of a lot better condition before the Islamic invasion of Egypt.

The alabaster casings of the Giza pyramids were striped off and used to decorate mosques… had not the ancient Egyptians built the structures so massive and with so much precision, the last remaining “seven wonders” would not be here today.

Although Muslims are not the only group guilty of suppressing or destroying historical monuments and text, they do seem to have a veracious, unrelenting appetite for it. Moreover, it is sanctioned by their twisted belief system, a system that allows NO examination, as it is the “infallible” word of God. {…but, not my God!}

I currently live in Cairo. It never ceases to amaze me how devoid of humanity and culture the vast majority of Muslims, both “educated” and “fallaheen” are. They demand respect, but never bother to respect. They demand that you hear them, but they cannot be bothered to hear you. They are right, you are wrong.

It is also amazing to see first hand just how utterly incompetent and unproductive the vast majority are… with few exceptions, they can’t even build their own mosques, but instead, rely on “others” to construct them for them.

So it should not be any surprise that Muslims have no interest in ‘pre/non-Islamic’ history, as they have contributed nothing to history, save death and destruction… what a legacy…

...may piss be upon them all.

Posted by: gnegypt at February 22, 2007 7:07 AM

...ironically in a twisted way it is Muslim history the Muslims want you to forget, it is exactly the violent history of Islam we must remember....

....the Peaceful Religion of Islam...what a bunch of tyrannical losers.....

Ban Muslim immigration now...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at February 22, 2007 7:08 AM

"Jahiliyya is the [PRE]-Islamic period of ignorance."

How can their history begin at Makkah and Medina yet still draw from historical documents and lay claim to prophets prior to that point in history?
So Abraham, Moses, Jesus (Issa), etc. were all contributors to jahiliyya?

Burger King has a similar philosophy when it comes to their customers: Have it your way.

May the day come where we can only reminisce about the "Islamic period of ignorance."

-XRDC

Posted by: XRDC at February 22, 2007 8:26 AM

gnegypt

Wow. I hope your country's secret police don't go after you for those comments. We could use a voice from "behind enemy lines" if you know what I mean.

I do want to visit Cairo before Mubarak dies and the country officially becomes an Islamic republic.

Posted by: wrathofasma at February 22, 2007 8:47 AM

I am from Pakistan:

The whole southern province of Sind was Hindu, until arabs invaded in 712 A.D. Headed by Mohammad Bin Qasim, Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam.

Almost all of Punjab province was Hindu and Sikh. There are similar last names of muslims and Sikhs.

Entire Northwestern Frontier province was Buddhist.

Mullahs do not want younger generation to learn the past.

I can proudly say that my great grand parent were hindus from Punjab but then they converted to Christianity.

Posted by: Crusader at February 22, 2007 10:12 AM

Crusader wrote:

"Headed by Mohammad Bin Qasim..."

Don't you mean "be-headed?"

-XRDC

Posted by: XRDC at February 22, 2007 11:19 AM

If Europe is anything like the US, any real discussion of the Christian past has already by marginalized and downplayed by the hard-core secularlists and is no longer taught (perhaps only the wrongs perpetrated by Christianity). From what I know about Europe, the church buildings may be there but the Church is having very little real impact in society.

The moslems won't have that much to do (eliminating the history before islam) if they ever take over any parts of Europe is my point.

Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at February 22, 2007 1:10 PM

Crusader

Reading tiger's first comment, which is of course accurate, does Pakistan's history involve all of India's Islamic history? Such as the Mamluqs, Qhiljis, Tughluqs, Syeds, Lodis, Moghuls? How about Muslim kingdoms that never incorporated any part of Pakistan, such as the Bahamani sultanates, the Nizam of Hyderabad, Hyder Ali & Tipu Sultan's sultanate of Mysore, et al? Does the latter get covered in Pakistani history? If yes, on what basis? Simply because it was Islamic? In that case, Saladin and Suleiman the Magnificent would also be a part of Pakistani history.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at February 22, 2007 1:25 PM

Here's a quote that sums the whole issue of 'pre-Islamic ignorance' up for me.

Bukhari: Volume 5, Book 58, Number 188:
Narrated 'Amr bin Maimun:

“During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys.
They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.”

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at February 22, 2007 2:20 PM

"Here's a quote that sums the whole issue of 'pre-Islamic ignorance' up for me.

Bukhari: Volume 5, Book 58, Number 188:
Narrated 'Amr bin Maimun:

“During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys.
They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.”

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses"

poor lil monkey :(
Islam's fascination with sex is fascinating

Posted by: kelisw at February 22, 2007 5:20 PM

Keep the ignorant ignorant. Before the Moslems invaded India, there was no history--nothing. The history of Pakistan starts with "partition."

History starts with Mohammed, before him, everything that existed was worthless.

Actually, come to think of it, you can turn that around--sort of: Everything that comes after Mohammed--Islamic history--is worthless: Bloody violence, lies, deceit, robbery, rape, and everything that we can do without and that the World would be a better place for not having.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at February 22, 2007 5:20 PM

Everything there is had a beginning, including Islam. Before the beginning there was stuff, but most of the stuff was worthless. If Islamic history started at Mecca or Medina, or with Mohammad, what happened to the stuff that Allah's 'Pen of Desiny', wrote about the first muslim Adam, and the great muslim and Patriarch Abraham? How about Eve and those tribes of Jinn? Is this history now worthless?
Well, it's not necessarily worthless. Islamic history and $3.50, will get you a beer in most American cities...

Posted by: duh_swami at February 22, 2007 11:06 PM

Personally, I've gotten over the whole muslim issue. They've never done a thing for humankind. Never invented a machine or technology, never developed a science or a medicine. They're pretty efficient at choping off heads and throwing rocks because swords and stones had already been invented in the 7th century. Basically, muslims are losers. I contributed more to humankind before my milk teeth cut through simply because I wasn't born muslim.

Posted by: mareeS at February 23, 2007 1:52 AM

I wonder if Robert had some sort of psychological analysis of Muhammed (piss be upon him) in his book. I have just started reading Sahih Bukhari for myself and my goodness, if people read it, they would know that Muhammed was a mentally depraved lunatic. That alone should concern our leaders.

Posted by: wrathofasma at February 23, 2007 11:20 AM

sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 76, Number 569:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

I heard Allah's Apostles when his uncle, Abu Talib had been mentioned in his presence, saying, "May be my intercession will help him (Abu Talib) on the Day of Resurrection so that he may be put in a shallow place in the Fire, with fire reaching his ankles and causing his brain to boil."

You've got to be kidding me...

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at February 23, 2007 12:11 PM

Many times on this site, Google it, I have tried to warn you all about how mawzlems view history and archaeology (my specialism). Occassionally I have been hooted down but mostly I have been ignored and sometimes laughed at. Some of that is obviously my fault for I tend to post in haste and repent at leisure - I am currently trying to work out how I can apologise to all of you, and Hugh (Fitzgerald) in particular, for my post on the thread concerning Bulgaria the other day (I was mostly wrong and relying too heavily on out of date textbooks).

However, I do feel that the head post here by Robert - Mr. Spencer - vindicates my position and the views which I hold vis-a-vis the islamic approach to history - if it doesn't chime with what they believe then re-write it or ignore it (better still: blow it up) - and I urge you all to consider this head post in the light of everything else which I have tried to tell you about the mawzlem approach to historical, and verifiable historical, fact.

And, please, do not be mislead by the likes of Naseem (who posts here). Whilst she, herself, is undoubtedly a deeply convinced person with a well developed sense of the immanent she, and her belief group, are amongst the worst and most violent offenders against any knowledge of the past and they are the group most often convicted of violence and murder against historians and archaeologists.

That is hardly surprising since she, and the group to which she belongs, are amongst the most persistent offenders when it comes to re-writing history. Most of what she, and her belief group, believe about the past - her groups' history or our history - is, quite simply, wrong and completely unsupported by any physical evidence.

That aside, the information in the head post to this thread is completely typical of the mawzlem response everywhere. I, personally, know of no mawzlem country - not one - where historians and archaeologist are not routinely threatened and subjected to violence if they try to look at the world before the alleged prophet whom we know as 'mohammed the damned' and whom they, in their crass stupidity, revere.

Recently, a colleague of mine returned to the UK from a visit to the Sangiran cave and Brangkal River sites on Java (Indonesia). Quite apart from having to endure the most awful vilifications from the local mawzlems he, and his party, were also attacked by the locals and only managed to get out alive because one of the party had contacts in the Indonesian military who rescued them from what was a life threatening situation.

Even so, the military refused to carry out any of the equipment and, what is much more important, the soldiers refused to permit the carrying out of essential supplies of insulin for one of the party, female, and cited as their reasons for not so permitting that 'it was probably illegal heroin' and that 'it didn't matter if she died because she was a woman and had no value'. What further enraged my colleague was the statement from the senior Indonesian Army Officer present that 'since she was the only woman on the expedition it was patently obvious that she must be the employed whore'. The lady in question, and no, I will not name her, even though by now you have probably guessed her identity, only happens to be one of the world's foremost experts on pre-history and ancient man. She survived. Thank God.

This sort of thing is what we face as archaeologists and historians every day - near enough. What sickens me is that we are now facing this in our own countries. I have recounted on this site (Google it) in the past that I and my team have been confronted by groups of mawzlem youths, as we emerged from an overnight rescue dig, who have attempted to physically attack us as well as yelling verbal abuse at us. The substance of their complaint - in as much as it can be said to have any substance - was that we were disturbing an ancient mawzlem burial ground that was, and I quote, 'thousands of years old' and destroying the evidence of the first built mosk in England which, according to them, was built before Stonehenge. Risible, of course, but also dangerous.

So, don't be surprised by the actions of the members of the six-party Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal because this is the sort of thing, coupled with the wholesale destruction of ancient sites (don't get me started!) which happens everywhere in the islamic world on a daily basis. Violence against academics who dare to speak out is routine in islam but they seem to reserve a very special kind of hatred for the historian and the archaeologist - is that, perhaps, because we can prove them wrong?

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at February 24, 2007 12:21 AM

Dominic,
I knew you were an archaeologist when you posted about your trip to the banks of the river Sindh some time this month. And what you have written above is also true. Don't know who hooted you, though. You have always come across as a highly educated person to me, though we had our unpleasant moments. I apologize for my rude comments some 6-8 months back, when you were talking about giving them a chance, and I was mad at you for even thinking of them as human. Guess we all think of them as human sometime or the other forgetting the carnage that they have unleashed upon us Infidels, that they are unleashing upon us even now, in some part of the world or the other. Better men than us have made this mistake in the past, and they lived to regret it.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at February 24, 2007 9:30 AM

arjun.sevak/

Thank-you. And please accept my apologies for any insult which I may have levelled at you: as I said, I tend to post in haste (and, sometimes, anger) and repent at leisure.

I don't think that a belief in islam per se makes these people less physically human but as I explore with my colleagues what happens to the brain when it is subjected to such extreme belief systems (about anything) I am becoming more and more convinced - as are they - that the human brain seems to revert to some primitive state, that certain (but not all by any manner of means) of the higher reasoning functions seem to be deleted or suspended or corrupted. The interesting question is, to my mind, how much such abstract and objective functionality has to be interferred with before we can classify such people as being only physically human but lacking the essential mental attributes which define humanity?

Obviously, the most rabid of islamic believers have ceased to be human in any meaningful sense of the word - they look human, they possess all the physical characteristics of a human but they are unable (not just unwilling but also functionally unable) to reason or think as human beings. They are totally in thrall to a world view which is completely at variance from any known reality apart from their's and they believe that their reality has the right, the duty even, to destroy all others.

Is this insanity? Yes! Does it make them less than human in some real way or sense? Probably, but the jury is still out on that one for even the most expert person in the various fields of mental health cannot, as yet, tell us what to expect in our species in the way of mental illness. It could be that the rabid behaviour exhibited by mawzlems is within normal parameters for our species - that we are looking at a type of insanity rather than a destruction of human-ness.

Obviously, if they are merely insane then we have to "contain the contagion" and this would necessitate a particular approach of control, containment, innoculation and defense. If, however, belief in islam, as I suspect, destroys the impetus to humanity, and its finer attributes, in the brain then we are quite at liberty to destroy, utterly and completely, any believer in the disease of islam for they will have, quite simply, ceased to be human in any meaningful way.

So, which is it - insanity or the destruction of the human mind? Well, I cannot answer that so, therefore, I err on the side of caution and I choose to treat islam as a disease which leads to a particular form of insanity.

But I will not deny that there is a large body of evidence which seems to point to islam as a contagious disease which destroys the human-ness of humans, which renders a human, when infected by islam, no better, and probably much worse, than a predatory animal.

However, let me end by once again thanking you for your kind comment. Thank-you.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at February 24, 2007 10:39 PM

Dominic,
A brilliant posting once again. I am going to print it out. Yes, I have come around to the opinion that being born a homo sapien does not guarantee that one will develop to be a human being. I have started differentiating between the two. I think islam damages the thought processes, an individual's ability to think. I have lived near a muslim ghetto, and I can tell you that the azan really bothered me. It broke my train of thoughts. I ended up soundproofing the house. (Moved my family away anyway). Just think what it is like to be a muslim, who has to rush to the nearest mosque at the sound of wailing, and then to perform the wazu prior to entering it to offer "prayers". This compulsion of answering the call to prayer does not allow for normal thought processes. An individual gets around 2 hours to do some work by the time the muezzin starts wailing again.

I am in a hurry today as well, so am ending this with a request. The post that you wrote above, would you be willing to elaborate it including the 5 times a day compulsion to prayer and other facets of islam that make human being behave like zombies ? It has the makings of a brilliant essay.

Last but not the least. Thanks for forgiving.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at February 25, 2007 10:09 AM

arjun.sevak/

I am completely unqualified to expand my thesis on the mental condition of rabid believers any more than I already have done, but, and none-the-less, thank-you for your kind words. I have at least one colleague, in a different Faculty, who is very interested in exploring this subject in greater depth.

Therefore, I am contemplating, and have been for some time, setting up my own blog on which interesting matters such as this, and all the others, which arise out of Mr. Spencer's head postings and Mr. Fitzgerald's (and other people's) invaluable contributions to the debate, can be explored further, and at leisure, without cluttering up this site and taking discussions so far off topic as to incur the ire of the JW staff.

However, I am no expert in this technology nor can I devote more than a modicum of my time to mentoring and moderating such a site. Perhaps you would care to assist me? If so, please email me by using my 'posted by:' name and adding to it 'hotmail.co.uk' in the usual way for emails.

If anyone else who reads this site would be interested in helping to set up and run a sort of 'matters arising' blog site then please feel free to email me, also. The aim, as I see it, of such a site would be to debate the various issues pertaining to islam which, from time to time, occupy us here and which, usually, we do not have the leisure of a space to compleat the debate in. I would envisage that such a site would also debate other interesting issues which arise out of the posts and head posts here such as, and just for example, the precise age of the Stonehenge and the Pyramids of Egypt.

Obviously I would wish all the debates to be centered around the islamic response to the questions so posed and the islamic way of looking at us and our world and to highlight how the islamists hijack learning and knowledge - as we know they do - and to correct the record so that they (the islamics) do not go unchallenged on the world wide web when they make obviously false claims about matters of recorded fact and detail.

Does this sound too ambitious?

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at February 25, 2007 10:38 PM

Dominic,
No, it is not so ambitious. I already volunteer for another anti-islam site, and I will be glad to assist you. Though I am not a techie, I think we shall be able to get by. I also feel the need for such a site. I will mail you sometime in the evening, hopefully I would have a few suggestions by then.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at February 26, 2007 3:44 AM