Pakistan: Goodbye & Good Luck

Source: http://www.newslaundry.com/2013/05/pakistan-goodbye-good-luck/

Human beings cut off ties with one another all the time. This not only prevents a fight-unto-death scenario, it also allows the adversaries to cool off and move on – go their separate ways.

The time has come for India to cut off all diplomatic, economic, cinematic and other ties with Pakistan. In perpetuity. Good luck and goodbye, Pakistan. May you prosper and may your people find peace.

I say this with a degree of conviction and moral certitude that our forefathers, barring perhaps Mahatma Gandhi, would have approved of. Let me explain.

Pakistan has a pathological hatred of India and the idea of India.

It was a nation created because of it. The creators of Pakistan abhorred India’s plurality. They disbelieved the assertion of many – including Gandhi – that Hindus and Muslims can stay as brothers. They doubted India’s assertion of secularism. No, they said, a time will come when our people will be under the boot of the majority. We want a separate land for our people.

The first speech Mr Jinnah gave in the newly created Pakistan was astonishing in its effrontery. He talked of how he wanted Pakistan to be a secular state! That’s right – you can’t bear to live as one in a secular state, but now that you’ve created your own nation – based solely on a religious conviction and unfounded fear of the majority – you are happy to believe that your newly-turned majority desires nothing else but a secular state where all minorities shall live in peace. Well, we know what came of it, the experiment that was Pakistan.

Pakistan has never been able to reconcile with the fact that an overwhelming majority of Muslims – whom Pakistan’s founders were supposedly fighting for in the first place – decided to stay back in India. This is a thorn that pricks Pakistan daily and will continue to do so.

Those who doubt the sincerity of Indian Muslims and forever taunt them and address them as “they”, forget this simplest of facts. A huge piece of land was created especially for them – “Come all ye brothers, to our promised land where you will never live under fear of the majority” – and then, when the time came, these very people, the Indian Muslims, ignored the call. Can anything else be more telling of the idea of India?

Pakistan has a pathological hatred of India because millions of Muslims decided to stay back.

The hatred became acute when Pakistan broke into two, of its own internal stress. A nation that was based on religion could not keep itself together to even celebrate its silver jubilee.

All history – right from the time of Herodotus – is contemporary when you factor in the fact that we read, assess and describe a few thousand years on a timeline of 13.8 billion years. What monumental folly! No wonder we cannot trust history and we fail to learn from it.

The cutting off of economic ties will not hurt India. It may hurt Pakistan, but if they believe it won’t then so be it. Our bilateral trade is minuscule compared to our trade with other countries.

It is, however, the cutting off of ALL ties, meaning people-to-people mostly, that divides opinion in our country, to the extent that we begin to label people as hawks and doves. We somehow believe it is not morally right.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

For all the unimaginable work that Bapu did for us, and the path he showed us, there were some blunders he committed that went on to condition us. The Mahatma, we must understand, had an unrivalled moral compass, more so if you notice the decades he was active in – Hitler, Churchill, Stalin, Mao, and Mussolini were his contemporaries.

I believe he was wrong in demanding that India pay Pakistan a chunk of money we owed them Rs 55 crore ($ 78.5 million today) even though it was certain that Pakistan would use it against India, in buying arms and expanding its skirmishes and not-so-contained battles over Kashmir. In any case, the two nations were at war when Gandhi demanded we make this payment.

The only man who stood up to Gandhi was Sardar Patel. I don’t know how to say this, and pardon my ignorance of history, but I am yet to find a blunder that Patel committed in all the years that he served India’s cause. I love Bapu and I like Nehru, but it is inescapable that the two made some astonishing mistakes. If anyone can list a single blunder of Patel, I’d be the wiser.

Those who say he was a right-wing fanatic know nothing! Patel exhibited the goodness of Gandhi but crucially, he did not let it – like Nehru did every time – cloud his exemplary realpolitik wisdom. In essence, Patel was an incredible student of history. People forget how close he was to Bapu – many a time Bapu told him to keep Nehru in check for he worried Nehru was getting too close to the Communists.

Patel was forthright in his objection to handing Pakistan the money. He went to Gandhi and told him so in as many words. But what can anyone do if the man he loves and admires decides to go on a fast-unto-death over the issue? What does a son do when the father blackmails? The awful dilemma of Patel – realpolitik versus Gandhi’s moral compass – is described in many books (Alex Von Tunzelmann’s Indian Summer comes to mind immediately). But the most objective description is in Joseph Lelyveld’s Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and his struggle with India. What does one do when the person you love asks something from you that you don’t want to give? In the end Patel backed out.

That was the first occasion when Pakistanis knew Indians are emotional people, that their every judgment from thereon would be clouded by emotion and the desire to feel good about taking the high moral ground.

We have suffered ever since at the hands of Pakistan. Not a day has passed when it hasn’t desired the destruction of India. Those who are old enough to remember the 1980s would recall how, when Pakistan was clearly fomenting trouble in Punjab, we gushed at Zia-ul-Haq’s arrival at the Jaipur test match. Even though we saw Pakistan’s intentions we wanted to embrace her, we wanted to take the high moral ground. This continued all through the 90s and continues to this day. The release of the Kandahar terrorists and their rapturous welcome in the streets of Pakistan; the 26/11 massacre; the LOC beheadings; the murder of Sarabjit…nothing will stir us into cutting all ties with Pakistan. Why? Because we think it’s not ethical and moral to do so.

But this is where we are so wrong!

India was one of the few countries which were unequivocal in cutting all relations with the apartheid South Africa. Those who say sports and politics shouldn’t be mixed forget that for decades we as Indians didn’t want anything to do with South Africa. It was even written in our passports, for crying out loud! Can any right-thinking person say that it was wrong on our part to do so?

Those who say that the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis are like us, good people, nice friendly people – why do they forget that the same held true for a large number of white south Africans, too? Were Nadine Gordimer and Dr Christiaan Barnard racist? But nations don’t behave like how their well-meaning people would like them to behave.

Apartheid continued for 50 years. The South African economy, based on diamonds, and gold, and mining and agro products, was one of the largest in the world during the time of apartheid, so much so that those who call themselves the upholders of morality and ethics now – the Western world – continued to trade with South Africa until as late as 1989!

But we were steadfast. And I am proud of that, proud that we can look Mandela and Tutu and Biko (if he was alive) in the eyes and say we stood with you, brothers, we were there right beside you.

We could have benefited a great deal from trading with the apartheid regime but we stood up for principles. Not all white South Africans were racist pigs. But despite that we wanted nothing to do with South Africa.

Why can’t we realise that the situation with Pakistan is exactly the same? Come what may, no matter how many Pakistanis think well of India, the pathological hatred that was the basis of their nation’s creation will make sure that Pakistan will use any opportunity to humiliate India, to bring her down, to break her.

I have nothing personal against Pakistanis. The majority of them are fine people and I have many of them as friends. But this is about our people, their continued suffering. It is time we took a stand, like we did against the apartheid South Africa despite losing out on economic trade and other ties.

We must cut all ties with Pakistan and be in no hurry to resume them until we are certain that the leopard has changed its spots. We must not worry about Pakistanis not being able to come and play cricket here. Did we lament when Gavaskar and Chandra and Amarnath couldn’t play with the South Africans? On the contrary, we were proud of them. Not so the case with the few West Indians who went on a rebel tour to South Africa in the 80s. They are derided to this day in the West Indies for selling out.

No, it’s much more than sports or Bollywood or literary contacts. It’s about two brothers realising reconciliation is impossible if one of them fails to confront the truth.

Pakistan, we wish you luck. Goodbye

Your’s Sincerely
Diljit C Shah
N. Gopaldas & Co.,
36, Chinnakadai Street.,P.O. Box 328,
Tiruchirapalli – 620 002. India
email: diljitshah@yahoo.co.in

Price for Surrendering in India

Claims, Counter-Claims

• Syed Liaqat Shah was arrested from the Sanauli checkpost on the India-Nepal border on March 20 by the Delhi police
• They say he was a Hizbul Mujahideen man, on his way to Delhi as part of a ‘Holi terror plot’
• The Jammu and Kashmir police refutes this. They say Liaqat was a former militant on his way to his Kashmir home from PoK. According to them, he was a beneficiary of the state’s rehabilitaion policy for former militants.
• The Centre has asked the National Investigation Agency to probe and resolve the dispute
• It has now been decided to deploy J&K police, along with the Sashastra Seema Bal, on the Indo-Nepal border to streamline the surrender of ex-militants

Withering words. “I won’t think twice if the government allows us to return to Pakistan,” says Akhtar-un-Nisa, the second wife of Syed Liaqat Shah who was arrested by the Delhi police as a “conspirator of a terror plot” to launch fidayeen attacks in the capital on Holi.

Akhtar, 47, is the best person to hear the story from: “We were among the 10 people returning from Pakistan to India via Nepal. Seven people were received by their relatives, no one came to receive us. They (special cell of the Delhi police) arrested us near the Indo-Nepal border and took us to Gorakhpur. They didn’t recover any objectionable item from us. We pleaded that we were going to Kash­mir under the rehabilitation policy ann­ounced by the Jammu and Kashmir government for militants who want to surrender, but they didn’t listen to us. I was later released in New Delhi.”

It’s become a full-blown controversy  that ref­uses to die down. Even in the face of criticism, the Delhi police is sticking to its claim that Liaqat is a Hizbul Muj­ah­ideen operative. The Jammu and Kash­mir police is firm in its position that he was a PoK-based ex-militant on his way to Kas­hmir for state-sponsored rehabilitation. At the very least, the affair exposes the lack of com­munication between the police of the two states, especially on the issue of sur­render and rehabilitation.

The J&K government has reason to be upset. It says its rehabilitation policy—which has the overt backing of the Union home ministry—has attracted over 1,000 applications, and has enabled 241 former militants to return to J&K from Pakistan in the past two years. One source of this  row is the route of return. Ex-militants are officially all­owed to return through four entry poi­nts—Poonch-Rawalakote, Uri-Muz­affarabad, Wagah (Punjab) and the igi airport, Delhi. However, none of the former militants, including Liaqat, chose to travel through these designated routes. They preferred the Nepal route—ostensibly because Pakistan (for obvious reasons) created hurdles in the policy’s implementation. The J&K government reluctantly allowed this for the sake of its pet policy. Of the men who have returned to start on a clean slate, including 113 who have brought their families along, several arrived in India via Kathmandu, after flying there on Pakistani passports.

Akhtar says she had travelled to Pak­istan on a valid passport in 2001 after her first husband died in an encounter with the army in 1995. Her physically chall­enged teenage daughter, Jabeena, who accompanied her to Pakistan and back, was from her first marriage. “In 2006, I married Liaqat, who ran a grocery shop at Muzaffarabad (capital of PoK)…he had abandoned militancy long back. We wanted to return to our roots to lead a happy life, but the Delhi police has played spoilsport. Now I won’t think again if they allow us to return,” a visibly shaken and disappointed Akhtar says.

The J&K government and the state police have confirmed that Liaqat was slated for the rehabilitation policy meant for ex-militants in Pakistan who had ren­ounced violence and wanted to ret­urn home. Liaquat’s first wife, Ameena Bano, submitted the required documents on Feb­ruary 5, 2011, in the deputy commissioner’s office in Kupwara, the town nea­­rest to Liaqat’s village, Dardpora, in north Kashmir. As the Kupwara police had no criminal case against Liaqat, it approved the application and forwarded it to the CID and other departments. Lia­­qat’s family duly informed the police about his probable date of return after he left Pakistan with his family.

“When the state government announ­ced that militants who had crossed the LoC will be allowed to return, we urged him to return along with his second wife and step-daughter,” says Ameena, who lives with her two sons. “My brother never participated in any militant activity in Kashmir,” says Liaqat’s brother, Syed Kar­amat Shah. “He was coming here to sur­render, and we were jubilant that he was returning after 18 years.”

The J&K government fears that Liaqat’s arrest might be a “big setback” to its sho­wpiece rehabilitation policy. “Other Kashmiris who want to come back to their homes under it will be discouraged,” says chief minister Omar Abd­ullah. Already there are reports that 15 former militants, all of them from Dar­d­pora, have second thoughts about ret­urning to the Valley after seeing what  Lia­qat is going through. “This includes two of Liaqat’s relatives. They have decided to reconsider their decision,” says local MLA Abdul Haq Khan.

Meanwhile, the Delhi police has bec­ome a figure of ridicule in the milita­ncy-hardened Kashmir valley—its credibility barely there after taking Liaqat (who is in his early 50s) for a ‘dreaded fidayeen’. Among those who picked holes in the Delhi police story is CM Omar Abd­ullah himself. “I have yet to see a fidayeen who returned holding the hands of his wife and daughter. Had he been a fidayeen, he would have grenades and guns in his hands,” Omar told the assembly in one of his rare broadsides against New Delhi.

Expectedly, the media in the Valley too has been rather scathing in its censure. A Kashmir Times editorial titled Fiction of Holi-terror plot had this to say, “The incident again highlights the misuse of authority and abuse of power by men in uniform, an obvious bid to win promotions and gallantry awa­rds or for someone’s political convenience.” A journalist wrote on Facebook: “My 12-year-old cousin on Liaqat’s arr­est: ‘This old man can’t handle a pis­tol, how would he have carried out a fidayeen attack?’”  Alluding to the Delhi police linking Liaqat to the recovery of arms and ammunition from a city guest house, he added: “Certainly, when India wants to implicate Kash­miris, guns grow even on trees”.

Mehbooba Mufti, president of the PDP, agrees. “Liaqat Shah’s arrest in Delhi indicates that the old industry of falsely implicating Kashmiri youth for sake of rewards and medals is thriving. Kashmiri youth have become a fodder for Con­gress-BJP electoral politics.”

In the past, around twelve Kashmiris, all arrested by the Delhi police on terror charges, had been declared innocent by the courts. Tragically, for the accused the clean chit came late; they had had to spend the prime of their life in prison.

No wonder everyone’s hoping for caution, maturity and restraint from New Delhi. A storm of protests in Kashmir—on the street and in the assembly—has forced the Union home ministry to ask the National Inve­stigation Agency to get to the bottom of the Liaqat affair, and check the circumstances of his arrest and the veracity  of the Delhi and J&K police’s opposing claims. Greater crises have blown over Kashmir. But they often have their origins in smaller bunglings.

Why are the Jews So Powerful?

By Farrukh Saleem

The writer is the Pakistani Executive Director of the Center for Research and Security Studies, a think tank established in 2007, and son in law of Khalilur Rehman of the Jang Group.

There are only 14 million Jews in the world:

seven million in the Americas

five million in Asia

two million in Europe

100,000 in Africa .

For every single Jew in the world there are 100 Muslims.

Yet, Jews are more than a hundred times more powerful than all the Muslims put together.

Ever wondered why?

Jesus of Nazareth was Jewish.

Albert Einstein, the most influential scientist of all time and TIME magazine’s ’Person of the Century’, was a Jew.

Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis was a Jew.

So were Karl Marx, Paul Samuelson and Milton Friedman.

Here are a few other Jews whose intellectual output has enriched the whole humanity:

Benjamin Rubin gave humanity the vaccinating needle.

Jonas Salk developed the first polio vaccine.

Albert Sabin developed the improved live polio vaccine.

Gertrude Elion gave us a leukemia fighting drug.

Baruch Blumberg developed the vaccination for Hepatitis B.

Paul Ehrlich discovered a treatment for syphilis.

Elie Metchnikoff won a Nobel Prize in infectious diseases.

Bernard Katz won a Nobel Prize in neuromuscular transmission.

Andrew Schally won a Nobel in endocrinology.

Aaron Beck founded Cognitive Therapy.

Gregory Pincus developed the first oral contraceptive pill.

George Wald won a Nobel for our understanding of the human eye.

Stanley Cohen won a Nobel in embryology.

Willem Kolff came up with the kidney dialysis machine.

Over the past 105 years, 14 million Jews have won 15-dozen Nobel Prizes while only three Nobel Prizes have been won by 1.4 billion
Muslims (other than Peace Prizes).

Stanley Mezor invented the first micro-processing chip.

Leo Szilard developed the first nuclear chain reactor;

Peter Schultz, optical fibre cable;

Charles Adler, traffic lights;

Benno Strauss, Stainless steel;

Isador Kisee, sound movies;

Emile Berliner, telephone microphone;

Charles Ginsburg, videotape recorder.

Famous financiers in the business world who belong to Jewish faith include:

Ralph Lauren (Polo),

Levis Strauss (Levi’s Jeans),

Howard Schultz (Starbuck’s) ,

Sergey Brin (Google),

Michael Dell (Dell Computers),

Larry Ellison (Oracle),

Donna Karan (DKNY),

Irv Robbins (Baskins & Robbins) and

Bill Rosenberg (Dunkin Donuts).

Richard Levin, President of Yale University, is a Jew. So are Henry Kissinger (American secretary of state), Alan Greenspan (Fed chairman under Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush), Joseph Lieberman (US Senator), Madeleine Albright (American secretary of state), Casper Weinberger (American secretary of defense), Maxim Litvinov ( USSR foreign Minister), David Marshal ( Singapore ‘s first chief minister), Issac Isaacs (governor-general of Australia ), Benjamin
Disraeli (British statesman and author), Yevgeny Primakov (Russian PM), Barry Goldwater (US Senator), Jorge Sampaio (president of Portugal ), John Deutsch (CIA director), Herb Gray (Canadian deputy PM), Pierre Mendes (French PM), Michael Howard (British home
secretary), Bruno Kreisky (chancellor of Austria ) and Robert Rubin (American secretary of treasury).

In the media, famous Jews include:

Wolf Blitzer (CNN), Barbara Walters (ABC News), Eugene Meyer (Washington Post), Henry Grunwald (editor-in-chief Time), Katherine Graham (publisher of The Washington Post), Joseph Lelyveld (Executive editor, The New York Times), and Max Frankel (New York Times).

The most beneficent philanthropist in the history of the world is George Soros, a Jew, who has so far donated a colossal $4 billion most of which has gone as aid to scientists and universities around the world.

Second to George Soros is Walter Annenberg, another Jew, who has built a hundred libraries by donating an estimated $2 billion.

At the Olympics, Mark Spitz set a record of sorts by winning seven gold medals; Lenny Krayzelburg is a three-time Olympic gold medalist.

Spitz, Krayzelburg and Boris Becker (Tennis) are all Jewish.

Did you know that Harrison Ford, George Burns, Tony Curtis, Charles Bronson, Sandra Bullock, Billy Crystal, Woody Allen, Paul Newman,
Peter Sellers, Dustin Hoffman, Michael Douglas, Ben Kingsley, Kirk Douglas, Goldie Hawn, Cary Grant, William Shatner, Jerry Lewis and
Peter Falk are all Jews.

As a matter of fact, Hollywood itself was founded by a Jew.

Among directors and producers, Steven Spielberg, Mel Brooks, Oliver Stone, Aaron Spelling ( Beverly Hills 90210), Neil Simon (The Odd Couple), Andrew Vaina (Rambo 1/2/3), Michael Man (Starsky andHutch), Milos Forman (One flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest), Douglas Fairbanks (The Thief of Baghdad ) and Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters) are all Jewish.

So, why are Jews so powerful?
Answer : EDUCATION

Why are Muslims so powerless?
There are an estimated 1,476,233,470 Muslims on the face of the planet: one billion in Asia, 400 million in Africa, 44 million in Europe and six million in the Americas . Every fifth human being is a Muslim; for every single Hindu there are two Muslims, for every Buddhist there are two Muslims and for every Jew there are 100 Muslims.

Ever wondered why Muslims are so powerless?
Here is why: There are 57 member-countries of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), and all of them put together have around
500 universities; one university for every three million Muslims.

The United States has 5,758 universities and India has 8,407.

In 2004, Shanghai Jiao Tong University compiled an ‘Academic Ranking of World Universities’ , and intriguingly, not one university from Muslim-majority states was in the top-500.

As per data collected by the UNDP, literacy in the Christian world stands at nearly 90 per cent and 15 Christian-majority states have a literacy rate of 100 per cent.

A Muslim-majority state, as a sharp contrast, has an average literacy rate of around 40 per cent and there is no Muslim-majority state with a literacy rate of 100 per cent.

Some 98 per cent of the ‘literates’ in the Christian world had completed primary school, while less than 50 per cent of the ‘literates’ in the Muslim world did the same.

Around 40 per cent of the ‘literates’ in the Christian world attended university while no more than two per cent of the ‘literates’ in the Muslim world did the same.

Muslim-majority countries have 230 scientists per one million Muslims. The US has 4,000 scientists per million and Japan has 5,000 per million.

In the entire Arab world, the total number of full-time researchers is 35,000 and there are only 50 technicians per one million Arabs. (in the Christian world there are up to 1,000 technicians per one million).

The Muslim world spends 0.2 per cent of its GDP on research and development, while the Christian world spends around five per cent of its GDP.

Conclusion: The Muslim world lacks the capacity to produce knowledge!

Daily newspapers per 1,000 people and number of book titles per million are two indicators of whether knowledge is being diffused in a society.

In Pakistan , there are 23 daily newspapers per 1,000 Pakistanis while the same ratio in Singapore is 360. In the UK , the number of book titles per million stands at 2,000 while the same in Egypt is 20.

Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to diffuse knowledge. 

Exports of high technology products as a percentage of total exports are an important indicator of knowledge application. Pakistan ‘s export of high technology products as a percentage of total exports stands at one per cent. The same for Saudi Arabia is 0.3 per cent; Kuwait , Morocco , and Algeria are all at 0.3 per cent, while Singapore is at 58 per cent.

Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to apply knowledge. 

Why are Muslims powerless?

…..Because we aren’t producing knowledge,
…..Because we aren’t diffusing knowledge.,
…..Because we aren’t applying knowledge.

And, the future belongs to knowledge-based societies.

Interestingly, the combined annual GDP of 57 OIC-countries is under $2 trillion.

America , just by herself, produces goods and services worth $12 trillion; China $8 trillion, Japan $3.8 trillion and Germany $2.4 trillion (purchasing power parity basis).

Oil rich Saudi Arabia , UAE, Kuwait and Qatar collectively produce goods and services (mostly oil) worth $500 billion; Spain alone produces goods and services worth over $1 trillion, Catholic Poland $489 billion and Buddhist Thailand $545 billion.

….. (Muslim GDP as a percentage of world GDP is fast declining).

All we do is shout to Allah the whole day and blame everyone else for our multiple failures!

Muslims are not happy

They’re not happy in Gaza

They’re not happy in Egypt

They’re not happy in Libya

They’re not happy in Morocco

They’re not happy in Iran

They’re not happy in Iraq

They’re not happy in Yemen

They’re not happy in Afghanistan

They’re not happy in Pakistan

They’re not happy in Syria

They’re not happy in Lebanon

So, where are they happy?

They’re happy in Australia

They’re happy in England

They’re happy in France

They’re happy in Italy

They’re happy in Germany

They’re happy in Sweden

They’re happy in the USA & Canada

They’re happy in Norway

They’re happy in almost every country that is not Islamic!

And who do they blame?

Not Islam…

Not their leadership…

Not themselves…

THEY BLAME THE COUNTRIES THEY ARE HAPPY IN

And they want to change the countries they’re happy in, to be like the countries they came from, where they were unhappy.

Try to find logic in that!

Jeff Foxworthy on Muslims:

1. If You refine heroin for a living, but you have a moral objection to liquor. You are a Muslim

2. If You own a $3,000 machine gun and $5,000 rocket launcher, but you can’t afford shoes. You are a Muslim

3. If You have more wives than teeth. You are a Muslim

4. If You wipe your butt with your bare hand, but consider bacon unclean. You are a Muslim.

5. If You think vests come in two styles: bullet-proof and suicide. You are a Muslim

6. If You can’t think of anyone you haven’t declared Jihad against.
You are a Muslim

7. If You consider television dangerous, but routinely carry explosives in your clothing. You are a Muslim

8. If You were amazed to discover that cell phones have uses other than setting off roadside bombs. You are a Muslim

9. If You have nothing against women and think every man should own at least four. You are a Muslim

 

Does Holy Jihad Entail Killing of All Non-Muslims?

This is a true story and the author, Rick Mathes, is a well-known leader in prison ministry 

The man who walks with God always gets to his destination. If you have a pulse you have a purpose.

The Muslim religion is the fastest growing religion per capita in the United States , especially in the minority races!

Last month I attended my annual training session that’s required for maintaining my state prison security clearance.

During the training session there was a presentation by three speakers representing the Roman Catholic, Protestant and Muslim faiths , who each explained their beliefs.

I was particularly interested in what the Islamic had to say. The Muslim gave a great presentation of the basics of Islam, complete with a video. After the presentations, time was provided for questions and answers then it was my turn. I directed my question to the Muslim and asked:

‘Please, correct me if I’m wrong, but I understand that most Imams and clerics of Islam have declared a holy jihad [Holy war] against the infidels of the world and, that by killing an infidel, (which is a command to all Muslims) they are assured of a place in heaven. If that’s the case, can you give me the definition of an infidel?’  

There was no disagreement with my statements and, without hesitation, he replied, ‘ Non-believers! ‘

I responded, ‘So, let me make sure I have this straight. All followers of Allah have been commanded to kill everyone who is not of your faith so they can have a place in heaven.

Is that correct?’

The expression on his face changed from one of authority and command to that of a little boy who had just been caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He sheepishly replied, ‘Yes.’

I then stated, ‘Well, sir, I have a real problem trying to imagine The Pope commanding all Catholics to kill those of your faith or Dr. Stanley ordering all Protestants to do the same in order to guarantee them a place in heaven!’

The Muslim was speechless! I continued,’I also have a problem with being your friend when you and your brother clerics are telling your followers to kill me!

Let me ask you a question:

Would you rather have your Allah, who tells you to kill me in order for you to go to heaven, or my Jesus who tells me to love you because I am going to heaven and He wants you to be there with me?’

You could have heard a pin drop as the Imam hung his head in shame.

Needless to say, the organizers and/or promoters of the ‘Diversification’ training seminar were not happy with my way of dealing with the Islamic Imam, and exposing the truth about the Muslims’ beliefs.

In 20 years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. to elect the President!

I think everyone in the U.S. should be required to read this, but with the ACLU, there is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us sends it on!

Saudis Discourage Tourism

Draped in a long black abaya, French tourist Virginie de Tinguy gingerly picks her way up a majestic stone staircase, careful to lift the heavy folds of fabric out of the way of her feet, lest she stumble on steps made smooth by centuries of use. The perilous climb to the top of a 13th century citadel is rewarded with a breathtaking view. Below her sprawls the ancient walled city of Al Ula, a labyrinthine warren of stone houses built so closely together that the second-floor balconies practically kiss, casting the alleys below into perpetual shade. Gray-green date-palm orchards lap at the city walls; beyond them a jagged red rock massif looms, tinting the horizon a dusty rose. “This is exceptional,” de Tinguy utters in rapturous French to her husband. “I never would have guessed there were places so beautiful in Saudi Arabia.” As if on cue, the call to prayer curls through the deserted alleys, beckoning long-departed residents to the recently restored 630-year-old mosque nearby. All that’s missing from this 1,001 Nights tableau is a flying carpet or a mustachioed genie.

Not 20 minutes away by car, another extraordinary scene can be found: the carved stone tombs of the 1st century Nabataean trading center, Mada’in Saleh, now classified as a UNESCO World Heritage site — Saudi Arabia’s first. In between Al Ula and Mada’in Saleh lies a vast gathering of surreal rock formations, magenta and gold spires and tortured, wind-carved sandstone escarpments rising out of the dunes. It’s as if the Parthenon, the Grand Canyon and Colorado’s Garden of the Gods were all crammed together in an area not much larger than Manhattan. If it were anywhere else in the world, the sites would be crammed with camera-toting tourists. Instead, de Tinguy and her husband have the entire place to themselves, alone with their voluble and informed Saudi guide, who is in the process of explaining the mechanics of a primitive sundial that alerted local farmers when it was time to plant crops. “I could just spend days exploring this place,” says de Tinguy. “I would tell all my friends back home to visit.”

De Tinguy’s friends, however, would likely have a hard time getting here even if they listened to her advice. Saudi Arabia opens its doors to some 5 million religious pilgrims a year, but it displays a polite yet firm “do not disturb” sign to any would-be foreign tourists. Those who want to visit the country’s wealth of potential tourist sites, from the turquoise waters of the Red Sea coast, to desert oases, mountain fortresses and ancient souks dating back to the days of Abraham and later, the Prophet Muhammad, must do so in the course of a business trip or while visiting a family member, which is how the de Tinguys were able to come.

There are no tourism visas for Saudi Arabia, a fact made all the more frustrating for would-be visitors enchanted by the tantalizing glimpses of the country’s fantastical archaeological record found in the Roads of Arabia exhibit currently traveling between a series of U.S. and European museums. “We have so much to show the world,” laments the de Tinguys’ guide, Abdulaziz. “From the outside, I think, Saudi Arabia doesn’t look like such a nice place. But once you are here, you fall in love. If more people could visit, they would better understand our country and our traditions.”

Prince Sultan bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, a former astronaut and president of the Saudi tourism commission, couldn’t agree more. Still, he cautions, the kingdom is not yet prepared for an onslaught of tourists, no matter how much opening the country’s doors to the nonpilgrim visitors might help increase understanding of a country that has often been portrayed in the West as a bastion of religious extremism. “When you want to invite people to your house, you want a house that is ready to receive them,” he tells TIME in an interview at Riyadh’s National Museum, a hulking edifice packed full of archaeological wonders spanning millennia — and about as empty as the heritage city in Al Ula.

Things move slowly in Saudi Arabia. Prince Sultan launched the tourism commission in 2000. Nine years later he announced that Saudi Arabia would be issuing tourist visas in “the near future.” But, with $288 billion in oil revenues last year, it’s not like Saudi Arabia is desperate for foreign currency. There is much to take into consideration before the country opens its doors: What would the kingdom’s reactive religious conservatives say about an influx of infidels? Would Western women consent to wearing the floor-length black abaya and headscarf that is required of Saudi women? Would those women demand to drive their own rented cars — something Saudi women are not allowed to do? And how could the authorities protect tourists in a country still threatened by domestic terrorism? After all, a militant suspected of having ties to al-Qaeda assassinated four French visitors not far from Mada’in Saleh in 2007. Fears of cultural and political contagion, too, are rife: Western notions of individual freedoms could be intensely destabilizing for a country that has so far weathered the storms of the Arab Spring. While change is happening at an unprecedented rate inside the kingdom — just last month, women started serving on the closest thing the country has to a parliament — a flood of insensitive outsiders could force too much too quickly, provoking a vehement backlash from the country’s conservative core. It’s easier, and less risky, not to let anyone in at all.

Saudi Arabia may be shutting the door to foreign tourists, but it is still spending hundreds of millions of dollars to burnish the country’s cultural gems, in preparation for a different kind of visitor: Saudis themselves. Just outside of Riyadh, an army of workmen are putting the finishing touches on an ambitious restoration of Saudi Arabia’s first capital, the vast mud-brick city of Addiriyah, founded in 1740 by the first King Saud and the religious reformer Imam Mohammad Abdulwahab, father of the strictly back-to-basics Wahhabi Islam that dominates Saudi theology. Once completed, the site will house five museums, a heritage hotel, a handicraft market and a sound-and-light show. Elsewhere in the country, 25 archaeological teams are unearthing clues to Saudi Arabia’s pre-Islamic past, an undertaking once frowned upon by clerics who saw no need to study the dark days before the arrival of Islam. Prince Sultan has launched a heritage-hotel company in a joint venture with a local hospitality consortium, as well as a loan program for farmers to convert their holdings into rural inns. “Saudi Arabia is literally at the crossroads of the world’s great civilizations,” says Sultan. But it is the country’s vast wealth and oil wells, not its cultural heritage, that dominate the popular imagination. Sultan wants to change that. “Saudis are just starting to realize that with these heritage buildings and traditional villages they are sitting on a different kind of oil well.”

His target audience is the estimated 6 million to 7 million Saudis who leave the kingdom every year to vacation abroad. Sultan is gambling that if the government spends big to jazz up local attractions, more of those vacationing Saudis will stay home for the holidays. “To me, the most important foreign tourist is the Saudi tourist that is going to foreign countries,” he says. Not only will an increase in domestic tourism help diversify an economy deeply skewed in favor of oil, it will help create service-sector jobs for a swelling youth population that can no longer count on lifetime employment in a government ministry. And, Sultan hopes, it will help Saudis to fall in love anew with their homeland. “This initiative will reignite the interest of our young people,” he says. “Our country will only go forward if our people understand their roots and the traditions that keep them together.” That may be the case, but it will be a while yet before young Saudis choose Mada’in Saleh over St. Moritz for their winter holidays: Al Ula tour guide Abdulaziz says he gets on average four to five groups a week in the winter months, and none of them are Saudi, just resident expatriates looking to explore a little. Saudi Arabia may not be ready for foreign tourists, but Saudi tourists, it seems, aren’t quite ready for Saudi Arabia.
Read more: http://world.time.com/2013/03/22/saudi-arabia-to-tourists-we-are-just-not-that-into-you/#ixzz2OXYArW5z

The Ideology of Pakistan

by Baseer Naveed

The most popular slogan during the movement for the creation of Pakistan was, “Haath main lota munh main paan — laiker rahain gay Pakistan”, believe it that this was the ideology of Pakistan

It was on March 25, 1969, when General Yahya Khan imposed another period of Martial Law by sending General Ayub Khan home after he had ruled the country for almost eleven years. I was among those (young) students who were released after serving a jail term of four months on the charge of offending the ‘Defence of Pakistan Rules’ (DPR). General Yahya announced that general elections would be held in October 1970 but this was postponed to December 7 because of flooding in former East Pakistan. We were not voters in those days but very active in the students movement and had launched a country-wide movement against the military regime of General Ayub.

As the elections were announced, suddenly Pakistanis heard the phrase, the “Ideology of Pakistan”. Everybody was surprised with this terminology. In those days many leaders were still alive who had been in the forefront of the Pakistan movement in both East and West Pakistan. All the leadership denied this terminology but later on when Bangladesh was formed and those who preferred to live in West Pakistan used this phrase to justify the killings of innocent Bengalis for the punishment of disassociating with Pakistan.

The true story behind the Ideology of Pakistan was that General Yahya Khan had a Minister of Information by the name of Nawabzada Sher Ali Khan. He was short of stature and liked to be called Bonapart. Indeed, he had a statue of himself at his house and took great delight in showing it to his visitors. One leader from Jamat-e-Islami (JI), Mian Tufail Mohammad, was very close to Nawabzada and treated him as a true Muslim or ‘Islam Pasand’. The JI and its leader, Abul Aala Maudoodi, invented the term Islam Pasand for the Islamic religious parties but generally people said that the religious parties were not, in fact, Islamic but only paid Islam lip service. So, Jamat-e-Islami was, in those days, declared as Islam Pasand.

Nawabzada and Mian Tufail started campaigning for the new-born Ideology of Pakistan. This was the first time the phrase was introduced and more than 70 percent of the population was not considered as Islam Pasand. A strong propaganda campaign was initiated by the state about the Ideology of Islam by using the Ministry of Information which was virtually under control of the Jamat-e-Islami. Then May 31 was declared as the day of “Shoukat-e-Isam”, the supremacy of Islam. Hence, the Jamat-e-Islami started at country level under the patronage of the Martial Law government.

To impose the slogan of the Ideology of Pakistan many student groups, trade unions, professional associations such as the Pakistan Medical Association, Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists, bar associations and several civil society groups were declared non Islamic. Again we (the young) students were arrested in 1969 with hundreds of ‘infidels’ and tried by military courts. I was sentenced by the military court to one year of rigorous imprisonment and was incarcerated in Bahawalpur Central Prison with hardened prisoners. The prison was used for under-trial prisoners of murders and it was just next to Phansi Ghat (the place where executions took place by hanging). We were also booked under section 124A of the Pakistan Penal Code on charges of hatching a criminal conspiracy against Pakistan. This charge was framed against us because we were very much vocal against the Islamic Ideology.

The General and his favourite party, the JI, failed to convince the people on the Ideology of Pakistan and Jamat-e-Islami only got four out of the 300 seats. The Ideology could not take off at the initial stage and it crashed. The JI leader, Maudoodi cursed the people calling them donkeys and not true Muslims. The JI created two militant organizations, the Al-Shams and Al-Badr, who were given the task of punishing the anti Ideology of Pakistan elements and extending full support to the Pakistan army for cleansing the anti Pakistan element from former East Pakistan, present day Bangladesh. Over 30,000 women were raped and killed and millions of people were killed in East Pakistan in the name of this ‘Ideology’.

Whenever there is the chance of free and fair elections in Pakistan this Ideology stupidity resurfaces to call the supra constitutional forces to safeguard the ideological boundaries of the country. This is an intentional initiative from these forces and now the judiciary is also involved in the attempt to stop the Pakistan becoming a ‘nation state’. It looks very much as if Pakistan is not a country but an ideology. The judicial officers at the helm of the elections are asking questions about the personal behavior of the candidates and then associating it with the Ideology of Pakistan.

The real back ground of the Ideology of Pakistan was that it has never existed during the movement for the creation of the country. There was only the two nation theory; the Hindu nation and the Muslim nation and this was the basis of the creation of Pakistan which within a period of 24 years proved to be foolishness as another Muslim state was created from the womb of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. It was claimed that religion cannot be a bonding element for the different nationalities.

The Bengalis were more Muslim than the people of West Pakistan but they had to prove themselves before the ordinary soldiers of Pakistan by opening their sarongs (Lungi) or trousers to prove that they were circumcised. One can find these photographs on the Google engine.

All these absurdities were created to turn a country into a theocratic state but it has always failed. One example of this was General Muhammad Zia ul Haq’s attempt to create an Islamic state and he added articles to the Constitution for the election of righteous and pure people. However, despite the fact that he had the full support of the military he failed. He wanted Pakistan to be an Islamic state based on 1400 years of Islamic teachings and the result was that the most corrupt people from the society of the day were elected to his parliament.

Today, only state run institutions practice this Islamification order to provide protection for their corruption, nepotism and undemocratic way of governance. The founding fathers have never used these words in their speeches or manifestos. But the most popular slogan of the movement of Pakistan was “Hath main lota munh main paan—laker rahain gay Pakistan”. Lota means a spherical water vessel of brass, copper or plastic used in parts of South Asia for self cleaning. The meaning of this slogan is that by holding the lota in one hand and beetle nuts in the mouth we will ultimately get the Pakistan we want. However many poets and writers tried to develop many slogans including some religious ones but those never gained in popularity among the Muslim population of the Sub Continent of India.

The proponents of the Ideology of Pakistan want to snatch the fundamental rights of the people by refusing them the possibility of individual liberty, freedom of expression and opinion and the choice to elect the representatives they want in government. They want a rigid and theocratic society based on their version of Islam so that they can negate the concept of a modern state.

If the persons elected were, in fact, pure Muslim according to the so-called Ideology of Pakistan then this means that Pakistan will become a pure Islamic and theocratic country where there would be no room for democracy. Religion and democracy cannot coexist as democracy is essentially a secular phenomenon. In a secular system all sections of a society are treated equally. The sole purpose of the Ideology of Pakistan is to deny the people of the country their sovereignty, equal rights, prosperity and the rule of law.

 

Eyptian Women in Reverse Gear

One angry woman with a bleeding mouth and eyes streaming from the tear gas pulled off her headscarf and stood yelling at the other side, the supporters of the ruling Muslim Brotherhood: “You are not Islam! You are not Egypt! Where is my freedom?”

So go most Fridays in Cairo over the past few weeks as liberal Egyptians have shown their virulent opposition to the president, Mohamed Morsi, as he has awarded himself new powers and pushed through a deeply contentious new constitution. Several buildings of the Muslim Brotherhood, the group behind Morsi, have been burned.

In post-Arab spring Egypt the revolution continues. But it’s women of all classes who have found themselves most alienated – written out of the jostling for power and subjected to a skyrocketing number of sex assaults, rapes and harassment.

Women who stood shoulder to shoulder with men during the 2011 Tahrir Square protests that brought down Hosni Mubarak found their position in society undermined almost immediately.

The parliamentary quota for women was removed without debate and a promised female vice-president failed to materialise, amid what political commentator Moushira Khattab called “a radical anti-feminist sentiment”.

Morsi threatened but stopped short of decriminalising Egypt’s practice of female genital mutilation, carried out on almost three-quarters of Egyptian girls, making it clear he would not tackle an issue he called “a family matter”.

The new constitution has swept away recognition of women’s rights and left the door open to the legalisation of perhaps Egypt’s most crippling social issue – underage marriage. Draft legislation that would allow the legal age of marriage to be lowered from 18 to 13 has been drawn up while clerics within the Muslim Brotherhood have indicated that marriage at the age of nine for girls is acceptable.

“They see women as, number one, objects of sex and, number two, to clean their floors. This is what the Egyptian ‘brotherhood’ is all about,” said Fatma, 24, an engineering graduate marching with her friends, some in burqas, some in headscarves. The women keep close together, arms linked and eyes alert for the men flying down the side of the demonstration on motorcycles grabbing and screaming at females. “They want to marry us at nine years old. Are these really the kind of men we want to run our country? Paedophiles?”

Political progress has been slow, with parliamentary elections scheduled for April now postponed with no new date. Frustrations have built.

“They are like a pack of dogs, tearing out the weakest first, raping and harassing the women and the girls, getting rid of them, and then fighting among themselves to be pack leader,” said Aya Kadry, 62.

Around Cairo hundreds of tower blocks are being built, extending the Arab world’s largest city leg by leg into the desert. This is where the vast majority of Egypt’s women are already living the constrained lives that the educated and middle-classes fear will be imposed by a radical government. Child marriage is common, the norm among the poor. Doctors are bribed to sign documents asserting a 14-year-old is 18 but most people don’t have the money so marriages go ahead without registration. Underage girls then have children who, essentially illegal, cannot have their births registered. Without papers those children cannot attend school, encasing a whole new generation in poverty.

In the poor district of Ezbet Khairallah 10 women are sitting around a metal cash box, holding the weekly meeting of their savings and loans group.

“We do not really have time to talk to our neighbours, there is a great burden of things to do in the home and for some of us our husbands do not like us to go out of doors, although we have convinced them we should meet for this social fund because it will help all the family,” said Seham Ahmed, 38, who is taking the opportunity to show the group how to make a basic liquid soap.

“I was married at 14,” she said, thumping a stick round a battered bucket and most of the women around her nod. “Pulled out of school one day and married that night. I hope my daughters can wait a little while but it’s quite difficult for girls who are not married at an early age to find a good man later and there is a lot of pressure. And fathers want girls gone because it is one mouth less to feed.”

Asmaa Mohamed Fawzy is 21. She was engaged but her family allowed her to break it off when her best friend died in childbirth aged 16. “I liked having the ring but I was only 15 and didn’t know any better. When Aya died it was a miserable tragedy and I’m lucky that my mum agreed with me I should not get married. I get teased and bullied. They shout I am not pretty enough, why am I the ugly one, but I do not want to die or to have children who cannot go to school. It is probably too late for me now and I’m sad I won’t have children.”

Her mother, Naghzaky Abdalla, 47, also endures being shunned by her neighbours. “When her friend died I too made up my mind. We only have one so we can afford to protect her. A neighbour had died at 15 of bleeding: the doctors wouldn’t treat her because she was married illegally and they don’t want to get involved. The girls’ bodies are not ready for childbirth and they are not ready for sexual relations which make their husbands impatient with them.

“Three girls in our street stay indoors now for ever because their husbands divorced them. If they cannot prove they were married and they are not virgins then they cannot get married again so they are shunned. Many are divorced because of course these girls are too young to understand what marriage means, she is still a child. In our community, though, a girl should be married before she is 16, maximum.”

Mrs Gihan, 45, a community activist with strong views, is fervently for the lowering the age of marriage to 13 in law. “We must do this,” she said. “Because all the unregistered children who cannot go to school need to be helped. These girls are denied healthcare, their children are denied a future. They have already decreased the legal age of work from 14 to 12 and I think this age too should be lowered. When Mubarak listened to international pressure and raised the age to 18 it changed nothing here. If you decree a legal age then you simply criminalise and marginalise. Men leave their wives before they turn 18 and their children are seen as being born into prostitution. We will raise awareness and stop child marriage this way.”

The stench of human waste coming from the river in another poor Cairo district, Manial Sheiha, is overpowering. The streets of packed earth are quiet with only children to be seen.

Nawal Rashid opens her door but remains on one side of the deep concrete threshold that she cannot cross – or allow visitors to cross – without her 70-year-old husband’s permission. He is at work. Her three-year-old son plays behind her and she insists she married at 18 – which makes her 21 now – but her neighbours all say she was 14. “I accepted the older man to help my family as there were four other children and my parents are very poor. I am quite content and happy to have sacrificed myself for my family.”

Next door is Etab, 19. She has two children and has returned to stay with her despairing mother Nearnat, 42, her ageing father and her three siblings.

“We thought by marrying her we would get her a better life,” said Nearnat. “Now she is divorced because he was a bad man. She refuses to get married again because then her ex-husband would take the children and now her younger sister is begging me not to go ahead with her marriage. I regret that my daughter was married young because now if she leaves the house her reputation will be ruined. The community all tease me.”

Outside in the street a group of young men explain why they want to marry young brides. “Children need to have their rights but also you want to marry a girl who is much younger so she will stay young and beautiful when you are old. Also you can control her better and make sure she is not one of these girls who goes around wanting to be harassed,” said Abdel Rahman, 17. His friend Youssef, 20, agrees. “There are many girls who just want to be harassed, walking around in the streets with their eyes uncovered.”

Mona Hussein Wasef, 26, says that we were in Tahrir Square, side by side, men and women, educated and uneducated, rich and poor. Never have I felt so much solidarity. I was Egypt, we were all Egypt, fighting for freedom, shoulder to shoulder,” she said. She is too fearful to attend any political demonstrations these days.

“Now we have never been so far apart, men and women. In such a short time, such a gulf. Now we are fighting just for the right to walk down the street without being assaulted. It is so hard, so shocking. To see the rights we had being ripped away and lost in the power struggle. To see us go backwards.”

Rasmia Ahmed Emam was 17 when she was married to a 50-year-old stranger.

“My family is a big one so I had to sacrifice to support them. My dad went to a marriage broker to find a rich husband for me and she told us she had a Saudi man. He came and seemed to like me and gave my parents the money to build a roof on our house.”

But the desperation of poor families combined with the acceptance of child marriage has created opportunities for unscrupulous marriage brokers trading young girls to sex tourists. Rasmia thought she was getting married but in fact she was kept in a hotel room for two weeks before “her husband” went home.

“I felt insulted, scared. I had a nervous breakdown. My father went to the broker but we had no proof of the marriage. She offered to marry me again. I refused. All my neighbours knew I was a prostitute, all my friends abandoned me. My future is destroyed. Now three girls in my street have been Saudi wives. All men are liars.”

The phenomenon is becoming increasingly common in Cairo.The taxi drivers bring men from the airport to the brokers. These girls are being traded and trafficked and dumped back home, their lives ruined.

It is becoming clearer and clearer to Saudi men and other tourists that Egypt is the place for child marriage, for ignoring girls’ and women’s rights. It has got worse since the revolution and keeps getting worse every day.

The Dutch Clamp Down on the Muslims

Netherlands, where six per cent of the population is now Muslim is scrapping multiculturalism:
The Dutch government says it will abandon the long-standing model of multiculturalism that has encouraged Muslim immigrants to create a parallel society within the Netherlands .

A new integration bill, which Dutch Interior Minister Piet Hein Donner presented to parliament on June 16, 2012 reads:

“The government shares the social dissatisfaction over the multicultural society model and plans to shift priority to the values of the Dutch people. A more obligatory integration is justified because the government also demands that from its own  citizens.
It is necessary because otherwise the society gradually grows apart and eventually no one feels at home anymore in the Netherlands.

Under the new law, the government steps away from the model of a multicultural society.

The new integration policy will place more demands on immigrants. For example, immigrants will be required to learn the Dutch language, and the government will take a tougher approach to immigrants who ignore Dutch values or disobey Dutch law.

The government will also stop  offering special subsidies for Muslim immigrants because, according to Donner:

“It is not the government’s job to  integrate immigrants”

The government will introduce new legislation that outlaws forced marriages and will also impose tougher measures against Muslim immigrants who lower their chances of employment by the way they dress.

More specifically, the government will impose a ban on face-covering, Islamic burqas as of January 1, 2013.

Holland has done that whole liberal thing, and realized, it may be too late, that creating a nation of tribes will kill the nation itself.

Muslim immigrants leave their  countries of birth because of civil and political  unrest. Countries like Holland and Australia have an established way of life that actually works, so why embrace the unworkable?

If Muslims do not wish to accept another culture, the answer is simple: ”stay where you are!”

Dr Peter Hammond Says that Muslims are Bad News

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond’s book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components.

The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.

Islamisation begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.

When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well..

Here’s how it works:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens.

This is the case in:

United States              Muslim 0.6 %
Australia                      Muslim 1.5%
Canada                        Muslim 1.9%
China                           Muslim 1.8%
Italy                             Muslim 1.5%
Norway                       Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytise from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs.

This is happening in:

Denmark                     Muslim 2%
Germany                     Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom         Muslim 2.7%
Spain                           Muslim 4%
Thailand                      Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves, along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France                                     Muslim 8%
Philippines                               5%
Sweden                       Muslim 5%
Switzerland                 Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands          Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago     Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Prophet Mohammed’s cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in:

Guyana                        Muslim 10%
India                            Muslim 13.4%
Israel                           Muslim 16%
Kenya                          Muslim 10%
Russia                          Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia                       Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia                         Muslim 40%
Chad                           Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon                      Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania                        Muslim 70%
Malaysia                      Muslim 60.4%
Qatar                           Muslim 77.5%
Sudan                          Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some state-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh                 Muslim 83%
Egypt                          Muslim 90%
Gaza                            Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia                    Muslim 86.1%
Iran                              Muslim 98%
Iraq                              Muslim 97%
Jordan                         Muslim 92%
Morocco                      Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan                       Muslim 97%
Palestine                      Muslim 99%
Syria                            Muslim 90%
Tajikistan                     Muslim 90%
Turkey                         Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ – the Islamic House of Peace.. Here there’s supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan                Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia               Muslim 100%
Somalia                       Muslim 100%
Yemen                         Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

‘Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidels.

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In
such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death.

Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today’s 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world’s population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world’s population by the end of this century.

Christians Unlikely to Vote For PML-N

The small incident of a quarrel between three Christian and Muslim friends during a drinking session (of alcohol) turned into the ransacking, looting and burning of 180 Christian houses in Lahore. The fighting between the friends happened on March 5, 2013 but after three days some people in high places used the incident to grab the land and property owned by the Christians. The planners used and pressured a Muslim, a friend of a Christian alleged to be a blasphemer, to lodge a First Information Report (FIR) with the police station on Friday, March 8.

Shahid Imran, a Muslim and barber by profession, was a close friend of the Christian, Sawan Masih. Apart from his barber shop Imran was also doing illegal business of buying and selling liquor along with another Muslim friend. On March 5 when they were having drinks in the late hours they scuffled on some business issue and the Christian proved himself more powerful than his Muslim friend. Shahid Imran was deeply insulted that a Christian had beaten him and he threatened Masih that he would face dire consequences. Imran discussed the incident with activists from banned religious organizations who later had discussions with land grabbers who, for a period of two years, had been pressurising the Christian community of Joseph Colony, Badami Bagh, to vacate so that they could turn it into a huge commercial area.

On March 8, during the Friday prayers, it was announced through the mosque loud speaker that Masih committed blasphemy by passing remarks against the last prophet of Islam. The police who were already prepared arrested Masih when a crowed attacked the community under the leadership of Imran.

In the ensuing incident they beat Masih’s father seriously. The police asked the community to vacate the area as there were chances of further attacks, totally ignoring their responsibility to protect members of the religious community.

The police left the area thereby providing a perfect opportunity for the attackers to return the next day, March 9. It is unconscionable that among the attackers were members of the assembly and even one from the national assembly, Mr. Riaz Malik. There was also one member of the Punjab provincial assembly, Asad Ashraf. Both of these men are from the ruling party of the province, the PML-N.

It is also unworthy of the press and media houses that no reporting or comments were made about the real cause behind the attack. In this instance, the person who made the accusation of blasphemy is himself a blasphemer as he is selling alcohol which is forbidden by Islam.

The attackers were from the Madressas (Muslim seminaries) and most of the persons were from nearby provinces and were not familiar with the area and the PML-N workers who were guiding them.

On March 11morning, a police party opened fire with their service weapons at St. Francis Church, Kot Lakhpat, Lahore damaging the Church and the Cross. They also fired at the gate of the Church. The people were scared and left the place immediately. The police told them to close the church and warned them that if they did not then they would face problems. The police were obviously following the wishes of the land grabbers who are interested in the area as it is a large industrial place and the property is highly sought after.

This is not the first incident of attacks on religious minority groups in the province by the PML-N goons. During the last five years of the government of PML-N more than 200 persons from minority groups were killed in attacks on Christians, Ahmadis and Shias.

Todate more than ten churches have been attacked and burned by government protected henchmen.

On July 31, 2009, in the Gojra city incident more than 100 houses belonging to Christians were attacked by members from banned religious organizations under the leadership of a member of the provincial assembly, Abdul Qadir Awan, from the PML-N. In this incident eight persons were burned alive, including five women and children. The attackers were arrested but soon released one by one by the courts that are inclined towards the PML-N.

The government in Punjab is running a hate drive against the minority groups so Punjab has become a safe haven of the Taliban, Al-Qaida and other banned organizations including Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Lashkar-e-Taiba.

The Chief Minister of Punjab province has offered the terrorist groups a place to live so they do not conduct any terrorist activities against his government. Previously the Governor of Punjab was assassinated by a policeman from the Punjab Elite Force and the former federal minister, who was Christian, was also assassinated. The policeman is now considered a hero.

The attacks and incidents of killings of Christians are due to the sheer negligence and biased attitude of the Punjab provincial government and police. The Punjab government is notorious for appeasing banned Muslim militant organisations.

The Punjab provincial government, during the bye elections in 2009, released a number of extremist leaders from the jails who were involved in sectarian violence and killings, which helped them to win the elections.

The continuous use of the blasphemy laws to attack anyone who might not share the same views as the government or whose land is valuable has become the best tool for the hate movement against the religious minority groups.

The recent incident at Joseph Colony has set a precedent that any religious group can hire people and start attacking on the excuse of blasphemy and as has happened constantly in the past the police and the government has failed to provide protection to the minorities. Not only are they failing to provide protection but in view of the fact that members of the assemblies are involved in the incident it is blatantly clear that the government approves of the attacks.