Pakistani police man kills sister for wearing jeans

lol... I hope you don't use the link you used in this thread for your academic papers as sources.

 

Just another day in the life of a Pakistani.

 

Really everyone is missing the point here:

The problem is socioeconomic. Religion is a major influence in a Muslims life. A Muslim will justify acts of rebellion or mold acts of rebellion in fashions that he believes to be holy- whether his religious understanding is right or not.

Two addtl notes:

1- isn't nw Pakistan a border of Afghanistan - so what does that point prove. That there's violence at the border. Mexican cartel violence often spills over into the us. D/n mean we are now a part of Mexico.

2- isn't northern Africa predominantly Muslim? What's the point behind that argument.

Crimes in any country are primarily out of desperation. Socio economics are a huge factor in this. Muslims are the poor of their wealth. Don't let oil money fool you. There is a huge disparity in the distribution of wealth.

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY. Forums will always have SOME individuals that will adamantly try to rile up Muslims To test their virtue. No reasoning will suffice. Read about the nypd spy operation that was uncovered in NJ and released yesterday.

So what if some Internet tough guy thinks he has an inkling of an idea about the intricacies of what is going on on the other side of the world. Let him be the king of his desktop. Far more people see a bigger picture.

 

off topic but with a 2000 join date you are still in school?

 

Are we talking about lack of education, or someone shooting a woman?

Because a lack of education in some hands isn't life threatening to others. But in this guys hands it was. So obviously it must be the person himself.

 

Irrational fear it is not.
There is a reason for the fear and dislike of Muslims by certain communities, so it is not irrational.

Lets take for example Sudan which is now two countries, Sudan and South Sudan. I will use the terms North Sudan and South Sudan to make sure we don't get to countries mixed up. North Sudan is Muslim and South Sudan is Christian. They are two different countries because of the religious violence in the country before it became two separate countries. In the past 100 years, between 3.5 million and 4 million people have been killed, with a large majority being Christians. The reason for this is because of Muslims in North Sudan trying to convert the Christians and South Sudan to Muslim, and killing those that don't convert.

The one thing that is really frustrating and irritating is how both European and American newspaper/media refer to the conflict between the two groups as ethnic tribes in an effort to be politically correct and and so that Muslims are not perceived as violent.

The reality of the matter is, it is simply conflict between Muslims and Christians with Muslims forcibly converting Christians. Do Christians in South Sudan have an irrational fear?

Let's take a look at Nigeria. President Jonathan Goodluck declared a state of emergency in the country at the beginning of the year. Why? Because Christian churches are being attacked and Christians killed. Boko Haram is a Muslim group in northern Nigeria that has stated Christians either need to convert or leave, and if they don't convert or leave, they will be killed. Do Christians in Nigeria have an irrational fear?

Let's take a look at Thailand. A country that is between 96 and 97% Buddhist. There are constant bombings and terrorist attacks by Muslims from southern Thailand on Buddhists. While the terrorist attacks have been wide-ranging and have hit shopping centers and markets, a large number of them have targeted school teachers and Buddhist monks. Do Thais have an irrational fear of Muslims and Islam?

What about in the Philippines where there are Muslim groups who want to break away from the Philippines and set up their own state. Approximately 15,000 Filipino Christians have been killed since 2000 by these Muslim groups who want their own state? two Filipino Christians have an irrational fear?

I can provide additional examples of Chinese Buddhists being attacked by Muslims, Christians in parts of Russia, and Hindus that live in India on the border with Bangladesh.

 

You are assuming that my Muslim friends are not educated about Islam because your Sikh friends were not educated about Sikhism or did not follow the Sikh religion. That is not a very good analogy.

 

I'm speaking of his irrational fear of Islam invading his house or Americans fear of some conspiracy of American citizens to bring sharia law to the United States.

Don't worry, I know your next move. Its going to be an article of some crazy individual or small group of Muslims in this country wanting to somehow spread Sharia Law.

 

You should really take up this concern of yours with higher authorities, don't think posting on a sports centered forum based in Houston will help your agenda much.

 

The Afghanistanization of Pakistan is undoubtedly a contributing factor to Pakistan's steady decline over the past three decades.

 

Agreed.

 

ATW, I still would like for to explain Mathloom's stats about UAE's (an Islamic State) women being 90 percent educated. You brushed off that stat by simply saying it was largely due to western influence or whatever.

Do you actually think the main cause of these tragedies in Pakistan is a "crazy ideology"? Or is it the lack of education, the lack of common sense, poverty that causes people to not handle religion like a rational and intelligent human being. I think you should go back and read Ronny's post, he summed it up pretty well.

PS I think you are too obsessed with spreading your agenda filled threads and holding grudges against a few Muslim posters than to engage in any reasonable discussions anymore.

 

I don't know any. I haven't previously made lists of people nor had an agenda against anyone. I don't really speak German, but I am sure you can figure it out, you seem to do well with google.

Also, if you do try to call the authorities and they keep hanging up on you, maybe you can consider an alternative institution to call? Irrenanstalt? Klapsmühle?

 

Thanks.
I also agree with a lot of your points. Just to add to what you said…

Democracy only works efficiently in highly educated homogenous societies (Japan and in Europe pre-mass immigration). Our founding fathers for all practical purposes really only gave the right to vote to land owning (wealthy ) white men so the voting block was pretty homogenous. When you have different groups, they will tend to divide the country and you will see factions develop (political groups) that then pander to certain groups verses doing what is best for the country. For example, the Democrats with the Latino community & unions, and Republicans with gun rights advocates, with each group having their own agenda. This is one of the things that scared the founding fathers. I want to say it was Thomas Jefferson that actually wrote about the evils of political parties.

While I am no big fan of communism, you have to marvel at its efficiency. People in United States complain about things not getting done in Washington, well in Beijing things move at light speed. Once the Chinese government (remember its Communist) moved from a socialist economic structure to one based on capitalism in the late 1970s to the early to mid-1980s, (and it wasn't until the mid to late 1980s that China had fully moved to a capitalistic economic structure) that China exploded economically. The fact that China is also Communist allows the Chinese government to adopt and implement economic policies that will help the country grow. How long has the discussion regarding the Keystone Pipeline been going on? Seems like forever, In China that decision would have already been made, and the project probably would have been completed by now.

The trade-off of course is basic human rights. No freedom of speech and I love my freedom of speech. If I lived in China, I would probably get thrown into a hard labor camp for starting a free Tibet protest.

After World War I and World War II, the British installed dictatorships in all the countries throughout the Middle East, with the exception being Iran. Iran actually had a democracy, but the Eisenhower administration went in and had the government overthrown and installed the Shah of Iran. European countries knew that the best way to have political stability, peace (although that is relative when one looks at all the wars that have occurred in the Middle East going back to World War II), and economic growth was by having dictatorships with the dictators being progressive and sympathetic to Western ideologies.

In response to your statement, “you make getting an education in a stable economy sound as easy as getting a flu vaccination,” I will make the following arguments:


If we look back, we can actually see that the dictatorships provided greater political and economic stability as well as peace. Lets compare Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Egypt to Pakistan and Bangladesh. Tunisia was probably the most progressive country in the Arab world and that has now been lost.

The exception being Turkey with Mustafa Kemal Ataturk who was a huge advocate of a progressive secular Islamic state. Turkey was hailed by the West as the model Islamic state. Now Turkey seems to be progressing backward with allot of the reforms that were implemented by Ataturk being undone by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

A democracy is not the end all solution for what ails the countries in the Middle East and it is foolish to think that. Realistically, what are the growth prospects for countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. I thought Hosni Mubarak did a great job in Egypt. What are the growth prospects for Egypt now that it has a democratically elected State leader? Things are not looking quite as rosy. Same goes for Tunisia.

If the monarchies in Saudi Arabia and the UAE get overthrown with Pro-Islamist democratic governments, all hell would break out in the Middle East. The Saudi’s understood this and quelled the pro-democracy movement in its infancy by sending troops and immediately arresting protestors. They also dole out approximately 130 billion per year to the people that live in that country as a way of preventing social unrest from simmering up. If the monarchies got overthrown, there would be significant sectarian fighting between the different braches of Islam (Sunnis and Shiites).

I am not big fan of Condoleezza Rice, but she hit the nail on the head when she talked about the sectarian fighting between the different branches of Islam.

So while providing an education may not be as easy as getting a flu shot, it is not as hard as we may think it is. It does require strong leaders who understand what the role of government is and to support those governments (even if they are dictatorships or monarchies) that will promote economic stability and peace, as well as human rights for minorities, women and gays.

I could give you a dozen reasons why Jimmy Carter was by and far the worst president this country ever had. But the following reason is probably the most significant; and it was his failure to support the Shaw of Iran, which subsequent led to his overthrow. Iran was probably America’s strongest ally in the middle east after Israel, but that all changed after the Ayatollah Khomeini came to power. As a result, we have complete and utter mess right now in dealing with Iran.

I will leave you with two things to ponder. First a democracy by itself does not provide basic human rights. The Bill of Rights was added after the constitution was written. I know this fact is common sense, but it is important to understand the gravity of that statement. We can rephrase that last comment another way to say, the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution because a democracy by itself does not provide basic human rights.

Second, as long as you have peace along with basic human rights, you can have economic growth. Compare South Africa, Namibia, and Angola to Mali, Niger and Chad.
Compare south Nigeria to north Nigeria
Compare South Sudan to North Sudan.
Compare India to Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Compare Israel to Jordan and Egypt.
What Israel, Japan and Germany have accomplished is something every country can do.

BTW, I am not a Harvard grad. Wish I was. I am a University of Houston Cougar and later ended up in Boston /Cambridge in a weird round about way. I am just doing research into what would be a better program for me to pursue. Harvard Economics vs. Masters in Financial Engineering at MIT. MIT is where modern finance was invented.

 

Hurricane, you must have missed my earlier post, would really love to hear your thoughts.

I saw that you said any pro-democratic movement in the UAE would be Islamist, but this doesn't add up when you consider the staggering rate of female literacy/education in the UAE (would seem to indicate that even if what you're saying is true, these Islamists have equally educated women), a country where all citizens are allegedly Muslim, and the huge majority of females wear the hijab, observe prayer, fast, go for pilgrimmage, get married traditionally, etc.

Fresh graduate jobs are dominated by females, to an almost embarrassing degree for males. Education is same. Women in the UAE don't even stop at a bachelor's degree anymore - a huge percentage of them go on to get their masters. We have female CEO's who still live at their parents house. Movie makers, journalists, everest climbers, olympic athletes, business women, entrepreneurs, fashion designers, pilots, police officers, military service, almost every conceivable job. Certainly, diversity has been a contributor, but female literacy only picked up recently while Dubai/Abu Dhabi have been ethnically diverse for at least 6 decades, and the influence of other religions on citizens is limited "successfully" by law.

Again, you stated yourself that the monarchies are supressing sectarian tensions, I would like to see some statistics on sectarian tensions here. Nothing of the sort seems to be going on, shiites and sunnis actually get along better here than probably any Islamic country.

The country's constitution and laws are shariah-based.

Again, you've trotted out a number of examples of countries where there are massive socioeconomic problems and conveniently highlighted Islam as the problem. I can easily point to Myanmar, where Buddhist monks are denying humanitarian aid to 10 million Muslims because of 3 rapists. This doesn't mean Buddhists or Buddhism opposes human rights.

Another thing to consider is the Muslim Americans:

Here is another interesting find:

Your assertions seem to fall away once Muslim women are located in a place where there is improved socioeconomic conditions. The link between Islam and female literacy seems weak at best.

Would love to hear your thoughts, thanks.