الأربعاء، يوليو 04، 2012

Pakistani mob burns 'blasphemer'

Nice allies you got there, America.


A Pakistani mob has taken a man accused of blasphemy from a police station and burnt him to death, police say.

The man was being held for allegedly burning a copy of the Koran in public. The incident took place on the outskirts of Bahawalpur, in Punjab province.Witnesses said hundreds of people looked on as he screamed for help.

Pakistan's controversial blasphemy law imposes the death penalty for insulting Islam, but it is rarely carried out. The area where the lynching took place is home to hundreds of madrassas - religious schools - run by radical Islamist or sectarian groups.

هناك 58 تعليقًا:

Allah swt يقول...

Burn a digital Quran

Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

Nope, not our allies, Zeyad. Those would be "allies" of Al-Qaida, whom we are fighting. That they operate in Pakistan has become no secret after the reactions of people to our removal of Bin-Laden.

Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

Allah swt,

Thanks, but I'll pass. It's not a book's fault that people are idiots. Everything is open to interpretation, and if they want to see only the extreme version, it's their own fault.

Zeyad يقول...

Lynnette, al-Qaeda has nothing to do with it. Those are regular folks who dragged the man out of his cell and burned him to death while the rest of the village watched on and cheered. Enough with the "al-Qaeda" phantoms that your media perpetuates.

Marcus يقول...

I'd guess a majority or at least a lagre minority in Pakistan would welcome the burning of anyone who burned a koran. That said, burning a koran I myself find a silly thing to do, but at the most it should get you fined, perhaps not even that, and certainly not burned.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Zeyad يقول...

Lee, and who do you think attends the religious schools? Aliens? Saudi Arabia, another one of your allies, funds these schools for the general population to attend.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال المؤلف هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Zeyad يقول...

They're not allies of al-Qaeda. They are common folks who were enraged by a defiant act that they consider to be against their religion, probably the worst act possible in their eyes. Blasphemers are regularly executed all over the Islamic world (most notably in Saudi Arabia and Iran, no fans of al-Qaeda) and if this man wasn't dragged out of jail by the mob and lynched he would have been executed by the authorities (i.e. your allies, the ones you train and give billions of dollars of aid to).

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Petes يقول...

Basically Zeyad, Lee C. wants to tell you that America's interest in the Middle East and Western Asia is purely out of financial self-interest, so no hard feelings. And you, being a mere native of said region, and having lived through an actual conflict there, are by definition a "naïvé (sic) Middle Easterner" and wouldn't understand such lofty motivations. And the Yanks don't really like the Saudi (sic) and the Paki (very sic), so any unpleasant happenings your naïvé (sic) self wants to bring to their attention is outside the scope of their alliances of convenience. Anything else you need to know, Lee C will be happy to tell you what to think. And yes, he truly is that arrogant. (Not too bright though, so I wouldn't bet on being able to enlighten him any).

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

Zeyad,

I did not mean literal allies of Al-Qaida, which is why I put that word in quotes. At least not in the sense that they are fighting for them. What I was trying to convey is that their behavior is akin to the extremism exhibited by Al-Qaida.

Why is there any difference between one type of extremism and another? The only difference I see is the prey. And, really, given the opportunity that may not be so different either.

Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

Zeyad,

Blasphemers are regularly executed all over the Islamic world (most notably in Saudi Arabia and Iran, no fans of al-Qaeda)

But they are no fans of Al-Qaida not because they necessarily disagree with Al-Qaida's message, but because Al-Qaida is after their jobs. Or, one might say, their positions on the Middle East's chessboard. No?

(i.e. your allies, the ones you train and give billions of dollars of aid to).

Well, lotta good that did us in the case of Iran. As to KSA, as Lee pointed out, it was mostly Saudis who carried out the 09/11 attacks.

Seems to me that our alliances with Iran(in the past) and KSA(currently) are pretty superficial, from both sides points of view.

And by superficial I mean they are not natural alliances because of shared beliefs, but because of political(our Cold War with the Soviet Union) or economic (the goal of stable oil prices) reasons.

Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

Zeyad,

One more comment. Do you have any thoughts on how we could help in neutralizing the extremism that seems to pervade the ME?

Marcus يقول...

Lynnette: "And by superficial I mean they are not natural alliances because of shared beliefs, but because of political(our Cold War with the Soviet Union) or economic (the goal of stable oil prices) reasons."

My opinion is that the US is first and foremost in the game for the following reasons:

1. Energy security - seeing to it that no other force could deny the US of ME oil and to strive to keep the flow going, which is good for the entire world economy - not just the US. Also to have the potential weapon of denying ME oil to enemies in a time of conflict. Basically the US is acting as the global energy-supply watch dog (And before you attack me for this I might add that it is quite possible that there needs to be such a watch dog and that the US is in fact the least bad one we realistically have today to handle the task).

2. Geopolitics. This ties in to #1 and is basically to make sure to push back or to retain the capacity to push back any competitor that might strive to dominate the region. Chinese companies are welcomed to get their contracts in the ME, but chinese military bases would be seeen as a severe threat. The US wants to have the final say in the region.

3. Protecting the Petro-Dollar, or the Dollar as the world reserve currency. The reason ya'll can run the deficits that you do without tanking like Iceland or Greece is the position of the Dollar. And the Dollar holds that position in large part because oil is traded in Dollars. The vast majority of nations need to buy oil, so they therefor need to get their hands on US Dollars. This props up your currency and rules that apply to other nations do not apply in the same sense to ya'll.

All these reasons I believe weigh way more heavily than the threat of any ME terrorists ever will. And these reasons are way more important to you than democracy in the ME is. If democracy would futher the points above you're for it, but if it would threaten your status in the region you'd be against it. If, for instace, there was a real democratic movement in the KSA but it was one hostile to American influence I'd bet your government would prop up the KSA regime to strike that movement down, no matter how harshly.

Zeyad يقول...

@Marcus: If democracy would futher the points above you're for it, but if it would threaten your status in the region you'd be against it.

See Bahrain, Yemen

Marcus يقول...

Lynnette:

"Do you have any thoughts on how we could help in neutralizing the extremism that seems to pervade the ME?"

I'd like to hear from Zeyad on that matter also.

My own opinion is that the outlook is bleak. The fact is that the ME in general is either poor like Jemen or has oil incomes like various other states. Even Dubai which is a financial centre would plummet if not for the oil money that finds its way there.

When did you last buy anything other than gasoline that was made in the ME? Dates mabe but no machinery, technology, medicine or any other processed goods. The entire region is also vastly over populated if you consider water and food recorces. The only reason the populations keep growing is that oil pays for imports of necessary goods. Not even Egypt which was once the corn-store for the Roman empire can feed itself without imports.

To get to the point:

Oil is what runs the entire region. And oil income has created a human surplus of which a large part has few opportunities for individual achievments. There are only so many public jobs and there are precious few innovative and competitive private enterprises. Young people go to school and get fancy degrees but the most of the jobs offered are in the public sector ripe with corruption. And there are huge legions of young people with few opportunities in life.

Couple this with a religion/culture that basically says (to the believers) you're superior to the non-believers, but where the non-believers in this world are doing so much better and what do you get? Frustration, anger, and extremism.

Now, if ME populations continue to soar and oil income will eventually start to drop, what's the prognosis for the future? More extremism I would say. Migration for the ones with the opportunity and extremism for many of the ones left behind. And I don't see this whole "arab spring" thing like a step in the right direction either. What democracy there was voted the fundies right into the drivers seat. Good luck crreating a society that spawns the next Apple Inc. with the Muslim Brotherhood in government.

Marcus يقول...

@Zeyad

I was thinking of Bahrein when I wrote the post.

The hypocricy in the entire west was very evident in the media rection to the protests in Bahrein compared to the rreaction to protests/insurgencies in other ME nations.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

@Marcus: If democracy would futher the points above you're for it, but if it would threaten your status in the region you'd be against it.


[Marcus] And I don't see this whole "arab spring" thing like a step in the right direction either. What democracy there was voted the fundies right into the drivers seat.


Zeyad & Marcus,

So if our support of democracy isn't going to help, except to usher in more fundamentalists, and we are condemend for not being supportive enough in Bahrain and Yemen, then exactly what are we supposed to do? Either the US or the West in general?

Back to you, Zeyad...

And if you can't answer that, having lived there, then how do you expect us to? :)

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال المؤلف هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

Marcus,

The entire region is also vastly over populated if you consider water and food recorces.

Yes. This does not bode well for the region as a whole to weather(excuse the pun) global climate change.

The only reason the populations keep growing is that oil pays for imports of necessary goods.

Hmmm...I don't know, that seems a stretch. I think you have a lot of countries in the region where people have large families because of other reasons, such as religious(no use of birth control), or perhaps to ensure survival of the family line. And somehow I don't think abortion is an option in many places.

Oil is what runs the entire region.

Oil is what funds much of the region, yes. There is not too much diversification of industries that I see.

There are only so many public jobs and there are precious few innovative and competitive private enterprises.

I agree. Or at least not on a global scale. But then their economic structures seem more in line with socialism. Private enterprises are alive and well in the black market, which is more akin to capitalism. At least that's what I gathered on Iraq. Zeyad can correct me if I'm wrong.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

[Lee} Even growing up in Iraq you learn, if ya gotta pay people to sometimes pretend they're your friend, not even always, just pretend sometimes when it suits them, then ya both know they're not your friend.

Well said.

Zeyad يقول...

it's just too ‘comfortable’ for the locals to go there and stay there. Absolves them of the blame for following the leaders they choose to follow and present to the world as their leaders.

Look around, Lee. In Iraq right after the war Bremer handpicked the 'leaders' that best suited America's interests and forced them upon us (you can peruse my archives for the reactions of Iraqis to that at the time). The bunch we have today (Maliki, Allawi, Hashimi, Barzani, Talibani, etc.) were all propped up by the US civil administration. They managed to entrench themselves politically and militarily in the few years that followed and with the money they gained from commissions out of contracts with Halliburton and co. and 'bribes' they were in a position to win elections. Nevertheless, last time we voted, Maliki lost the election but look who's still in power? No surprise since he's the only Iraqi politician willing to keep you guys around. Doesn't matter how unpopular he really is. Might makes right.

Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

I suppose we can exempt, to a large extent, both the Turks and the Kurds from that accusation.

Yes, they seem to do all right for themselves. So that means it's not something that cannot be changed.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Marcus يقول...

Lee: "Simplistic, and, more importantly, wrong. Japan runs deficits higher than ours. Japan's overall debt to GDP ratio is over 200%; ours has barely reached 100%"

I don't know if you're trying to pull one off here or if you're that ignorant.

Japan's debt is almost solely to its own population, in Yen. They have very little foreign debt, The US debt is primarilly to foreign states, China being the biggest one. Do you not see the difference?

The Google it and read up some. I assure you here's a difference.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

Yup. With 'friends' like that you don't need enemies.

Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

People popped up in the middle of that, Lee.

My 1:38 PM comment is referencing your 1:25 PM comment.

Marcus يقول...

Lynnette:

Me: "The only reason the populations keep growing is that oil pays for imports of necessary goods."

Lynnette: "Hmmm...I don't know, that seems a stretch. I think you have a lot of countries in the region where people have large families because of other reasons, such as religious(no use of birth control), or perhaps to ensure survival of the family line. And somehow I don't think abortion is an option in many places."

The population would never have increased to such numbers without food and water to subside it. And that food and water was imported and oil paid for it. Simple as that.

Now, think about an inceasing population but lower the oil incomes- what do you get?

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...

 
      "Now, think about an inceasing population but lower
      the oil incomes- what do you get?
"

Africa.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

Now, think about an inceasing population but lower the oil incomes- what do you get?

Afghanistan?

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

The Chinese are now spending more money on internal security than they are on their combined military (which devotes a huge percentage of its budget to internal security too).

As much as we bemoan the horrible economy here or in Europe, we forget that China has problems of its own. They have a billion people to feed, house and clothe. Not to mention medical expenses, if there is any health care available. I rather think the leadership there worries more about internal issues than foreign adventures.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
Lynnette In Minnesota يقول...

There are all sorts of gems in Zeyad's archives. It's kind of like rummaging through someone's attic. He hasn't put any comments back though. They might be kind of interesting, juding by his responses in his posts.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     يقول...
أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.
غير معرف يقول...

It's actually a great and helpful piece of information.

I'm glad that you just shared this useful information with us.
Please keep us informed like this. Thanks for sharing.


Feel free to surf to my web site :: Yellow Booth