[thechat] War Essentials: World Domination

[Syed Zeeshan Haider]

From: "Madhu Menon"

> America is a "Muslim nation"? Since when? And what is this *one* "Muslim
> nation" you speak of?

You lost my point completely, my friend. Any Muslim in any part of the world is
a part of a nation called Muslim Nation, Muslim Ummah or Islamic Ummah (Ummah
means nation). Territorial boundaries cannot affect it.
America is "officially" a secular COUNTRY, as far as I know.

> Sorry, it sounds like religious fanaticism to me -

Yes! Being a Muslim is not just having a religion as a part time practice. Islam
is a COMPLETE roadmap of life. It decides dos and don'ts for a Muslim. If a
Muslim practices Islam with his/her COMPLETE faith then his every act is
considered
worship of Allah; even when he/she eats, when he/she drinks, when he/she walks,
when he/she talks, when he/she goes to work, when he/she writes, when he/she
enjoys time with his/her spouse or when he/she sleeps. Islam is name of
controlling the life of a Muslim by his/her faith.

> Have to wonder why these "oppressed" people pack their bags and immigrate
> to America in the first place.

I was talking about a WHITE American Muslim, who was a native of USA by birth
and
a new convert of Islam. Being a part of Muslim nation he could feel the grief
and pain of Muslims all around the world and he had his own opinion about
relieving their pains.

> >Study the history of Muslims. When Muslims attack  THEY ATTACK TO WIN.
>
> Ahem. I won't point out examples to further inflame the issue, but you know
> you're wrong on that one.

I would like to SEE the examples of ATTACKS BY MUSLIMS.

> Just like Bush and Blair made plans to occupy Iraq "Real Soon Now".

They boast much and they do least. We do and demonstrate. Our WMD program is an
example.

> And
> what do you mean by "Indian-occupied" anyway?

I mean what I have written and I strongly believe it.

> That's like
> "American-occupied" Texas.

It's same just as fire and water are alike.

> (Incidentally, democratic elections were held in
> Kashmir recently and a majority voted a government into power. Not quite
> the repressed people you think.)

They do NOT need puppet elections. They need the Right of Self-Determination
under 1948 resolutions of UN on which India's former Prime Minister (Pardhaan
Mantari as one would say in Hindi) Nehru agreed and signed. For this purpose a
referendum must be held in Indian-occupied Kashmir under the supervision of UNO
and Kashmiris must be asked to choose Pakistan or India. Elections with 700000
military and paramilitary troops in Indian-occupied Kashmir can NOT be
democratic.

> You can't launch a nuke as far as USA.

We can use them against their Ships in seas. Anyhow, I meant something else.

> Assuming of course that USA does
> attack Pakistan, which I doubt very much. (But maybe if they found Osama
> hiding there ;)

They don't need to find. Their claim will be enough.

> Man... it feels like the Crusades all over again. More people calling for
> war in the name of religion.

Not in the name of religion but in the name of security of Muslims, security of
their
territories, their resources, their religion and their rights and to stop the
expansion of aggression of USA, UK and Israel.

> Damn, I'm glad I'm an atheist.

I'm also glad.
--
Syed Zeeshan Haider.
http://syedzeeshanhaider.faithweb.com/

PS: If we begin to discuss Pakistan-India relations, this forum will easily be
full of flames. That's why, I have always refrained from this. While writing my
previous post, I was 100% sure to receive a response from you. I hope this will
remain discussion only. So, no hard feelings!