Big C Superstore Bombed

[Sir Burr]

Am not sure I agree with all you say.

The term Jihad means 'struggle'. One can have a personal jihad. If you have a particular goal, but find difficulty in reaching this goal, this would be a personal jihad.

Islam only respects religions of 'the book'. Christianity and Judaism to be precise.

There have been many instances of forced conversions ie. India under the Moghuls.

As a couple of posters have mentioned. If you marry an islamic woman, you MUST convert. They do not tolerate marriages with other faiths, even if they are 'of the book'.

It's the only religion that imposes death for apostasy.

I think everybody agrees that women do NOT have the same rights as men in Islam (this is a topic in itself).

Edited August 2, 2005 by Sir Burr

[Anon999]

"What more than 95 per cent of all suicide terrorist attacks around the world have in common is not religion, but a specific political goal to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland or prize greatly."  Robert Pape

What do the three Southern Provinces have that the rest of Thailand wants?

Is there oil or other natural resources down there?

Why not just give them autonomy? Let them form their own country?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There's a LOT of oil right there off-shore..one of the contributing reasons why the Thaksin Government and hopefully each succeeding government will hang onto and not trade-off at any cost. (There's also a LOT of oil in Irag). One wonders!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There isn't any oil in Northern Ireland. Anyway fanatics will always find and excuse of some sort. You will invariably find that religiion is always behind the problem if you dig deep enough.

Whether it is suicide bombing, ethnic cleansing or some other "reason" like in Africa where being from the wrong tribe is a good enough excuse. Atrocities are not carried out for humanitarian, economic or reasons that most of us can consider remotely justified.

[zaz]

"The term Jihad means 'struggle'. One can have a personal jihad. If you have a particular goal, but find difficulty in reaching this goal, this would be a personal jihad."

If it is a "personal jihad" then surely it is wrong to create this into a general jihad involving others? It cannot be right to assume a personal jihad is a religious one?

"Islam only respects religions of 'the book'. Christianity and Judaism to be precise."

True because these are acknowledged religions that involved a Prophet relaying a message from God. However, the general aspect of respecting other religions should be applied to all non-Islamic faiths.

"There have been many instances of forced conversions ie. India under the Moghuls."

This was clearly wrong and has contributed to portraying the wrong message that Islam stands for.

"As a couple of posters have mentioned. If you marry an islamic woman, you MUST convert. They do not tolerate marriages with other faiths, even if they are 'of the book'."

Wrong - a Muslim women firstly is required to marry a Muslim man. It's not a case that "he must" convert to Islam it is more a case that her faith is put to detriment. This will lead us to the point that women are treated in disregard but on this particular subject the man being a Muslim is important because he would have a major influence on their children which is why it would be better (from Islam's point of view) for him to be a Muslim.

"It's the only religion that imposes death for apostasy."

This is also untrue. If one abondons Islam then God will serve his/her punishment. People are left to live until their days are over to allow them to repent and give them a chance to amend their wrongdoings.

"I think everybody agrees that women do NOT have the same rights as men in Islam (this is a topic in itself)."

Agreed - women have different rights for the reason that women are different to men - it's a physical fact. There perfectly logical are reasons why this is so. As you say this is another suject in iteself.

[psychosid10]

Sir Blurr , please dont waste your time in discussing something with ppl who watch the world through a prism of very one-dimensional views... Views about parvez musharaf being really interested in stoppping terrorism is nonsense. He has sheltered militants under his nose. The only thing thats changed now is that international pressure due to london bombings. And as far as other things are concerned WHY ARE WE DISCUSSING GOODs & BADs of a RELIGION in the topic of terrorism. Does it make it synonymous with terrorism?

And about the women in scantily clothes on TV and respect shown to them , why cant we let the women decide how u want to be ? if the women like being under the burka thats fine , but its when they dont want to be in burka ,it bcomes an issue..

The fact is that Islam wants to be above any other law prevailing in a country and that causes all the issues .. The things that should be solved by the state suddenly are given a religious angle.. i have seen unemployment being given a religious angle at times.. come on . you cant have everything that way ..

Edited August 2, 2005 by psychosid10

[zaz]

So we discuss the issues - Muslims and other people openly and democratically discuss the issues and you say don't bother because it's a waste of time?? The key thing required to resolve any issue is for everyone from all angles to talk about how to resolve a problem and root out the issues but you don't want to?

I am a fairly reasonable bloke. I am no cleric and I am not overly religious, in fact I get up to plenty while I'm in Thailand for which I'd be stoned to death if I lived in an Islamic country!!! So please don't treat me or talk about me or the religion which I attach myself to with contempt.

I offer you a friendly handshake and you turn and walk away that's up to you. It's no way forward is it really? We can tell who wants to create a peaceful world and who doesn't.

Edited August 2, 2005 by zaz

[Sir Burr]

Sir Blurr , please dont waste your time in discussing something with ppl blar blar blar

I don't consider discussion with a muslim as a waste of time. Maybe if there was more discussion there would be less bombs.

As a wise fellow once said "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it".

[psychosid10]

Okay .. so lets discuss .. I'll ask you a simple question ..

How should the South thai problem be solved ?

Dont give a lengthy vague philosophical answer .. Just give me a simple straight solution ...

[psychosid10]

That question was for zaz ..

[zaz]

Okay .. so lets discuss .. I'll ask you a simple question ..

How should the South thai problem be solved ?

Dont give a lengthy vague philosophical answer .. Just give me a simple straight solution ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To be openly honest with you I don't even know what they (the Muslims in the South) actually want and why they are resorting to violent techniques to make some sort of point. However, having read the above posts I can deduce that the problem isn't only with those people but actually with the government also? Is that not true? All this nonsense about putting pride before talking to terrorists will just let the viscious cirlce keep spinning. It won't stop until these people discuss the problem which I guess (?) is not happening. Listen mate, I might be a Muslim but I'm just as frustrated and concerned and scared as you guys by what's happening in this world. I wish it would stop too.

[arthsch]

i trust the thai police and the intelligence service. the police will find and knock out this murderers. thailand is a civiliseized land and civiliseized people. not a place to hide murderers.

[psychosid10]

Well .. to be fairly honest , No one here LOVES to HATE any individual .. most of the non muslims here have muslim friends so thats not the point.. The point is why do the militants or terrorists always use Islam as the reason for these bombings. why not anything else ?? i know no religion would support killings ( in that case , it wont be a religion in the first place .. ) but why is the name of ISLAM used so often ...

As far as problem in deep south , they basically want a separate homeland and they feel they have been neglected by the government of thailand which might be true .. This feeling has been fuelled apparently by the malaysian militant groups who use the frustration of the youth to increase violence in the deep south ..

[zaz]

It is a pity. As you say, if religion supported violence then it wouldn't be a religion. And Islam does not support violence in the way it is being used right now in many parts of the world. Therefore, they cannot be fighting in the name of Islam, strictly speaking, and as said before this is purely politics.

So apart from all that then, how are things...?

[seonai]

Hi Zaz and Psychocid10,

The way I see it is that the southern Muslims were asking for autonomy for years because the Thai governmet never respected them or offered them the same facitilties they offer Buddhist Thais - I guess this is because Thailand has never been collonised and it is fiercly protective of that and maintaining the staus quo. BUT the Thai government authorised the shooting of over a hundred Muslim youths in a mosque less than a year ago and subsequently ordered the arrest of hundres of Muslim men who later suffocated in custody. So I guess feelings are running pretty high????

The thing that REALLY worries me is that some of the Muslims in the south who are very young may get 'indoctrinated' by visiting fundamentalists. That would spell disaster.

It's all very confusing - its seems Britain handed over these four southern provinces after givin up rule in Malaysia - the four were formerly part of Malaysia.

Zaz - good on you for trying to be friendly. I am only new to Islam but I am very open minsed about religions and I am trying to ubderstand it all. I wouldn't have converted had I for one second thought that Islam preached violence.

As I speak I can hear the call to prayer, I checked with local Imams and there is no talk of violence or hatred in daily sermons. Only that of love and family happiness etc. And I live only hours away from where all the killing is taking place.

Ok, later,

Azero

[ozzydom]

This debate just goes around in circles like a dog chasing its tail,so perhaps somebody can enlighten we mere mortals with a few facts which may allow us to get a better picture of what is really going on in the South.

Songkhla,Yala and Narithawat have been had a separatist movement since the 1980,s ,the population is Thai,Chinese and Muslim with the latter being the predominant society. Malay is the spoken language of the majority of citizens.

Question Do the Muslims want a separate state or to become part of Malaysia,even the Muslims posting here dont know. Do you??

It has been stated that the Central Government has neglected the area

Question. Does it receive funding equitable with other areas of Thailand?

The area is the major serving area for Thailands oil and gas industry as well as a major fishing and trading area ,so on the surface it appears to be a valuable area to the Thai economy.So it should be funded accordingly.

Evidentally Mr.Thaksins TRT party did not win a single seat in the area, is this the reason for the alleged neglect in providing infrastructure,health and education for all citizens??

Perhaps one answer is for the Government to get off its high horse and allow a qualified Non Government Organisation from outside the country or chosen by ASEAN countries to study the problem and come up with ideas which would satisfy all parties.That is my suggestion to a long term resolution,but short term,the killers must be rounded up and punished.

[Eddie67]

The west, with US of A in the lead, is trying to controll all the economy and recourses in the world. Most of us like the "democracy", which it actually is not, rather a system of controlling by the law and rules. Some laws are neccesary, of course, but in the west now the law book would be much smaller if the told what was legal instead of illigal.

A human sosiety has to have moral in the base, not THE LAW.

So, US and the west wants to dominate the economic world by force, and they want everyone to accept their reason for doing this.

This, their reason, is not valid by others than the west and their "friends" and it is creating protests. Most (to my knowlegde, anyway) muslim countrys have there own system, better or worse, at any case it is not for anyone to judge but their own citisens. It is looking bizzar to many as of the treating of woman for example, but hey, many of the wests punichments are bad too. What is most bad is not the point. The point is that all changes must come from within the spesific country, not by brutality from the outside. This is what is happening many places, and more and more pepole is protesting.　By bad luck, only some of the muslims are as fanatic as some of the christians, and ALAS, to enemies have found each other. This is of course spreading to countries like Thailand, and I am very sorry.

So now it has of course become political in the way that every country which seems to be a friend of the west, is an enemy of the terrorists.

So I think this bad bombings and terrorist attacks will not go away before every country will start to keep their minds where they belong, and that will be in their own domain. As an exaple, US domain is not in the middle east at all. They say they are protecting US interests, but who gave them the right to have any interests there in the first place. Remember also that the fight against the famous "evil axis" was actually not created by the muslims.

And if they try to controll the terrorists by new rules, the terrorists will find another way to avoid those same rules. This happens with every aspects of criminality, they cannot be fought in this way. Again, look to the US, how many people is murdered every day ? Controlling is working ? Forget about it.

Ed.

And please forgive my grammar error, this is due to the fact that I am not a native english speaker.

[zaz]

This debate just goes around in circles like a dog chasing its tail,so perhaps somebody can enlighten we mere mortals with a few facts which may allow us to get a better picture of what is really going on in the South.

Songkhla,Yala and Narithawat have been had a separatist movement since the 1980,s ,the population is Thai,Chinese and Muslim with the latter being the predominant society. Malay is the spoken language of the majority of citizens.

Question Do the Muslims want a separate state or to become part of Malaysia,even the Muslims posting here dont know. Do you??

It has been stated that the Central Government has neglected the area

Question. Does it receive funding equitable with other areas of Thailand?

The area is the major serving area for Thailands oil and gas industry as well as a major fishing and trading area ,so on the surface it appears to be a valuable area to the Thai economy.So it should be funded accordingly.

Evidentally Mr.Thaksins TRT party did not win a single seat in the area, is this the reason for the alleged neglect in providing infrastructure,health and education for all citizens??

Perhaps one answer is for the Government to get off its high horse and allow a qualified Non Government Organisation from outside the country or chosen by ASEAN countries to study the problem and come up with ideas which would satisfy all parties.That is my suggestion to a long term resolution,but short term,the killers must be rounded up and punished.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for that ozzydom. If it's a case of wanting a separate state then I'm not really a fan of that. Islam doesn't really require it's own separate state etc. Muslims can be Muslims wherever they live. There are Muslims in the USA, they're not fighting for a separate state, there are Muslims here in the UK and we're not fighting for a separate state and there are Muslims in many other countries who are not fighting for a separate state. Why? Because we have the freedom to practice our faiths, we live in a democracy and a civilised society, we don't really have any major problem that we need to resort to extremes. So where does the problem lie? Surely with the individual country in question and it's government? And not with the Muslims themselves? If they are being unfairly treated then sure they are going to be upset, otherwise I'm sure they have no grievances against anyone.

[patsfangr]

Human nature, at its core, will not change. If you've read through this thread as it has developed, you have seen a very wide range of reactions and opinions on the subjects of terrorism itself, and the Muslim religion that is alleged by the terroists to be its justification. Some of this discussion has been knee jerk in nature, some of it very deliberate and intelligent.

Now, tell me how many of the writers have changed their views one iota as a result of all of this discussion. ... I'll wait while you roll up the totals. ...

The number of people who change their core beliefs after reaching the age of 25 or so is so small as to be microscopic by analogy. So-called "open discussion" is, in fact, nearly always nothing more than one person, or group of people, trying desperately to convince listeners that their point of view is the "right" one. How many such discussions, centering on deep philosophical, political, or religioius views, have you seen end with one side saying "You were right. I've changed my mind."? ... Again, I'll wait for the totals ...

I believe the same to be true of the basic philosophy regarding methods to be used to effect change. Those who believe that violence is the way will continue to be violent until they are prevented from doing so either by death or incarceration. Human nature being what it is, there will always be such people. Always. For one cause or another, some humans will believe that they have the right, possibly even the obligation, to kill humans who will not accept their rules of life, whatever they may be.

I know how I feel about the current wave of "Muslim" terrorism. I know my opinion about its motivation. I know my opinion of how best to minimize the devastation it causes. I know my opinion of where to draw the line between "individual freedom" and a "safe police state". I also know that, no matter how "brilliantly" I may present those opinions, most of you would not be swayed from your own current opinions on each of those points.

Governments will do what governments will do to combat these terrorist acts. In some countries, those governments are elected by the governed. There, actions of the government may change, over time. In some countries, governments are in place by force of might. There, actions will change only when a mighter force, or possibly a new generation, takes over.

In any case, we, the individuals outside of the government, can really have an affect on all of this in, at most, two ways. We can be cautious, observant, and responsible in reporting suspicious behavior or packages. We, some of us, can vote for those whose philosophy seems closest to our own. But we can not change the way others think; not the terrorists; not the governments of other countries; not those who read our opinions and arguements here.

It is what it is.

GR

[zaz]

You are quite right. However, rather than discuss or debate these issues in order to change peoples' minds I would say it is more appropriate to discuss/debate to reliably inform or educate others of a point of view on which they may be very misinformed leading them to hold prejudices against particular people. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion, however, it would certainly be worth the effort if such debate actually changes peoples prejudices or perceptions of a subject they may not be well versed in. Gaining knowledge is a very powerful tool. The ability to teach/inform others of facts is also just as powerful. My opinion of Thailand is that it is a beautiful country with well mannered and cultured people, which I why I visit the country so often and feel so passionate about it. I absolutely love the atmosphere of the place and want to spend as much time there as possible. However, I'm no expert in Thai culture or society and if anyone who was reliably informed started telling me that it was actually a very bad place to live or be in then I would of course find it hard to accept. But if that was true then I would have to change my way of thinking about the country. It's not the best analogy but it may put it into perspective.

Now although I am a Muslim, I am not in favour of terrorists or any of their violent ideologies which puts me well placed on the same side of the line as you guys and the majority of others. I'm sure we all stand as one on this one regardless of race, religion or background as we all value life and the right to live.

The people that we need to change the minds of are the political leaders (of both sides), the people who have the power to make the difference - now if they want peace they will sit down and talk, if they don't want peace then they will probably carry on as they are...

[ericjt]

Certainly terror is not something new. Has anyone researched how other countries and governments have dealt with terrorists in the past, historically? Anything useful there? et

"What more than 95 per cent of all suicide terrorist attacks around the world have in common is not religion, but a specific political goal to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland or prize greatly."  Robert Pape

What do the three Southern Provinces have that the rest of Thailand wants?

Is there oil or other natural resources down there?

Why not just give them autonomy? Let them form their own country?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of the 25 posts so far, this is the only sensible one that trys to identify the source of the problem, and brings us closer to a solution.

The rest of us seem to accept and label the terror incidents in Thailand, London, Egypt and so on as "Muslim". Why is this label being applied? What assumptions come along with the use of the term "Muslim"? How does this allow politicians to avoid responsibility for solving the problem?

First, I cant remember any CREDIBLE reports where the perpetrators claim that their aim is to convert the attacked nation to islam. These acts are political violence, with a political aim or to get revenge for percived injustice, or to resist occupation.

Second, Unless the general public wake up to the implication of the use of the label "Muslim", there will no end to this problem. The motivation for these acts is not the spread of Islam. This is not an apology for that religion, which I also find distasteful, but a statement of fact.

Thirdly, The ruling politiclans and compliant media have created this label, precisely to stop the public thinking about the reasons for these terror actions. They dont want us to see what is driving these attacks, and they hijack our feeling of outrage, by presenting us with "eye for a eye" solutions that lead nowhere. They appeal to the desire for revenge so that they can continue to carry on with the policies that cause the problem in the first place. The american public is a prime example of an unthinking and gullible electorate, and we must not become like them, otherwise we will end up losing our values of justice and civilisation, just as they have in the fight against political violence.

From palestine, iraq, alqueida, pattani, the reasons are different and varied, and if we simplify all these to "Muslim" then we have no chance of a peaceful future.

Finally, Stop using the term Muslim and start thinking about the problem in the context of poltical terror, or political violence, and start asking what can be done to choke this problem at the source

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[seonai]

Zaz, what's the general feeling amongst Muslims and non Muslims in England right now? Azero

[Suteef]

Thanks for that ozzydom. If it's a case of wanting a separate state then I'm not really a fan of that. Islam doesn't really require it's own separate state etc. Muslims can be Muslims wherever they live. There are Muslims in the USA, they're not fighting for a separate state, there are Muslims here in the UK and we're not fighting for a separate state and there are Muslims in many other countries who are not fighting for a separate state. Why? Because we have the freedom to practice our faiths, we live in a democracy and a civilised society, we don't really have any major problem that we need to resort to extremes. So where does the problem lie? Surely with the individual country in question and it's government? And not with the Muslims themselves? If they are being unfairly treated then sure they are going to be upset, otherwise I'm sure they have no grievances against anyone.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First time poster. May I say I applaud all of you who have posted the last 20 or so postings. Especially you Zaz, and the last words you have written here. I must admit that I normally do not read this far into threads, because I can not stomach the absurdity of the postings. Not to say that anyone should not have their say in the matters. It's just that toward the end of this thread some real constructive and enlighting discourse took place. To bad, they can't be put these last postings at the front so that more people would get into the real poignant views and comments.

I do not think that the present Thai government has looked at its or past governments policies in the South and made reasonable and effective decisions. And as Zaz so clearly states above, this is the key, or at least one of the top key issues in this problem. If Thailand were to become more understanding of other cultures within the country and not so defensive about its "Thai culture," and I include Buddhism, than I believe many of these problems .. over time .. could be resolved. George Bush has his way ... using force ... and Thaksin seems to be mimicking it. The problem with this is ... Bush does not have the wherewithall to deal with what he has gotten into .. in Iraq obviously and Iran, Afghanistan as well. Taksin is not fighting the same kind of "battle." To simply mimic Bush is not going to address the issues. Who can have respect for those who do not come to understand and, God forbid, admit the problems and mistakes in the past which have lead to the present situation. Read some Chomsky, Mr. Thaksin. Do your homework. Look how the US has bullied its way since WWII and do not follow that path. You have a smaller country with issues that a government just maybe able to be resolved. Don't get caught up with the Bush "Doctrine." Look back at your own history and get to know what's eating those in the South, both terrorists and those who are deathly afraid of turning the culprits in. Sure those provinces are a part of Thailand and to lose them would affect the well-being of all Thai citizens, but get into the issues of injustice and try to create some kind of real democratic process in which all can get along with one another. Gain their trust by facing past mistakes ... rather than follow the ways of Bush, ignoring the problems and mistakes of past history and thereby losing more and more respect along the way.

Thanks again to all, expecially those of you who are muslims, new or old, for coming forth. This thread would really have been a waste of time had you not expressed your opinions.

One other small but helpful tip.. if you are not a native speaker try typing your thoughts in Word, do a grammar check and then cut and paste. Non-native English speakers really are important to hear from and it would be a shame if your thoughts were misinterpreted. Still good job none-the-less to those who have bravely posted. I speak, read, and to some degree write Thai. I couldn't imagine trying to write my thoughts in Thai. Good on ya!

Edited August 2, 2005 by Suteef

[zaz]

Zaz, what's the general feeling amongst Muslims and non Muslims in England right now? Azero

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Following the London bombings especially, the Muslim community is actually in deep shock. We are shocked that these individuals came from within.We are in disbelief - why did they do it? They were British citizens and it makes no sense at all why they would kill in their home country. Frustration, confusion, anger, bewilderment...

Ok in Palestine, in Iraq, in Afghanistan etc we could probably understand that some people will take to extreme measures because they are directly affected by oppression, war etc but why would a British citizen who walks freely in this country want to carry explosives and set them off in London??!! They have been led astray and have been talked into committing these acts and they have been taken advantage of. We all stand together as a community and we all stand together with the rest of the World against this new era of terror. We will stamp it out, the true perpetrators will be dug out of their wholes.

[Nam Kao]

The cure

http://www.radgraphics.net/images/main/ArtilleryShell.jpg

[zaz]

....err......no I wouldn't think so.....

[lukamar]

They have been led astray and have been talked into committing these acts and they have been taken advantage of. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Zaz, although I don't agree with you on a few things, I do agree with you on this.

I think a lot of terrorism, be it in the name of religion or not, is performed by people who have been indoctrinated and convinced that it is the only way to have change come about.

Talking about the South, one thing seems to always to come to the forefront, religion aside, they are young and at an impressionable age. Someone or some group has taken these young people and convinced them, maybe over time, that terrorism is correct and the only thing to do.

The Thai Government has to find the source of the problem and eradicate that, even if the source of the problem ends up as the Thai Governments policies themselves.

[patsfangr]

They have been led astray and have been talked into committing these acts and they have been taken advantage of. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Zaz, although I don't agree with you on a few things, I do agree with you on this.

I think a lot of terrorism, be it in the name of religion or not, is performed by people who have been indoctrinated and convinced that it is the only way to have change come about.

Talking about the South, one thing seems to always to come to the forefront, religion aside, they are young and at an impressionable age. Someone or some group has taken these young people and convinced them, maybe over time, that terrorism is correct and the only thing to do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Lukamar, you have shown us the way. Thank you! Stop terrorism. Kill all young people! (Well ... young males, that is!)

GR

[lukamar]

Lukamar, you have shown us the way. Thank you! Stop terrorism. Kill all young people!    (Well ... young males, that is!) 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

patsfangr, I don't think you got the jist of the post. I have never said to kill off anyone.

I'll try and rephrase it more clearly for you.

It it seems that in the south some impressionable young people are being recruited. The Thai Government has to find the source of the reason they are being recruited. The Thai government has to eradicate the source of the problem before they can have some semblance of harmony in the region. If the source of the problems is the policy of the government then they have to put policies in place that minimize the problems, not policies that make them worse and feed the fire that has already started.

[patsfangr]

Lukamar, you have shown us the way. Thank you! Stop terrorism. Kill all young people!    (Well ... young males, that is!) 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

patsfangr, I don't think you got the jist of the post. I have never said to kill off anyone.

I'll try and rephrase it more clearly for you.

It it seems that in the south some impressionable young people are being recruited. The Thai Government has to find the source of the reason they are being recruited. The Thai government has to eradicate the source of the problem before they can have some semblance of harmony in the region. If the source of the problems is the policy of the government then they have to put policies in place that minimize the problems, not policies that make them worse and feed the fire that has already started.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was joking, lukamar. The touch of sarcasm was intended to intimate that such a ludicrous "solution" to the problem as "kill all the young people" is nearly as likely as any other that might be proposed to "end terrorism for all time."

GR

[vasan_blr]

Zaz thanks for anwering my questions before. The following can change the entire world.

1. Education - General education and access to technology is required. Muslims should try to learn Koran as a part of education not full time as long it is not required for them. I meanto beome a Mullah full time religious education is required, not for all. If you have a general education you can compete others in the world in job and economy.

2. Women's rights - Women should allowed to be educated and work. There are many professioin Women's role is required for example Lady Doctors, Teachers and Nurses. If she is educated she can teach her children to become very good professional in life. Think like this, if one woman is educated one family is going to have a bright future.

3. Extremism in religion - Islam should not force any one to follow. If some one likes Islam they can learn. Muslims should not force others to follow their beliefs. This is applied for all the religions.

4. Common Civil Law - Everyone should follow and obey the civil rights and laws given for them in the country they live. For example, if a government says every chidren should go for general education they should obey, you teach religion privately or at home. Also if a government says to stop making more children then follow that. Like in India population is crossed 1 billion already, many Muslims go for family planning after 2 children, this is appriciated. It is good for them and good for the country too. In Pakistan it is othe way around. So they dont care if their children become Camel jakies in Dubai. Recenly UNICEF rescued 400 such small boys from Dubai, and Pakistani parents refuse to accept them back home. If they have only 2 children will they do that ?.

Not only Muslims, If the four of the above factors are considered by eveyone in the world then we can live in peace. Bye bye.

[magobligin]

I am saddened, like many others, at the mindless destruction and the use of religion to try and sanatize barberous deeds such as those taking place in Pattani.

What is especially frightening about the Islamic terrorists is that they do not have specific aims but are bent on destroying any culture that does not conform to their Islamic ideals.

In my opinion, the conflicts involving terrorist muslims is a 'cultural war' and the sooner people realise this the better. Nothing would please the terrorists more than to drag all of us back to the dark ages.

Forget appeasement, it did not work in 1939 and it will not work with the Islamic terrorists. Militant Islam is here to stay.

My greatest fear that there will be a backlash against muslims by non-muslims and this could lead to a situation where the non-muslims start behaving like the terrorists and believe they are fighting a 'holy war'. The idea of a crusade against muslims is not as unpopular as people would believe. Even the use of the word 'crusade' is now considered politically incorrect because it is perceived to be inflammatory.

For those who would charge that I am anti-islamic I would point out that I have been involved in teaching technical subjects to muslims in Indonesia, Malaysia, Libya and the United Arab Emirates for many years and found them good and able students.

I do not have any answers. Who does?