115 People Murdered in One Day in Pakistan

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2260416/Bomb-attacks-Pakistan-leave-115-dead--including-80-twin-blasts-bustling-billiard-hall.html

Such a shame. It is easy to forget that more often than not the biggest victims of Islam are Muslims themselves. It is a sad fact that more people went out on the streets rioting over the girl who was framed for ripping a Quran, or a youtube video, than the murder of hundreds of people. Let us not forget this isn't a Pakistani issue either; In the last week there have been over 100 other murders in places ranging from Nigeria, to Iraq, to Thailand, to Afghanistan. The only common denominator is Islam.

It says its a sectarian attack. So, surely by definition that means it's not indicative of all of Islam?

It's not just Islam at all.

What you have to remember is some people are just *****. Complete and total *****. When someone challenges them they'll use Islam to defend themselves. If Islam wasn't there they'd just use something else. A man is a **** whether he's athiest, muslim, or christian. It's the one thing humans tend to have in common.

I'd also argue some of the incidents to do with violence are down to people actively going out of their way to antagonise their religion and beliefs. Is it right how they react? No, but don't try to just blame Islam as the one common denominator when it clearly isn't. It's farcical reasoning.

And I'm speaking about events generally now not just the things you link.

Here are some more common denominators between various murderous events:

They are women.
They are men.
They are human.
They are foreign.
They live in hot countries (oh my it must be the heat)

These events are far more complex than you give them credit for. I suspect much of it just comes with the usual round of 'Muzzie bashin' innit' though.

Sectarian as in this is Sunnis killing the Shia minority - much like they do with any minority they can get explosives near, anywhere in the world. Unlike Ireland where there is a very strong political element, this is purely about persecuting. Amazing that they have killed more in one day than the IRA in the last 20+ years put together.

I don't really understand what you're saying. Do you mean it's more comprehensible that the IRA carried out their attacks because of the political element?

I am saying that although you can divide the political opponents down Catholic V Protestant lines, it is political and not religious. They couldn't give 2 ****s that one side follows the Pope and the other doesn't, it's about Ireland being free of Britain, and Protestants represent Britain. This is purely down to one sect of Islam trying to wipe the other out.

I'm not so sure you're correct about that. It's relatively easy to understand the local socio-political situations only a few hundred miles away. I don't see how you have such an equally intimate analysis of the political situation in Pakistan or other Islamic countries. I'd also add that, could it not be argued that religious affiliation is not important to the general populous of both Ireland and Pakistan/elsewhere and only to the interests of a select, extremist few?

You have not responded to the fact that all things being equal - poverty, heat, gender, war, discrimination, unhappiness etc. Muslims kill more people in the name of Islam, than Christians in an equal position do. Not just a few more people, thousands and thousands more people. Islam is in itself political. It is basically one long story about Mohammed fighting in the name of Islam, this he called Jihad. In this Sunni attack on Shias there is little political motive behind the attack. It was what Sunnis do to any religious minority near them - they do the same to Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews etc.

You are correct, Islam is political. It has a whole philosophy of life which can dictate everything from judicial frameworks to the social sphere at home, if one chooses to adopt them. As for the the numbers in comparison to Christianity, I did not raise this but I think it is a moot point. It could be down to any number of things that causes this disparity between the two. You yourself stated that that Islam is political and therefore, you already acknowledge that it cannot simply be as straightforward as to do with religion. My analysis of it would suggest that is perhaps a range of factors from economic difference to ideological perspective within denominations and a plethora more to add to the debate.

In conclusion, as you say, it is not a particularly religious affair but may be perhaps a cultural or political one.

There are just as many Christians in economic poverty as Muslims, try again. Ideological difference i.e. Islam says that Muslims must fight for Sharia, and that is what they are doing? Come on now, you're being slightly dishonest. Religion shouldn't be so inherently political in itself... and you can't divorce the culture of Pakistanis from Islam either.

I think you're viewing what I'm posting incorrectly. I don't mean to isolate economic poverty from any of the other mentioned and unmentioned factors I've listed. Rather, it is the specific mixture of all of these elements which is going to build the culture that engenders this sort of violence. I also believe you are simplifying the ideological differences within different denominations of Islam. I don't understand how you came to the conclusion that 'Muslims must fight for Sharia' prefigures as a major point of Islamic ideology. Also, I am talking about difference; what you mention indicates similarity which isn't a reasonable cause for friction and violence amongst peoples.

I am not divorcing anything from anything else. If you notice the part I have highlighted in your post, I would say this is precisely what you are doing. As for your assertion about what religion should or shouldn't be, why is this case and what are your criteria for what qualifies a religion?

But the only common denominator is Islam. You will find Muslims in very rich countries, like Saudi or the UK, who support terrorist activities in the name of Islam. You will find them in poor countries. You will find black Muslims who are terrorists, Asian Muslims, and Thai Muslims etc. The thing that links these people is that they are suicidal, and usually male. The problem is that were they Christian or atheist, 99.99999% of the time they would just kill themselves, whereas with Islam they pick up the Quran and get advised by certain scholars that they can kill themselves and get a primo position in heaven.

My position is that Islam is a cult. It doesn't allow independent thinking for oneself.

My position is that Islam is a cult. It doesn't allow independent thinking for oneself.

So your thread about people dying in Pakistan transformed into an anti-Islamic rant.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? Like I said, we don't know or understand the cultures of countries hundreds of miles away from us when we make statements such as those. I am sure plenty of people support terrorism from all sectors of Islam. There are also plenty of people who don't support them. And probably even more who just don't really care about it at all.

If Islam is a cult then every single Muslim (or at least every male) would subscribe to the picture you're painting and common sense would tell you that's not the case. I'm sure if you calculated it by ratio, the number of suicide bombers and fanatics in Islam compared to the number of Muslims in the entire world at this moment would make it comparatively a small proportion.

That's not to condone these attacks at all but I think you're viewing this with a lack of perspective in my view.

It is smaller but by no means small. It is as a percentage several times higher than any other religion or ideology on the planet. Furthermore those who support terrorism are also high in number, even if they don't commit it. I think it is you who is viewing it with a lack of perspective, actually. Having given no good reason why it is nothing to do with Islam... In each of these countries there are non-Muslims i.e. those who are being killed, and they don't behave like this.

And Islam isn't a cult just because these things happen, it's a cult because they chant and pray in the same direction, dress the same, say little sayings like PBUH, disown those who leave the cult - even kill them, and have complete submission to a human being who performed no miracles (Mohammed).

I've given reasons as to why it isn't to do with Islam. Primarily because it does not rest that because these people are Muslims, does not make it inherent that Islam propagates this type of violence, or any type of violence. I don't see how that is a lack of perspective. I think most people would agree with me in saying that most people, regardless of race, creed or religion are pretty rational and don't want or care about hurting some other guy because they believe in something different. We both agree that these people are committing heinous crimes but that doesn't really lead, logically, to the condemnation of a wider circle of people.

I do not know the exact figures but considering Islam is one of the largest religions in the world now and the fastest growing, undoubtedly, in comparison to other religions, Islam will inevitably have a comparatively higher number of fanatics. This was and is not my point. I was comparing fanatic Muslims within Islam and if fanaticism is a small proportion of the religion, as most people would say is true of most religions, then I see nothing out of the ordinary here.

What you have listed does not really make sense in qualifying Islam as a cult, at least to me. Muslims do dress the same and pray in the same direction, but only in certain places and only at certain times of the day. I'd also like to point out that, for example, many Sikhs are obliged (or feel obliged) to wear the turban and other such garments yet I imagine you would not label Sikhs in the same way. PBUH is the same as saying Christ be with you, praise be to God and various other phrases. The term is used as a form of respect toward their prophet who they believe to have communicated with God. It is surely the same as the Christian respect of Jesus when honouring his crucifixion at Easter and his birth at Christmas. Your penultimate qualification is specialised. I do not believe swathes of Muslims are liable to murdering their kin or friends for deciding to convert from Islam to another religion or becoming atheist. Granted, this does happen and I accept the fact but it is by no means commonplace. As for submission to Muhammed, this is simply not true. The religion vehemently rejects any depictions of their prophet and does not grant him any special status aside from the fact that he served as a vessel to communicate the commands and wishes of God. The same respect is extended to other Abrahamic prophets, contemporaneous and past, such as Jesus.

I believe you may not fully understand the religion and all its tenets to the greatest degree, hence the misinterpretations I believe you have made. This is why I am somewhat sceptical toward your stance in branding all Muslims or the religion of Islam as a hateful cult, inspiring its followers to violence.

The 400 terrorists on whom I’ve collected data were the ones who actually targeted the “far enemy,” the U.S., as opposed to their own governments. I wanted to limit myself for analytical purity to that group, to see if I could identify anything different from other terrorist movements, which were far more nationalistic.

Most people think that terrorism comes from poverty, broken families, ignorance, immaturity, lack of family or occupational responsibilities, weak minds susceptible to brainwashing - the sociopath, the criminals, the religious fanatic, or, in this country, some believe they’re just plain evil.

Taking these perceived root causes in turn, three quarters of my sample came from the upper or middle class. The vast majority—90 percent—came from caring, intact families. Sixty-three percent had gone to college, as compared with the 5-6 percent that’s usual for the third world. These are the best and brightest of their societies in many ways.

Al Qaeda’s members are not the Palestinian fourteen-year- olds we see on the news, but join the jihad at the average age of 26. Three-quarters were professionals or semi- professionals. They are engineers, architects, and civil engineers, mostly scientists. Very few humanities are represented, and quite surprisingly very few had any background in religion. The natural sciences predominate. Bin Laden himself is a civil engineer, Zawahiri is a physician, Mohammed Atta was, of course, an architect; and a few members are military, such as Mohammed Ibrahim Makawi, who is supposedly the head of the military committee.

Far from having no family or job responsibilities, 73 percent were married and the vast majority had children. Those who were not married were usually too young to be married. Only 13 percent were madrassa-trained and most of them come from what I call the Southeast Asian sample, the Jemaah Islamiyya (JI). They had gone to schools headed by Sungkar and Bashir. Sungkar was the head of JI; he died in 1999. His successor, Bashir, is the cleric who is being tried for the Jakarta Marriott bombing of August 2003; he is also suspected of planning the October 2002 Bali bombing.

As a psychiatrist, originally I was looking for any characteristic common to these men. But only four of the 400 men had any hint of a disorder. This is below the worldwide base rate for thought disorders. So they are as healthy as the general population. I didn’t find many personality disorders, which makes sense in that people who are antisocial usually don’t cooperate well enough with others to join groups. This is a well-organized type of terrorism: these men are not like Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, loners off planning in the woods. Loners are weeded out early on. Of the nineteen 9-11 terrorists, none had a criminal record. You could almost say that those least likely to cause harm individually are most likely to do so collectively.

At the time they joined jihad, the terrorists were not very religious. They only became religious once they joined the jihad.

They are dying in Pakistani because of Islam. No Islam = no deaths in this case.