9 1 1

[Mapraputa Is]

Originally posted by Michael Ernest:
Second: you're right, what you're suggesting is a bold statement for your average Russian is probably not for your average homegrown US citizen. After three years of (academic) study of Russian language and culture, I can't say I have a handle on the differences. It works better in person, in my experience.

I am contaminating threads, but this translation business is such an eye-opener
Some things have a direct analog in Russian, some can be translated with certain inventiveness, and some point to black holes, which is the most interesting case, of course.
Currently the collective translator is at loss how to translate "usability" into Russian. In the country where all social institutes were modeled after a prison, "usability" doesn't map well to anything. I searched the Internet to find out how Mother Russia translates it, and it turned out she doesn't bother to translate it, uses "usability" "as is" and often doesn't even bother to transliterate in Russian letters, she is happy with original English word.
Or another question that was asked: how to translate "somebody who can get things done" (this is from a guide to interviewing). The answer literally was "somebody who is doing things" - colloquial idiomatic expression, but do you see the difference? It's more typical to talk about "doing things" than about "getting things done". Not that it's impossible, but it is slightly out of lingual gauge.
Back to my translating thread now...
[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

[Anonymous]

We thought Cold War was over!!! :roll:
Duh!!

[Paul Stevens]

Originally posted by <Shura Balaganov>:
On a brighter note, Iraq just allowed UN inspectors in.

If current reports are true, he only agreed to let them on military bases. Story
See paragraph 3.

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Paul Stevens:

If current reports are true, he only agreed to let them on military bases. Story
See paragraph 3.

As opposed to his "Baby milk factories" that happen to glow in the dark and have armed guards purely by coincidence.

[Thomas Paul]

An Arab League spokesman said only military sites were covered because it would take 10 years for inspectors to examine civilian buildings, which would divert the UN's attention from making Israel obey its resolutions. "If the US really wants to resolve this dispute it will welcome the offer," he added.

As if one had anything to do with the other. Do the same individuals who look for biological/nuclear weapons also enforce resolutions on Israel? Perhaps the UN should think about separating these two functions into two separate agencies or hiring more staff. :roll:
Looks like it is war after all.

[Rufus BugleWeed]

Originally posted by Jason
Since this thread is "9 1 1", and you brought up how patriotism is beginning to wear thin on you, may I ask what if anything you did this past September, 11, and why?

I turned on the TV every few hours to see if anything new was burning.
When it turned out to be politicians grandstanding, babies without parents, and photo essays of a year ago, I shut the TV off.
Those New Yorkers were a symbol of dog-eat-dog capitalists and conspicuous consumption. Memorializing them as saints was nasueating.
I have some RW&B stuff that was pretty well worn before 9-11. I have pushed it to the back of the closet. Flag waving these days is jingoism.
That tired claim that the American Republic and the American free enterprise system is the greatest system is horse hockey. OBL, and some rednecks in OK, claim it is tyrannical and corrupt.
Patriotism is raising the bar.
[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Rufus BugleWeed ]

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Rufus BugleWeed:
Those New Yorkers were a symbol of dog-eat-dog capitalists and conspicuous consumption. Memorializing them as saints was nasueating.

What's nauseating is quotes like that and the people who would make them.
Nobody was memorializing anybody as saints, they were simply memorializing the lives of innocent people who were murdered. If you cannot have any compassion or sympathy for people's suffering, then you lead a hollow and meaningless existance.
I'm sure the families of the emergency services personnel, the children who died, the aircraft passengers, the Army Retiree Advocate at the Pentagon, the low paid cleaning and security staff, and everyone else who was nuffed off the earth that morning appreciate your "dismissal of their loved-ones lifes' worth as "a symbol of dog-eat-dog capitalists and conspicuous consumption".
Have you ever considered for a moment that it might have you that was up there working as a programmer developing applications for some financial company? Maybe you just happened to be walking by at the time. Maybe your children were unfortunate enough to win a school contest that had them on a plane over DC that morning.
As for tuning in to see if anything was burning? Why did you bother? Idle curiousity? It doesn't sound like you would have cared for any other reason.
Comments such as that make me want to puke. Maybe I've misunderstood you, but I don't think so.
[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Rufus BugleWeed:
Those New Yorkers were a symbol of dog-eat-dog capitalists and conspicuous consumption. Memorializing them as saints was nasueating.

The dead firemen, policemen, and EMS wrokers appreciate your concern. I would be more than happy to tell you what I think you are a symbol of, but as a sheriff I would be forced to delete my post.

[Rufus BugleWeed]

I don't think so either. I did not think this would be easy.
The song goes something like -
The bubble headed bleach blonde comes on at nine, she can tell you bout the plane crash with a gleam in her eye. Oh we love dirty laundry...
And I'm not alone. They had a special on PBS last week about the tragedy. They were deciding where to put a temporary momument to the victims. The people who live in that neighborhood said you can't put that monumet here. We don't want that in our neighborhood. They compromised on Battery Park.
Jason I don't think you're quite as concerned about so many Iraqi's that will be collateral damage in quest to unseat Saddam. So many people in the third world are fed up with US's infectious greed. Three thousand in 250 million looks small to many in the world. But I think the message is clear. You can't go home to the DC suburbs and feel like Ward and June anymore.
Some people have sent the US a harsh slap in the face. Get up on your soap box and preach your moral indignation. If you're a taxpayer, you're fueling the machine. If your of voting capacity you're the machine. You're not an innocent bystander to the actions of your country.
You don't have to wear a military uniform. They don't care if you're a legal combitant.
People don't crash airliners into buildings for the fun of it. People don't become suicide bombers for the glory. People don't truck bombs the court house as an experiment. They are serious about sending you a message.
They think the US government is the muscle that enables the capitalist pigs to exploit the have nots. They think the US government is corrupt.
They don't think what Bill Gates has done for the world is worth rewarding him with 50 Billion.
We only have small views as to whether the beast is corrupt or not. There is a female FBI attorney that's under the whistle blower protection program. The woman that risked her life and career exposing the machine. Has Bush pinned a medal on her chest in a rose garden ceremony?
You can find my words revolting. Unless the capitalist pigs change their ways, Jihad has just begun.
[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Rufus BugleWeed ]

[Thomas Paul]

Actually, Al Queda doesn't care about American capitalism. They don't care that we are rich. They care about infidels being in Saudi Arabia. They care about our support for Israel. People don't crash planes into buildings because they are mad that Americans have a better life. They apply for visas because Americans have a better life. People crash planes into buldings because they are demented monsters who believe that the death of infidels is a good thing. This is a religious war, not a war about money.

[Paul Stevens]

Rufus petty jealousy is the problem. Who cares that Bill Gates is worth 50 Billion on paper? This feeling of entitlement is the problem. Someone else has something that someone else doesn't and the problem is that they have it. Not what can be done to get it too. Let's take it or hate the ones who have. You can try to rationalize the hate all you want. They are just excuses not reasons. Most of the places that hate the most, are run be dictators or monarchies that keep the countries wealth or waste it on armies. They direct the hate elsewhere to keep the people ignorant and have someone other than their own leaders to blame for their plight. We didn't take the worlds wealth we created our own. Hate and ignorance is all we hear from parts of the world.
OH wait a minute it is all of the world is wise and worldly and the poor americans don't understand how things really are.

[Jason Menard]

As Thomas pointed out, the responsible parties don't care one bit about capitalism. So I'm sorry if your socialist tendencies are out of place in this argument, but capitalism has nothing to do with it. The reasons are based ultimately in religion.
And for your information, yes every innocent person that is killed bothers me, even more so when they are mistakenly killed as a result of US action. For very obvious reasons I am able to more strongly react when it hits a little closer to home.
You show little to no understanding of why these acts occured. The socialists would have us believe it is all about capitalism, however the reasons are much simpler than that I'm afraid.
I can't say what I'd really like to as it would no doubt quickly be deleted I'm sure.

[Christophe Lee]

Originally posted by Rufus BugleWeed:
[QB]
Jason I don't think you're quite as concerned about so many Iraqi's that will be collateral damage in quest to unseat Saddam. So many people in the third world are fed up with US's infectious greed. Three thousand in 250 million looks small to many in the world. But I think the message is clear. You can't go home to the DC suburbs and feel like Ward and June anymore.
You can find my words revolting.

It's not the United State's infectious greed...it's human nature's infectious greed. Therefore, this materialism, selfishness is not a US symptom, but a worldwide one. Killing every single American in the world is not going to erase "infectious greed".

Unless the capitalist pigs change their ways, Jihad has just begun.

Change to what?
In the US, I am allowed to voice my opinion..curse the President...gather petitions for change. There are many things wrong with the US, but the fundamental difference is that I am empowered to make a differnce and mold it to my liking.
I don't think Saddam or the Taliban would have given me these rights.
Perhaps if they did, they know all the would-be suicidal Muslims would focus their energy on social change within their own countries.
I agree...American government, American big business is full of racist, conservative, short-sighted, materialistic people. They weld incredible power in the world. Some may also live in NYC.
But the American system allows for all our voices to be heard...and collectively, our little voices roar louder than those few who want to push us down. Much more of these people live in NYC.
Many Muslims have been taught that violence is the only way....MLK and Gandhi have shown that there is social change with peace as well. The choice is up to you.

[Shura Balaganov]

Paul Stevens: ...and the poor americans don't understand how things really are
nor they care to understand. a lot of irony here, not intended to offend anyone on this board, just a generalized observation of an average...hmm...it seems that the word redneck is not very offending on this board...
Thomas Paul: Shura, in order to debate with someone there has to be a reasoned argument. Your arguments seem to be, "every news source lies (unless they say something I agree with)" and "I am right and you are wrong because you watch CNN."
That isn't exactly grounds for reasoned debate. up until now you have yet to actually say something that is worth debating. How can we debate with you if facts mean nothing to you? The only thing that means anything to you is your own experience. It's like trying to discuss that the world is round with someone who refuses to accept anything except his own experience that the world is flat....
Apparently you can insult us all you want but if we dare to insult you then you get all upset like a 4 year old.
I already answered all this. Failure to communicate. Apparently, my statements make you to believe I have no points, that the world is flat, etc. Well, since it looks like there are other people on this board who found some meaning in what I was saying...which most likely leads to the conclusion that you and I have no base for this discussion; let's leave it at that.
Allow me to disagree with this remark: "This is a religious war, not a war about money."
Jason Menard: The socialists would have us believe it is all about capitalism, however the reasons are much simpler than that I'm afraid.
J, so what do you think are the reasons? Where is it said that Muslims should attack US? Why not China? Or Russia? I believe this Jihad thing is overblown. I mean, before doing that, why didn't they kill every single american tourist then? It seems like someone wanted to make a huge statement with 9/11 attack. Or force US to level Middle East. Or make US economy collapse. But unlikely to start a Jihad.
Christophe Lee: Change to what?...But the American system allows for all our voices to be heard...
Good point. Topic for another thread.
Shura

[Rufus BugleWeed]

If this is a religous war why not target The Vatican, Billy Grahams Church, or the largest synagogue in America?
If it's about hating what America stands for the Statue of Liberty was prominent and just seconds away.
If it's about killing as many infidels as we can in one fell blow, there's better targets than the WTC.
Sorry boys, the WTC is not an icon of religion.

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Rufus BugleWeed:
If this is a religous war why not target The Vatican, Billy Grahams Church, or the largest synagogue in America?
If it's about hating what America stands for the Statue of Liberty was prominent and just seconds away.
If it's about killing as many infidels as we can in one fell blow, there's better targets than the WTC.
Sorry boys, the WTC is not an icon of religion.

Rufus, does the Vatican have troops based in Saudi Arabia? Do you even bother reading what anyone says? What better target than two buidlings that hold up to 50,000 infidels on a typical day? If the goal is to kill Americans what better target?

[Rufus BugleWeed]

Jason:
Socialist, have you been visiting Joseph McCarthy's grave?
TP:
They did not even believe the towers would collapse. I think the SuperBowl kills more.
I'm sorry to burst your bubble and shatter your naive illusions. But government of the people, for the people, and by the people has perished from inside the beltway. It's a cesspool of corruption and self interest.
I'm sorry, I'm offending many fine noble public servants but they are a minority. I'm suprised they have not silenced that maverick from AZ pushing for stopping the special interest graft.
Ross Perot tried and failed too. The innocents always seem to go for good-looking Mr. Smoothie. Harry Truman or Sam Walton would never stand a
chance in front of the television camera.
The American people through slough and indifference have created a monster. Plundering the rest of the world is not enough. Now the scourge comes home.
Has anybody been fired at the SEC, FAA, CIA or the FBI?
I have to think the most insulting and condescending has been Candolezza Reice getting up there and telling us nobody ever imagined terrorist stealing a plane and using it as a weapon.
I believe I prefer womanizing to blundering.

[Rufus BugleWeed]

I found out what the Beltway Bunch did for Coleen Rowley. Google brings up slim pickings.
Steve Perry: How the Bush Administration Buried Coleen Rowley
Not intending to take away from Todd Beamer's heroics, but I see his lovely widow on the TV a lot more than I do Coleen Rowley.
(edited by Cindy to fix link)
[ September 18, 2002: Message edited by: Cindy Glass ]

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Rufus BugleWeed:
TP:
They did not even believe the towers would collapse. I think the SuperBowl kills more.

That is simply wrong. They thought the buildings would collapse in 1993. They realized their mistake and found a new way.

[Jason Menard]

Have you by any chance ever opened a book or tried to learn about this topic? Do you have any clue whatsoever as to what motivates bin Laden and his cronies? Nevermind, that was a rhetorical question.
Bin Laden's numero uno primo goal against America has always been to drive US troops from Saudi Arabia. Why you ask? I'm glad you asked. Religion. In his eyes, and according to his version of Islam, we are infidels. Not only that, he sees us as infidels defiling the Holy Land (that's Saudia Arabia to you and me).
Let me let you in on Bin Laden's August 23, 1996 pronouncement, The Declaration of Jihad on the Americans Occupying the Country of the Two Sacred Places.

The Muslims have realized they are the main target of the aggression of the coalition of Jews and the Crusaders.... The latest of these assaults is the greatest disaster since the death of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) - that is the occupation of the country of the two sacred mosques - the home ground of Islam.

He claims that this goes against a hadith of the Prophet Muhammad, who stated on his deathbed: "If Allah wills and I live, God willing I will expel the Jews and Christians from Arabia." He concludes...

"Our Muslim brothers throughout the world... Your brothers in the country of the two sacred places and in Palestine request your support. They are asking you to participate with them against their enemies, who are also you enemies - the Israelis and the Americans - by causing them as much harm as can possibly be achieved."

(Interesting side note, this declaration of holy war against Americans was supposedly written on an Apple Macintosh - "Think Different".)
On February 22, 1998 bin Laden announced the formation of the World Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and the Crusaders, which brought several different terrorist organizations under one banner. The announcement of the inauguration of this group is very relevant:

Since Allah spread out the Arabian Peninsula, created its desert, and drew its seas, no such disaster has ever struck as when those Christian legions spread like pest, crowded its land, ate its resources, eradicated its nature, and humiliated its leaders...No one argues today over three facts...They are: Since about seven years ago, America has been occupying the most sacred lands of Islam: the Arabian Peninsula. It has been stealing its resources, dictating to its leaders, humiliating its people, and frightening its neighbors. It is using its rule in the Peninsula as a weapon to fight the neighboring peoples of Islam...The most evident proof is when the Americans went to far in their aggression against the people of Iraq...Despite the major destruction to the Iraqi people at the hand of the Christian alliance and the great number of victims exceeding one million, Americans are trying once again to repeat these horrifying massacres as if they are not satisfied with the long blockade or the destruction. Here they come today to eradicate the rest of these people and to humiliate its Muslim neighbors. Although the Americans' objectives of these wars are religious and economic, they are also to serve the Jewish state and distract from the occupation of the Holy Land and its killing of Muslims therein. The most evident proof thereof is their persistence to destroy Iraq, the most powerful neighboring Arab state...All of those crimes and calamities are an explicit declaration by the Americans of war on Allah....Based upon this and in order to obey the Almighty, we hereby give all Muslims the following judgment: The judgment to kill and fight Americans and their allies, whether civilian or military, is an obligation for every Muslim who is able to do so in any country...In the name of Allah, we call upon every Muslim, who believes in Allah and asks for forgiveness, to abide by Allah's order by killing Americans, and stealing their money anywhere, anytime, and whenever possible. We also call upon Muslim scholars, their faithful leaders, young believers, and soldiers to launch a raid on the American soldiers of Satan and their allies of the Devil.

He is now also latching on to the Iraq issue. This is ironic because when Iraq was about to invade Saudi Arabia, bin Laden offered the services of himself and his "holy warriors" to King Fahd, who didn't really take him seriously and turned to the US instead. It is also of note to mention that he saw our efforts in Somalia as further attacks against the Muslim world.
So to sum up for you, Bin Laden wants the Infidel Crusaders expelled from the Holy Land, he sees our support of Israel as an attack against Islam, he has decided that our actions in Iraq and Somalia are also attacks against Islam. So you see, it is all about religion in his mind. To use prejudicial language as described in a previous Michael Ernest post, anyone who believes otherwise is clueless.
I recommend the book Holy War, Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Osama Bin Laden by Peter L. Bergen (Touchstone, 2002). It's fairly light reading, but it doesn't have any pretty pictures I'm afraid.
[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]

[Axel Janssen]

Interesting Jason.
I have another one: Abdelwahab Meddeb: The malady of Islam. Its written by an Tunesian who works as a university profesor in Paris.
here :

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0465044352
/reviews/qid=1032332949/sr=8-4/ref=sr_8_4/104-4918196-3286303
[I separated URL into two lines since it was forcing the whole page to be too wide - Jim Y]
It came in yesterday and I have read the first 80 pages in a rush. Great book.
For me there is some explanation for the astonishing sympathy for religious fanatism in parts of the muslimic world today. Economic problems can�t be the explanation. It might help to foster damaging tendencies which are still virulent in the culture. Coming himself from a Tunis based family of theologists, he states that fundamentalism is the malady of Islam as nacism is the malady of first half of 20 century Germany.
He sees two traditions of Islam. One is humanistic and tolerant. The other is militant-militaristic and narowed, with the latter on the rise in recent years.
He sets up the thesis that there is some sort of ressentiment in the islamic world against the west, because they saw their position dwindling to an inferior position against westeners, because the once fertile culture (they invented algebra) lost steem and did not support anything creative and new to the world of science since the Middle Ages.
There was an early process directed towards relativation and critical new interpretation of Islam in the early middle ages, but it got no mass support. He sees paralells between that early philosofical-theological-arts movements and the western age of enlightment in the 17/18th century (this Locke, Voltaire, Kant-stuff). For example the following poem was written in 9th century Bagdad:
To whom, he asks: Do you want to go to Mekka?
I answer: Yes I will,
when the pleasures of Bagdad will have ended.
How could I go on pilgrims voyage,
when I am fallen here
with the bwad or the bartender.
Abu Nuwas
(my traduction from german traduction)
Sounds like an early precesor of Shura. Anyway the world would be much safer with more such thinking in Bagdad.
Meddeb states that the fundamentalist movement is based on some narrow focussed second rate theologists. He shows that these very doubtable interpretation played a prominent role in the formation of Saudi Arabia.
No pictures, too. Not even one single UML-diagram. Its readable, although the author bases lots of his arguments on stuff from the corpus of history of philosofical and theological thinking.
I expect to discover more insights in the rest of the 252 pages.
[ September 18, 2002: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]
[ September 18, 2002: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Mapraputa Is]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
Have you by any chance ever opened a book or tried to learn about this topic? Do you have any clue whatsoever as to what motivates bin Laden and his cronies? Nevermind, that was a rhetorical question.

The last thing I was going to do was to participate in this discussion!
But! Do you really believe that you can understand bin Laden's motives by reading a book? As an inherently anti-American person I can tell that it's all is freaking complicated. I would be surprised if OBL could clearly express what he feels/thinks/believes is true...

[Younes Essouabni]

Ben Laden has his own motivation, people supporting him have others motivations.
[ September 18, 2002: Message edited by: Younes Essouabni ]

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Younes Essouabni:
Ben Laden has his own motivation, people supporting him have others motivations.

Do you have any evidence of that or is this merely your "feelings". Was John Walker (the American tabliban) a crusader for poverty? Or just another spoiled middle class American bored with his life and looking for a leader? Wake up! There is a strain of Islam that is spreading hate of infidels around the world.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
The last thing I was going to do was to participate in this discussion!
But! Do you really believe that you can understand bin Laden's motives by reading a book? As an inherently anti-American person I can tell that it's all is freaking complicated. I would be surprised if OBL could clearly express what he feels/thinks/believes is true...

No, I don't believe reading a single book is going to lead to any great insights. However by digesting much of what Bin Laden has said, analyzing the actions of he and his group, and taking history into context, it becomes as clear as it can be for those who don't actually hang out and go drinking with him.
There is another book some might find interesting called Origins of Terrorism: Psychologies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of Mind, edited by Walter Reich (Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 1998). In it's own way it's kind of like a Wrox book. It's collected writings of various phsychologists and terrorism experts who each tackle various facets of the origins and motivations of terrorism, particularly from a psychological standpoint. This one also has n opictures (not even on the cover) and is not really easy reading, but it does have some good info.
Regarding bin Laden expressing himself, he is well educated and has never shown that he has had a problem with this before, quite the opposite in fact, so in light of a lack of evidence to the contrary I see no reason to speculate that he can't express himself clearly nor do I see any reason not to take him at his word.
[ September 18, 2002: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Axel Janssen:
He sets up the thesis that there is some sort of ressentiment in the islamic world against the west, because they saw their position dwindling to an inferior position against westeners

I've heard this before as well. You won't hear it too often it seems because some see it as politically incorrect. And we all know that facts and theories that aren't politically correct are just plain evil. :roll:
Anyway, good info Axel. I've got a couple of books I've been meaning to read but haven't gotten around to yet that discuss some of the earliest interactions between Europe and the Muslim world, particularly how the Muslims viewed European culture in contrast to their own. I have another book, called What went wrong? or something like that, that places a historical perspective on Western-Middle Eastern relations today. Someday maybe I'll actually get around to reading them (not that I should bother it seems :roll: ).

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Younes Essouabni:
Ben Laden has his own motivation, people supporting him have others motivations.
[ September 18, 2002: Message edited by: Younes Essouabni ]

Is this based on anything substantial, like personal experience perhaps? Can you provide evidence of this?

[omar khan]

Jason and others.
I would like to point some books I found of some interest:
Edward Said -Orientalism
Edward Said -Covering Islam
Ahmed Rashid -Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia
Tariq Ramadan -To Be a European Muslim
Akbar S. Ahmed -Islam Today
They give an idea of what an European Muslim (Mr. Ramadan), Asian Muslim (Mr. Ahmed & Mr. Rashid) and Asian Christian (Mr. Said) think of topics as
East-West relation, Islam vs. Modernity and so on.
If you will want to read them they will certainly provide a different perspective.
Orientalism requires some English literature background and I found it rather difficult to read, so I would advise you to leave as the last one. The others are simpler.

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

My advice: lay off the alcohol. :roll:

So Jason is that how an educated discussion goes. Let me rephrase the comment you attacked:
Anyone who does not like that statment should lay off the alcohol.
My advice: If you do not know how to participate in a real discussion yourself, do not try to tell other people how to. It makes you look silly. Oh, and stay off the alcohol too.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by <anthony>:
So Jason is that how an educated discussion goes. Let me rephrase the comment you attacked:
Anyone who does not like that statment should lay off the alcohol.
My advice: If you do not know how to participate in a real discussion yourself, do not try to tell other people how to. It makes you look silly. Oh, and stay off the alcohol too.

Anthony G, back and trying to cause trouble again. I guess your arrival means this thread will soon be closed.
Maybe you should try reading the entire conversation and take it in context. The comments were between Shura and I. We've already discussed this, he knows in what spirit (no pun intended) the comments were made in, and that's all that matters. Your input, days later, is out of place, again. As the comments did not concern you and were between two parties who are aware of the context of the conversation (as well as everybody else but you apparently), maybe the best course of action would have been to say nothing?
You apparently have nothing constructive to add to the conversation (once again) so you resort to lame and humorously off-target personal attacks (once again). I've said it before, I'll say it again... Kindly get a life and stop stalking me.

[Jason Menard]

Omar,
Thanks for the book list. So much to read... so little time.

[R K Singh]

I have one question.
How many of you beleive that people are bound more to religion than society ?
If question is not clear then let me clarify it. How many muslims women in USA do use Burqa OR veil OR purdah?

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Ravish Kumar:
I have one question.
How many of you beleive that people are bound more to religion than society ?

I think that depends on how much religion is part of the society. I would say that more than anything people are bound to society, however when religion is very intertwined with that society, it is hard to separate the difference.

How many muslims women in USA do use Burqa OR veil OR purdah?

I've seen many who do, and known some who don't. Although you aren't going to know what a person's religion is if they don't tell you or they aren't wearing garb that is particular to a given religion, so you can't really come up with a percentage.

[R K Singh]

and for time being I got good message board for you guys .....
people are talking meaningful talk in MD.
going back to work... this cgi-perl is good, but there is no separation in view and logic

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
I've seen many who do, and known some who don't.

Actually I came to delete my pev reply, but you are too fast Jason
AW ... I was thinking that in US, Muslims women dont wear Burqa (atleast most of).
AW I asked this question because as Jason said

I would say that more than anything people are bound to society.

I also think the same so its not good to give comments on ones religion.
Religion changes with society.
What christianity you have in US, you wont find in India. So I can not genaralise all christian except that they pray to Jesus. Evev the way indian pray will be different. (I have scene many christians who do Aarti* of Mother Mary.)
* Aarti is hindu way to do worship their god.
AW sorry for disturbing you all.

[Thomas Paul]

Aarti is hindu way to do worship their god.
Could you explain this a little more? How is this different than the Christian way to worship God?

[R K Singh]

Imagine Mother Mary instead of Durga Ma (Mother Durga) :)
Here try to your put your mouse pointer on lamp, Sindoor(the red thing in bowl, I dont what it is called in english), flowers, garland, etc.
HTH http://www.siddhashram.org/aarti.shtml (Its in text and very short description in begining of the page itself.)
[ September 18, 2002: Message edited by: Ravish Kumar ]

[Thomas Paul]

In any Roman Catholic Cathedral you will see people put flowers on a statue of Mary so I don't see what the big difference is. Perhaps if you could describe what you think is non-typical Christian in the Christian worship in India?

[R K Singh]

Here what I want to say that, religion depend on the society.
If you are worshiping any God, it does not matter how are you doing it.
You can very easily find the affect of the Hindu society on the Indian Christian. Flower is one part, they have made Aarti(Lyrics) for Mother Mary. They sing it the way Hindu(tone) do. Lamp is shown to Mother in a manner as Hindu show it. On Christmas "Sheera" (an Indian sweet dish is compulsory.)
Even in India itself you will find different way worshiping, which depends on Geographic situation of that place, effect of ruler and lot of other things.
Nothing wrong in this, I am just saying religion is more depend on society.
Even in Hindus, you can easily find the affect of Mugal era. No one speaks pure Hindi in India. They cant speak. Hindi is right now consist of Hindi, Urdu, Arbee, Farsee, English and God knows how many other languages.
I was shocked to know that "Chabhi" is a portgue word (which I was thinking is Urdu) and very commonly used in India for Key. "Kunji" is Hindi word for Key, but most people use "Chabhi".
We cant generalise any religion.

[Cindy Glass]

Huh???
You guys are confusing the trappings and the ritual with the religion.
It has absolutely NO difference in meaning if a person sings to God while chanting in hindi or using a Christian hymnal.
Flowers or no flowers has NOTHING to do with it. That is just an outward expression of an inner feeling.
Religion is not about HOW YOU WORSHIP, but What and WHY you worship.