Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-athena.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!mit-athena!martillo From: martillo@mit-athena.UUCP (Joaquim Martillo) Newsgroups: net.followup,net.politics Subject: Re: Protesting the Beirut Hostage Crisis Message-ID: <284@mit-athena.UUCP> Date: Wed, 10-Jul-85 10:08:06 EDT Article-I.D.: mit-athe.284 Posted: Wed Jul 10 10:08:06 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 00:46:24 EDT References: <498@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <1918@ut-ngp.UTEXAS> <720@ihlpg.UUCP> <1948@ut-ngp.UTEXAS> <692@lsuc.UUCP> <2004@ut-ngp.UTEXAS> Reply-To: martillo@mit-athena.UUCP (Joaquim Martillo) Distribution: net Organization: MIT Project Athena Lines: 94 Xref: watmath net.followup:5083 net.politics:9846 Summary: > > ... Remember that Lebanon > > and Israel are officially at war and have been since 1948 ... >I guess the war seemed only to continue with the Muslim populations, not >with the sweet Facist Phalange Party and the other Christian populations. Muslims as a matter of religious faith and practise consider themselves obligated to humiliate and degrade non-Muslims. As far as I can tell, the only reason the phalange is fascist is that when they have been strong enough to resist, they have been unwilling to grovel and lick the feet of Muslim overlords. I should point out the the "fascist" phalange often helped and aided Jewish and other refugees from Hitler while most Muslim political parties and religious leaders have been and still are openly sympathetic to Hitler. By being sympathetic to Arab Muslim nationalist movements, Raju Bhatt clearly demonstrates his basic Nazi racist outlook. > > ... every other Arab country except Egypt, refuses to recognize > > Israel's existence, has refused any peace treaty, and has attacked > > Israel: that places the countries in a state of war). >Does that mean any country not recognizing the state of Israel should >fear Israeli action one day? Lebanon declared war on Israel in 1948 and never terminated the state of war. > > last thing it wants is more terrorist attacks on its citizens > > and guerrilla attacks on its army, which is trying to protect > > its citizens. >Likewise the Shiites are only trying to protect their people from the >Israeli army and the local traitors (those helping the 'occupation >forces' of Israel) along with the South Lebanese Army. What Bullshit! Shiites in no danger will go out of their way to attack non-muslims. I have seen many articles telling how sympathetic we should be to poor oppressed sunnis and shi`is. While shi`is have known some minor oppression from sunnis in recent times, any one who bothers to read the writings of Shi`i mullahs and other religious leaders as I have quite quickly realizes, shi`is are upset that they were not doing the oppressing of sunnis. In any case, whether or not shi`is were being oppressed by sunnis the shi`is made an especial effort to persecute, oppress and degrade the non-muslims in their regions. If the sunnis required non-muslims to remove their shoes when leaving the non-muslim ghetto (don't want that disgusting non-Muslim dust mixing with that good Muslim dust), the shi`is practised child-kidnapping as matter of religious principle. My family comes from an Ismaili (a type of shi`ite) area in Libya. The Koran says there should be no compulsion in religion. The `ulama (scholars) say that a person's natural religion is Islam. Out of respect for your father you might be a non-muslim. Any other reason would be compulsion. Therefor if your father died before you became an adult (12-13 years old), your mother would be compelling you if she raised you in any religion but Islam. Therefor Muslims took away the young children of widowed mothers in our region. Of course, they were most zeolous in the case of 13 year-old females so that the practise really amounted to systematic kidnapping and rape. This practise also existed in Yemen, Iran and Shiite dominated areas of India. > > As things settle down in Lebanon, Israel has been > > releasing the Shiites, and this has nothing whatsoever to do with > > the TWA hijacking. >How about once all Israeli soldiers are 'safe' the Shiites were slowly >being released? You are right this action had nothing to do with the >TWA hijacking. The real basic problem is that in modern times given current destructive possibilities of technology, Islam is an unacceptable system of life. For non-muslims in muslim areas, Islam is worse than Jim Crow. In no country ruled by Muslims are non-muslims treated on terms of mutual respect and equality. In fact, Islam is probably the cause of Apartheid. Not too surprising, one Afrikaner derogatory term for black is kafir which of course is Arabic for non-adherent to Islam. Basically the dutch in South Africa showed no signs or racial bigotry toward blacks until they began interacting with the Arab and Indian Muslim slave traders. Most of the structure of Apartheid is directly based on the Islamic treatment of non-Muslims. If you oppose apartheid, you must oppose Islam. The only decent places to live in the Muslim world for non-Muslims to live have been those areas dominated by Europeans who were gradually stamping out Islamic barbarism. Granting Muslim nations independence without first extirpating Islamic practises was perhaps the most regressive series of events in the last millenium. Muslim independence given the nature of Islam immediately leads to barbaric acts like the Iranian and TWA hostage crisis. By sympathizing with such Muslim barbarism, Bhatt shows himself an enemy of humanity. Until Muslims show some decency in the way they relate to the non-muslim world, the only proper course of action is to suppress them and eventually return Muslim nations to colonial domination.