Muslim Mob Kills Wife, Children

[nmap]

The point of this post is not the article itself. The news events are only an illustrative example.

People refer to two terms - those are "Islam" and "Radical Islam", or derivative terms with the same essential meaning. In the article below, it appears that a substantial number are acting in a manner that might fit within the term "radical Islam", while their other attributes seem to suggest they are close to the norm for their area.

So, then, a question. How does one differentiate between a "Muslim" and a "Radical Muslim"? What attributes of personality, appearance, or behavior define the difference? I do not ask the question lightly; because, if there is no easily discernible difference, I cannot help but wonder if the implied dichotomy really exists.

More pointedly, the central figure in the story was a native-born Pakistani and seemingly could not tell that the neighborhood he moved into included a substantial number of "radical Muslims". If he could not tell, how can we tell in our dealings with Muslims, both foreign and domestic?

My initial premise: There is no difference between the two classes. It is similar to drawing a line between "pregnant" and "A little bit pregnant".



LINK

July 9, 2010

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CDN) — A Muslim mob in Jhelum, Pakistan murdered the wife and four children of a Christian last month, but local authorities are too afraid of the local Muslim leader to file charges, according to area Muslim and Christian sources.

Jamshed Masih, a police officer who was transferred 50 kilometers (31 miles) from Gujrat to Jhelum, Punjab Province, said a mob led by Muslim religious leader Maulana Mahfooz Khan killed his family on June 21 after Khan called him to the local mosque and told him to leave the predominantly Muslim colony. Jhelum is 85 kilometers (53 miles) south of Islamabad.

"You must leave with your family, no non-Muslim has ever been allowed to live in this colony - we want to keep our colony safe from scum," Khan told Masih, the bereaved Christian told Compass.

Masih had moved to Mustafa Colony in Jhelum with his wife, two sons and two daughters and were living in a rented house. Masih said that a Muslim neighbor, Ali Murtaza, told him that area Muslims notified Khan, telling the religious leader, "We cannot allow these non-Muslims to live here, they will be a bad influence on our children."

An anxious Masih told his wife Razia Jamshed about the local Muslim response, and they decided to bring their concern to the pastor of a local Presbyterian church, Saleem Mall.

"Pastor Saleem said, ‘I will also advise you to vacate the house, as it can be dangerous living there - these people can harm your family," Masih said.

Masih's neighbor, Murtaza, confirmed to Compass the response of the local Muslims and related incidents that led up to the murders. Murtaza told Compass that after Masih went to work at 7 a.m. on June 21, his children could be heard singing hymns before breakfast.
"Razia sent their eldest son to buy a packet of Surf [detergent], and he was singing a hymn on his way to buy the Surf," Murtaza said.

Neighbors saw Masih's s 11-year-old son come into the store, he said. The shopkeeper asked him if he was a Christian; the child responded that he was.

"The shopkeeper refused to give him the packet of Surf and spoke very harshly to him, ‘I don't sell to any non-Muslim, you are not welcome here, don't you dare ever come to my shop again,'" Murtaza said.

The boy went home, upset, and told his mother about the encounter; she grew worried and called her husband, saying, "Jamshed, please come home quickly, the kids and I are very worried, we must leave this house today," Masih said.

His neighbor, Murtaza, said that shortly afterward some area residents came to the door with the Muslim religious leader, Khan.

"Your son has committed blasphemy against Muhammad, our beloved prophet - we can't allow him to live, he should be punished," Khan told Razia Masih, Murtaza said. "Razia got scared and said, ‘My son couldn't do such a thing, he is only 11 years old.'"

Khan became furious and said, "Are we lying to you? You call us liars, how dare you insult us," Murtaza said. "Someone from the crowd hit something hard on her head, and she started bleeding. The children started crying and shouted for help. Razia kept shouting for help, ‘Please have mercy on us, please let my husband come, then we can talk.'"

Jamshed Masih said his daughter telephoned police as the mob attacked his wife and children. He said he later learned that "the people kept shouting, ‘This family has committed blasphemy, they should be killed."

Before police arrived, his family was murdered, he said.

Murtaza said Masih rushed home and was devastated to find the dead bodies of his wife and four children.

When Masih tried to file a complaint against Khan for the murder, Station House Officer (SHO) Ramzan Mumtaz refused to do so, according to Murtaza and Mall, the Presbyterian clergyman.

"He said, ‘Khan is an influential man, and he said your son has committed blasphemy - we cannot do anything against him,'" Mall said.

Murtaza added, "The SHO just said, ‘I am a poor man, I have a family, and I was pressured by higher authorities not to register the FIR [First Information Report] as Khan is a very influential man. I am sorry, I don't have anything in my hands.'"

Contacted by Compass, SHO Mumtaz confirmed that he responded to the request to file the complaint against Khan in these exact words.

Masih has filed a complaint with the chief minister of Punjab Province begging him for justice, Mall told Compass.

"We condemn this brutal murder of innocent children in the name of Islam," Mall said. "This has to stop now. We appeal to the government to let us live in peace."

[dr. mabuse]

Nmap, as expected, a great post.

A Muslim described the problem this way. He said any Muslim could "go to the Radical side" at any time. He has seen neighbors and acquaintances "switch sides" after a lifetime of peaceful conduct.

Something they saw or heard set them off, in his opinion.

If that is true, we have our hands full, don't we?

[nmap]

Originally Posted by dr. mabuse

Something they saw or heard set them off, in his opinion.

If that is true, we have our hands full, don't we?

Very much so. It also implies that if we want to maintain the peace, then we must make the environment conform to whatever avoids setting them off. That sounds remarkably akin to putting them in control of our society - a choice I don't care for.

[dr. mabuse]

Concur. Are we going to be as "assertive" as they are with regards to assimilation, as it were?

We live in interesting times. Far better than the old days of black powder and flintlock.

[akv]

Nmap,

My $.02,

In answer to your question, I would say at the end of the day people are people, some good, some bad, most in between regardless of their culture, religion, ethnicity, or nationality. IMHO "Radical Muslims" are fundamentalist in nature, they cannot deal with modernization and the evolution of demographics towards the freedoms of a secular democratic society. They want to move the clock back to medieval values and culture. They are right to be scared, nature weeds out those who don't evolve with society. They have no qualms about using violence against innocent folks their fellow Muslims and the West in efforts to coerce their agenda. I recall meeting a Palestinian in school who was as blinded by hate, as I imagine a klansman would be.

If I may ask sir, not knowing your background, how many Muslims have you known personally or do you interact with regularly on a substantial basis? I'm curious, FWIW, I've known Muslims from college and in the industry and my experience was pretty mixed, just like folks in general some were great people, some were not, the most reasonable of them were extremely highly educated, tolerant, and moderate in their beliefs.

Obviously QP's and vets here have had even greater interaction with Muslims here and abroad, and I wonder how they would answer your question? Two BTDT sources that stood out to me were the writings of Major Gant and SGM Billy Waugh, both true warriors with extensive experience living in several Islamic countries, and their opinions were consistent with my experiences in the states.

[Maytime]

Originally Posted by nmap

Whole article

Fucking ANIMALS.

Rage vented. Although we take for granted the personal freedoms we have here in the civilized world, one cannot think that there may have been a lack in the SA department of the Christian family when moving to such an area. Why poke the bear with so much to lose? I empathize with the man and his terrible loss, but cannot fathom how it feels.

I have met many Muslim students in my studies, and every single one has been the highest caliber of person. Some from Pakistan, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, yada yada, most of them could give two shits about their homeland and were very grateful and humble about their journey here. All were family men which was foremost in their thoughts. Selfless were their ambitions to make better lives for their family. I respect that, and applaud the ferocity in which they pursue their goals.

[craigepo]

Originally Posted by Maytime

...one cannot think that there may have been a lack in the SA department of the Christian family when moving to such an area. Why poke the bear with so much to lose?

I think I read that the husband was transferred to the town due to his job as a policeman. Gotta leave the house at some point to go to work.

I believe that Churchill and John Quincy Adams had this all figured out, and both men's learned opinions bear repeating at frequent interval, lest we begin to think that Islamic radicalism is a new, benign condition:

Churchill: How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.

The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

Adams:
"In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, [.....] Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST.- TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE.... Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant ... While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men."

[Richard]

MOO - both the Quran and the Bible have proven themselves to be enduringly invaluable references for anyone seeking justification to behave either morally or immorally.

However, YMMV - and so it goes...

Richard's $.02

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Richard

MOO - both the Quran and the Bible have proven themselves to be enduringly invaluable references for anyone seeking justification to behave either morally or immorally.
..........

Richard, can you tell me how many times in the last 10 years a Christian mob has rapaged through a Muslim neighborhood killing Muslims? Other than West Africa that seems to be having a tit-for-tat going on.

Yes, Muslims seem to be well behaved when they are in the minority. Get over 20% and they seem to revert to their true nature. That may be because it gives the minority in the Muslim population cover to do the rampaging - but it seems the majority is not that much bothered by it.

Islam - the sea in which the shark of terrorism swims. It aids and comforts the shark on it's journey. When the water is deep enough the shark swims free.

[nmap]

Originally Posted by akv

If I may ask sir, not knowing your background, how many Muslims have you known personally or do you interact with regularly on a substantial basis? I'm curious, FWIW, I've known Muslims from college and in the industry and my experience was pretty mixed, just like folks in general some were great people, some were not, the most reasonable of them were extremely highly educated, tolerant, and moderate in their beliefs.

My experience is not so different from your own. There was one fellow...looked like the stereotypical American...smart, hard-working, shy around women. His wife (very rarely observed) wore a black abaya, with only her eyes showing - in San Antonio...during the summer. Then there was another one...came to an ice cream party I threw. There were a variety of toppings, including pre-made cherries jubilee sauce. He pointedly asked about the presence of any alcohol in the sauce. Smart, productive...and his wife made the best baklava I've ever tasted. And then there's another one who supervises waiters at banquets. Again, highly capable. Pleasant, always. But makes cracks about having to work on Easter because it isn't one of his holidays.

So, just as you say - the individuals are a typical mix, not so different than any other.

Having said all that, personal experiences (or, if you prefer, biases) are something we all have, and they must surely influence our views about a great many things. Thus they have some value.

However...the problem is not that the population is "good" or "bad". Rather, there seems to be a set of behaviors that are more likely among Islamic militants (or fundamentalists, or whatever we call them) than among others. We don't seem to have any viable way to discern which Islamics are militants, and which are not.

The quotes offered by Craigpo are worthy of deep reflection. We have a billion or so people mired in a miserable existence, for the most part - with the Saudi royal family as notable exceptions.

So...we seem to agree that there's nothing wrong with the people. We might be forgiven for wondering why they have all the bad outcomes we observe. Still more, these problems have lasted over the years - as the quotes from Churchill and Adams suggest. Furthermore, there seems to be little difference between areas that are militant, and those which are not. Worse, we see little advancement in such societies. Is Islam connected with these problems? It looks that way to me. Does it cause the problems, due to the effect of religious beliefs on behavior? Harder to say, but it appears possible. (YMMV)


It seems as if there isn't much (or any?) difference between the sharks and the sea they swim in, to use Pete's simile.

And now, the problem. We have two social systems, A and B, each founded on something people believe deeply. The fundamental values and standards of A and B are in conflict, as they have been for centuries.

It seems that either A or B must be changed (changed, actually, to the point of destruction), or both must change (again, this is essentially the destruction of both.) Perhaps A and B are equally good, or equally bad. Perhaps each has a high body count. That doesn't matter - no matter what name we affix, the central fact remains that the systems are in conflict.

Notice I am not saying anything about the people or the real estate. I speak only of the belief systems.

With that disclaimer firmly in mind, I see no way out of the conclusion that at least one of the belief systems will perish at some point, and must perish to regain stability. Islam could adopt freedom of worship and religion, but that seems to come near to making fundamental changes in it's very nature - hence, the destruction mentioned above. Perhaps others see alternatives that I have not.

[SF-TX]

Originally Posted by nmap

Perhaps others see alternatives that I have not.

Unfortunately, no. When one belief system is mutually exclusive, there don't seem to be too many alternatives.

A rhetorical question. Where would you prefer to live? In a country where belief system A is predominate, or B ('B' is the mutually exclusive belief system)?

[The Reaper]

Look at the home grown Islamic terrorists we have seen here, only uncovered when their plots were discovered or after they occurred.

How many of their friends and associates said, "Hey, he was a great guy, very nice, I cannot believe that he would do that"?

When I was in Afghanistan, I had Afghan associates. I never trusted them completely, or let my guard down.

Too many of them suddenly go jihadi, and I did not plan on dying there because I got too comfortable.

Just my .02, call me a bad American infidel.

TR

[orion5]

Originally Posted by nmap

We have two social systems, A and B, each founded on something people believe deeply. The fundamental values and standards of A and B are in conflict, as they have been for centuries.

It seems that either A or B must be changed (changed, actually, to the point of destruction), or both must change (again, this is essentially the destruction of both.) Perhaps A and B are equally good, or equally bad. Perhaps each has a high body count. That doesn't matter - no matter what name we affix, the central fact remains that the systems are in conflict.

Notice I am not saying anything about the people or the real estate. I speak only of the belief systems.

Islam could adopt freedom of worship and religion, but that seems to come near to making fundamental changes in it's very nature - hence, the destruction mentioned above.

nmap, IMO this is possibly your best post, ever.

I happen to be a person of faith, and as such, I believe the faith issues cannot be completely wiped out of a discussion. However, there is simply no convincing an atheist that these are worthy factors, nor convincing a zealous Muslim that he/she should live peaceably with Christians, or a zealous Christian that he/she should live peaceably with Muslims, unless looking for opportunities to convert them.

As you suggest, when you strip out the faith factors, the geographic factors, the "good" vs "bad" labels, you are left with one social system A that will always be in conflict with the other social system B. Both have non-negotiable factors. Never mind that one system has left its people mired in inequality, frustration, poverty, and internal/external conflict while the other has prospered and empowered its people.

Even in moderate Islamic countries, like Malaysia, where there is an attempt at freedom of worship for Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Christians, one religion (Islam) is more equal than the other in almost every facet of that society. I can think of no positive example anywhere in the world of an originally Islamic society that has now progressed to a free, open, non-persecuted society with equality in government, business, education, and opportunities. Even in Jordan, with an American-educated and American-sympathizing King....a few seats are given to Christians in their parliament, but they are ruled by Islamic law, the highest positions will always be Muslim, proselytizing to Muslims is banned (if you want to convert a Christian, go right ahead), etc. etc. etc.

Only in America are we free.

YMMV.

[greenberetTFS]

Originally Posted by Richard

MOO - both the Quran and the Bible have proven themselves to be enduringly invaluable references for anyone seeking justification to behave either morally or immorally.

However, YMMV - and so it goes...

Richard's $.02

I'm sorry Richard don't agree with you about the Bible,you receive "Justification" the minute you receive Jesus Christ,as your Lord and Savior and become Born Again...............

Big Teddy

[SF-TX]

Originally Posted by orion5

Even in Jordan, with an American-educated and American-sympathizing King....

Interesting that Queen Rania has apparently turned down offers to publish a Hebrew edition of her recently released children's book.

Her Majesty Queen Rania Al Abdullah of Jordan will visit United Nations Headquarters on 27 April to launch a new children’s book on cross-cultural understanding. The book, entitled The Sandwich Swap, is a warm-hearted fable about friendship and tolerance across cultural lines. The story is based on an anecdote Her Majesty tells and which encapsulates, in today’s troubled times, the need for global understanding. The event will take place in the United Nations Bookshop at United Nations Headquarters in New York.

Source

Queen Rania of Jordan has turned down several offers to publish a Hebrew version of a children's book she recently wrote. The book, which was published in the United States by Hyperion under the title "The Sandwich Swap" for children between 4 and 8 years old, was co-written with Kelly DiPucchio and illustrated by Tricia Tusa.

Source