Bitcoin Forum

DHAKA, Bangladesh — Fear has wormed its way into the mind of Mithila Farzana, who hosts two talk shows on a Bangladeshi television news channel.

These days, she is so alert to the sensation of men coming up behind her that when she walks the halls of the university in Dhaka where she teaches, she will step aside, heart racing, to let students pass. Her husband will no longer allow her to take a car service to work, reasoning that in a city that is home to well-resourced radical networks, “a driver can sell himself easily,” she says. He drives her himself.

In the past, Ms. Farzana could survey the danger from a professional distance, reporting the facts each time militants murdered one of the bloggers campaigning against fundamentalist Islam.

Then, last month, a shadowy group — the same one that claimed responsibility for killing the bloggers — sent a letter to a television news channel warning that unless media outlets stopped employing unveiled women as journalists, “the outcome will be dreadful.” On Saturday, militants carried out simultaneous attacks on two book publishers — not secular activists, this time, but low-profile businessmen who acted as intellectual supply lines for some of the country’s most prominent writers.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/world/asia/bangladesh-terrorism-ansar-al-islam.html?ref=world&_r=0

Sad to see militant islam succeeding in Bangladesh.
Although they have not had much success politically, these militants have succeeded in establishing a climate of fear.

The problem with fighting is that someone gets hurt.

Bangladesh is a common law nation. It is based on English common law. Theis means that the people can own any property that they want - guns.

If the people would wake up and arm themselves, even if it is against the legal law, terrorists would die. Sure, some of the people might get hurt until the fighting dies down, but they are going to get hurt and be under slavery anyway, if they don't fight.

Learn the common law. Put down the government when it tries to stop you from owning property - guns and ammo. Defend yourself, since the government won't do it.

:)

Some 25-30 years ago, Bangladesh used to be a staunchly secular country, where Islamist attire such as Niqaab, Burqa.etc were extremely rare. Things changed in the late 1980s, when the Saudis started setting up mosques in every nook and corner of Bangladesh. The Saudis sent in radical clerics from Yemen and Pakistan, who brainwashed the Bangladeshi children and the teenagers. And in the beginning of the 21st century, Qatar also chipped in, sending in billions of USD in funds to various Salafist groups in Dhaka, Sylhet and Chittagong. It was a very slow process. But it was also a very successful one. At least one-third of the Bangladeshi population has converted to Salafism, mostly the youth.

Islam was around for a long time in Bangladesh, before British rule came in. British rule introduced freedom for anybody. The Bangladesh people stuck with their Islamic slavery idea, even though they practiced freedom to some extent. Then, as Bangladesh government gradually became its own thing, and the British had less and less influence, Islam gradually came back in force.

Bangladesh is still, technically, a common law nation on the books. But people are throwing it away because they don't understand what freedom is for them.

Stand up and take responsibility for your life and that of your children. Slavery - Islam - gives responsibility for your life over to others. And they aren't going to rule over you for your own good... rather for their good.

:)

The Brits conquered Bengal in the 18th century, when the population was mostly Hindu. The Muslims gained the most from the British rule, as the Hindu Brahmin dominance was put to an end by the Europeans . Muslims became a majority in the eastern portions of Bengal somewhere in 1880 or 1890, after close to 100 years of British rule. Had Bengal remained under the local rulers, then it would have been Hindu by now.

And God gave them a chance to become His children by becoming the Christianity that the Brits brought to them. But they, in majority, rejected it. So God is giving them over to something worse.

Common law still works, even in Bangladesh. But they won't accept it, just like most Americans, British people, and Canadians.

:)

Christianity is an alien religion for the Bengalis, which is not compatible with their culture and traditions. That is why less than 1% of them are Christians. There are Christian majority regions in the vicinity of Bangladesh (such as the states of Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland in India, and Kachin and Chin in Myanmar). And all these regions are immersed in religious violence.

Less than 1% may be correct. That's the point. God has given them their chance through British conquest in the past. They have thrown away their chance. So, they get what they deserve.

However, if they picked up English common law that they still have, they could turn themselves into a free nation. But they won't. They reject common law and go into slavery, just as they reject Christianity, the only salvation for eternal life.

:)

Perhaps that has something to do with the behavior of the British in India. Even after close to 70 years, the Indians still despise the Brits. Being a regular traveler to India, I have noticed that although there is no discrimination towards the British individuals or corporations, the Indians still feel bitter about the colonial period. They claim that the Brits looted the natural resources of India.

The Indians were too stupid to pick up and use common law back then, and they still are. Had they any real thinker, they could have turned British law against itself. All they had was Gandhi, who didn't understand freedom any more than the Indians do today.

:)

EDIT: The sad thing is that Americans, Canadians and Brits don't understand common law much better. It is only inertia of the past that keeps common law as strong as it is in these countries.

You think converting to Christianity would have solved all their problems?

http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/files/2014/11/rabbit-god-duck-god.png

Yap , christians like ourselves are also the ones causing problems. Salvation is based on your own deeds

Converting to Christianity DOES solve all our problems.

Simply saying that you have converted to Christianity, or saying it and then following something else, isn't converting to Christianity.

Salvation is based on one deed, if you can call it that. Salvation is believing that Jesus took all the punishment for all your sins and mistakes that you made as you live your whole life in the sight of God.

This life is relatively short. Most of us in this forum can imagine what it would be like to live in health from now on... no end.

There will be a resurrection from death, and there will follow it a judgment before God. Depending on a persons faith in Jesus in this life, it will have already been decided whether he/she will spend eternity in glory with God, or in the eternal dying that it takes for the soul to truly die.

Becoming a Christian in truth or in name doesn't stop one from making more trouble for himself in this short life.

:)

Yes you are totally right. If there is god and yes there is.. God would only accept Christians in heaven..

Do you even understand the concept of religion, 1 god for all of humanity. Every country, every religion is...

The same

Unlike the jews, I believe there is salvations for everybody, religion independant.

There is no religion that can save us

-some song i forgot

There is great question in this. To what extent will God allow mistakes about understanding Him. For example.

Everyone recognizes (at least way down deep) that God exists. One person believes that God is a spirit that can't be seen, but can only be felt. Another believes that an erupting volcano just has to be God. A third believes that God is the sun which gives warmth and light to all.

How far will God go in allowing people to believe misunderstandings about Him, and yet forgive them? Who can tell that if religious people of different religions that have basically the correct understanding of what God is like, and yet are completely separate religions, that the religion that God emphasizes will receive blessing while others not, even though they are so similar?

Perhaps it is the heart of each individual believer that determines where he stands with God. Some people of the same religion are saved. Others are not. Ultimately it would be God's decision.

The Judeo-Christian religion seems to have tremendous strength to it. Way more ancient copies of parts of the Bible exist than of the religious writings of any other religion. The nation of Israel is strong, while nations of other religions are weak (at least size for size), and they (Israel) are the ones who have maintained the Bible in the past.

The point? Let's get as close to being accurate as we can. Why? Because even though we feel that God will/might/should save all people, doesn't mean that God thinks like this. He might accept only the religion that is close to correct, and the people who worship Him in spirit and truth. After all, He has to be a God of truth to be able to maintain such a great universe, doesn't He.

:)

The Saudis, especially in the 80s, are/were nothing but the trained poodles of western intelligence.

They would never even sneeze without the OK from Washington/London/Paris/Berlin/Tel Aviv.

The radicalization of formerly secular countries is part of their divide and rule "strategy of tension."

Of course, this absolutely must be considered within the context of the Cold War, when militant atheist Marxist-Lenist Soviets were targeting the second and third world for ideological and territorial expansion.

If the Russian people had stopped the Bolsheviks (and/or the American people had stopped the Federal Reserve Act), all of that Fundy-proxy-army-creation would have been avoided.

It's a nasty, dangerous situation and the more you guys muddy the waters with your (*cough* insufferable *cough*) God talk the worse and more intractable it becomes.

Bangladesh has a history of political disturbance. Killing locals, politicians is nothing new over there.

Generals and politicians are not the same cup of tea, although for this kind of countries it could be helpfull to bring stability (look what Musharraf did in Pakistan). The problem with Bangladesh is the tremendous corruption on all levels. Governement (regional and local), militairy, businesses etc.

The people are used to it and every attempt to kill it, is being lost.

Religion used to be a short-cut solution to all problems of this world.
Do X because it is god's will.
Unfortunately, it is the cause of problems in the 21st century.
The world will be a better place if there are no religions (Christianity included).

I used to think that the Arabs were idiots, who just love to waste their petrodollars on low quality weapons and whores. But time has proven me wrong. Although they were subservient to the Americans for many decades, now slowly they are asserting their dominance. They know that the American corporations will collapse without the OPEC oil. Now it is the Americans, who have been relegated to the level of poodles.

Sure, that's what exactly what they want you and (more importantly) the rest of the world to think.

"Appear weak when you are strong."  -Sun Tzu

SA and the other petro-kingdoms are paper statelets.

NATO can flip a switch and change the regimes in Riyadh, etc. within 24 hours.

NATO and Russia have all the nukes; good luck "asserting dominance" without MIRV-tipped SLBM.

All the Sheik's stacks of fiat and gold and army toys are worthless without NATO's strategic umbrella.

NATO's petro-fiat hegemony will end eventually.  But until then...

https://i.imgur.com/BnNC5Es.jpg

Power flows from the launch tube of a sub. 

Not all religions have a god, at least not formally. Not all people of theistic religions believe that there is a god, and not all people of atheistic religions believe there is no god.

There is nothing in the universe that suggests God does not exist. In fact, the existence of the universe in its present state of the complexity, suggests highly that God does exist.

The religion of science - where some people believe that the unproven theories about universe development without God - is just like any other religion. People have a handful of facts or witness reports, and they have turned it into something in their minds that is not necessarily true, and in the face of other religions, absolutely is not true.

The world absolutely would not be a better place without religion, because the only way this could happen, would be if people were not people. If people were not people, who knows what they would be? But they certainly wouldn't have done the great works of the past - archaeological constructions of ancient peoples, and advanced thinking such as calculus.

One of the things people would not be able to do if they didn't have religion is, people wouldn't be able to think about such complex thoughts like, Would the world be a better place without religion?

:)