Militant islams new stronghols

Submitted by Prashant (United States), May 7, 2013 at 00:05

Dear Dr Pipes, regarding your 2002 article describing Bangladesh as a new stronghold of militant Islam, today it is reported that 33 people were killed in Bangladesh because an athiest blogger was using his freedom of speech. A brand new outfit ('protector of Islam') wanted to defend the Prophet (who is already dead fr about 1400 years) so it decided to cause the death of 33 people!

While you recognized that Bangladesh was becoming a stronghold of Islamic fundamentalism in 2002, those who were killed in Noakhali Massacre in 1946, will be glad to testify that what you recognized in 2002 was nothing new. 9/11 served a reminder to us that Islamic fundamentalism is a world-wide problem and it is an equal opportunity victimizer. It has always been. If I tell your readers the dates of Islamic aggression in Spain (western end of the religion-of-peace empire) and Islamic aggression in Sindh (the then eastern end), they will find a a surreal match between the two: Spain was won in 711 and Sindh in 712. At that time when neither the people in Spain nor the people in Sindh might have known about the existence of other, both were becoming victims of the same doctrine at the same time. For the central authority (or authorities) the common theme would have been to send one rampaging hoodlum to the east and another rampaging hoodlum to the west. In the years 711 and 712 these two (Spain and Sindh) would have been two unlinked incidences. In the time frame around 2001, Mumbai, Jerusalem, Beirut, New York, Bali and Bangladesh are all linked with one common thread.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".