August 11, 2006
Just Who Are These "Asians"?
Geography quiz: which, if any, of the following countries are "Asian" countries?[ANSWER BELOW THE FOLD]
All of the above are considered "Asian" countries under the common geographic definitions of "Asia".
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
India
Iran
Iraq
Israel
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Syria
In other words:
Pakistani terrorists are "Asian" terroristsWhy is this important? Because the news media's recent politically-correct use of the term "Asian" to describe Pakistanis, much like their politically-correct refusal to describe Islamic terrorists as Islamic, serves to blur things and insert ambiguity into what is otherwise a fairly straightforward story.
Syrian terrorists are "Asian" terrorists
Saudi Arabian terrorists are "Asian" terrorists
Posted by: Ragnar at
06:12 PM
| Comments (36)
| Add Comment
Post contains 100 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 11, 2006 06:34 PM (Bp6wV)
2
If I had to pick one, I would say None since they are all in the Asia region.
Posted by: Cmunk at August 11, 2006 06:34 PM (n4VvM)
3
From what I have seen of Pakistani Muslims, a lot of them are amongst the most vicious Islamists; I mean vicious enough to make Osama Bin-Laden proud!
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 11, 2006 06:51 PM (Bp6wV)
4
Its bad for 'real' asian people. 
Now all dumb people pointing to 'real' asian people and say 'Asian are TERRORIST'.
sry for bad english ^^
Now all dumb people pointing to 'real' asian people and say 'Asian are TERRORIST'.
sry for bad english ^^
Posted by: MajorDad at August 11, 2006 06:55 PM (B7x5K)
5
"Asians" are those tiny cute chicks with olive complexions and raven hair, by my definition. But hey, I'm a bachelor.
I say we call Arab terrorists "Ishmaelites." That's sure to induce strokes in all of the right people.
I say we call Arab terrorists "Ishmaelites." That's sure to induce strokes in all of the right people.
Posted by: Hucbald at August 11, 2006 07:08 PM (Q6gPh)
6
I always liked "Pakis", but it was discredited a while ago as being offensive. Who knew?
Posted by: oseaghdha at August 11, 2006 07:11 PM (Tcfhr)
7
Olive skin and raving hair! Hmmm! Think I'll go pay Michelle Malkin a visit ..... on her site of course! sigh! ;-) I think Bush finally said it right with the Islamic dodo-heads or whatever it was. Extremists, terrorists. The geography is interesting, but it is the theocracy based organization of Islam that needs to be dealt with.
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at August 11, 2006 07:42 PM (gLMre)
8
Finally people are noticing it. Being an Indian living in the UK for some time now, its quite distressing to see the media constantly referring to the terrorists as Asians, thus painting even Indians in a bad light. Clear distinctions need to be made and country or origin based identification should be made in the media because unlike the Chinese or Koreans there are very few differences in the appearance of Indians and Pakistanis. I've lost count of the number of times people have thought that I'm a Pakistani. Also the number of radical muslims that i've come across in the UK is beyond belief. After having lived in the UK for over two years now, the results of the various surveys about the degree of radicalisation among British Muslims do not come as a surprise. James Forsyth, an editor of Foreign Policy magazine touches upon the sobering results of the surveys here...
Its only after 9/11, that the developed countries of the west woke up to the threat posed by the ideology of extremist Islam and its followers, while we Indians have been experiencing it for over two decades (Its much less than the Israelis, I admit.) But the failure of the US and the UK to recognise the role played by Pakistan in training and assisting the jihadis, will only lead to further problems. Nitin Pai in this post on "The Indian National Interest" touches on the Pakistan problem. Also noteworthy is this comment on the same post.
Its only after 9/11, that the developed countries of the west woke up to the threat posed by the ideology of extremist Islam and its followers, while we Indians have been experiencing it for over two decades (Its much less than the Israelis, I admit.) But the failure of the US and the UK to recognise the role played by Pakistan in training and assisting the jihadis, will only lead to further problems. Nitin Pai in this post on "The Indian National Interest" touches on the Pakistan problem. Also noteworthy is this comment on the same post.
Posted by: Ken at August 11, 2006 08:00 PM (rXl/4)
9
Ken, very interesting, and I want you to know that I just finishing reading a history of the Muslim conquests in India, and I was sickened by the brutality of it. What India has experienced at the hands of the Muslims is beyond what the rest of the World suffered, and I can assure you that the rest of the World has suffered horribly, but India certainly bore the brunt of the conquests. That a mountain range was named for the slaughter of the Hindus(Hindu Kush) says it all.
Posted by: jesusland joe at August 11, 2006 08:21 PM (rUyw4)
10
Ken,
I assume you're from India; and as I recall Indian folks suffered waves of genocide at the hands of Islam before the British gained infulence there. Wasn't the last Mongol King defeated by an alliance of Brits, Sikhs, and Hindu's?
I assume you're from India; and as I recall Indian folks suffered waves of genocide at the hands of Islam before the British gained infulence there. Wasn't the last Mongol King defeated by an alliance of Brits, Sikhs, and Hindu's?
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 11, 2006 08:53 PM (Bp6wV)
11
Please, Hucbald, don't start talking about Asian girls here, or that Jack Sanderson dude will show up and start pimping his website. He's been spamming me nonstop, asking me why I don't like foreign women and crap like that. He's as nutty as a Christmas cake.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 11, 2006 09:02 PM (v3I+x)
12
Maxie, you don't like foreign women? I thought you did, except for the ones in the burkas. Do you have a confession to make?
Posted by: jesusland joe at August 11, 2006 09:31 PM (rUyw4)
13
Do we need to jump into the internal policys of the UK and Pakistan at this time. Give it a break for awhile. They were just instumental in stopping a horrible event.
Posted by: greyrooster at August 11, 2006 09:49 PM (AG5IC)
14
Iran is the enemy. Focus, focus, focus.
Posted by: greyrooster at August 11, 2006 09:50 PM (AG5IC)
15
Amadbadboobyjob is going to be on 60 Minutes Sunday.
(Amadmadinajad?)
All of you who are male, and over 5' 11" tall. Please, listen to me. This guy is a short f**ker. This should give you an idea of what personality we are up against. Little guys are the biggest pains in the ass the world has ever known. The most ridiculous thing of it all is Chavez and Assad tower over this chump. Why don't they just snach his little stupid ass up, and take over his country?
(Amadmadinajad?)
All of you who are male, and over 5' 11" tall. Please, listen to me. This guy is a short f**ker. This should give you an idea of what personality we are up against. Little guys are the biggest pains in the ass the world has ever known. The most ridiculous thing of it all is Chavez and Assad tower over this chump. Why don't they just snach his little stupid ass up, and take over his country?
Posted by: Cmunk at August 11, 2006 10:25 PM (n4VvM)
16
JJ, it's not that I don't like them, it's that he won't f*#%ing shut up about them, and he goes on and on about his website, which he claims isn't his, but he sure as hell promotes it like it is. See, he claims he lives in Europe, and prefers Eastern European women, but he bitches ceaselessly about some law that restricts meeting foreigners online. If he lives there, and prefers the women, then why else would he pimp a website for Americans to meet foreign women? He's about a half bubble off plumb if you ask me, and if he emails you, for Pete's sake don't encourage him. If he doesn't stop spamming me I'm going to report him to his ISP.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 11, 2006 10:28 PM (v3I+x)
17
Sonds like love to me.
Posted by: Cmunk at August 11, 2006 10:32 PM (n4VvM)
18
What the h%ll do the folks at Sixty-Minutes think they can get from interviewing this Arab-worshipping bona fide delusional psychopathic mass murderer?
This jackass actually believes that his deity is sitting at the bottom of a well in Iran waiting for Shii'tes to have prepared the way for his coming. He's known to have written letters addressed to the same deity and dropped them in that well! He believes this bullsh#t so strongly that he's already drawn up city plans for the capital of this global Caliphate under the rule of the well-dwelling deity!
If delusional bullsh#t is what Mike Wallace wants, a much cheaper alternative would've been to consume some potent narcotics, magic mushrooms or whatever ......
This jackass actually believes that his deity is sitting at the bottom of a well in Iran waiting for Shii'tes to have prepared the way for his coming. He's known to have written letters addressed to the same deity and dropped them in that well! He believes this bullsh#t so strongly that he's already drawn up city plans for the capital of this global Caliphate under the rule of the well-dwelling deity!
If delusional bullsh#t is what Mike Wallace wants, a much cheaper alternative would've been to consume some potent narcotics, magic mushrooms or whatever ......
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 11, 2006 10:38 PM (Bp6wV)
19
Whos the delusional one? Friggin Iranian.
Posted by: greyrooster at August 11, 2006 10:55 PM (AG5IC)
20
Cmuck, I am married to a man who is under 5'6", so stop with the comparisons of short men w/personalities of Iranian dictators. That totally pisses me off. All of the tall men that I dated tried to physically intimidate me when I disagreed with them and wanted a bubblebrain for a girlfriend. Funny how they still wanted to copy my homework. I am neither easily intimidated nor idiotic, and my husband is most certainly not the dictatorial type because of his stature. And BTW, Donald Rumsfeld is 5'7", Condoleeza Rice is 5'6", and Dick Cheney is 5'8".
/totally off topic rant off
/totally off topic rant off
Posted by: RepJ at August 11, 2006 11:17 PM (uy3W4)
21
and hondo is 5'7" - in my prime age at 145+lbs I spent many a joyful day getting into fights with the biggest guys I cold find. Yeah, I lost often - but won a few too - all did wonders for my reputation. Oh, an Astrid was 5'10" along with a few others who topped 6 ft. Ya never know till you try.
Posted by: hondo at August 12, 2006 07:08 AM (XrexX)
22
As a mid-sized guy myself, I always hated getting in fights with short guys, because they have such economy of movement. Conversely, I didn't mind fighting tall guys, because their jewels were much more vulnerable to a good uppercut after I ducked their attempt to hit me in the face, which was the only part convenient for them to reach. Becuase of them having to punch downward, they were off balance and much easier to push over after a couple of shots to the groin and midsection. It's funny watching a big guy writhing on the ground, wretching from the pain in his cojones. It's also a good time for a boot to the tailbone, just so he'll remember me.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 12, 2006 09:34 AM (v3I+x)
23
maxie
Ah maxie, a man after my own heart! Worst beating I ever took was at at the hands of a 5'3" 125lb runt from Utah. Turned out the kid was a damn good college boxer from BYU. Damn, those Mormons stay fit! Had to use my teeth just to get a draw!
Damn embarrassing!
Ah maxie, a man after my own heart! Worst beating I ever took was at at the hands of a 5'3" 125lb runt from Utah. Turned out the kid was a damn good college boxer from BYU. Damn, those Mormons stay fit! Had to use my teeth just to get a draw!
Damn embarrassing!
Posted by: hondo at August 12, 2006 09:44 AM (XrexX)
24
Damn, why didn't I have hondo and maxie with me when I visited that cajun joint just outside New Iberia, La.? Kinda like Ron White, I didn't know how many it would take to whoop my ass, but I saw how many they had, and I knew it was going to be bad. I still miss that tooth, and I always take my cousin's advice and never stare at a coon ass, no matter how stupid he looks. And I never take offense when he makes a pass at a local girl my cousin just happened to fix me up with. Good advice for hondo and maxie, too.
Posted by: jesusland joe at August 12, 2006 10:45 AM (rUyw4)
25
We're no fools! We don't mess with no cajuns! Besides, the girl could have been his cousin too - there - who knows!
Posted by: hondo at August 12, 2006 11:34 AM (XrexX)
26
I never fight fair against anyone, because anyone stupid enough to pick a fight doesn't deserve the courtesy. That said, I try to avoid people who are stupid enough to pick a fight, but if it can't be avoided, I try to end the fight at the beginning, preferably by the use of something harder than my fist and the antagonist's head.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 12, 2006 12:05 PM (v3I+x)
27
Small pointer to my American friends. For reasons that are unknown to me, in England when they say "Asian" they mean "South Asian". To my English friends, in America (and Canada) when they say "Asian" they mean "East Asian". Describing a bunch of guys of Pakistani descent as "Asian" is not something that was made up just to avoid calling them "murderous scumbags" (them or their two dumb-ass English convert friends).
Posted by: Flea at August 12, 2006 03:04 PM (Mcw9l)
28
Ken, Flea's right. It still confuses me in the Brit usage when I run across "Asian" being used in that context. Some of my Sikh neighbors have had a hard time recently with the turban thing, but ol' Singh (and his buddy, Singh, and his cousin, Singh)put a serious hurt on the misguided sob, then explained (very politely) that he (and his buddies) were not Moslems, and didn't want ANY intolerant assholes in their neighborhood, starting with him. Then they helped him into the ambulance.
In Houston there is an enclave of Sikhs in the Montrose area, an area known mostly for its "artistic" (read "gay, poseur, ill-groomed, leftist") aesthetic. You can tell the Sikh area - its the one with the yards mowed, the clean streets, and the American flags. Better neighbors I've never had.
In Houston there is an enclave of Sikhs in the Montrose area, an area known mostly for its "artistic" (read "gay, poseur, ill-groomed, leftist") aesthetic. You can tell the Sikh area - its the one with the yards mowed, the clean streets, and the American flags. Better neighbors I've never had.
Posted by: ktel at August 12, 2006 03:23 PM (p0XuB)
29
Give till it hurts...someone else.
Moslems are required by their faith to donate a portion of their yearly wealth to charity.
This is good and noble.
However if an honest, law-abiding American Moslem gives alms they may also be funding terror unwittingly. The issue of Moslem charities either duping the giver or enabling actual terror funding knowingly by the donor appears endemic amongst moslem charities.
Many Christians and Jews ask how could a charity fund terror? Probably because non-Moslems don’t understand what is meant by the Koranic injunction to give.
So who DESERVE alms according to Islam?
The requirement to give is called "Zakah" or "Zakat".
One of the five pillars of Islam is the requirement that every Muslims contribute to Zakat. According to the Qur'an, the Zakat funds MUST be used to suport the following.
*The poor who do not beg for support.
*The poor who beg for support.
*Those who administer the collection and distribution of the Zakat funds.
*Those who may be enticed to Islam as well as new converts who need financial support.
*Those Muslim slaves who may have their freedom purchased.
*Muslim travelers who need assistance while on a journey.
*Those who are fighting in the Cause of Allah, i.e. Mujahideen, Holy Warriors, Jihadist. Today they are known as Terrorist by non-moslems.
Huh! It makes sense why you have groups like the following (and so many others):
-----------------------------------------
Benevolence International ….
The rest at my site
Moslems are required by their faith to donate a portion of their yearly wealth to charity.
This is good and noble.
However if an honest, law-abiding American Moslem gives alms they may also be funding terror unwittingly. The issue of Moslem charities either duping the giver or enabling actual terror funding knowingly by the donor appears endemic amongst moslem charities.
Many Christians and Jews ask how could a charity fund terror? Probably because non-Moslems don’t understand what is meant by the Koranic injunction to give.
So who DESERVE alms according to Islam?
The requirement to give is called "Zakah" or "Zakat".
One of the five pillars of Islam is the requirement that every Muslims contribute to Zakat. According to the Qur'an, the Zakat funds MUST be used to suport the following.
*The poor who do not beg for support.
*The poor who beg for support.
*Those who administer the collection and distribution of the Zakat funds.
*Those who may be enticed to Islam as well as new converts who need financial support.
*Those Muslim slaves who may have their freedom purchased.
*Muslim travelers who need assistance while on a journey.
*Those who are fighting in the Cause of Allah, i.e. Mujahideen, Holy Warriors, Jihadist. Today they are known as Terrorist by non-moslems.
Huh! It makes sense why you have groups like the following (and so many others):
-----------------------------------------
Benevolence International ….
The rest at my site
Posted by: massachusetts republican at August 12, 2006 06:32 PM (TiKv7)
30
MR,ther's no unwittinglyness about it; all muslims know where their money goes. The local mosque her supported the Chechen and Kosovar jihadis, and ran a chapter of the muslim brotherhood. Once there are enough of them, and they have enough dhimmis in government, they will bring the war to us, right here in America, in a very real way.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 13, 2006 10:32 AM (v3I+x)
31
RepJ I hope you husband treats you well. Can't answer for the tall guys whose homework you did for them. Sounds like a personal shortcoming. As for intimidation, I was never into that. Besides, intimidation is not limited to tall people. Short guys in power use their power to intimidate.
Also, if I intimidate you, is that my fault? Anone who uses height as a measure of strength is already made a mistake. I was lit up by a whole bunch of little Thai guys and paid a price. My point is Ahmadinijad is a typical short man with a short man's chip on his shoulder, and we are all paying the price for this.If you husband ever takes over a hostile country, and makes threats towards me, I will probably dog on him too.
Hondo made my point. I don't know if that was his intention. Small guys are the ones most likely to pick a fight to prove something.
RepJ I hope you husband treats you well. Can't answer for the tall guys whose homework you did for them. Sounds like a personal shortcoming. As for intimidation, I was never into that. Besides, intimidation is not limited to tall people. Short guys in power use their power to intimidate.
Also, if I intimidate you, is that my fault? Anone who uses height as a measure of strength is already made a mistake. I was lit up by a whole bunch of little Thai guys and paid a price. My point is Ahmadinijad is a typical short man with a short man's chip on his shoulder, and we are all paying the price for this.If you husband ever takes over a hostile country, and makes threats towards me, I will probably dog on him too.
Posted by: SeeMonk at August 13, 2006 02:37 PM (n4VvM)
32
Seemonk (changed your handle?)
That wasn't my intention, but I did inadverently walk into it. I disagree (being serious). Your generalization concerning height is far to broad to be given serious consideration.
The term you are looking for is not chip on shoulder, but over compensation - in the case of the Iranian president the actual driving force is insanity. Your attempting to explain him by extrapolating motivation by using a simple physical discription too simplistic a parameter.
That wasn't my intention, but I did inadverently walk into it. I disagree (being serious). Your generalization concerning height is far to broad to be given serious consideration.
The term you are looking for is not chip on shoulder, but over compensation - in the case of the Iranian president the actual driving force is insanity. Your attempting to explain him by extrapolating motivation by using a simple physical discription too simplistic a parameter.
Posted by: hondo at August 13, 2006 04:25 PM (XrexX)
33
Yep, I see in this little bastard the same over compensation I have experienced with small men who abuse authority. I don't doubt he is nuts. Most fanatics are. The rest are just crazy. Yes I changed for the new site I opened. I could not register my old one.
Posted by: SeeMonk at August 13, 2006 06:26 PM (n4VvM)
34
Repj: Ever gotten straightened out by 6'5"'r. Try it, you'll like it. The vertically challenged are usually very pushy. Like they have something to prove. That is unles they're gutless. Then they let the ladies rule the roost out of fear. I let the lady rule because everyone sees the irony. Also a lot of short men are academic meatheads. They studied while the rest of use played football and partied.
Posted by: greyrooster at August 14, 2006 08:48 PM (y5dGS)
35
Further more people my size are afraid of short people. They get so scared you never can tell what they'll pull out.
Posted by: greyrooster at August 14, 2006 08:57 PM (y5dGS)
Posted by: hondo at August 15, 2006 01:13 PM (XrexX)
49kb generated in CPU 2.0993, elapsed 2.003 seconds.
34 queries taking 1.4903 seconds, 191 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
34 queries taking 1.4903 seconds, 191 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
