Punishment for terrorists

Mr Haneef is back from Australia, people are denouncing Australia, the chief minister of Karnataka has promised Haneef a job as chief surgeon, his family and friends are celebrating with chicken curry and mutton biryani, but forgotten is the fact that his cousin, to whom he lent his cell phone, car etc tried to kill innocent people in a terrorist attack. I dont know if Haneef was directly involved (Dont tell me, there was never a dinner conversation over kababs about each others religious beliefs and ideas) but isnt it necessary to make a warning out of him.

These jehadis act under the assumption that they will receive 70 virgins to enjoy on death, what about the people they leave behind, their loved ones, why not torture them to see weather those 70 virgins are still alluring. I firmly belive that a family has a strong hand in how an individual shapes up, so if he turns out to be a terrorist, then the family should also be punished, let the aspiring terrorists also see what becomes of their families after them, for all we know, the relatives are happy to receive money from the terrorist group and celebrate that their son has the services of 70 virgns now.

Remember, punishment is not only a chastisement for the action done, but also the means to dissuade future transgressions.



My contention here is, it doesnt matter what his involvement was

Moses, Pharoah and Ra's revenge as Hitler

Read this article with an open mind, imagine you are the pharoah of Egypt when all this happens.

I was reading the book, "Le Roman De La Momie" a french novel which had as a subplot, Moses delivering the Jews to the promised land. I thought it totally unjust how the pharoah and the people of egypt were treated by Moses and the jewish gods. Here was a guy (Pharoah), who had conquered different regions spilling the blood of his people, and had, as all kings have always done brought back people as slaves and put them to work for his people. Moses shows up one day (no 2 week notice) and commands him to free his people as they have to go somewhere (promised land), worship some other god than his and form another kingdom rivaling his. Would anybody in their sane mind accept such a preposition without any doubts or verification. Wouldnt you resist?

So then there is a duel of miracles. Most of the miracles by Moses were duplicated by the high preists of the pharoah, so for all practical purposes we can consider Moses as another magician or preist with miracle powers, a messenger of god, definitely not. The preists also say that they coudnt duplicate all the miracles of Moses because they hadnt completly mastered their magic books (which is so very humble). All this while, Moses is not beaten up, thrown into a prison or forced to accept other gods, but then suddenly Moses asks all the Jews to put a red mark on all their doors and kills all the first born children of Egypt. If you were a egyption, how would you feel, you never forced your religion on the Jews, you never killed them unneceserily and your little kids are dead.

Imagine, this little kid playing with his little sphynx, playing sphynx games little egyption children play, while his first cousin sister is neatly dressing up the latest cleopatra doll even as their infant cousin is pushing a small triangular Ra cart around, all these innocent little children have to now die, because Moses wants this people to go free. What justice is this, what vengful god is this, cold hearted that too to kill these innocent children. I refuse to believe that any god can do this, kill children, just because they are not of his faith. This kind of pales in front of what Hitler did to the Jews in world war two, at least the Jews could fight back and had support from the rest of the world.

Compare what the jewish gods did to the children of Egypt to what Hitler did to the jews, are they actually different? Maybe its just bad karma catching up with them or maybe even, the Egyption gods getting even with the Jews (revenge is a dish that tastes best cold)

No religion should give the right to kill, not under any circumstance, self defence yes, but not in any other circumstance.