Book Review: AAVARANA
Thursday, 14. June 2007 - 1:57 AM
Aavarana is a book Indian secular intellectuals love to hate but cannot ignore. The “average reader” (which increasingly means someone endowed with commonsense, a healthy sense of balance, and has not mortgaged brains at the ideological altar) chose to respond differently. In the miniscule market for Kannada fiction, Aavarna has seen nine reprints in just four months since it was first published in February this year. This however, is not a significant measure of its success.
Aavarana owes its success by justifying what its title signifies.
In the preface to the book, S L Bhyrappa, the author of Aavarana expounds the meaning of Aavarana. To this end, he draws from such diverse primary sources as Nagarjuna, Vedanta, and Advaita. He captures the essence of Aavarana as Maya and Avidya. Aavarana is an illusion, a veil–a suppression of the real nature of things.
Aavarana is perhaps the first novel in recent times that deals with an explosive theme in a world dangerously supercharged with political correctness. It is notable for another substantial reason. Of all his works, Aavarana contains marked political undertones like in no other Bhyrappa work–not even the epic Tanthu (Strand). Aavarana marks a complete departure from all of Bhyrappa’s works in terms of theme, form and content.
In just about 300 pages, Aavarna uncovers the flimsy lid on top of the abyss of Islam’s encounters with India. It is simultaneously historical and contemporary because it exposes the contemporary manipulation of history justified in the garb of preserving secularism.
Aavarana opens with Razia, a middle-aged feminist filmmaker mulling over the ruins at Hampi. She’s there with her husband, Ameer to make a government-sponsored documentary on Hampi. The goal of the documentary ostensibly, is to project Hampi as a symbol of Hindu-Muslim brotherhood. Her research slowly leads her to doubt the history she has learned to believe, and takes her back in time to examine her own life so far. News of her father’s sudden death takes her back in space to her native village near Hassan. As she examines his personal effects, she is astonished to find his library stocked with volumes of scholarly literature about Islam’s encounters with India. She reads his detailed notes on almost every page of each book and suddenly recalls what he had told her when she had announced her decision to marry Ameer: Lakshmi, some day in future, your own descendants will destroy temples. (Ed: liberal paraphrased translation)
Lakshmi’s past provokes her again. As a bright graduate blazing her way towards success as a feminist filmmaker, she decides to marry her classmate, Ameer. Both are products of the ’60s secular/progressive school of thought that shuns artificial barriers of caste and religion. However, when she marries Ameer, it never occurs to her why she should convert to Islam, and change her name despite Ameer’s disbelief in said artificial obstacles to True Love. Her first tryst with beef-eating poses similar problems. She self-justifies them all but isn’t fully convinced till her fateful visit to Hampi. Her son, a PG from a US university has found a job in Saudi Arabia. He is a product of the modern world unable to reconcile its ways with his newfound zeal for the “pure” Islamic way of life. Living in Saudi Arabia, he firmly veers towards Islam.
Lakshmi/Razia stays back at her village and begins reading the copious literature her father has left behind. What she learns horrifies her. She decides to write a novel on it.
From here on, Aavarna alternates between Lakshmi/Razia and her novel. S. L Bhyrappa uses the play-within-a-play technique.
Lakshmi/Razia’s novel starts with the conquest of a tiny Hindu kingdom by Mughal hordes. Everybody except the teenaged-crown prince dies in the encounter. The kingdom’s family diety is smashed, trampled upon, and desecrated and the prince taken prisoner, converted and renamed to Khwaja Jahan. Khwaja Jahan wonders why they spared him. It takes him exactly one painful encounter to realize that his innocent, boyish face has caught the commander’s fancy. He is given special attention for a few weeks. Some days later, he is treated to a nice drink, which makes him drowsy, and then he’s semi-conscious. Two powerfully-built men hold his legs while a third uses wooden tongs to castrate him. The commander pleasures himself with the boy and later, sells him as a slave.
Khwaja Jahan realizes that he’s just one among tens of thousands of such castrated males. He is made in charge of guarding the quarters of a commander’s mansion of concubines. The rest of Lakshmi’s novel chronicles Khwaja Jahan’s experiences in this role.
Aavarana bares the excesses of the Mughal slave system in horrid detail. Equally, it describes how Islamic rule destroyed centuries of lofty civilization and wounded an entire way of life. It shows the painful struggles of people fighting to preserve it. Khwaja Jahan’s dialogue with a Sadhu on the banks of the Ganga in Benares is heart-rending to read. At one level, Aavarana is difficult to read without squirming at the atrocities an entire civilization has gone through.
Aavarana’s singular merit is just one shocking symbolism. Khwaja Jahan’s violent castration shows exactly where Islamic imperialism aimed at. To an extent it is also a measure of its success. It is also interesting that the success rate of a person staying alive after this kind of violent castration was very low. But Khwaja Jahan stays alive, another symbol of the plight of Hindu civilization under Islamic rule. For instance, Hindus suffered on a massive scale during the more bloodier part of Mughal rule under Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb. Unarguably, Aurangzeb inflicted the most damage on Hindu ethos and populace than any other Islamic ruler. Lakshmi/Razia finds it tragic that today’s Delhi has a road named after Aurangzeb, a monument to remember a barbarian. In a way, Khwaja Jahan symbolizes an emaciated India that was never prepared for, and reeled under repeated waves of invasions, which had their roots in religious ideology.
Aavarana has understandably outraged intellectuals/progressives/secularists/writers in Karnataka. I’ve written about Professor Shastri in my earlier post so I don’t need to cover that again. S.L Bhyrappa contends that it is dishonest to conceal historical facts on the (flimsy) excuse of promoting communal harmony/secularism. Aavarna raises the important question of Hinduism vis-a-vis Islam and Christianity. Hindus have admitted to several social evils and set themselves on corrective action–Mahatma Gandhi’s emancipation of Harijans, etc. The West rejected Christianity as a guide/means to rule the state, embraced democracy, etc. Why don’t we see a similar introspection among the Muslims?
A few critics also raise the why-Aavarana-now question. The answer is buried in the question. How long do we want to ignore the obvious threat of Islamic fundamentalism? Not much has changed in Islam from Aurangzeb’s time to now. Bin Laden is merely Aurangzeb’s cousin in time. The same ideological compulsions motivated them both. Aavarana explores precisely these compulsions laid down in Islamic literature starting with the Quran. Besides, much of what passes as India’s medieval “history” is mere interpretation. In other words, a veil, concealment of facts, Aavarana. More fundamentally, has concealing/falsifying history really ensured communal harmony?
Finally, the reactions to Aavarana–while they were expected–also reveal the tragic depths we’ve plumbed. Kannada has a rich repository of historical novels that includes Masti’s Chikaveera Rajendra, Korati’s Paramesha Pulikeshi, and Ta Ra Su’s Durgastamana (Durga’s Sunset). Durgastamana describes the fall and destruction of Chitradurga under the Nayakas when Hyder Ali attacked Chitradurga. Durgastamana is still hailed as a classic in Kannada literature. I wonder how our progressives would react if he’d written Durgastamana now.
Postscript: It is only available in Kannada now but it is worth more than the 200 Rupees (approx) it costs.
Crossposted on Desicritics.
14. June 2007 - 3:45 AM
thanks for the great review, (please put spoiler alert next time;))
14. June 2007 - 9:12 AM
Dear Sandeep,
Thanks for the great review. Have you read Ravi Belagere’s dissection of “Avarana” and “secularists” in “Hi Bangalore?” He literally trashes the secularists and commies, but doesn’t rate “Avarana” highly.
14. June 2007 - 10:12 AM
Thanks for the great review, Sandeep.
14. June 2007 - 11:25 AM
nkota,
I haven’t revealed anything at all, actually. That’s the meat of the novel.
Vikram,
I’ve read Ravi Belagere’s take and don’t agree with a lot of it. He’s a safe player. He likes Bhyrappa as a novelist but can’t stomach the hard truth in Aavarana. In any case, he’s intellectually dishonest.
14. June 2007 - 11:32 AM
Awesome review!
Is the book available in English too?
14. June 2007 - 4:34 PM
Hi Sandeep,
Thanks for a fantastic review.
14. June 2007 - 5:09 PM
Nice one, Sandeep. I wish I could get an English translation.
Another thing to note is how the author depicts the very commonplace conversion of women by muslims. First they will claim that they are secular, True Love, etc. Then they will ask for conversion before marriage, and also force the burka or beef on the women.
For those who will say that the guy is marrying the woman – For muslims, marriage has not much sanctity or binding. They can marry 4 women at a time (keep many infidels in their harems, of course) and divorce them easily, to get another one. Its almost as if islam does not believe in marriage, it believes in some kind of glorified flesh trade or prostitution.
14. June 2007 - 5:11 PM
Another thing to note is that its always the non-muslim who must convert to islam, whether man or woman!! You will very rarely ever read or hear about the reverse case. Why ??
14. June 2007 - 7:07 PM
Sandeep,
You are on the spot. I completely agree with you about Ravi Belagere’s intellectual dishonesty. After all he is a dyed in wool communist. What else can you expect from him. Read my comments on thatskannada.com, suryashikari section for more details.
Regards,
Mayura
14. June 2007 - 11:35 PM
AavaraNa should be translated asap. It has a capturing theme and a universal message, namely the vitality of ‘truth’. Bhyrappa has meticulously probed the natural thoughts in the life of a convert through Razia’s dilemma. His message that truth shall prevail over socially convenient fabrications is socially epochal and touches the undercurrents of contemporary public thought quite profoundly. Question is, will the translation live upto its promise?! I sure hope so. Though its effect can be dramatically multiplied if other novelists pick up the theme and give it their regional flourish. To still from Mao- Let thousand Bhyrappa’s bloom!
15. June 2007 - 7:06 AM
http://www.hindu.com/fr/2007/06/08/stories/2007060852190300.htm
read the standard “THE HINDU” response
15. June 2007 - 10:48 AM
Have any of SL Bhyrappa’s novels/books been translated into English. He seems to be politically incorrect – very rare for people in the literary scene. Alas- I am not able to read Kannada.
socal – AavaraNa should be translated asap.
Yes. It is better if it is done now when it is in the news. Who are the publishers? Any idea of Bangloreans can contact them and request a translation. I doubt whether the leading publishers like Penguin would ever make the effort to translate such a politically incorrect work.
15. June 2007 - 11:06 AM
After reading this review, the ONLY question which comes to my mind is how long will Hindus continue to be second class citizens in their own country ? After all, even our PM has said that minorities (read Muslims) must have the first share to the countries resources! Has he forgotten that his brave ancestors like Maharaja Ranjit Singh fought against Muslim invaders?
15. June 2007 - 11:35 AM
kota,
Since you referred cHindu’s review, please follow its systematic emasculation by a blogger here-
http://cbcnn.blogspot.com/2007/06/hindu-view-is-not-plural-anti-hindu.html
Niketan,
I don’t understand Kannada either, but going through the reviews and interview with Bhyrappa at the pointer above does indicate that a translation is in works and apparently a Publisher is all that needs to be arranged. Of course with all the notoriety that this novel has accumulated for itself, that shouldn’t be very hard a task.
Bhyrappa needs to refashion his answers from the interview with urgency. Eg. why the novel now?- should be unapologetically linked with its pertinence to contemporary social scene and with the populist message of novel genre’s efficacy. Bhyrappa’s diffidence on this and other counts will directly play into secularist hands while there’s no need to do so.
15. June 2007 - 1:30 PM
Socal, that was good interview. Although the interview itself was bit amateurish (in my opinion anyway), Bhyrappa put across his views very well (his dismissal of communists ideology was crisp).
15. June 2007 - 3:19 PM
All,
For the record, there IS some effort going on to translate the book. All of Bhyrappa’s earlier works have been translated into multiple Indian languages but given the almost oppressive hold of English book publishing, they’ve not reached the actual audience they deserve. I speak as one who has met and spoken to the author several times.
That’s a story for another day.
15. June 2007 - 4:08 PM
Now will Bhyrappa be condemned, trashed and forced into oblivion or forced to become become politically correct as what has happened to some other personalities? The entire media seems to have blacklisted him? This has happened so often in the Hindi Film industry.
15. June 2007 - 5:13 PM
I think the discussion is at cross purposes.
The reason why a non-”Hindu” generally does not convert to “Hinduism” post marraige is something for the “Hindus” to sort out. No point blaming Muslims and Christians here.
I can empathise with the need for historical truth…however, the position that “Hindus” themselves in general have recognized their terrible “foibles” when it comes to their own “brethren” *and not some “Kafirs”*…is a bit out of this world.
Bhyrappa’s work may or may not be unique in Kannada litrature..but I am amused by the controversy surrounding it.
It’s simply time we ALL faced facts. – “Hindus” and the rest.
For those sentimental “Hindus”…there are tougher questions to worry about than communist reactions to an unoriginal novel.
15. June 2007 - 7:58 PM
i wonder wen we wil rise above all this
15. June 2007 - 8:59 PM
>>>Although the interview itself was bit amateurish
Chandra,
“Amateurish” in what way? It was arguably more substantial than any interview you might see on the Rajdeep and Barkha networks.
15. June 2007 - 11:35 PM
Palahalli, the issue is not about Hindus and Muslims but how history is white washed by pseudo-secular, mainly communists, forces in our country. Apparently our entire secular country and the apparatus that supports it is based on this history (the main theme of why secularism is successful in an economically poor country is discounted because it’s based on Hindu ethos by the same folks and apparatus). Is there a tougher question for our country? I think not. Do you have other examples of the “original” novels that explored this theme in other languages?
Socal, it was a passing comment. I think the questions were appropriate but not through. I don’t think the interviewer had much understanding of the subject (he says he didn’t even read the book, which may be fine) beyound the superficial controversy issues. That doesn’t take anything away from Bhyrappa’s in depth and intelligent replies – it could have easily gone the polemic way (The Hindu and it’s cohorts way). Unless you were the interviewer
think nothing about it.
15. June 2007 - 11:37 PM
BTW, who says Rajdeeps and Barkhas are not amateurs?
16. June 2007 - 3:48 AM
OT, but the Left has said that because Karan Singh organized a Hindu Sammelan, his “secular” credentials are suspect.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/33744.html
And so ladies and gentlemen, a Hindu is a pariah in Hindustan. Hows that for irony ?
16. June 2007 - 5:29 AM
The dangerous thing is that a lightweight, pushover, non-entity might end up occupying Rashtrapati Bhavan. What a pity that increasingly qualifications matter less and less in all walks of Indian life.
>>>Chandra, “who says Rajdeeps and Barkhas are not amateurs?”
Lol, Rajdeep TV and Barkha TV certainly doesn’t think so.
16. June 2007 - 2:51 PM
Chandra, if you observe the nature of this discussion…it certainly is all about “Hindus” and Muslims. Past and present. The thing about this country is that the past never really dies. Because of the nature of our society..and our tendency to “preserve” all of our “diversity”…there is hardly a chance to submerge our differences…exceptions apart.
The grouse is not against recognizing historical truth…but what we do about the fire after it’s lit (?) You certainly cannot remain cordial with Muslims after claiming and reclaiming that they are “cordial” with Aurangzeb..can you?
Has Bhyrappa suggested remedies? Are we also missing generalizations in the entire landscape too? Who has conducted a survey before asserting that Aurangzeb is the beloved of Muslims in this country? Is this not as preposterous as claiming that Shivaji is the “Hriday Samrat” of ALL “Hindus”? Do we not know that his statue languished under wraps right here in Bangalore…for longer than comfort brings? Are ALL or even the majority of inter-religious marraiges a failure? What about marraiges within the same religion? What about inter caste marraiges? Are they all successes? Are they all failures?
I want to ask people this. What happens when a Brahmin marries a non-Brahmin? If the said individual is indeed a “Brahmin”…will he/she allow non-Brahmin customs and ways of life to prevail within the household? Is there no opposition from within the larger Brahmin or even non-Brahmin household? The answer would be Yes and No. Because the Brahmin or the non-Brahmin may compromise somewhere. I have seen the same with inter-religious marraiges. I have seen them flourish and have seen them fail. Life is indeed complex.
Sir…brandishing swear words and ideological abuse puts folks in the same category as leftist ideologues they love to criticize. Who is a pseudo-secularist? How is this animal different from its opposite? Who has NOT whitewashed our history? Are entire groups claimants to a lily white status?
This country “survives” AS IS not because of its so called “Hindu” ethos…whatever that may mean…but because of the fact that enough people see better sense in being together…and the fact that they have a right to speak out and organize themselves. Not including the truly emasculated masses that will be happy to eat “something” in their daily miserable existence. But these too…bear it all. It’s a simple truth.
From where comes the preaching??
16. June 2007 - 5:42 PM
“Why don’t we see a similar introspection among the Muslims?”
Crore rupee question! All flowery language diversions should not push us into inaction when there is no such introspection on the part of Islam. Commie mofo’s will lecture us about rights, constitution blah blah while the jihadi’s continue to do their own thing infromt of their eyes.
When truth and ideolgy are in conflict, truth becomes hate – Commie SOP.
16. June 2007 - 8:46 PM
Vikas…what do you suggest the non-Islamists do? Or is it the non-Muslims? Or..is there no difference?
17. June 2007 - 12:15 PM
Sandeep,
Perhaps you can help me with investigating a long forgetten story. I would appreciate your references – even if it is in Kannada.
It appears that there was a massacre on the Mandyam /Mandya /Melkote ayyangar brahmin community on or around Diwali time by Hyder Ali or Tipu Sultan. About 700 men women and kids were allegedly put to the sword. Read the link for more details.
Has SL Bhyrappa written about this incident in any of his works. I cant find any references other than some mention on http://www.india-forum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1648&pid=64756&mode=threaded&show=&st=&
17. June 2007 - 12:22 PM
To other commenters,
Lets not conclude anything about the present day muslims based on the past behaviour of conquerors on the vanquished. Y know, back in the day – it really sucked to be defeated in battle.
Let us not also seek to hide facts about the true nature of muslim rule or british rule. We cannot name roads and monuments after Aurangazeb – just like Germans wont celebrate Hitler or Goebbels. Just because they are part of our history, doesnt mean they need to be a celebrated part.
17. June 2007 - 12:42 PM
Palahalli,you can look at our neighbours for learning what they do after the fire is lit.Records of Hindu population,in these nations,in 1947 and 2007 will prove that for you.Also,you speak in a tone that ‘it is the duty of every Hindu to be cordial with the Muslims’.Do you think it is being reciprocated?You cannot deny that religion is ‘first and last thing’ for a Muslim.
It’s a pity that we live in a world where ‘naming a road after a barbarian’ is considered proudfully secular!
By the way,waiting for Sandeep’s reply to Palahalli.
17. June 2007 - 6:49 PM
Palahali
What is a non-islamist? Going by your defn., do Bukhari(Jama masjid)/Geelani (hurriyat) make the cut as non-islamists?
I am looking for reformists a la Taslima Nasreen (a Bangladeshi) whom the non-islamists wont touch with a barge pole. My suggestions are worth diddly-squat, the reform of koran (not muslims) has to be from within the muslim community.
18. June 2007 - 7:48 AM
A few points.
The people today, be they Hindus, Muslims, Indians, or otherwise are a different people from the people of the past. Enmities that existed then have no place in today’s world. We have to live together, hang together, or hang separately. Let us not set out on this dangerous path of setting right the wrongs of the past. How many people know that a group of burqa-clad Muslim women gathered at the Sankat Mochan Mandir after the terrorist inflicted violence there, to recite the Hanuman Chalisa? How many of us know that Parvaiz Elahi the CM of Punjab (Pakistan) invited a Hindu purohit to perform a Holi aarti at his residence (and had himself anointed with a kumkum tilak)? There are very deep bonds in this land of ours. That is why Tom Alter’s son who went to colege in the US returned to India because he simply couldn’t stay away from home. Eselbhi avaru is a universalist. He is no bigot demanding vengeance. Like the great Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu he is simply asking for truth and reconciliation, so that we may put the past behind us. If you ever have the opportunity see the classic Paavamanippu in Tamizh starring Shivaji, Savitri, Gemini Ganesan, Devika, SV Subbiah, Nagiah, and the one and only M.R.Radhakrishna Naidu aka M.R. Radha – screen villain extraordinaire. This movie was directed by the great auteur Bhim Singh, a Rajput from AP. Sivaji plays the role of a foundling (actually MR Radha’s son) brought up as a Muslim who falls in love with a Hindu (Savitri). At the end of the movie (when all riddles are solved) Shivaji is united with his biological father MR Radha (who spends most of the movie making life miserable for the man who is actually his son) and Savitri are united in matrimony, Sivaji famously utters “vazhkkaiyil munnera, manamaaRRam veNDum, madhamaRRam alla,” “we must change our mind not our creed”.
18. June 2007 - 9:20 AM
Vikas – Why assume I meant Bukhari or Geelani? These fellows do not even command respect within their own communities. Else…Bukhari’s periodic electoral fatwahs would have been respected by all Muslims..no?
There are plenty like Taslima Nasreen out there…these need to be encouraged and protected. It is true that the violent in Islam are very overt…they do not hide in closets..quite unlike Christians and “Hindus” to a lesser extent. And that is why they are more dangerous.
Let’s take Nasreen’s example. For years she has been requesting Indian citizenship..what have we done? Before someone jumps up…”ALL PSEUDO SECULARISTS!!”…I would like to ask what the BJP did in it’s six years? The fact is…Taslima can make even the “Hindu” leadership uncomfortable with her point blank statements
Now…when the aggressive amongst “Hindus” cannot shelter Taslima…how must we expect the lay Muslim…who is more bothered about making a living and feeding his family…than about the next Jehad…be expected to muster courage? This is no excuse…but just common sense.
I don’t know what you mean by a “reform” of the Koran? Your suggestions seems worthless to you..only because this/they seem to be impractical. The Koran cannot be changed. We can surely encourage reinterpretations? A much more milder “version” of the Koran is possible because of the fact that there are Muslim nations that are moderate too. More education is possible..more reform of Madrasas are possible.
Sometimes…I feel folks who are so aggressive toward Muslims and against them in general…probably have never met a Muslim in their lives
But this is not true…we live amongst them…work with them..interact with them on a daily basis…hell! Some of us have best friends amongst them too! And we get by all of these contacts without them resulting in general massacres. So..there must be a better and more intelligent way of looking at this seeming “problem”. I say…more and better education. For all sections of our people.
Realitycheck – I feel “Hindu” Leadership is symbolism driven in the extreme. Symbols may have their uses…but that’s not the game.
18. June 2007 - 12:57 PM
http://www.ibnlive.com/news/patil-veiled-under-a-controversy/top/43118-3.html
The little secularist cried wee-wee-wee and ran all the way home
18. June 2007 - 4:26 PM
Palahalli, reg. non-islamist, Bukhari or Geelani, I never assumed anything, it was a question. Was it so difficult to answer that you had to resort to lying???(THIS IS A QUESTION, Palahalli).
Remove the no good RED blinkers and maybe then we can have an honest talk. Till then, go f*ck yourself.
18. June 2007 - 8:25 PM
kaangeya all fine and dandy, but how exactly do you expect harmony in view of the Quran’s commandments concerning non muslims?
18. June 2007 - 10:39 PM
There are plenty like Taslima Nasreen out there …
YA RIGHT !
I would like to ask what the BJP did in it’s six years?
If BJP had given citizenship to Nasreen, the entire media lead by Barkha Dutts and Sardesais and Shekhar Guptas would have made life hell for audiences across the nation, putting more fuel in the fire… questions like “Is BJP playing communal politics on a sensitive issue?” “We the People – Should BJP not interfere with muslim communities sentiments”, “Is BJP playing with muslim sentiments..”
would have been persistently raised in all forums 24×7 and made the NDA life hell. BJP was not fool enough to give the NDTVs of the world another handle to beat them with.
The question really should have been, why the west bengal government the chest-thumping secularists of the nation not siding with Taslima? Why is she so inconvenient to the Javed Akhtars and Shabana Azmis and Teestas of the secular world that nobody even dare mention her name, leave aside work for her in getting a honorable citizenship.
If you can answer this, do; else keep your double-standards-hypocritical mouth shut.
18. June 2007 - 11:01 PM
>>>”There are plenty like Taslima Nasreen out there”
Most certainly. Well, if ghosts count!
Anyway, the centerpiece of Bhyrappa’s argument is that social bonds should be based on Truth, and truth alone. Under no circumstances should this criterion be diluted. A not so subtle attempt to obfuscate this important issue seems to be at work here. Exceptions have already landed us in quagmire of partition and numerous riots. Should we still be pursuing the same mistaken path? Or is it time to look at this whole shebang anew? The choice is clear I guess.
18. June 2007 - 11:20 PM
Regarding Tasleema:
The commies have been witholding her petition in Calcutta so it is pointless to blame BJP or others for her affliction(btw its been 3 yrs. since UPA is in power, wonder what’s stopping them; I mean since when have secularists started following BJP’s precedent?). Tasleema has expressed time and again that she wishes to live in West Bengal only because of the similarity of language and Bong culture- whatever that is. So it is important that the commie ruled state push her application further. It won’t.
So please convince your comrades first before blaming others. Why is Hindus always in quotes in your post? You can’t even mention Hindus with straitface, sheesh!
19. June 2007 - 2:07 AM
Various:
1. Anon coward: I read the article…which “secularist” cried wee-wee-wee? Btw, does Pratibha now qualify for “Hindu” support? On Mughals and the “Hindu” veil…please think about this…Babar appeared on the Indian landscape in the 16th century. We have had Muslim dynasties ruling in various parts of this country before that. Is it your contention that these invaders never abused native women prior to Babar? Or that the “veil” idea took root only post Babar?
2. Vikas: I guess your question might have been..”What is a non-islamist? Going by your defn., do Bukhari(Jama masjid)/Geelani (hurriyat) make the cut as (islamists)?
Well, as per my understanding…an Islamist is a Muslim with a religio-political agenda. Yes, both of them would qualify as Islamists.
Question for you; where have I lied? And where have I displayed RED blinkers?
I won’t dignify your abuse by responding to it.
3. Harish: If I may wager an answer; I expect harmony in lieu of the fact that millions upon millions of “Hindus” and Muslims live together in this country. If your reasoning is correct…we should have had continual unremitting civil wars. I think that is a reasonable deduction in light of Koranic injunctions against Kafirs (?). The question is…why is it NOT happening?
4. Anonymous/Socal: I was serious about “plenty of Taslima Nasreens” out there. I have known Muslim women who are fiercely independent. Most of these are a feminist’s delight. Taslima seems to have made it to the eye of a storm because of her outspoken public style. Her outrageously lovable statements. This raises the Mullah’s hackles
On her request for citizenship; perhaps you could have paid more attention and caught me on a technicality..Taslima applied in 2005. The UPA was already in power and the BJP/NDA need not have made any decision except for political stance/pressure. But this too, was/has not been done by upholders of freedom…defenders of “Hindus” against Islam. It seems they prefer to use the authoress of Lajja and then forget her. Taslima of course…cannot be labeled Hindutva friendly too. Probably that is the reason? I can understand the communists and the congress pandering to Mullahs…but what of the BJP? Are they better?
http://ceras.alternatives.ca/17/taslima.htm
Again…why should the BJP’s/Hindutva stance be dependent on reactions from elsewhere? That means they can be bullied and dictated to.
The reasons for the partition and riots in this country are complex. It will be nice to pick up a specific linkage with the notion of “Truth and Reconciliation”.
I myself have nothing against Bhyrappa’s central argument.
Socal: The reason I have “Hindus” within quotes is very clear to me. There is no meaning to the term in its religious sense unless we take into account its caste-outcaste structure. Most commentators these days are happy to link “Hinduism” with some notion of Brahmanism. In fact…it makes more sense that way…except for the fact that it leaves out most of “it’s” non-Brahmanic people. The other definition of the “Hindu” as a resident..this side of the Indus is embarrassingly self restrictive. But what’s all of this got to do with having a straight face?
I need to know something; have none of the Hindutva-vadis here ever interacted with a Muslim at work? In their neighbourhood? At school? College? At the store? If yes…then what has been your experience?
Thank you.
19. June 2007 - 3:01 AM
pale,
>>>The reason I have “Hindus†within quotes is very clear to me. There is no meaning to the term in its religious sense
Hmm…you won’t concede as much as quotation marks for it deviates from your notion of accuracy or truth, but want Hindus(which btw is widely understood and recognized) to gloss over hard facts which have cost them millions of lives?! Intriguing to say the least.
Taslima: The only accurate technicality would’ve been her being not present in India for mandatory 12 yrs.(which govt. can override), which you didn’t cite. She applied for citizenship first in 2002, when NDA was ruling. Marxist-ruled W.Bengal has objected to that ever since.
I think your loaded piffle about experiencing Muslims is best left unanswered. Btw, one would think someone enamored of myriad complexities of life wouldn’t fall for the temptation to categorize people. Ah, but then exceptions can always be made…especially when it suits the cause. Cheers,
19. June 2007 - 3:23 AM
Hmm…you won’t concede as much as quotation marks for it deviates from your notion of accuracy or truth, but want Hindus(which btw is widely understood and recognized) to gloss over hard facts which have cost them millions of lives?! Intriguing to say the least.
- Intriguing if I had indeed suggested it. Don’t gloss over ANY historical fact…but do not superimpose them onto the present. As for “Hindus”, I have stated my reason for keeping the term within quotes.
Taslima: The only accurate technicality would’ve been her being not present in India for mandatory 12 yrs.(which govt. can override), which you didn’t cite. She applied for citizenship first in 2002, when NDA was ruling.
- Your latter statement is wrong per this attached report;
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1026083.cms
My question still is this – why should it matter to the Hindutva vadis that her opponents oppose her vehemently? Why not just push for something right? I will understand if you say…”all this is politics”.
I think your loaded piffle about experiencing Muslims is best left unanswered. – Why?
Btw, one would think someone enamored of myriad complexities of life wouldn’t fall for the temptation to categorize people. – What “categorization” are you talking about?
Ah, but then exceptions can always be made…especially when it suits the cause.- What cause? The only folks with a “cause” around here seem to be Hindutva vadis..
Btw – I think you have to face the question of relating your understanding of Muslims and their Koran with forward movement in their relationship with Non-Muslims, in this country.
19. June 2007 - 3:57 AM
god , now we have to understand koran? give us a break kid and get a life.
let us hindutva-vadis, us blood-thirsty,fundamentalists,modi lovers,sonia haters live in our ignorant bliss. you can buy a ticket to pakistan and understand all the koran you want.
19. June 2007 - 6:07 AM
Oh we understand Koran alrite, it’s juat head in the sand nuts like you that don’t understand what it has in store for mushriks like you.
19. June 2007 - 7:10 AM
>>>Intriguing if I had indeed suggested it. Don’t gloss over ANY historical fact…but do not superimpose them onto the present. As for “Hindusâ€, I have stated my reason for keeping the term within quotes.
Your first few posts invariably seem to say so. I suggest read them again.
It is history for non-muslims but the muslims consider the origins of that conduct to be eternal applicable. Submerging is ok superimposition is not. Wonder, why? Btw superimposition, juxtaposition whatever you choose to label it, avoidable it isn’t. So the term Hindu is bereft of religious connotation because of castes?! In that case I don’t see how you see religion in terms that imply a deadlier classification as in believers and non-believers, and all the uncivilized exhortations that are incumbent upon the favorably classified. What’s sauce for the goose…Anyway, the whole exercise of quoting etc., would in any case be ludicrously juvenile.
>>>My question still is this – why should it matter to the Hindutva vadis that her opponents oppose her vehemently? Why not just push for something right? I will understand if you say…â€all this is politicsâ€.
I remember a different report which claimed contrary. Will have to look for it. Your question: It should matter to everyone who cares about fairness because of the innate hypocrisy in the “opposition of opponents.” I wonder why anti-Hindutvavadis, who are usually most vocal about matters “secular”, remain silent about this palpable duplicity. I will understand if you showed me the politics. I see none that benefits BJP.
>>>I think your loaded piffle about experiencing Muslims is best left unanswered. – Why?
>>>What cause? The only folks with a “cause†around here seem to be Hindutva vadis..
Do I have to believe you would expend all this time which, as per your own suggestion, ought to be spent on “important issues” without a cause?
>>>I think you have to face the question of relating your understanding of Muslims and their Koran with forward movement in their relationship with Non-Muslims, in this country.
It will be folly to think that any “forward/progressive movement” can be based on something that essentially looks backward by more than a millenium. The onus is on muslims to seek forward path and meet others in present. Even meeting half-ways isn’t an option unless most people agree on 14th century living.
19. June 2007 - 8:00 AM
Palihalli is a well known orkut troll.
19. June 2007 - 1:46 PM
Anonymous: Hindutva-vadis remain a bullying minority within this country…but why would I leave for Pakistan?
It is not I who claim the Koran is liberal…but you who claim the Koran is bloodthirsty. My simple question is this: Why then, do we not have civil wars raging all over India if the Koran, per yourself, instigates Muslims to take up arms against the Kafirs? Why are living examples…in a majority, of co-existence within these communities..all over India, completely ignored in your “analysis” of the Koran and it’s Muslims? May I add these masses are quite religious?
Allright, can you at least tell me what the contribution of Indian Muslims has been/is, to the Jehadi “movement” in general? Or are you asking me to believe that every Muslim is a closet Jehadi?
Harish – In that case, should I not have been harmed already? I mean…how does your projection of some of Koran’s “revelations” into daily life make sense if I am still alive?
Socal – What do my “first few” posts invariably seem to say? All that they do is, largely not agree with you.
Ah…THE MUSLIMS again! Muslims consider the Koran this…they consider the Koran that! They (the Muslims) also are pretty confused about what they consider Koran to be..amongst themselves
But yes..practical Koran needs to be learnt/understood at the feet of the H-Vadi!
Where have I hinted at submergence? I have asked only that you back up your contention that the Koran teaches massacre and Muslims are good students. *If this is not your thought process, then I correct myself*.
And yes..do not “avoid” inconvenient historical facts. I have already made my position clear. I am all for facing these.
On your linking Caste with Kafirs and Dhimmis – Hmm…are you suggesting caste is not a reality in this country? On the other hand, I have not seen a Muslim…sword in hand…out to butcher Kafirs….in order to comply with his Koran..and thence secure a place in heaven.
Heck…the latest trend is for the H-Vadis to point toward caste amongst Muslims
Not that I disagree with them there. But then…where is Caste in the Koran??
I did not get this logic – “It should matter to everyone who cares about fairness because of the innate hypocrisy in the “opposition of opponents.†I wonder why anti-Hindutva vadis, who are usually most vocal about matters “secularâ€, remain silent about this palpable duplicity. I will understand if you showed me the politics. I see none that benefits BJP.”
- Are you implying that it is “fair” on the part of the BJP and Co. to take into account opponent opinion that they know..goes against their (BJP’s) grain of thought? *Supposedly*
On the anti-Hindutva vadis’ duplicity…well, that is already confirmed in your eyes. Why be surprised when they stick to their “colors”? What I would like know is why the BJP and the Parivar not do the right thing??
I can venture to say that the BJP is truly scared of sticking by Taslima. They have recognized that she cannot be tamed. As my link has shown, she is too straightforward for the likes of the Parivar. How then, will the BJP explain to its cadre their support to Taslima when she makes all those “inconvenient” and strong statements? Staying away from Taslima but using Lajja…benefits the BJP’s politics.
Socal, what “cause” can I have? If I do have one…it is to try and have our “patriots” answer some obvious questions. But you don’t really have to believe anything you don’t want to
This makes a little sense…but for different reasons – “It will be folly to think that any “forward/progressive movement†can be based on something that essentially looks backward by more than a millennium. The onus is on muslims to seek forward path and meet others in present. Even meeting half-ways isn’t an option unless most people agree on 14th century living.”
- I would not support basing a partnership on anything regressive. Let’s look at the mass of Muslims as they are…around us. You seem to like your propaganda too much. Given the opportunities…Muslims have shown that they want progress and want to live in the “present”. On the other hand…”14th century living” is not a necessary criteria for fanaticism.
Btw…I know that folks associated with the Hindu Jagarana Vedike in Bangalore have agreed on a boycott of all dealings with Muslims. I have a close pal who is part of this group and he welcomes this decision. Methinks…this and suchlike is the reason why it is so easy for some people to speak of Muslims in general..in such black colors. So far…none here has even once admitted to the possibility that there might be another way to resolve this mess.
Truth and Reconciliation is all very well. There is the knowledge of some historical truth…but hardly any reconciliation…at least not evident in this discussion so far.
What is the way forward? In South Africa…the Blacks faced upto White perpetrators in the flesh. LIVING in their times. This commission was largely essential because the Whites, by and large, had not entertained the idea of leaving SA…a la the British from India. They were part and parcel. And the Whites constituted a predominantly/all educated minority. Some such thing IS NOT the case in India. The H-Vadi grouse against Muslims is historical. They would like the Muslims to “own up” to Aurangzeb’s acts and the like…who/which they supposedly eulogize. No self respecting citizen of a free country – Muslim or “Hindu” – would willingly bend under such arrogance. Moreover…on the other hand..Muslims can be ignored or “boycotted” at the peril of the rest of our country. They constitute…16% of our population. No way the “minority”, 9.6%, that Whites in SA are.
So..what is the way forward? Except through common sense and education?
But first…the larger H-Vadi challenge seems to be to start making friends and influencing people. Indeed, even Ram Swarup and Sita Ram Goel stood apart from the Parivar. It is not very surprising that even in their “core-competence” of Islam bashing…they seem to have no global presence. The Israelis have ignored them…the US under Bush, has ignored them. In a manner..Koenraad Elst recognizes this deficiency amongst the H-Vadi folks. Not even in it’s six years of power did the BJP mend fences with the media and build strong lasting bonds with its allies. The movement as it is…is yet immature.
Not capable of initiating any kind of “Truth and Reconciliation” as yet.
Bombat Flyer – An inconvenient contestation of happy “consensus” can also be classified as “trolling”.Yes.
Btw..its PALAHALLI. It’s my real name.
19. June 2007 - 4:40 PM
Palahalli, the untruth is there in the first line of my previous post.
You and red chaddis have a lot in common. You hate Hindus but don’t want the Hindu to hate you. Hypocrisy at its trekkian finest.
I visit Sandeep’s blog to learn stuff that reds have pushed under the carpet for long and continue to do so. But you come here with a ‘know it all and ’tis the truth’ chip on your shoulder. You come here to preach, not to learn and it is others who need to be taught about the jadi-booti potion that you have found in some gufa. All you are doing here is trying to sound superior and repeat yourself like a software code in an infinite loop.
You and LALLu’s have another thing in common, you do not hate all religions, only Hindu religion.
Your hatred for Hindu tradition and culture has blinded you in batting for murderers and rapists along with the endangered and elusive moderate muslim. Hypocrisy mumbo-jumbo is for mere mortals like me, for ov3rlords like you make your own rules, isn’t it? See the red tint!
OTOH, thank you for answering my question. Now, how would you diferentiate between a moderate muslim and a islamist moderate faker? Shouldn’t the moderate muslims, wherever they are, ask and answer this question amongst themselves rather than me, Hindu kufr asking you, an ov3rlord?
19. June 2007 - 5:24 PM
Vikas: Please spell out the “untruth”. You have called me a liar, I see, for no reason. Where is this “untruth”? I don’t see it in my post.
I am almost relieved.
*****
You and red chaddis have a lot in common. You hate Hindus but don’t want the Hindu to hate you. Hypocrisy at its trekkian finest.
* So, I am NOT one of them after all. It’s me AND the RCs
I suggest you do not use the “Hindu” front. The H-Vadis are currently in an inglorious minority. Btw…I do not “hate” the “Hindus”. Yes, I am hard on high flying pompous folks amongst them. I like to bring them back to solid ground once in a while.
*****
I visit Sandeep’s blog to learn stuff that reds have pushed under the carpet for long and continue to do so. But you come here with a ‘know it all and ’tis the truth’ chip on your shoulder. You come here to preach, not to learn and it is others who need to be taught about the jadi-booti potion that you have found in some gufa. All you are doing here is trying to sound superior and repeat yourself like a software code in an infinite loop.
* I can understand your angst. Like Sandeep, I have known Saurav on another forum. A real self made intellectual. He takes a challenge in his stride. I have not yet challenged Sandeep…but I see some opportunity. Wherever I do not, I learn from him and such. This is not the first time I’ve visited his blog. I feel it’s good to challenge “settled” notions. Don’t you?
However, I have never claimed a “‘know it all and ’tis the truth’ chip”…I have asked for some rationale for the hysteria. Is that so difficult to provide?
Sounding superior (?) Where did that come from?
******
You and LALLu’s have another thing in common, you do not hate all religions, only Hindu religion.
* Why should I “hate” ANY religion? Or is it your grouse that I have not joined the Islam = Crap bandwagon? If I notice deficiencies…I will make my observations.
*******
Your hatred for Hindu tradition and culture has blinded you in batting for murderers and rapists along with the endangered and elusive moderate Muslim. Hypocrisy mumbo-jumbo is for mere mortals like me, for ov3rlords like you make your own rules, isn’t it? See the red tint!
* Wherefrom did you deduce my “hatred for Hindu tradition and culture”..? And where have I been “batting for murderers and rapists”? I plead guilty to the latter “endangered and elusive moderate muslim.”..charge, even though you have somehow decided that these are indeed elusive and endangered.
Red tint? Where?
********
OTOH, thank you for answering my question. Now, how would you diferentiate between a moderate muslim and a islamist moderate faker? Shouldn’t the moderate muslims, wherever they are, ask and answer this question amongst themselves rather than me, Hindu kufr asking you, an ov3rlord?
* Good first question.
What test do you generally use to differentiate between a “Hindu” and a H-Vadi? I suppose the same may be used in the Muslim case too. You see…it’s really easy. A “Hindu” who is NOT a H-Vadi is a vile pseudo-secularist, a Red Tinted idiot..that is..if the fellow is not already RED, ov3rlord…and generally speaking..an untrustworthy boot licker of assorted rapists and murderers.
Now…guess what the Islamists call moderate Muslims?
I find myself coming back to the same basic question. What is the quality of your interaction with Muslim folk around you?
19. June 2007 - 8:00 PM
Palahalli:
*It is not I who claim the Koran is liberal…but you who claim the Koran is bloodthirsty. My simple question is this: Why then, do we not have civil wars raging all over India if the Koran, per yourself, instigates Muslims to take up arms against the Kafirs? Why are living examples…in a majority, of co-existence within these communities..all over India, completely ignored in your “analysis†of the Koran and it’s Muslims? May I add these masses are quite religious? *
Well,a secular is empty headed enough not to be able to see the obvious.But civil war rages whenever the followers of the islamic cult become significant in numbert e.g in Kashmir.The other parts of India are not raging in civil wars only because Hindus have infinite tolerance towards bomb blasts in railway stations,stone pelting on their religious processions,passengers being burnt alive in train bogies.It’s not because the Indian muslims are in any way more peaceful.From time to time these mullahs do reveal their true colors.Maybe they are waiting for the right time.That’s the reason the Hindus have been almost wiped out from Pakistan and Bangladesh.Sickulars like Palahalli won’t understand untill they get the mid night knock on their doors.
19. June 2007 - 8:51 PM
Uh…
“On your linking Caste with Kafirs and Dhimmis – Hmm…are you suggesting caste is not a reality in this country? On the other hand, I have not seen a Muslim…sword in hand…out to butcher Kafirs….in order to comply with his Koran..and thence secure a place in heaven. ”
Buddy get a life. Do you think people are fools to believe everything that you say? Who ever say caste is not present in India? The caste system is evil and please , there has been enough debate about it. Caste as we know it, never existed in the Vedic period. Santana Dharma picked up the bad habits somewhere down the line. We have had reformers who have shown us the mirror and reform is taking place.
But to suggest Muslims dont kill infidels. Hmm. well not a sword in hand, but definitely bombs in bags do the trick. Bombs in trains.
The recent bomb blasts in the Muslim dominated areas is a smoke screen to forment more rabid behaviour amongst their own.
How do you interpret the ” kill the infidels” verse in Quran? Hope you have heard about it.
Please do read and let us know about it.
19. June 2007 - 10:03 PM
P,
In your excitement to post, least you should do is read (& re-read since you lose track easily) what I’ve written and you’ll get the answers. So much keyboard gymnastics, huff and puff but nothing concrete comes out of you. Do you have any ideas of your own or you’re a ideological ctrl-C&ctrl-V type of person?
My question had two parts to it, how do you diferentiate between truly moderate muslim and a moderate faker and why don’t muslims ask these Q?’s amongst themselves?
Instead of a straight answer, you pulled out this nagina from your rear “What test do you generally use to differentiate between a “Hindu†and a H-Vadi? I suppose the same may be used in the Muslim case too.”
Comparing H-V and islamists hmmmm….thats not a new one. Show me the global network of Hindutvadi’s justifying the killings of non Hindus with the Hindu holy texts (Ved, Gita)? Muslims do that. This is going to continue until muslims reform and reject the cult doctrine (koran). Also, moderate H are questioning H-V’s but do you see moderate mulsims doing the same to islamists? If yes, where? If not, why not?
IMO, you are quite capable of answering honestly (you did it with the islamist/non islamist Q), do it once more.
20. June 2007 - 1:43 AM
Vikas: You do an average job at being patronizing..but let’s see what you come up with next.
I have some reminders and queries for you;
1. You said I had lied. I would like to know where?
2. Do you believe that the Muslims around you are plotting to kill Kafirs including yourself?
3. Please define a “truly moderate and a moderate faker”.
4. Are you sure Muslims are NOT asking difficult questions amongst themselves?
5. What is meant by Muslim reform, according to you? And what is meant by the rejection of their Koran?
6. Moderate “Hindus”?? – But who are the P-Secs? The RED tints? etc..etc..
7. Moderate Muslims questioning Islamists – http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/390
Be my guest…read up on a lot of Daniel Pipes. Controversial…but thinking.
A protest against being “moderate” – http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0423/p09s01-coop.htm
A push toward being more “moderate” – http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0714/p09s01-coop.html
KPS Gill’s take on the issue – http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/kpsgill/governance/07apr20Pio.htm
8. Coming back to India, what has been the Indian Muslim contribution – Money and man power, to the Jehadi movement?
Here’s my take again on what can be done constructively ; Encourage and drive education for all..and assure protection for dissenters. Most importantly, curb looney criminality within H-Vadi organizations.
Here’s what actually happens ; While a Christian Britain Knights Salman Rushdie in the face of Iranian opposition, the BJP/Sangh Parivar is lead by the nose by their opponents and their own weaknesses, on Taslima. Drag her over coals on “Water”…and beat up boys like Chandramohan. These are just illustrations..the details are more embarassing.
But…I might still be biased and wrong wrt the H-Vadis…so please tell me how they plan to resolve the vexed Muslim and Minority questions.
20. June 2007 - 6:55 PM
Palhalli
” beat up boys like Chandramohan”
Please dont think that chandramohan was a innocent boy, it is very clear that he was biased and above that he actually was pagarizing some italians work.
I am unable to find link in pioneer, if i remember right it was kanchan gupta’s article please do read it and find out the otehr side of issue.
But you should again remeber that the protests were very civil when compared to danish cartoons protest , saddam hussian protests(in bangalore) the cause of which were not even indians.
It seems that you are quite old (you have told 36 or something) please take some time to understand hindu philosophy rather than trying to score brownie points.
If you like to be a rationalist, just check the number of places where civil unrest exists currently in the world (darfur, chechnya, kashmir, iraq to name a few), and try to rationalize them.
It is really easy to argue beacuse, of course everyside has its weakness, and no one is perfect , but that doesnt mean all are equally corrupt.
20. June 2007 - 6:55 PM
i meant plagarizing —-typo
20. June 2007 - 8:46 PM
nkota: Thanks for the sugestion to “understand hindu philosophy”..but how is all this relevant to the fact that the protest was rowdy and violent. That an artiste was jailed for his work? His work was destroyed. That supposedly “cultural” organizations and their sisters in arms, stood back and watched and supported such action?
Are we saying that because it was not as violent as the cartoons issue..we should be happy?
Isn’t correction required?
Why get defensive and touchy?
20. June 2007 - 9:44 PM
I can’t believe how this thread has segued from the pertinence of Bhyrappa’s novel to appeasing a rebel-with-no-cause’s vanity. Bhyrappa is relevant because he delves into a phenomenon which has been hitherto completely overshadowed by the tyrannical regime of political correctness. Islamic fundamentalism is real and its origin are independent of any grouping that it claims victimhood against. There is no moral equivalence between acts of barbarism committed in the name of Islam which are sanctioned by Islam and other random violence which bear no such religious approval. And this can be solved only through addressing its root cause which lies in the violent creed if Islam. Any reform has to come from within Islam. The subtle innuendo in requesting redressal of this problem through education is that Muslims are not educated, in their own religion that too. What hubris!
20. June 2007 - 9:47 PM
@Palhalli
I guess socal makes the point clear in his statement on moral equivalence.
20. June 2007 - 10:05 PM
P,
While you don’t answer ALL the questions asked but expect me to do answer.
My post #48 & #52:
1. You missed out on the first part “how do you diferentiate between truly moderate muslim and a moderate faker and why don’t muslims ask these Q?’s amongst themselves?”.
My post #52
2. You missed out on “Show me the global network of Hindutvadi’s justifying the killings of non Hindus with the Hindu holy texts (Ved, Gita)? Muslims do that.” while equating H-V’s with islamists.
21. June 2007 - 12:16 AM
Observations till now: Socal and others..
1. Muslims are terrorists or supporters of terror.
2. Muslims must reform their religion and this must start from within. Root cause is mentioned..but not clarified.
3. But H-Vadis will cry if Muslims don’t move…They will cry if they move. H-Vadis will also cry if some “Hindus” amongst them try to help the process along and call them names…
4. H-Vadis will make n number of excuses not to help Muslims who brave the maniacs amongst them.
It is difficult to say with what courage another blasphemous Muslim will look to India for support..with or without the H-Vadis in the throne!
5. Education? Bah! The thought seems to be repugnant! Of course…it was not even an option here since the very mention of it brought memories of unrepentant Koran recitals!
* Did I say “religious” education??
6. I think you guys are very lucky..living in Muslim free neighbourhoods..huh? The worry is all mine. I work with Muslims in my team…I have Muslim neighbours..Muslim friends…psst..Tell me…Can I trust them??
7. There are over a billion Muslims worldwide…with close to 200 million in this country alone.
I see some options open to H-Vadis. Maybe you will like these.
a. Convert the 200 million to one or more of several castes. Ouch! But you gotta be born in one right? Maybe a special caste then??
b. Segregate and isolate the 200 million in ghettoes. Let’s look at the map..SMZ types.
c. Deport the 200 million to some country that will take them…with no land borders of course! Enough of trouble already. What about the sea??
“b” and “c” may not really solve the problem…so I guess…you have to just gear up for “a”.
And…I am supposed to be VAIN!
As for the minor issue of H-Vadi arrogance and preying on unsuspecting folk….the novelty seems to be that they manage all this without reference to a holy book. – Congratulations!
Back to the topic: No issue with Bhyrappa’s message of facing historical facts squarely.
Sleep easy my braves
21. June 2007 - 1:37 AM
>>>5. Education? Bah! The thought seems to be repugnant! Of course…it was not even an option here since the very mention of it brought memories of unrepentant Koran recitals!
* Did I say “religious†education??
Doh! You sure can’t do it through fundamentals of marxist theory! Why harp on religious, it applies to every form of education? It is a sick notion to say muslims should be educated as if they aren’t capable by themselves? Instruct if asked, yes, one can understand, but educate?
Btw #60 is quite comical. The poor Hindutvavadi portrayed seems more like a figment of leftist imagination rather than any real one I’ve ever come across. Perhaps battling your own ghosts has purloined your sleep, hence the worry about others’.
21. June 2007 - 2:01 AM
>>>Convert the 200 million to one or more of several castes. Ouch! But you gotta be born in one right? Maybe a special caste then??
Ummm…that’s hardly an issue. Didn’t justice Khacchar acknowledge muslim castes in his report?
21. June 2007 - 2:52 AM
Thanks Socal…we are agreed on conversion of all our Muslims or at least incorporating their castes
. Good..now we just gotta do it.
Yes. Educate. Like promoting education? Ever heard of that? Modernize their schools? Encourage Muslims who want to do these things. When we can shove Saraswati Vandana down their throats..we can surely do more basic things…what?
Have you never interacted with Muslims..ever?
21. June 2007 - 8:04 AM
@Palahalli
dude please stop beating around the bush, listen it is proved beyond doubt that there is absolutley no equivalence between terrorism and hindutvavad, so there is no point arguing on the lines that “they are wrong but we are also”
All it is required is strong comdenation and strong resistance from within the community, which is clearly not seen, and when seen. it is brutually suppressed,(Ayaan hirsi ali has been attacked multiple times , rushdie is living under fear, Taslima has left the country).
Please do not argue for the sake of arguing.
21. June 2007 - 9:24 AM
kota,
>>>Please do not argue for the sake of arguing.
I beg to differ. It is quite rare and regaling to confront someone so steeply prejudiced against you. His flail attempts at humor can certainly be condoned for greater good.
21. June 2007 - 9:40 AM
pale,
>>>Thanks Socal…we are agreed on conversion of all our Muslims or at least incorporating their castes . Good..now we just gotta do it.
Not to worry. The pleasure is all mine. I am just elated that you’ve agreed upon what seems to be a nice way to promote social harmony.
>>>Yes. Educate. Like promoting education? Ever heard of that? Modernize their schools? Encourage Muslims who want to do these things. When we can shove Saraswati Vandana down their throats..we can surely do more basic things…what?
*their schools* With your emphasis on “interaction” you outta have overcome this petty, divisive “ours-theirs” notion–atleast with regard to muslims–by now. Whatever happened to the lofty “same-same” “bhaichara” attitude!
>>>Have you never interacted with Muslims..ever?
I don’t know why you repeatedly ask this silly, rather redundant question. If you so confidently assert that muslims are everywhere why do you doubt any interaction would be lacking?
21. June 2007 - 9:50 AM
>>>Modernize their schools? Encourage Muslims….
I forgot to mention, but you still seem to miss the inherent superciliousness in your benign venture. No one has discouraged muslims from modernizing and even muslim clerics have underlined the importance of pursuing that goal. They certainly express confidence in their ability towards any such undertaking. Do you doubt it? I hope not.
21. June 2007 - 10:01 AM
* muslims from modernizing their educational institutions and even muslim clerics *
21. June 2007 - 12:13 PM
I’ll persist.
I have NOT stated that Islamic radicalism is the same as H-Vadi radicalism.
Secondly, anybody who cannot…will not..differentiate between crazed fundamentalists and innocent folk should think again…to put it very mildly.
Thirdly, H-Vadi violence is being justified and not opposed by your eminences. It may not be comparable with Islamic terror…but can never be justified. In most cases…this violence has now turned against “Hindus” themselves. Of course…under the categories P-secs…Red tints…etc etc.
Fourthly, in all of the wars on terror that are going on around the world today, the H-Vadi voice is minimal to non-existent. None of the players take our home grown warriors seriously.
Please ponder the reason.
Fifthly, please lay off the bombast. It is unhelpful. More than that, it gives you an illusory and false sense of strength and self – righteousness.
Sixthly, please leave your own ghettoes and know our own people better…and then let us talk about how many Muslims tried to convert you by the sword.
Seventhly, I have been a Swayamsevak…per oath..still am, attended the OTCs…have worked with various Pracharaks…known and interacted with important people in that organization, worked for the BJP, the VHP, was a member of the Bajrang Dal…was City Secretary in the ABVP…have seen action during the Rama Janmabhoomi campaign…1989-1992. Have organized folks and rioted too…in Hassan district. I respect the intelligence and drive of people like Elst..Goel…and Swarup. I had some respect for Shourie…until he did a miserable job at assassinating Ambedkar. The RSS itself attracts dedicated and sincere people…who are stifled and die as life passes them by. The organization makes Savarkar’s epitaph on the RSS a reality. I have studied the Sangh too deeply for it to occasion any more surprises in me.
So…please be done with your malignant “know all”…arrogance.
21. June 2007 - 12:29 PM
“I don’t know why you repeatedly ask this silly, rather redundant question. If you so confidently assert that muslims are everywhere why do you doubt any interaction would be lacking?” – Just curious..that’s all.
And its very good and true that Muslim clerics are thinking in terms of secular education.
Trivia – Did you know that “Hindu” students also attend Mardrassas? That they employ “Hindu” teachers too?
21. June 2007 - 4:53 PM
Trivia – Did you know that “Hindu†students also attend Mardrassas? That they employ “Hindu†teachers too?
============
Palahali,
Since when did the exception become the norm ??
21. June 2007 - 7:20 PM
@Palahalli
Anecdotal evidence can not be used to rationalize things , please give statistical ones,
Worst thing is, as shadows pointed out, to pass off exception as a norm
21. June 2007 - 8:10 PM
In case you did not notice..I noted that it was trivia. Not to be used as part of the discussion. That was simply…fyi.
If you folks want stats…like brother Anonymous says…”Go figure!” Maybe you’ll also get to know the “Hindu” castes that mainly attend these Madrasas.
It’s time to appreciate positives around us…even if it comes from our Muslim community.
And I am supposed to be the bigot around here!
21. June 2007 - 8:24 PM
>>>And its very good and true that Muslim clerics are thinking in terms of secular education.
This is a bit overreading of their protestations. Muslim clerics evidently interprete modernizing with maths, science and computers. In the most important social studies area, which can pave the way for their moderation, no such opinion has been forthcoming, which is a huge cause to worry. Their emphasis on the ultimacy of islamic religious studies as a guide for daily living still stands. However none of this indicts their ability to modernize. The problem hinges on the amt. of will displayed by them which is insufficient to address real-world problem of islamic fundamentalism.
22. June 2007 - 10:32 AM
>>>Did you know that “Hindu†students also attend Mardrassas
What’s the result of their presence. Are the muslims in madarssas willing or allowed to learn Hindu ways? Or is the understanding one sided i.e. Hindus accepting Muslims but muslims won’t have none of it. Media just hypes up such isolated instances. Will those Hindu students go to these madarssas if affordable Hindu schools or convents were present in their vicinity? The devil lies in details and the leftists shrewdly avoid any mention of that. Therein lies the problem.
22. June 2007 - 1:23 PM
And I am supposed to be the bigot around here!
==========
No, we are the violent fundamentalist Hindu bigots..
Palahalli,
You know I can throw a lot of such “FYI” and “trivia” ??
>> It’s time to appreciate positives around us…even if it comes from our Muslim community.
We do. Like if we admire Dr APJ, we do it because he plays the Veena like the Hindus ??
Hey, wait a min,
Positives?? But how many are there ? Should we not criticize the negatives then ??
22. June 2007 - 4:30 PM
Palahalli,
I see that you have descended to the ‘flowery language’ realm and are looking for backdoor exits.
I have NOT stated that Islamic radicalism is the same as H-Vadi radicalism.
***Which means what, IR>HVR or IR
22. June 2007 - 4:36 PM
I see that you have descended to the ‘flowery language’ realm and are looking for backdoor exits.
I have NOT stated that Islamic radicalism is the same as H-Vadi radicalism.
++Which means what, IR greater than HVR or IR less than HVR? And how does it answer “Show me the global network of Hindutvadi’s justifying the killings of non Hindus with the Hindu holy texts (Ved, Gita)? Muslims do that.†when YOU EQUATED H-V’s WITH ISLAMISTS(your post#49).
Secondly, anybody who cannot…will not..differentiate between crazed fundamentalists and innocent folk should think again…to put it very mildly.
++I know it, Unkel. But first, intelligent men like you should define and help me in identifying moderate muslim and a fake moderate so that I, an ignoramus average joe, can differentiate between them.
“wars on terror that are going on around the world today, the H-Vadi voice is minimal to non-existent”
++Wars on terror around the world are a Xtian crusade against Islam, why should H-V’s get involved in that?
On the Salman Rushdie ‘knighting’ fiasco, what UK has done is nothing short of slapping the British muslims on their face and it is deplorable, playing with the sentiments of Brit muslims, why should we replicate it here in India? Just because the angrez did it.
23. June 2007 - 1:54 AM
Socal: You may have a point on the social studies part of education that is being provided. But, we have also observed the utter lack of “social” content in terms of grooming conscientious citizens in our “regular” schools. Indeed…we have glaringly dilinquent examples of children who have had “better” education..so to speak.
For a system that initially resisted even natural sciences..this is certainly a leap. Exposure to these “new” trends and studies..will also help lessen the impact of a purely religious curriculum. The opportunities these will generate will enable our Muslim children to work and mingle with their fellow citizens.
I do not know of a Muslim friend who has studied in a Madrasa. But they are Muslims nevertheless.
The pressure to succeed in these times..will add to the urgency of these measures. We witness this trend today.
I do not know about “Hindu” children learning “Hindu” ways and manners in Madrassas. It is improbable that these castes can even relate to “Hindu” manners in the sense that these are understood by the “mainstream”. Small wonder that these our “lower” caste kids…mainly Dalit, feel at home in these schools. Of course..there is a lack of “Hindu” schools which will accept these kids.
Let’s forget about the forever “evil” media for a minute and reflect on reality.
Per informed sources, mainly the West Bengal Madrasa system…where there are most “Hindu” students attending, Islamic learning occurs in the higher classes. Not in the junior and middle levels. There is some reference found on a blog on Madrasas.
http://madrasa.wordpress.com/2007/03/19/what-role-for-madrasas-that-teach-hindus/
***********
Shadows: “Hindus” cannot be fundamentalists. However, they can certainly be bigots and fanatics.
I wonder if Kalam would be pleased to call his..a “Hindu” family
Or not call himself a Muslim.
No..do not ignore the negatives..but when you find positives, please let us be men enough to recognize and nurture them.
**********
Vikas: Do you have friends amongst Muslims?
On the so called “crusades” being waged…I wonder if Praveen Togadia spoke with you prior to offering his support to the Vatican in the fight against Islam.
“On the Salman Rushdie ‘knighting’ fiasco, what UK has done is nothing short of slapping the British muslims on their face and it is deplorable, playing with the sentiments of Brit muslims, why should we replicate it here in India? Just because the angrez did it.” – You sound so much like Nehru. So, this is not pandering to extremism?
If I were you…I woudld either study the subject…or experience my surroundings.
23. June 2007 - 5:49 PM
Palahalli, you’re probably right, the NDA administration was only interested in milking the Lajja/Nasreen issue – all politics, as you put it. But you tread lightly on the issue of why the oh-so secular groups never even touched it with a barge pole. How is it then that the BJP always gets referred to as ‘right wing’, ‘Hindu Nationalist’ or ‘fundamentalists’ (within India and internationally)? I don’t remember those labels being used for the Congress, Commies or pretty much anyone outside the Parivar. Not even the IUML (except by those you might dismiss as H-Vadis).
Care to enlighten? I ask only out of curiosity, btw. Not because I’m into Hindutva or because I believe all Muslims are terrorists.
23. June 2007 - 6:24 PM
Also, whether the media is evil or not, it has surely been holier than thou and somewhat economical with the truth. Most of our secular commentators have no problems attacking BJP/Parivar, either directly or through innuendo, yet their stance is unclear on certain other issues. They were not so eager to defend freedom of speech for Satanic Verses or the Danish cartoons. I don’t condone the violence against Chandramohan or Hussain’s gallery, but just as you would have us recognise everything positive, let’s also recognise all wrongs.
24. June 2007 - 10:56 AM
Palahalli, you’re probably right, the NDA administration was only interested in milking the Lajja/Nasreen issue – all politics, as you put it.
- Agreed.
*********
But you tread lightly on the issue of why the oh-so secular groups never even touched it with a barge pole.
- You have not found me defending any so-called secular position. There is no such thing as “fair” politics in this country. What I find more than amusing is the fact that beraters of the “secular” front…will put the H-Vadis on a high pedestal…and then the “debate” easily descends into simple generalizations and bombast.
I am not the person who will defend the “secular” dispensation blindly. The same is my position on the H-Vadis.
********
How is it then that the BJP always gets referred to as ‘right wing’, ‘Hindu Nationalist’ or ‘fundamentalists’ (within India and internationally)? I don’t remember those labels being used for the Congress, Commies or pretty much anyone outside the Parivar. Not even the IUML (except by those you might dismiss as H-Vadis).
- I will not hesitate to say that the blame lies with the H-Vadis.
They have not done three things:
a. They have criminally neglected to build a media of their own.
b. They have been/are intellectually bereft.
c. They never distance themselves from people who will and can hurt their reputation.
eg: Acharya Giriraj Kishore – A man who condoned the lynching of Dalits in Jhaggar and then called for an autopsy on the cow that these Dalits had skinned. This man still is a highly regarded member of the VHP’s Dharma Sansad and a high office bearer.
Why should the H-Vadis expect kindness from folk they practically claim to be anti-Hindu and traitors to the land? Is this not a bit ludicrous? Instead…why not build a counterpoint and communicate it through their own media? How many channels did they build in the six years they ruled?
They lose in the market place of ideas because their wares are not there in the first place. All that is there is spurious. Anti- Valentines Day….beating up missionaries and artistes…and such other glorious works.
I am most certain there are counter points to what I have said…but can you deny these observations?
24. June 2007 - 9:22 PM
I seem to have emtered this juicy debate almost at the end
but “palahalli” here is very very interesting.
“palahalli” seems to think “Hindus” don’t exist
apparently because they are divided by caste. But “Muslims” are a reality for the dude, never mind that sunnis are blowing up shias, shias are returning the favor whenever they can, and both are after Ahmedias. (incidentally, the shebang in Kahsmir, mis-labeled as “Kashmiri separatasim” is the creation of a very narrow segment of people — some of the valley’s Sunnis — who are not even represenatiave of all of Kashmir’s “Muslims”, let alone of Kashmiris.)
More importantly, there is another fascinating dimension to “Muslims” that I want to debate with our “palahalli” here. Which is: where did our friend get this fancy idea that there are no castes among “Muslims”? Did he somehow just get this notion into his head, without rhyme or reason, or did he pick it up from some commie twerp’s “history” book?
25. June 2007 - 12:44 AM
Thanks for joining the debate Ot…but I want to help place yourself on the proper track..
- It has never been my claim that Muslims are ONE in their motivations and actions and even goals. They have enough dissentions and differences amongst themselves. However, the Koran is the same for ALL Muslims.
I’m almost worried about you being able to get our “Muslims are this and Muslims are that” pals in the debate off your back. Your crack on Kashmir may simply not go down very well with them
*******
On Caste and Muslims: Here’s what I said…
#47:”Heck…the latest trend is for the H-Vadis to point toward caste amongst Muslims. Not that I disagree with them there. But then…where is Caste in the Koran??”
The operative being – “”Not” that I disagree with them there.”
25. June 2007 - 9:49 AM
http://underway.wordpress.com/2007/06/06/o-privire-asupra-literaturii-indiene-anantha-murthy-si-bhyrappa/
wonder what is written, google translator did not work, probably it is romanian..
….
25. June 2007 - 10:04 AM
nkota: Looks like Romanian. Maybe even Bulgarian. Noticed some Romanie…and sorts. Will a translator on the system help?
It does look like an English article has been trnslated though.
25. June 2007 - 10:12 AM
>> Your crack on Kashmir may simply not go down very well with them
This is funny. Perhaps because “palahall’s” “father” drilled into his head right from childhood some myths about “Muslims”, “palahalli” continues to believe his “father” without applying his own mind. The consequences are truly tragicomic: he is telling us that Martians won’t be happy if you tell them that the blue cheese that Mars is made of is melting.
>>However, the Koran is the same for ALL Muslims.
Smart chap this. Why is it “self-evident” to this guy that having one “common” Koran makes a “community”? Only yesterday a bunch of Sunnis killed a bunch of shias in Iraq. They are even bombing each other’s mosques. (Hindus aren’t bombing each others’ temples!) Police found that the recent Hyderabad mosque bombing is a Sunni outfit’s handiwork against Shias.
It is not the Shia-Sunni-Qadiyani divide alone that plagues the “people” of one “common” Quran. Uppercaste “Muslims”, the friends of “palahalli”, are beating the stuffing out of lowercaste “Muslims”:
—
PATNA, FEBRUARY 23: A meeting convened by the high power Sachar Committee today to identify solutions for the social, economic and educational backwardness of India’s Muslims culminated in fists and blows over the issue of reservations for the minority community. Around half a dozen persons were injured in the clash.
Four members of the committee—constituted by the Centre to study the blockages that afflict Muslim society and to suggest steps to remove them— were here to hold meetings with different Muslim bodies and individuals. Tensions ran high when the Pasmanda Muslim Mahaj, an organisation championing the cause of Dalit Muslims, demanded that reservation to Muslims should be based on caste and not on religion. Mahaj
president Ali Anwar argued that as among the Hindus, caste-based backwardness also exists in Muslim society. If reservations were extended to the Muslim community as a whole, then only the upper castes or the affluent would end up benefitting, he alleged.
This view was vehemently opposed by another group which wants the Muslim community as a whole to get reservations. They argued that caste distinction was against Islam and stressed that the community in its entirety was backward. This led to angry protests from both sides—finally the meeting turned into a battle ground, with even chairs and flower pots being hurled in the attack. Anwar went on to allege that
everything was pre-planned by State Minority Welfare secretary Aashiq Ibrahimi to throttle the voice of Dalit Muslims. He demanded a high-level probe into the incident and later boycotted the meeting.
‘‘The pre-planned attack has proved how upper castes among Muslims are trying to suppress Dalit Muslims,’’ he said. ‘‘We will continue our struggle and will not allow affluent Muslims to take advantage of reservation.’’
For his part, Aashiq Ibrahimi denied the allegation and instead charged that the violence was started by the Mahaj members. Sociologist, Dr S F Rab, who attended the meeting termed the incident unfortunate
and said it was regrettable that the core issue of the minority community’s backwardness had been hijacked.
—
Look at that! For saying that uppercaste “Muslims” should not ride on the reservation bandwagon, lowercaste “Muslims” get beaten to pulp!!
Isn’t that weird. Our good friend’s “Muslims” are divided along shia-sunni-qadiyani lines, a sectarian division, to the extent that these sects bomb each other, and they are also divided along caste lines, with lowercaste “Muslims” getting a raw deal. And what does “Palahalli” have to offer these “Muslims”? One “common” book! Ha ha. Humourous fellow.
25. June 2007 - 12:11 PM
Ot: That was a pretty good duck from your earlier faux pas
…But has it worked?
1. Muslims are fighting themselves –
Deduction – The Ummah…if represented by ALL Muslims, is not working. If represented by Islamists, is serving to prove that one sect wants to get over the other…or could be fighting oppression by the more dominant sect.
In any case, is no support to the H-Vadi propaganda that Muslims are united by The Book…in their motivations and goals. Your Kashmir hypothesis is correct, but will not support H-Vadi contention of a conspiracy by the Muslims.
2. Muslims have lower and higher castes -
Deduction – Of course they do. I have never argued otherwise. What then, is the H-Vadi worry? The Muslims for all practical purposes now look like the “Hindus”. Except for their chief Book. The only reason they remain without quotes, to my mind. They can never say…”it is written in the Koran that you must serve me”. At least not to their own fellow Muslims.
3. “Hindus” don’t bomb each other’s temples –
Required/desired deduction – “Hindus” respect each other’s places of worship and actually love each other. Naturally, they are very much united. Apart from being “humorous”…it is actually an insult to those amongst the “Hindus” that suffer to this day.
At least the oppressed amongst the Muslims are able to fight back.
The only lucky ones amongst “Hindus” are the oppressors. The oppressed amongst them can hardly seek inspiration from their holy books to fight back. Is this the reason “Hindu” fighters do away with any notion of “Hinduism”? The LTTE never considered itself “Hindu”..for instance.
But..let’s go on.
“Hindus” should then be able to convince Muslims and Christians *also caste ridden* to claim themselves “Hindus”. More of the Muslims and Christians should actually rush headlong toward the nearest VHP Dharmadhikari and offer themselves to be converted. Ghar Vapasi really.
And…how did you divine that Upper Caste anythings…are my friends?
Post that…we can all stop our little debates and Sandeep can retire his blog or direct it’s interests elsewhere
…But before Sandeep can decide…you Sir, must convince our friends that Muslims can be and are nearly as diverse as the “Hindus”…except for The Book. I exaggerate a bit on the diverseness…that’s ok.
25. June 2007 - 12:35 PM
Palahalli:
Do you have friends amongst Muslims?
+++ Meeting a few muslim chicks and guys is irrelevant to the big pic(Islam is a threat to India).
On the so called “crusades†being waged…I wonder if Praveen Togadia spoke with you prior to offering his support to the Vatican in the fight against Islam.
+++Quite rich coming from someone who had his chaddi in knots when words like LALLu, commie, marxist came up. Pinko hypocrite
So, this is not pandering to extremism?
+++Sorry if it was not clear to you. I meant, UK is fueling the ‘root cause’ of terrorism.
Why don’t you give your ‘moral relativism’ gyan on some Islamic forums and see the welcome that you get? They are the people in need of your ‘moral’ guidance, not
the commenters here.
BTW, you have not helped me in finding the unicorn in the forest, moderate muslim and fake moderate diff^? Post #48 onwards!
25. June 2007 - 12:47 PM
>>In any case, is no support to the H-Vadi propaganda that Muslims are united by The Book
This is even funnier. Which joker said in this debate that “Muslims” have one book and that therefore unlike Hindus they are one people? Not any Hindutvavadi.
Perhaps the Islamist-long Red clowns have more in common with Hindutvavadis than they admit.
>>Muslims have lower and higher castes -
Deduction – Of course they do. I have never argued otherwise. What then, is the H-Vadi worry?
Once again, the obfuscating Red chaps seem in the habit of forgetting their own “arguments”. Let me jog the memory of these silly fellows:
“There is no meaning to the term in its religious sense unless we take into account its caste-outcaste structure. ”
There is no meaning to the term “Muslim” unless we take into account the Shia-Sunnia-Qadiyani-Uppercaste “Muslim”-Lowercaste “Muslim” structure either.
Let us take the case I illustrated.
“Anwar went on to allege that
everything was pre-planned by State Minority Welfare secretary Aashiq Ibrahimi to throttle the voice of Dalit Muslims.”
Who is the “Muslim” here? The uppercaste minister? Or the lowercaste Anwar who got beaten up?
>>They can never say…â€it is written in the Koran that you must serve meâ€.
Arre bhai, if uppercaste “Muslims” oppress lowercastes even when allegedly it is not in their book, imagine just what they would do if it is??
Contrariwise, the exhortation to “slay the idolaters wherever ye find them” IS in the book. Should we take the Red brigade’s claim then that what is written in the book influences the outcome to deduce that loot, the killings, and the rapes of Kashmir’s Hindus are inspired by the Koran?
>>At least the oppressed amongst the Muslims are able to fight back.
I encourage our friend “Palahalli” to tell the beaten-up Anwar above that “at least you guys are fighting back”. No doubt Anwar would be thrilled.
I bet “Palahalli’s” “father” also taught him that uppercaste “Muslims” don’t oppress lowercaste “Muslims”.
>>And…how did you divine that Upper Caste anythings…are my friends?
When a “palahalli” engages in an elaborate ritual of denial claiming that “Muslims” are one people, that uppercaste “Muslims” don’t oppress lowercaste “Muslims”, that no “Muslim” oppresses any other “Muslim” allegedly because there is no oppression advocated in the book — it is pretty easy to divine who “Palahalli” is fronting for.
>>must convince our friends that Muslims can be and are nearly as diverse as the “Hindusâ€
Actually, it is our “Palahalli” that needs to provide us proof that “Muslims” are as much united as Hindus are. Point is, one set of Hindus don’t walk into a temple with guns and pump bullets into another set of Hindus. “Muslims” do.
I attribute “Palahalli’s” mental cobwebs to multiple factors. Definitely, his “father’s” commie indoctrination seems to be there. Furthermore, some idiotic notion that “unity” consists of sporting a beard, wearing a skullcap, putting women under the veil, having a “common” book etc etc!!
>>The LTTE never considered itself “Hinduâ€..for instance.
Could be because there are non-Hindus among them. Could be because they are commies! I know a commie clown who was born Catholic, but is so ashemed of his birth that he dare not identify himself as a Christian, but spends his life fronting for Islamists on the net!!
25. June 2007 - 1:34 PM
Palahalli (#82), you say BJP never distanced itself from people that could hurt its image/credibility. This is hardly unique in Indian politics. Laloo is a cabinet minister, so was Jagdish Tytler (may be still is, not sure) and HKL Bhagat didn’t suffer a scratch. Yet why has the Congress not been called communal or cateist? Could it be because divisive politics is fine as long as it suits lower castes or religious minorities? Could it be that the media, or at least some sections, are really as evil as your favourite Hindutvawadis? The so-called secular parties are just brazen and they have plenty of support.
25. June 2007 - 1:44 PM
Vikas:
+++ Meeting a few muslim chicks and guys is irrelevant to the big pic(Islam is a threat to India).
* Ah…some progress. What do you do then? After meeting these “chicks and guys”?
****
+++Quite rich coming from someone who had his chaddi in knots when words like LALLu, commie, marxist came up. Pinko hypocrite
* Oops…did not know “Praveen Togadia” is now a swear word. Sorry.
*****
+++Sorry if it was not clear to you. I meant, UK is fueling the ‘root cause’ of terrorism.
* Oh ok. So standing up to Salman Rushdie’s right to write and honoring him for his works inspite of fanatic opposition is to you…”fuelling “root cause” of terrorism?”
*****
Why don’t you give your ‘moral relativism’ gyan on some Islamic forums and see the welcome that you get? They are the people in need of your ‘moral’ guidance, not
the commenters here.
* “Moral relativism”? Talking against “Hindu” arrogance is “Moral relativism”? Why feel so uncomfortable?
*****
BTW, you have not helped me in finding the unicorn in the forest, moderate muslim and fake moderate diff^? Post #48 onwards!
* Your answer to question one of this post will tell you.
Ot:
This is even funnier. Which joker said in this debate that “Muslims†have one book and that therefore unlike Hindus they are one people? Not any Hindutvavadi.
* Hmmm…so the Koran is not really a uniting factor. The fact that Muslims all over the world look toward this one Book…does not mean that it unites them. But somehow this Book motivates all of them to look at the Kafir as sub-human. Interesting.
*****
“There is no meaning to the term “Muslim†unless we take into account the Shia-Sunnia-Qadiyani-Uppercaste “Muslimâ€-Lowercaste “Muslim†structure either.”
- Be my guest. I’m all for it. Only..reckon without the Koran.
*****
“Who is the “Muslim†here? The uppercaste minister? Or the lowercaste Anwar who got beaten up?”
- Both actually. Both go to Mosques and both read the Koran. Both consider Allah the only God and Mohammed, Allah’s only Prophet.
*****
Arre bhai, if uppercaste “Muslims†oppress lowercastes even when allegedly it is not in their book, imagine just what they would do if it is??
- ?????
Contrariwise, the exhortation to “slay the idolaters wherever ye find them†IS in the book. Should we take the Red brigade’s claim then that what is written in the book influences the outcome to deduce that loot, the killings, and the rapes of Kashmir’s Hindus are inspired by the Koran?
* The “Red Brigade” claims that? Is that not a H-Vadi claim? I will be happy if the claim is not yours.
Do you still not see the link between circumstances/surroundings and people?
*****
I encourage our friend “Palahalli†to tell the beaten-up Anwar above that “at least you guys are fighting backâ€. No doubt Anwar would be thrilled.
- Not necessary. We will know when he meets his neighbourhood Dharmadhikari and converts to “Hinduism”.
*****
I bet “Palahalli’s†“father†also taught him that uppercaste “Muslims†don’t oppress lowercaste “Muslimsâ€.
- I guess my father spoke with you a lot more he did with me.
*****
When a “palahalli†engages in an elaborate ritual of denial claiming that “Muslims†are one people, that uppercaste “Muslims†don’t oppress lowercaste “Muslimsâ€, that no “Muslim†oppresses any other “Muslim†allegedly because there is no oppression advocated in the book — it is pretty easy to divine who “Palahalli†is fronting for.
- Hmmm…Muslims are ONE people? Why would I provide our H-Vadis with a stick like that? The rest is good imagination.
*****
Actually, it is our “Palahalli†that needs to provide us proof that “Muslims†are as much united as Hindus are. Point is, one set of Hindus don’t walk into a temple with guns and pump bullets into another set of Hindus. “Muslims†do.
* I suppose Hedgewar missed all this somehow. Him and his pals back in 1925 were real oafs..huh?
*****
I attribute “Palahalli’s†mental cobwebs to multiple factors. Definitely, his “father’s†commie indoctrination seems to be there. Furthermore, some idiotic notion that “unity†consists of sporting a beard, wearing a skullcap, putting women under the veil, having a “common†book etc etc!!
* What else did my father tell you?
*****
Could be because there are non-Hindus among them. Could be because they are commies! I know a commie clown who was born Catholic, but is so ashemed of his birth that he dare not identify himself as a Christian, but spends his life fronting for Islamists on the net!!
* Could be anything..but the way it is! Anyways…your probably an innocent bystander wanting to do a good deed. The H-Vadis are pleased to call the LTTE a Christian conspiracy.
http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?id=1141381467&type=articles
25. June 2007 - 1:48 PM
badindianmofo – I think the better way would be to clean our homes before pointing fingers.
Btw – I will not deny your observation about our politics. I just don’t like empty and “clever” bombast. It makes the proponents think all others are fools.
25. June 2007 - 3:18 PM
>>Hmmm…so the Koran is not really a uniting factor
Only in the eyes of Red nutcases.
If Koran were such a unifying factor, why do Sunnis routinely barge into Shia mosques, and kill those reciting verses from that very Koran?
To prove “Muslims” exist as a unified community, our friend “palahalli” needs to demonstrate that that unity exists in the real world. If he did that, and then claimed that this existing unity of “Muslims” follows from having one common book, that’d still be “post hoc ergo procter hoc” but he wouldn’t at least be sounding half as commie-nutty as he is now. But his actual logic is even more bizarre, probably owing ot the indoctrination by his “father”: he insists that because there is one common book, “Muslims” are united, no matter that they are bombing each our senseless, and no matter that they oppress their lower-castes.
Hilarious fellow, indeed.
>>The “Red Brigade†claims that? Is that not a H-Vadi claim? I will be happy if the claim is not yours.
Actually, my argument precisely is that there is no such thing as “Muslims” (note the quotes); that there are actually Sunnis, Shias, Qadiyanis, asraf, ajlaf etc etc, all lumped together in a mythical entity called “Muslims”, generally by those who are apologists are Islamic fundamentalism. I even gave an example: there is no such thing as “Kashmiri separatism”. There is no such thing as even “Kashmiri Muslim separatism”. It is a ruckus created by a few Sunni killers backed by Pakistan, thats all.
Only our friend “palahalli”, indoctrinated by his “father” in commie ideology, insists that these killers are “Muslims”.
>>I encourage our friend “Palahalli†to tell the beaten-up Anwar above that “at least you guys are fighting backâ€. No doubt Anwar would be thrilled.
- Not necessary. We will know when he meets his neighbourhood Dharmadhikari and converts to “Hinduismâ€
I bet in commie circles that passes for logic.
>>What else did my father tell you?
That is a good question though. I admit “palahalli’s” “father” didn’t tell me anything. But given our friend’s hallucinations about a rality called Hindus, and a myth called “Muslims”, it seemed reasonable to make certain assumptions about his “father”.
Point is, our friend has bizarre notions about what constitutes religion. He has been brainwashed that religion is all about having one common book, and abracadabra, unity naturally follows. In other words, the absence of diversity in some externally visible form constitutes unity!
Such “logic” is typical of commie imbecility. The internalization of such weird notions requires indoctraintion at home in some lunatic ideology (such as communism, which killed 80 million people) right from childhood.
I actually think religion is about having multiple books, multiple gods, diverse subcultures etc and yet to coexist amicably enough not to barge into shrines and gun down people praying to the same set of gods. Commies need to note: that’s why I put “Muslims” in quotes.
That this simple point is not comprehenisble to “Palahalli” seemed to suggest to me that he was indoctrinated in some fanatical credo at home by his “father”.
25. June 2007 - 4:52 PM
Ot: Are you talking to me or the likes of my pal Vikas?
Next post…please try to respond to my post. Not some strawman’s.
25. June 2007 - 5:17 PM
Dear sandeep,
something disturbs me very much.Tipu is rightly hated by hindus of malabar,coorg,chitradurga,mangalore.
But closer home in mysore,his dewan was a madhwa.He protected the sri ranganatha temple.He is spoken of in glowing terms in the sringeri records.You must be aware the matha and the sri saradha templewas ransacked by maratha hordes.(“a sad day in the history of hindus,a blot in the history of the marathas,when hindus were ransacked by their fellow brethren”-according to the maratha historian DN Sardeshai)It was tipu who afforded protection to sringeri.
Was there a political angle to his actions.I am not condoning his atrocities.But look how hindus from various regions can have different views of the same ruler.
26. June 2007 - 5:07 PM
Palahalli,
* Ah…some progress. What do you do then? After meeting these “chicks and guys�
]]]Forgotten your medication or what, Unkal? I never acknowledged/denied having muslim friends. Your, mine or our anecdotal experiences from a few muzlim ‘friends’ does not mean a ‘moderately enlightened(sorry paki jarnail) form of Islam’ is developing. What impression do you get when you see a hundred thousand Indian muslim men marching wth pictures of Seifullah Osama Bin Laden?
*****
* Oh ok. So standing up to Salman Rushdie’s right to write and honoring him for his works inspite of fanatic opposition is to you…â€fuelling “root cause†of terrorism?â€
]]] I’m following Govt of India, they banned his ‘blas-famous’ book.
What good is Brit Rushdie’s effing right to write since his famous book is banned by ‘suckular’ twits here in India. You are crying hoarse about Rushdie’s right to write but overlook your fellow Indian’s right to read? Backstab your own countrymen – only one ideology is there which prescribes to this kind of idiotic ‘thinking’. Communist.
*****
* “Moral relativism� Talking against “Hindu†arrogance is “Moral relativism� Why feel so uncomfortable?
]]]How many people have been killed by Hindu arrogance? You can equivocate all you want to play your word games. Concerned about Hindu ‘mythical arrogance’ but not about Islamic ‘real terrorism’. Says a lot about you.
*****
* Your answer to question one of this post will tell you.
]]]Where?
_________________________________________
XYZ:
Google shows DN Sardesai, a cricketer (Rajdeep’s daddy??). Cricketers writing history, what next? Is he amongst the ‘eminences’? No wonder the gobar in NCERT books stink far and wide.
26. June 2007 - 7:34 PM
Christopher Hitchens has a great piece on a professional Kashmiri “Muslim” protester and those who apologize for them. Very pertinent to this discusson.
http://www.slate.com/id/2169020/
26. June 2007 - 8:48 PM
Vikas,
I got the initials wrong.But are you denying the pillage?
What about the substantive part”the hindus have strong regional identities.”
27. June 2007 - 7:10 PM
Palahalli writes>>c. Deport the 200 million to some country that will take them…with no land borders of course! Enough of trouble already. What about the sea??>>
Pal, you should know that this was tried in 1947 by the muslimes themselves by partitioning the country. When our jokerlal and mk gandy should have insisted on total popultaion swap between the pukistan/beggardesh and India, no such thing happened because both these idiots were busy sucking up to the muslimes especially jokerlal who saw a captive votebank in the muslimes who remained back in India. It may surprise you that even muslimes from down south in places like tamilnad voted for the partition, even though they knew in their heart of hearts they never would/could go to pukistan. That should tell you some thing about muslime treachery, if you are willing to learn that is. There is a saying, you can wake up a man who is asleep but you cannot wake up a man who is pretending to sleep…you my friend belong to the second group of people. You might be happy to that your suggestion to deport/convert the minority has been successfully implemented in both pukistand and bangidesh.
Regards
Mayura
27. June 2007 - 7:12 PM
>>> No..do not ignore the negatives..but when you find positives, please let us be men enough to recognize and nurture them.
==============
Palahalli,
We have been doing that for long.. now its time to be men enough to call a spade a spade.
Sure, you seem to have a lot of time on your hands..
And please, stop giving examples about Hindus in west bengal attending madrassas.. its really dumb.
27. June 2007 - 7:14 PM
Pal,
Further to my earlier post, I wonder why are the bandigeshwasis are so eager to illegally migrate to the land of kafirs and the pukistani elites are so eager to trade with India, while their army keeps scheming to dismember India? And why do the usual suspects, the people following the religion of piss are hand in glove to encourage both these activities of pukistan and beggardesh.
Mayura
27. June 2007 - 7:15 PM
the people following the religion of piss…
Please also include their fellow travellers the commies and the sickular media…to the list
27. June 2007 - 7:21 PM
>>>>>>>>>
I do not know about “Hindu†children learning “Hindu†ways and manners in Madrassas. It is improbable that these castes can even relate to “Hindu†manners in the sense that these are understood by the “mainstreamâ€. Small wonder that these our “lower†caste kids…mainly Dalit, feel at home in these schools. Of course..there is a lack of “Hindu†schools which will accept these kids.
Let’s forget about the forever “evil†media for a minute and reflect on reality.
Per informed sources, mainly the West Bengal Madrasa system…where there are most “Hindu†students attending, Islamic learning occurs in the higher classes. Not in the junior and middle levels. There is some reference found on a blog on Madrasas.
===================
Palahalli,
My previous comment was in response to the useless paragraphs you posted.. (quoted above)
You are just going around in circles now.. I wonder whom are you talking to ???
Again, the fact that this is an exception means – there is a norm. And you pretty well know what it is, dont you?
27. June 2007 - 7:27 PM
>>> I think the better way would be to clean our homes before pointing fingers.
Yep, our home is the dirtiest of them all.. Other homes are very clean.. LOLzz
>>> Both go to Mosques and both read the Koran. Both consider Allah the only God and Mohammed, Allah’s only Prophet.
And Koran the only book.
You seem to know more about muslims !! Hmm… which madrassa did you go to?
28. June 2007 - 9:31 PM
xyz:
No offence intended in my earlier post. See, we have Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate in Economics telling us the history of Islam in India. Reputed in one field but trying to be an ‘expert’ in another. I genuinely thought DNS had written without bothering to check it up. My mistake.
I am hearing of the Maratha raid on the temple for the first time. I checked up on Goog and quite vague articles came up. Any pointers? One thing I would like to know please, what did the maratha’s do with the murti?
Cheers and apologies if you felt hurt.
1. July 2007 - 8:57 PM
Responding to “Hindu” bombast can be a treat sometimes..
I suppose my friend Vikas thinks a hundred thousand marching against Salman Rushdie is representative of all Muslims. In that case..what does he say about the two hundred thousand Turks marching against the idea of an Islamic Republic in Turkey?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18641418/
On freedom of any sort…I am all for it. Be it for Salman..Hussain or Chandramohan.
I am very concerned that a serious threat like Islamic radicalism is being “contested” by bombastic school drop-outs like Shri Vikas here.
*******
Socal: Read the Hitchins piece. There are some responses in that link that make more sense than the article itself.
May I ask Hitchins…through yourself..what would happen if the “all Muslims are radicals” test, fails to deliver a “YES” ?
The fact that any “rage boy” must not be given credence and must be opposed, is a sentiment shared by all decent people.
******
Mayura: I don’t feel too happy about responding to uncouth posts..but let me ignore base comments and carry on..
The most ardent proposer of population exchange was Dr.Ambedkar. He in fact, made a thorough study of the entire partition movement and published this book –
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/index.html
Few further facts..you might like to ponder over.
1. The Pakistan idea received greater support from Muslims outside of the areas of “original” Pakistan…than from those who were already resident in the claimed areas.
2. Important orthodox schools of Islam opposed partition. (Would you support these folks?)
3. “Pakistan” actually divided Muslims into first two…and then three different nationalities. So much for the Islamic Ummah.
And what do you propose to do with Muslims from down “tamilnad” and such like strange places whose grandfathers might have voted for Pakistan but not moved there?
I don’t know about you…but I am a strong supporter of the partition.
Further: “I wonder why are the bandigeshwasis are so eager to illegally migrate to the land of kafirs and the pukistani elites are so eager to trade with India, while their army keeps scheming to dismember India?”
- Read this statement again and reflect on the immense sense it actually makes. It may even induce you to start thinking along more sensible and realistic lines.
******
Shadows: “And please, stop giving examples about Hindus in west bengal attending madrassas.. its really dumb.”
- Dumb? Really? This is much better than asking these “Hindus” why they attend these Madrasas….isn’t it? Please let me know when you have the answers.
“Again, the fact that this is an exception means – there is a norm. And you pretty well know what it is, dont you?”
- And what may be the norm? That ALL Madrasas breed terrorists? You seem to not want an inconvenient truth. Let us try to test your postulation now. Please share with us what kind of Indian Muslim numbers are contributed to the Jehadi movement? And what are the numbers of Muslims churned out by Indian Madrasas?
“Yep, our home is the dirtiest of them all.. Other homes are very clean.. LOLzz”
- Only if it pleases you to be frivolous. Black and White games are not my cup of tea.
“You seem to know more about muslims !! Hmm… which madrassa did you go to?”
- A lot more than you can imagine. Also…beware! Now you know “Islamic” fundamentalists can breed outside of a Madrasa too!
I actually went to a “Hindu” school run by a reputed swami. Maybe my Muslim classmates in high school induced me toward “their kind” of thinking? What say?
XYZ – Your very correct about this raid on Sringeri.
http://www.sringeri.net/jagadgurus/later_acharyas3.php
Vikas…..see..no trace of that “Histo-cricketer” Sardesai
2. July 2007 - 1:22 PM
>> And what may be the norm? That ALL Madrasas breed terrorists?
No, the norm is that Hindus dont attend madrassas.. Will you please stop distorting the issue ? First of all, understand the posts and then respond.
Maybe there is a job ready for you here.
Guys,
I can understand your frustation with Palahalli and you are responding with angry comments. Remember that he is using the typical commie secular tactic. He will beat around the bush, obfuscate the issues, twist your words, change the context, deliberately misunderstand your posts, ascribe motives to you, etc.. Like he did above with my post.. And the way he is doing to all your posts.
2. July 2007 - 5:53 PM
**Responding to “Hindu†bombast can be a treat sometimes..
++Let’s see.
**I suppose my friend Vikas thinks a hundred thousand marching against Salman Rushdie is representative of all Muslims. In that case..what does he say about the two hundred thousand Turks marching against the idea of an Islamic Republic in Turkey?
++As I said earlier, anecdotal evidences are irrelevant but no problem if you insist. It amuses me that you could not find 100,000 moderate muslims in India (compatriots, huh) which has second largest muslim population in the world, sigh. On top of that, you chose Turkiye where Ataturk, by suppressing Islam, was able to create some sort of a secular order. Wow!
You are defining religion on the basis of its followers. In case of Islam, you are basing your arguments on evidence that there are secular muslims, peaceful muslims who
pose no threat to me. (Did you get it from Pipes, who uses this argument?).
I am sure there are secular Muslims, atheist Muslims, Muslims in name only (for the fear of being killed), muslim apostates etc. These are a portion of a population -> not the religion. To understand whether a Muslim is secular, atheist, devout, apostate etc you have to define the religion first. How can you tell if Mr. ABC practices DEF religion unless you know what the religion is? Islam defines who is a muslim and who is a kaffir(non-muslim/infidel) through koran (only source of authority). And it is the koran which is the source of supremacist ideology of conquest and rule and divides the planet into the house of war and peace(Dar al harb and dar al islam).
The problem is in koran. I dunno who said but its apt “There might be moderate muslims but there is no moderate islam.”
**I am very concerned that a serious threat like Islamic radicalism is being “contested†by bombastic school drop-outs like Shri Vikas here.
++Lookeee lookee here, Mr. I-won’t-dignify-your-abuse-by-responding-to-it has started his personal attacks to fall back on when people disturb his world view.ROFL. Loved it and looking for more of these. What about moderate muslim/faker defn?
**XYZ – Your very correct about this raid on Sringeri.
Nobody denied it, Einstein. Answering all the questions is not the strong point of com’red’s. What about the second question, Palahalli(what did the maratha’s do with the murti?)
3. July 2007 - 1:32 PM
Shadows:
“No, the norm is that Hindus dont attend madrassas.. Will you please stop distorting the issue ? First of all, understand the posts and then respond.”
* Thanks for the job offer…but all you could have said was…”No Palahalli, the norm is “Hindus” don’t attend Madrasas….etc etc.”
Thank but no thanks Shadows…I know that already.
“He will beat around the bush, obfuscate the issues, twist your words, change the context, deliberately misunderstand your posts, ascribe motives to you, etc..”
.
* I like the RED alert. Probably have it at the entrance somewhere
Now let me list my “assumptions” about some views here;
1. That some members claim that ALL Muslims are led by ALL of the Koran. Especially the violent injunctions – If this is a misunderstanding, I will be happy to concede ground.
2. That some members claim that the Koran teaches it’s adherents to kill Kafirs and make Dhimmis and so, that is what Muslims will do…or do. – If this is a misunderstanding, I am fine with withdrawing.
3. That some members here claim that inspite of such great “motivation and adherence” in and to the Koran and ALL Muslims taking it to heart, Muslims still are pretty much divided into various sects. – The disunity, I have never disputed. But why is the logic not applied to the Koran’s influence on the Muslim mind in general? And the manner it can be interpreted by it’s multitudinous adherents?
Btw this is a division/disunity that the Koran DOES NOT tolerate.
4. That Madrasas are (Islamic and regressive). – When shown evidence of progress in curricula, it is said there is no “Social Studies”. The fact that they got to “natural sciences” is obviously no measure of success. But let me put this down to impatience.
5. When “Hindu” students of Madrasas are cited…it is taken with unease…and then there is a “counter” claim…”This is NOT the norm!”.- As if there was a claim otherwise!
6. A hundred thousand Muslim protestors against Salman Rushdie ARE MUSLIMS.*This is NOT anecdotal*
Seven hundred thousand Muslim protestors against an Islamic Republic in Turkey *This IS anecdotal!* ARE NOT MUSLIMS. They are “secular…atheist…etc etc”. But of course….there has been a poll that determined it! Anything to gladden the cockles of our H-Vadi brigadiers.
Let’s try some entries now –
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/tu.html
Religions:
Muslim 99.8% (mostly Sunni), other 0.2% (mostly Christians and Jews)
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-44467/Turkey
“..Nearly all of the population claim allegiance to Islam. Of other adherents, there are about 20,000 Jews and about 200,000 Christians. Christian adherents are divided among Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Protestant, and other denominations.”
But..ah..the fact! Turkish Muslims are less Muslim than their Indian counterparts..my “compatriots”
Then an “argument” of some sort is used to prove one’s flawed assertion.
“You are defining religion on the basis of its followers. In case of Islam, you are basing your arguments on evidence that there are secular muslims, peaceful muslims who
pose no threat to me.” – Firstly, use some of your own prescription. DO NOT ASSUME. I am NOT defining any religion. Let alone Islam. I am contesting a rabid H-Vadi charge that Muslims are killers by virtue of their devotion to the Koran.
“I am sure there are secular Muslims, atheist Muslims, Muslims in name only (for the fear of being killed), muslim apostates etc.”
- Sure there are various kinds…and they call themselves Muslims. Do we take them at their word or not? If they say..”we are Muslims.” are we going to counter that with a *wink” *wink* *nudge* *nudge* and then tell them…”c’mon…don’t lie to us..we know your not Muslims. Your just play-acting..” (??!!)
Childish and preposterous!
And then the masterpiece!
“How can you tell if Mr. ABC practices DEF religion unless you know what the religion is? Islam defines who is a muslim and who is a kaffir(non-muslim/infidel) through koran (only source of authority). And it is the koran which is the source of supremacist ideology of conquest and rule and divides the planet into the house of war and peace(Dar al harb and dar al islam).The problem is in koran.”
And the stumbling on a pebble…as it were.
“There might be moderate muslims but there is no moderate islam.â€
Please explain this!
“what did the maratha’s do with the murti?” – Why not do some research of your own?
A proper study of “Hindu” revivalist history apart from the allied rest, will do you guys proud…and allow a reasonable debate.
And quit the “wannabe fanatic” convulsions!
Shadows – Please try not cry for reinforcements next time. It can be very embarrassing…
3. July 2007 - 10:11 PM
Palahalli:
**A hundred thousand Muslim protestors against Salman Rushdie ARE MUSLIMS.*This is NOT anecdotal* Seven hundred thousand Muslim protestors against an Islamic Republic in Turkey *This IS anecdotal!* ARE NOT MUSLIMS.
They are “secular…atheist…etc etcâ€. But of course….there has been a poll that determined it! Anything to gladden the cockles of our H-Vadi brigadiers.
But..ah..the fact! Turkish Muslims are less Muslim than their Indian counterparts..my “compatriotsâ€
++Can I please, please, please saddle Indian muslims with what pakistanis and bangladeshis are doing to non muslims since pukes and BD’s are no more, no less muslim than their Indian counterparts. Ummah-Wummah!
For someone who was tom-tomming about muslim ‘friends’ this and that, could not find even 1000 Indian moderate muslims, amongst 200+ million Indian muslims, protesting against terrorism in India, but wants me to believe that all will be fine if I accept muslims just as they are. Thousands of Indian muslims can come out of mosques (esp after friday prayers) charged up and riot over cartoons in Denmark and you give me a Turkic example. What happened to the moderate Indian muzzie. Maybe they are busy covering up for the jihadis and pulling wool over our eyes about how Islam is a ‘religion of peace’.
Rioting and looting shops by muslim over cartoons with MIM MemOfParliament Asaduddin Owaisi (Owaisi, a moderate?)
http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IEU20060217093512&Page=U&Ti
Ok,let me get this straight, we are supposed to applaud secular Turkish muslims who know what lies ahead if Turkey goes the Islamic way(IMVHO, which it will, given time, trust Erdogan)? Why? Encourage, yes, support, yes to save their own lives and way of life.
Lastly, how did these Turks become secular? Answer was in another point that you deliberately omitted, Ataturk made Turkey secular by SUPPRESSING Islam. While you want Islam to remain unchanged here in India.
**Then an “argument†of some sort is used to prove one’s flawed assertion.
++Yeah and you are always right, no. Flawed according to your warped world view.
**Firstly, use some of your own prescription. DO NOT ASSUME. I am NOT defining any religion. Let alone Islam. I am contesting a rabid H-Vadi charge that Muslims are killers by virtue of their devotion to the Koran.
++Did I hear ASSUME, pot…kettle…black. Muslims are following their so-called ‘prophet’ Mohammed, a mass murderer, Islamic Hugh Hefner, child molester, donkey riding thug and he is the the exemplary model of conduct and perfect man (uswa hasana | al-insan al-kamil)for muslims(33:21 of Holee Qurap). Following this pervert, what do you think they’ll become, Gandhi? Ha!
**“I am sure there are secular Muslims, atheist Muslims, Muslims in name only (for the fear of being killed), muslim apostates etc.â€- Sure there are various kinds…and they call themselves Muslims. Do we take them at their word or not?
++Lying and deception are part and parcel of Islam. When is Taquiyya permitted, may I ask you? Mind you, I dont make these ‘guidelines’.
**“There might be moderate muslims but there is no moderate islam.†Please explain this!
++Get your head out of your ass and read what was written above and you’ll get the answer. You might have some takleef seeing the sun after so long but it’ll be well worth it, I promiz.
**“what did the maratha’s do with the murti?†– Why not do some research of your own?
++Do you always say this when you cannot find the answer fitting your ‘world view’?
This exchange is becoming tedious and you are providing no countervailing evidence to weaken my conclusions except trying to sound funny with your ‘witty’ remarks but I’ll persist.
3. July 2007 - 11:26 PM
>>>This exchange is becoming tedious and you are providing no countervailing evidence to weaken my conclusions except trying to sound funny with your ‘witty’ remarks but I’ll persist.
There is NO “countervailing evidence,” how can you expect anyone to produce it?! That’s why the opprobrium over Bhyrappa’s novel, who acted as in interloper and spoiled the neat project to keep Islam’s unholy creed under wraps.
4. July 2007 - 2:44 AM
Vikas: Shortly…either you grow the balls to get to your logical conclusion or you don’t peddle your trash anymore.
If Muslims in general are a trashy people because they follow a trashy Prophet…then it should not be a problem to wean them off of Islam..correct?
Probably…Islam is a huge prison camp of a billion + that molests its people relentlessly.
Now, if Muslims don’t want to give up Islam…it follows, as per your logic, that they really like their trash.
This is a nut case argument that would have sounded fine in 30′s Germany…but not anymore.
But allow me to persist now.
What is your plan going to be to wean them away from Islam?
And…how do you see it succeeding?
****
“While you want Islam to remain unchanged here in India.” – Let’s stick with the truth when we debate please. Quiet obviously…it’s not just Muslims who can peddle a lie!
4. July 2007 - 1:32 PM
Socal:
Every word you say is true. What these slippery eels will do is only bait. On a topic of Hinduism vis-a-vis Islam, these buggers will sneak in evils like caste, dowry, sati,Water, ‘boys’ like Chandramohan. Just about any and everything under the sun but islam and this, even when none of us here defend their practice but the collective guilt is borne by us. Wonder why these eels maintain a studied silence and hide the broad brush when islamic jihad crops up? Is it the fear of islam or hatred of Hinduism, which makes them do illogical somersaults? IMHO, I believe, it is the latter.
—————-
Palahalli:
**Shortly…either you grow the balls to get to your logical conclusion or you don’t peddle your trash anymore.
++Wishful thinking will only give you heartburn.
**If Muslims in general are a trashy people because they follow a trashy Prophet…then it should not be a problem to wean them off of Islam..correct? Probably…Islam is a huge prison camp of a billion + that molests its people relentlessly. Now, if Muslims don’t want to give up Islam…it follows, as per your logic, that they really like their trash. This is a nut case argument that would have sounded fine in 30’s Germany…but not anymore.
++Call it, diligence of the convert which makes muslims defend obnoxious things and mullah mofo will provide them with ready made Apologetics 101 with twisted logic. How can you defend a 53 year old tharki Mo marrying 9 yr old girl? ROFL, this is insane. Ask muslims to explain it (if and when you grow the balls) and tell me about it?
**What is your plan going to be to wean them away from Islam? And…how do you see it succeeding?
++What the…you are sounding like Da Chooza {What iz Hindutva?(with a poker face)} Why should I tell you, go do your own research?Ghar ka bhedi lanka dhaaaye.
4. July 2007 - 1:46 PM
I am truly sorry if anybody (muslims incl):) feels offended by my posts.
The biggest losers in this will be secular muslims if they don’t take the mantle from these p-sec marxists posing as your well wishers.
4. July 2007 - 5:03 PM
Sandeep,
After reading your review I bought the book and have started reading. Evn though I am a kannadiga, i realised that my Kannada reading is rather pathetic. For requests that this book be translated to Engligh, I feel that if you are from Karnataka, you should read the book in Kannada. The most beautiful thing about the book is SLB’s writing style which will get lost in the translation. After I started reading this book I have begun to realize the importance of Kannada language teaching in schools and I feel that students in Karnataka have to learn to read Kannada else they will miss out on all these beautiful historical works (Tarasu’s books on Chitradurga etc). I am a history fan and eager to learn about our history and I feel this can be achieved only by reading locally generated works rather than some book written by some Brit (a la Darlymple) who has no clue about our culture and sentiments.
I think you should use your popular blog to introduce more Kannada works to your readers. Anyway keep up the good work.
5. July 2007 - 4:17 AM
My my….”collective guilt” huh? What kind of guilt buddy? You think you get accused of caste oppression when you speak about Islamic terror?? Where do I dwell on Caste or dowry here? Why feel guilty when “you” don’t support these evils? I have not used a broad brush against “Hindus” in general…and I refuse to do the same against Muslims.
Your grouse seems to be that I don’t use the broad brush at all. I don’t fit into your favorite whipping boy “sickular” mould do I? I seem to make your hatchet “job” very difficult.
****
Your rabid hatred is now getting to you.
“Ask muslims to explain it (if and when you grow the balls) and tell me about it?”
- C’mon. You live in Bangalore? Anybody on this board does?? I live in an area surrounded by Muslim families. I invite you to my home. I will also take you to these neigbours…and if you see one old man….with a girl as his wife…I will revert back to your glorious H-Vadi thought process.
You sicken me man! You can capture such sublime thoughts?! Unimaginable! You are a rishi!
Try this….
People worship Gandhi even to this day. People died for him at one time. A nation prostrated at his feet in times of need….and an old Gandhi slept with two naked women. He called it his test of celibacy. No one….Not One…even of your H-Vadi heroes dared bring this up. Not when he lived…and not to this day!
Ever read the Ekatmata Stotra good buddy?? Gandhi in given a place amongst heroes in it.
I have no quarrel with that at all. But you!….I will love to hear your views about this!
*****
“Why should I tell you, go do your own research?Ghar ka bhedi lanka dhaaaye.”
- I did not expect a response from you. I know you are pretty ignorant about Hindutva. You will only shoot your mouth off incoherently and abuse like your much hated communist pals. You guys actually get along well together.
BUT…what I like best is when you guys run off and cry for reinforcements!! Babies!!
This debate can progress if you get off your degenerate “thinking”. Let me know when you gather enough courage.
The offer of the invite still stands.
5. July 2007 - 9:12 AM
>>>Wonder why these eels maintain a studied silence and hide the broad brush when islamic jihad crops up? Is it the fear of islam or hatred of Hinduism, which makes them do illogical somersaults? IMHO, I believe, it is the latter.
I don’t. It has more to do with fear and personal inadequacy. In my observation leftist suffer a two-pronged debacle when faced with muslims and westerners. Any mischief gets repayed in the classic Islamic way as we have witnessed in case of Rushdie, Tasleema, Mo Fo Ho’s Meenaxi and most famously the Danish cartoon episode. Otherwise the Muslim intellectuals take care of leftist superficial commitment to humanism. I guess it is this lethal mix of inadequacy that turns leftists/marxists and like against normal Hindus. The extent to which they have dehumanised Hindus helps them turn deaf to any legitimate grievance of Hindus. If not for our numbers the situation of Hindus couldn’t have been much different than that of Jews in Weimar. Godhra and the morning after–as witnessed in the rational voices that dominated the echo chambers of print and visual media– were a classic reminder of this perversity and struggle for existence that Hindus face. Perhaps the educated Hindus will heed to Edmund Burke’s advice.
5. July 2007 - 9:23 AM
>>I don’t feel too happy about responding to uncouth posts>>
I wonder what is uncouth about my post. Me calling nehru and gadhi names..well they actually deserve it for what they did. So why feel unhappy?
>>The most ardent proposer of population exchange was Dr.Ambedkar. He in fact, made a thorough study of the entire partition movement and published this book ->>
So what is your point?
>> The Pakistan idea received greater support from Muslims outside of the areas of “original†Pakistan…than from those who were already resident in the claimed areas.>>
That was exactly my point when I wrote muslims from Tamilnad supported Pakistan when they had no desire to actually migrate.
>>Important orthodox schools of Islam opposed partition. (Would you support these folks?)>>
Like who…Jamaat-e-Islam which even today exists in another name in India with a hind attached to its name or Muslim League which also exists in India is a decisive factor in some state elections (Kerala..how are you so sure they did not stay back just come in handy for future partitions. After all SIMI is doing exactly that now. Now you tell whether I support such people?
>>“Pakistan†actually divided Muslims into first two…and then three different nationalities. So much for the Islamic Ummah. >>
Agree with you on this. But disagree on the Ummah thing. If it were not for Ummah a truly patriotic Indian muslim would not support the mischief mongers who sneak in pak and bangla to create havoc here.
>>And what do you propose to do with Muslims from down “tamilnad†and such like strange places whose grandfathers might have voted for Pakistan but not moved there?>>
What do YOU propose harbor these people among us and having incidents like Coimbatore serial bombing or Godhar part II repeated year after year.
>>I don’t know about you…but I am a strong supporter of the partition. >>
I too am but only with a difference…only with total population swap
>>Read this statement again and reflect on the immense sense it actually makes. It may even induce you to start thinking along more sensible and realistic lines>>
From their perspective it makes a lot of sense because they want to have the cake and eat it too..they are not only satisified with dismembering Bharat once and making a disaster of their own nations, but now they want to return to feast on our hard earned prosperity and also repeat the partition a second time…look at assam and kashmir.
Regards,
Mayura
5. July 2007 - 9:36 AM
I increasingly sympathize with Israel who must face similar dilemma as most of us here. There’s the terrorist Hamas for whom Israel exists only in quotes. Yet, the burden somehow lies with Israel to recognize Hamas’ govt. and, further still, have a dialogue with the terrorist group. Israel does what any self-respecting, civilized nation will do- it refuses to indulge in such a depraved process. Guess what?- It is Israel which gets denounced as pusillanimous while Hamas doesn’t evoke even cursory reprobation. Not only that Hamas actually gets a pat on its back for–hear this– its “brave” stance. Our choice should be clear.
5. July 2007 - 10:45 AM
Socal,
You hit it on the head my friend. Except for Israel and India, it would have been one big islamic crescent from midwest to south east asia.. I hope that god gives both our countries enough courage to fight back and keep at bay the isalmic monster.
I am not so sure about India, but I am certain Israel will not spare any effort to survive and prosper inspite of the torment by the islamic horde sorrounding it.
Regards,
Mayura
5. July 2007 - 4:14 PM
Something worse than self serving “analysis” is the condescending attitude toward those “Hindus” not educated the way some of us would like them to be.
This is the REAL mental block that retards the progress of various vociferous “Hindu” organizations. They have generally NO faith in the common “Hindu” sense of survival.
There is little wonder then that “anti-Muslim” anxieties exist more amongst “Hindus” not exposed to Muslims in their daily lives and/or in their neighborhood. The reverse amongst Muslims is also true.
I still remember the time when my father lost his sleep over Muslims moving in as neighbours…one by one. So much fear. When I asked him why…he responded…”Now we will have to see sheep being slaughtered in front of our eyes!”. And the time when my wife refused to accept the biryani sent over during the festivals…because it contained meat.
There is greater mingling of the Muslims and “Hindus” in neighborhoods that are “less educated”. In the “Hindu” reality, that regularly translates into “lower castes” and Muslims. In our rural locales…this includes more of “upper castes” too.
I have family bang in the middle of Mohammedan Block in Malleshwaram. They have been there since the past over 15 years. No “fear” in their eyes.
My uncle’s tent house business in Vyalikaval regularly deals with Muslims customers and Muslim business associates. Long standing relationships.
The problem with some geographically and mentally isolated folk is that it becomes easy for them to observe glass cages and write their simplistic analysis..without having to think of ground realities as they exist.
The project of Hindutva as conceived is based on the “urban educated Hindu” having to constantly worry about his less knowing “uneducated Hindu” brother
********
Mayura: The bad language used is unnesassary to make the point. When abuse sets in, there is no discussion. There is only abuse. But you know all this.
The point about Ambedkar’s book is to read and study it. It is not simply about the population exchange but is also very insightful in its analysis of the then prevailing situation and existing options.
Maybe we can discuss it post your review.
On Muslims in Tamil Nadu and a hundred other places…whose grandfathers might have voted for Pakistan, the point is, they chose to stay. Exchange was possible then, but not now.
Can you suggest a practical manner of going about this exchange?
The general thinking of Indian Muslims, in my opinion, is that Pakistan is a failed state making a major nuisanse of itself and for Muslims in the rest of the Sub-Continent. They surely lack the longing for Pakistan. I cannot say the same for some fanatics amongst them.
They also get a better deal under India’s secular dispensation.
I felt this was a good resource – http://www.futureofmuslimworld.com/research/ctID.5/ctrend.asp
In this…you will get a glimpse of what I said earlier. It contains anti-Hindutva fulminations but you may ignore and review only relevant data.
http://www.sasnet.lu.se/allahbaksh.html
The point I was trying to make was there were Muslims genuinly against partition and there were those who were against it for the sake of Islam. By and large, partition was driven and supported by folk who were secular and well heeled. So, the feeling is that the motivation and demand for partition may have been less due to religious and more due to political/secular factors and considerations. A first glimpse of this reversion may be had from Jinnah’s speech to Pakistan’s first Assembly.
“If it were not for Ummah a truly patriotic Indian muslim would not support the mischief mongers who sneak in pak and bangla to create havoc here.”
- I request you to review material in the SATPortal. There are local Muslims who are against this influx because of depletion in resources. The illegal migrants also receive help from the BSF and local politicians for obvious reasons.
Is it not very simplistic to collapse all of this into one huge well connected Islamic consipracy to convert India into Dar Ul Islam?
On Israel…there are more Zionists in the US than in the Middle East. But that topic is for another time. The Palestinians by the way…were reputed to be the most educated and secular of all Muslims in the area. Ill thought out policies and acts can ensure a terrible chain reaction. Trace if you must, the lapse into Islamic militancy in Palestine.
Nothing is BLACK AND WHITE.
5. July 2007 - 9:06 PM
Palahalli claimed:
“Something worse than self serving “analysis†is the condescending attitude toward those “Hindus†not educated the way some of us would like them to be.”
What is really funny about “Palahalli” is that he ascribes *his* own complexes to others, especially to Hindus. He, of course, does not realize his condescending attitude towards “Muslims” in his own Hindu-baiting eagerness, but look at the consequence: all his crazy, commie-loonie “analyses” have sprung from the belief that “Muslims” as a block exist, and this block is under grave threat (“Islam khatre main hain!”), and that therefore “Muslims” need services from him and his “father” in the department of apologetics.
What a silly fellow.
“I have family bang in the middle of Mohammedan Block in Malleshwaram…”
“My uncle’s tent house business in Vyalikaval”
I commend the chap for his good knowledge of Bangalore, which he no doubt is wearing on his sleeve for all to notice.
5. July 2007 - 9:19 PM
Ot,
Is that all?
I invited Vikas to home. Wanted him to meet my Muslim neighbours.
Would you be interested? You in Bangalore?
Let me know.
5. July 2007 - 10:48 PM
>>By and large, partition was driven and supported by folk who were secular and well heeled. So, the feeling is that the motivation and demand for partition may have been less due to religious and more due to political/secular factors and considerations. A first glimpse of this reversion may be had from Jinnah’s speech to Pakistan’s first Assembly.
>>
This is really pathetic. You are ascribing the partition now to political/secular factors and considerations and not to religion. I think you can do better than that. What Jinnah spoke to Pak’s first assembly is irrelevant. What he spoke prior the partition, the famous words “we will divide or destroy india” is more relevant here.
>>The general thinking of Indian Muslims, in my opinion, is that Pakistan is a failed state making a major nuisanse of itself and for Muslims in the rest of the Sub-Continent. >>
But their actions are contrary to their thinking. How do you explain that. A latest example Dr.Haneef from Chikamagalur is also a so called moderate muslim, he had a good education, a good career and what happened suddenly to him? If this is the case of a well educated muslim what to talk about the uneducated ones or the madrassa educated amongst them. Ponder over it.
>>There are local Muslims who are against this influx because of depletion in resources. The illegal migrants also receive help from the BSF and local politicians for obvious reasons.
>>
There you have it. There is no other reason for these people to oppose the illegal influx of bangldeshis or pakistanis, except that they are eating into their resources. No sense of national security or the well being of the nation at large. The fact that BSF and local politicians are helping this migration does not somehow absolve the very idea behind this illegal influx, namely demographic change. It is quite disturbing that this influx was first aided by Fakruddin Ali Ahmed, who was the then chief minister of assam and look how he was rewarded for his efforts…he was made the president of India.
>>Is it not very simplistic to collapse all of this into one huge well connected Islamic consipracy to convert India into Dar Ul Islam? >>
No it is not…refer to my response above.
>>The Palestinians by the way…were reputed to be the most educated and secular of all Muslims in the area. Ill thought out policies and acts can ensure a terrible chain reaction. Trace if you must, the lapse into Islamic militancy in Palestine. >>
That was very disingenious of you. In fact there was nothing by the name of palestine ever existing in middle east if you look at mideaval history and refer to the bible. In fact it was a very clever ploy of profit mahamad to have claimed that he travelled over night from saudi arabia to isreal on a flying horse back and prayed at the al aqsa mosque. This served two purposes, a reason to claim the zionist land as holy for the muslims and a feeble effort to convert the jews to islam. But the second purpose was not fruitful. The jews saw through this ploy of mahamad. In fact it was not the palestinians are the most educated and secular but the neighbouring lebanese muslims…at least until such time that the lebanese government allowed a palestine refugee camp to be set up….and after that everything was a text book case of islamofascism taking over the reasonable and educated lebanese muslims which resulted in the civil war and wanton killing of the coptic christians and jews in lebanon.
>>Ill thought out policies and acts can ensure a terrible chain reaction. Trace if you must, the lapse into Islamic militancy in Palestine.
>>
Very true as far as India is concerned. The policies of jawahar and his progeny has done incalculable damage to this country…we are still living and trying to cope with the pakistan and china, which were the creation of nehrus ill thought out policies and action.
Regards,
Mayura
6. July 2007 - 2:51 AM
“This is really pathetic. You are ascribing the partition now to political/secular factors and considerations and not to religion. I think you can do better than that. What Jinnah spoke to Pak’s first assembly is irrelevant. What he spoke prior the partition, the famous words “we will divide or destroy india†is more relevant here.”
- You have a point.
But please allow me to explain better.
Today, the strongest ideological argument against Kashmiri seperatism and indeed against Pakistan itself, we have, is this – That religion based nationalisms have failed. This means, such “set ups” cannot sustain themselves.
It is now nearly 60 years since partition. We have witnessed the breaking up of Pakistan first, and then, Pakistan at war with itself. On the other hand, we see constant civil strife in Bangladesh. The only area that is stable is India. And India is stable because it chose not a religion to base its “philosophy of existence”.I know H-Vadis will say, Hindu Rashtra is not a theocracy. They will need to prove their point better.
Coming quickly back on track again, if my observation above is true, it follows that Islam as basis for partition was NOT based on fact, but emotion and more than that, fear. Fear of a loss of identity. Fear of being overwhelmed. All we need do is look at developments from 1936 onwards. The Muslim League had actually fared miserably in that election. Not until the Pakistan Resolution in Lahore, did they have an issue to focus on. Then on…it was pressure tactics and gangsterism that made their day.
It may again be useful to look at Jinnah’s personality and its transformation. Pakistan would never have happened without Jinnah. There was no other Muslim leader of stature. And Jinnah was hardly religious.
If indeed Pakistan was a project conceived in religion/Islam, population transfer would have been proposed by Pakistan first. It would then have been logical for it to have a scheme whereby Muslims in the rest of India migrate to Pakistan over a period of time. Much like Israel does. But it did not. Nor did/does its land-natives tolerate their fellow “Mohajirs”.
To say that Islam is the basis of Pakistan is to give credence to an untruth. No matter if that untruth is peddled by the Pakistani establishment itself.
When Ambedkar proposed his population exchange plan, he was simply looking at the issue logically. However, it does not seem that Jinnah was being logical in the religious sense. He was however, being very logical in a power-political framework. He had his “nation” and his land. He was founder of his moth eaten Pakistan.
Jinnah’s statement in that First Assembly acquires immense significance in light of what I have touched upon. It almost appears he knew Pakistan would not survive as a purely Islamic state.
Advani did well in recognizing this fact.
******
“But their actions are contrary to their thinking. How do you explain that. A latest example Dr.Haneef from Chikamagalur is also a so called moderate muslim, he had a good education, a good career and what happened suddenly to him? If this is the case of a well educated muslim what to talk about the uneducated ones or the madrassa educated amongst them. Ponder over it.”
- Here is the story. – http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Jul42007/scroll2007070410917.asp?section=frontpagenews
But my question, if it was Islam always, why now? Why not yesterday? Why not with his parents?
No doubt motivation for such acts, if this man is guilty, is important. Motivation might well lie in Islam…or the sense of insecurity amongst some adherents. How do we deal with that? That has been my question always. You say “exchange populations”. I think what you actually mean is expulsion. However, you do not say how (?)
*******
“There you have it. There is no other reason for these people to oppose the illegal influx of bangldeshis or pakistanis, except that they are eating into their resources. No sense of national security or the well being of the nation at large. The fact that BSF and local politicians are helping this migration does not somehow absolve the very idea behind this illegal influx, namely demographic change. It is quite disturbing that this influx was first aided by Fakruddin Ali Ahmed, who was the then chief minister of assam and look how he was rewarded for his efforts…he was made the president of India.”
- Mayura, I feel Ali Ahmed (Is there a link?)not withstanding, this “migration” was/is going to happen. You may think it strange that rural folk working on their lands…have no higher purpose than sustenance..but that is how most folk think. All over this country. No wonder they attack anybody who threatens their “security” and “space” in any way. Be it Muslims or “Hindus” and there are both “Hindu” and Muslim politicians who will abet this for their own reasons. The bigger question is this. What is to be done for the long term?
*******
“No it is not…refer to my response above.”
- You are still far from proving an “Islamic Conspiracy”.
*******
“That was very disingenious of you. In fact there was nothing by the name of palestine ever existing in middle east if you look at mideaval history and refer to the bible. In fact it was a very clever ploy of profit mahamad to have claimed that he travelled over night from saudi arabia to isreal on a flying horse back and prayed at the al aqsa mosque. This served two purposes, a reason to claim the zionist land as holy for the muslims and a feeble effort to convert the jews to islam. But the second purpose was not fruitful. The jews saw through this ploy of mahamad. In fact it was not the palestinians are the most educated and secular but the neighbouring lebanese muslims…at least until such time that the lebanese government allowed a palestine refugee camp to be set up….and after that everything was a text book case of islamofascism taking over the reasonable and educated lebanese muslims which resulted in the civil war and wanton killing of the coptic christians and jews in lebanon.”
- I found this to be concise, please review – http://www.usd.edu/erp/Palestine/history.htm
Looks like the Muslims ended Roman rule…and not Jewish.
On Education – http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761557747/West_Bank.html
And more – http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/17/64/95.pdf
But it is very interesting that you make this statement – “In fact it was not the palestinians are the most educated and secular but the neighbouring lebanese muslims…at least until such time that the lebanese government allowed a palestine refugee camp to be set up….and after that everything was a text book case of islamofascism taking over the reasonable and educated lebanese muslims which resulted in the civil war and wanton killing of the coptic christians and jews in lebanon.” – What does this say to you?
Regards,
6. July 2007 - 10:47 AM
Palahalli, Post #27 of the two Q answered, I have by mistake posted my reply in the ‘two Q?s answered’ thread. You can reply here, my friend.
6. July 2007 - 8:15 PM
>>Today, the strongest ideological argument against Kashmiri seperatism and indeed against Pakistan itself, we have, is this – That religion based nationalisms have failed. This means, such “set ups†cannot sustain themselves.>>
Who is making that argument? The Indians but not the pakistanis. They still harp on the 2 nation theory and unfinished business of J&K. To the contrary religion based is succeeding pretty well..look at thailand,indonesia,serbia,croatia,lebanon,iran,iraq…oh boy the list never ends..does it?
>>I know H-Vadis will say, Hindu Rashtra is not a theocracy. They will need to prove their point better. >>
Of course not. Even when this country was purely hindu ie., before the advent of islam/christianity, hindus always welcomed outsiders and allowed them to co-exist peacefully…eg. parsees,jews and most recently the tibetians. When and how did this change and by whom…think about it.
>>Coming quickly back on track again, if my observation above is true, it follows that Islam as basis for partition was NOT based on fact, but emotion and more than that, fear. Fear of a loss of identity. Fear of being overwhelmed>>
This is a ridiculous argument. Islam WAS THE basis for partition. In fact even before Jinnah, it was Allama Iqbal who proposed that muslims and hindus could not live together as their worlds and beliefs are so different. Here are a people who ruled the nation for 800 years and did all sort of atrocities on a peaceful people and religion and now they have a fear of loss of identity and fear of being overwhelmed…come on even you can’t believe that.
>>If indeed Pakistan was a project conceived in religion/Islam, population transfer would have been proposed by Pakistan first. It would then have been logical for it to have a scheme whereby Muslims in the rest of India migrate to Pakistan over a period of time. Much like Israel does. But it did not. Nor did/does its land-natives tolerate their fellow “Mohajirsâ€.>>
Pakistan was a project conceived in religion/islam. Population transfer is one sided during and after partition. Look at all the muslims who voted for pakistan and shameless staying back, while pakistan systematically cleansed the hindu populatin or converted by forcibly. What the punjabi muslims do to mohajirs is their problem. When a momin does not find a kafir to kill he kills another momin and I am all for it. A very effective way of natural selection and cleaning up the gene pool of unwanted strains.
>>But my question, if it was Islam always, why now? Why not yesterday? Why not with his parents?
No doubt motivation for such acts, if this man is guilty, is important. Motivation might well lie in Islam…or the sense of insecurity amongst some adherents. How do we deal with that? That has been my question always. You say “exchange populationsâ€. I think what you actually mean is expulsion. However, you do not say how (?)>>
Look this haneef is a Indian. If genuinely he had any grouse it should be against fellow indians not against the distant british people. The very fact that he chose to act the way he did to harm his land of adoption says something about this guy and the ideology he adheres to. Why did the people who rioted in Shivajinagar against Saddams husseins execution do so…what has sadddam got to do with bangalore population, why did the people in delhi riot against profit mahamad’s caricature in denmark, why did they protest against Bush visit to India. Do they not see anything beyond their moth eaten terrorist cult to base their protest on. For heavens sake stop saying they are insecure. It is the non-muslims who are insucure living amongst these brainwahsed people who do not see anything beyond their bandit profit and his so called holy queeran.
Buying them a one way ticket to pakistan on the Samjhauta express would be good start
Regards,
Mayura
7. July 2007 - 6:46 AM
Sam Harris, the author of “End of Faith,” answers pretty much all rhetorical questions posed by those who advocate political correctness while dealing with Islam.
Relevant portions:
“It is time we recognized—and obliged the Muslim world to recognize—that “Muslim extremism†is not extreme among Muslims. Mainstream Islam itself represents an extremist rejection of intellectual honesty, gender equality, secular politics and genuine pluralism. The truth about Islam is as politically incorrect as it is terrifying: Islam is all fringe and no center. In Islam, we confront a civilization with an arrested history. It is as though a portal in time has opened, and the Christians of the 14th century are pouring into our world.”
and
“And yet, there are gradations to the evil that is done in name of God, and these gradations must be honestly observed. So let us now acknowledge the obvious: there is a direct link between the doctrine of Islam and Muslim violence. Acknowledging this link remains especially taboo among political liberals. While liberals are leery of religious fundamentalism in general, they consistently imagine that all religions at their core teach the same thing and teach it equally well. This is one of the many delusions borne of political correctness. Rather than continue to squander precious time, energy, and good will by denying the role that Islam now plays in perpetuating Muslim violence, we should urge Muslim communities, East and West, to reform the ideology of their religion. This will not be easy, as the Koran and hadith offer precious little basis for a Muslim Enlightenment, but it is necessary. The truth that we must finally confront is that Islam contains specific notions of martyrdom and jihad that fully explain the character of Muslim violence. Unless the world’s Muslims can find some way of expunging the metaphysics that is fast turning their religion into a cult of death, we will ultimately face the same perversely destructive behavior throughout much of the world. It should be clear that I am not speaking about a race or an ethnicity here; I am speaking about the logical consequences of specific ideas.”
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060207_reality_islam/#Jump
8. July 2007 - 11:13 AM
++Your Post# 40.
- This is what I said, “The reason I have “Hindus†within quotes is very clear to me. There is no meaning to the term in its religious sense unless we take into account its caste-outcaste structure. Most commentators these days are happy to link “Hinduism†with some notion of Brahmanism. In fact…it makes more sense that way…except for the fact that it leaves out most of “it’s†non-Brahmanic people. The other definition of the “Hindu†as a resident..this side of the Indus is embarrassingly self restrictive.”
And I think my explanation was wrt to Hindu within quotes. Nothing more or less. However, Caste is very relevant to “Hindu” relationships with folk of other religions. I hope you are not denying that.
I will also ignore snide and childish comments from you, that add no value to our discussion.
********
++I don’t stay in B’lore, anyway, where will you take me, to the recently caught Al-Qaeda jihadi’s homes. Haha! This is a classic case of ‘deepak taley andhera’. Muslims from Bangalore, get caught recently in UK and Oz for terrorist activities and this fella is saying ’see everything is OK, nobody has bombed me’. Get out of your house or read up before writing these silly posts? Maybe, you’ll NOT scream jeeeehaaad even when a bomb goes off underneath your a*s. Everyone is not bumf**ked braindead as you, pal.
- Too much hysteria. Is that why you could not wait before slaughtering over 3000 “Hindu” Sikhs in ’84?? Yes. I live in Bangalore. Amidst numerous Muslim families. Without fear.
What do you suggest? I look at them with suspicion? I stop speaking with them? I round up a brigade of braveheart “Hindu” youth and pelt stones and drag them into the main street?? What is it that I should do? Or what is it that you will do?? If there are Muslims within your reach…what have you already done?
*******
++You are entitled to your opinions about Gandhi, you don’t like him, fine with me. This Hindutvavadi likes Gandhi. Next comes The Big Leap, comparing Gandhi with Mohammed.
Gandhi was a human being, not god or apostle of god. Gandhi, might be mentioned in a stotr but he is not mentioned in Shruti and Smriti Prasthan (my holy books, V and BG). Mention of freedom fighters in stotr (hymns) don’t make them gods. Child m*lester Mo is there in koran and ahadith, ‘holy’ book for muslims. Gandhi, a human being, sleeping with 2 naked women, gets you to say “Chee Cheeâ€. OK. I’m all ears to what you’ll say to,
- Mohammed is not God even to Muslims. Certainly Gandhi and Mohammed are not Gods. My comparison was pertinent to the fact that folks generally will ignore and NOT FOLLOW inconvenient peculiarities in their heroes. I have a different opinion of Gandhi and Mohammed and many others that I might discuss with you when you get better educated. You are simply missing my point with all your abuse.
No, Gandhi’s actions are not chee-chee to me. They are his…and I am not aware enough to shoot my mouth off about such things.
******
I hope you do not support Mo’s child rap*ng and ogling other girls and women since I have not seen one line from you against Mo’s pa*dophilia and other assorted debauchery? Want another one of Ayesha and Mo escapades, I promise it’ll be as raunchy as this one if not more.
- You are pretty well versed in such details. It’s all very natural you see. Don’t worry, you will lose your wide eyed excitement after you find a girl-friend. It’s natural progression.
*****
It is very clear to me what Hindutva means to you. It’s too ugly to find mention here.
8. July 2007 - 11:13 AM
Vikas:
++Your Post# 40.
- This is what I said, “The reason I have “Hindus†within quotes is very clear to me. There is no meaning to the term in its religious sense unless we take into account its caste-outcaste structure. Most commentators these days are happy to link “Hinduism†with some notion of Brahmanism. In fact…it makes more sense that way…except for the fact that it leaves out most of “it’s†non-Brahmanic people. The other definition of the “Hindu†as a resident..this side of the Indus is embarrassingly self restrictive.”
And I think my explanation was wrt to Hindu within quotes. Nothing more or less. However, Caste is very relevant to “Hindu” relationships with folk of other religions. I hope you are not denying that.
I will also ignore snide and childish comments from you, that add no value to our discussion.
********
++I don’t stay in B’lore, anyway, where will you take me, to the recently caught Al-Qaeda jihadi’s homes. Haha! This is a classic case of ‘deepak taley andhera’. Muslims from Bangalore, get caught recently in UK and Oz for terrorist activities and this fella is saying ’see everything is OK, nobody has bombed me’. Get out of your house or read up before writing these silly posts? Maybe, you’ll NOT scream jeeeehaaad even when a bomb goes off underneath your a*s. Everyone is not bumf**ked braindead as you, pal.
- Too much hysteria. Is that why you could not wait before slaughtering over 3000 “Hindu” Sikhs in ’84?? Yes. I live in Bangalore. Amidst numerous Muslim families. Without fear.
What do you suggest? I look at them with suspicion? I stop speaking with them? I round up a brigade of braveheart “Hindu” youth and pelt stones and drag them into the main street?? What is it that I should do? Or what is it that you will do?? If there are Muslims within your reach…what have you already done?
*******
++You are entitled to your opinions about Gandhi, you don’t like him, fine with me. This Hindutvavadi likes Gandhi. Next comes The Big Leap, comparing Gandhi with Mohammed.
Gandhi was a human being, not god or apostle of god. Gandhi, might be mentioned in a stotr but he is not mentioned in Shruti and Smriti Prasthan (my holy books, V and BG). Mention of freedom fighters in stotr (hymns) don’t make them gods. Child m*lester Mo is there in koran and ahadith, ‘holy’ book for muslims. Gandhi, a human being, sleeping with 2 naked women, gets you to say “Chee Cheeâ€. OK. I’m all ears to what you’ll say to,
- Mohammed is not God even to Muslims. Certainly Gandhi and Mohammed are not Gods. My comparison was pertinent to the fact that folks generally will ignore and NOT FOLLOW inconvenient peculiarities in their heroes. I have a different opinion of Gandhi and Mohammed and many others that I might discuss with you when you get better educated. You are simply missing my point with all your abuse.
No, Gandhi’s actions are not chee-chee to me. They are his…and I am not aware enough to shoot my mouth off about such things.
******
I hope you do not support Mo’s child rap*ng and ogling other girls and women since I have not seen one line from you against Mo’s pa*dophilia and other assorted debauchery? Want another one of Ayesha and Mo escapades, I promise it’ll be as raunchy as this one if not more.
- You are pretty well versed in such details. It’s all very natural you see. Don’t worry, you will lose your wide eyed excitement after you find a girl-friend. It’s natural progression.
*****
It is very clear to me what Hindutva means to you. It’s too ugly to find mention here.
8. July 2007 - 11:18 AM
Sandeep – Please delete the repeated post #130. Must have been a problem with my comp.
Regards,
8. July 2007 - 1:04 PM
Mayura:
Who is making that argument? The Indians but not the pakistanis. They still harp on the 2 nation theory and unfinished business of J&K. To the contrary religion based is succeeding pretty well..look at thailand,indonesia,serbia,croatia,lebanon,iran,iraq…oh boy the list never ends..does it?
- Of course not the Pakistani establishment! Why should we expect them to say anything that goes against their favor? No matter if it is factual. Ever wondered why they limit their unfinished business to Kashmir? And not other Indian areas that might have Muslim populations? There was some talk in H-Vadi circles about pushing Pakistan to accept a plebiscite on Kashmir, with Muslims ALL OVER India voting YES or NO. I think, if well handled, it’s an excellent idea. If Muslims really are a nation by themselves, then they should vote YES. How do you think they’ll vote?
Religion based Nations will/can never succeed. They will create problems for themselves and for the rest. Of course, if you want India to be limited in scope like any of the countries in your list, then we might think about the option with “benefit”.
But…now that you mention it..it’s interesting. How do you see a “Hindu” State?
******
Of course not. Even when this country was purely hindu ie., before the advent of islam/christianity, hindus always welcomed outsiders and allowed them to co-exist peacefully…eg. parsees,jews and most recently the tibetians. When and how did this change and by whom…think about it.
- I am thinking. When were we “purely” “Hindu”? What being “Hindu” at the time of Al-Beruni was…is not what it is now. As for “Hindu Rashtra”, this is different, conceptually, from a “Hindu” State. But even with the former, our H-Vadis have managed to drive enough fear amongst “Hindus” themselves with their ridiculous ideas of social behavior and correctness. With their ridiculous and extraordinary views on how our country was and what it should be. The idea one gets is that of a straight jacket. I might generalize when I speak of such ideas emanating from H-Vadis…but no doubt, these are the ideas prevail in the market.
As forward action maybe you can list ideas that you may want as basis for a “Hindu Rashtra” and we can discuss to see if there is value in them and how, in essence, can they be had ONLY with the advent of such a Rashtra?
*******
This is a ridiculous argument. Islam WAS THE basis for partition. In fact even before Jinnah, it was Allama Iqbal who proposed that muslims and hindus could not live together as their worlds and beliefs are so different. Here are a people who ruled the nation for 800 years and did all sort of atrocities on a peaceful people and religion and now they have a fear of loss of identity and fear of being overwhelmed…come on even you can’t believe that.
- And we have Savarkar endorsing that principle. In his presidential address to the Hindu Mahasabha in December 1939, Savarkar declared: “We Hindus are a nation by ourselves … we Hindus are marked out as an abiding Nation by ourselves” (see Indian Annual Register, 1939, Vol II). Again later he reiterated, ” I have no quarrel
with Mr Jinnah’s two-nation theory. We, Hindus, are a nation by ourselves and it is a historical fact that Hindus and Muslims are two nations” (Indian Annual Register, 1943, Vol II).
However, all three and possibly a fourth, Ambedkar, depending on how far he took his logic and I feel that he was not really for partition, were terribly wrong in light of future events in the lives of their blessed “nationsâ€. How can we ignore all that has happened and only look at the “success†of the Partition project singly?
In so far as “minority insecurity†is concerned, you are being emotional in your approach. When a minority ruling class loses power to another, and it had been over three hundred years already, it will not necessarily say, “Come…rule over us now!â€. The modern State ensures safeguards for its minorities. Sometimes, even those safeguards are no guarantee against a minority walking away. In a famous Irish episode Ambedkar relates….the “minority†exclaims….â€to hell with your safeguards! We will not be ruled by you!â€.
It certainly appears that the “Hindu†leadership no doubt adamant about “Hindu†rule, was completely unprepared to impose any such rule on the most intransigent minority in their midst. It was singularly, a failure of imagination, policy and finally, will.
There were calls for civil war even then. If that had happened, partition would have nevertheless followed but with foreign troops on our soil, “to ensure peaceâ€. Post WW2, not one of the big powers was prepared and would have tolerated civil unrest on such a large scale in so wide a land so strategically placed.
********
Pakistan was a project conceived in religion/islam. Population transfer is one sided during and after partition. Look at all the muslims who voted for pakistan and shameless staying back, while pakistan systematically cleansed the hindu populatin or converted by forcibly. What the punjabi muslims do to mohajirs is their problem. When a momin does not find a kafir to kill he kills another momin and I am all for it. A very effective way of natural selection and cleaning up the gene pool of unwanted strains.
- This is not making any sense. I will put it down to ranting. Ignored.
*******
“Look this haneef is a Indian. If genuinely he had any grouse it should be against fellow indians not against the distant british people. The very fact that he chose to act the way he did to harm his land of adoption says something about this guy and the ideology he adheres to. Why did the people who rioted in Shivajinagar against Saddams husseins execution do so…what has sadddam got to do with bangalore population, why did the people in delhi riot against profit mahamad’s caricature in denmark, why did they protest against Bush visit to India.â€
- It seems you are asking me to do two things.
Provide justification for terrorist acts. * I cannot do that. If guilty, further investigations will provide his motivation.
Share in your caricature of all Muslims as rioters and troublemakers. * I do not agree with that caricature because it is not true.
*******
Buying them a one way ticket to pakistan on the Samjhauta express would be good start
- I can laugh at this….but since this is a serious discussion; let me ask how you would plan such an operation? When and if done…how would you plan to handle reactions and counter measures…both national and international? How would you plan on ensuring the safety of those “Hindus†that will inevitably need to travel and/or live outside of India?
And…..naturally, you expect Samjhauta’s arrival in Pakistan to be welcomed with garlands in hand. You are “fortunate†to dream these dreams.
I request you to cull those arguments that may add value to our discussion, in your response. But of course, you are completely free to respond to everything.
Regards,
8. July 2007 - 1:16 PM
Palahalli:
**However, Caste is very relevant to “Hindu†relationships with folk of other religions. I hope you are not denying that.
++I was tempted at the start to ask you why the Hindu in quotes but someone else did it before me. Now I know why? BTW, caste doesn’t matter to this non-brahmin.
********
- Too much hysteria. Yes. I live in
Bangalore. Amidst numerous Muslim families. Without fear. What do you suggest? I look at them with suspicion? I stop speaking with them? I round up a brigade of braveheart “Hindu†youth and pelt stones and drag them into the main street?? What is it that I should do? Or what is it that you will do?? If there are Muslims within your reach…what have you already done?
++Pretty sad that you can’t muster facts to counter my arguments and have to rely on hyperbole. At least first try to name the problem that Islamic terrorism is a reality in India. Do you agree with this statement without justification and apologetics? These Ahmed jokers have punctured many of your tall ‘claims’ about ‘religion of piece’. In the end, they became bombers just due to their fanaticism towards an ideology of murderous hegemony i.e. Islam. Beat that!
*******
- Mohammed is not God even to Muslims. Certainly Gandhi and Mohammed are not Gods. My comparison was pertinent to the fact that folks generally will ignore and NOT FOLLOW inconvenient peculiarities in their heroes. I have a different opinion of Gandhi and Mohammed and many others that I might discuss with you when you get better educated. You are simply missing my point with all your abuse.
++You really are unable to read in complete sentences(deliberately), aren’t you? You forgot that I mentioned god/apostle of god. Mohammed declared himself Rasulallah (apostle of god). Let me spell it for you, Gandhi is a human being and Mohammed is an apostle of god, so comparisons between the two are wrong. Better educate yourself and try to be sincere before giving the same advice to others.
I quoted from koran & ahadith and if you find that offensive, take your gripe to the Islamic types. Or is posting inconvenient quotes from koran that gets your goat and makes you squirm in your seat?
******
**You are pretty well versed in such details. It’s all very natural you see. Don’t worry, you will lose your wide eyed excitement after you find a girl-friend. It’s natural progression.
++Why fume, pal? Still, you have not answered the question about mohammed’s paedophilic sexual antics but are beating around the bush?
8. July 2007 - 2:38 PM
Vikas:
++I was tempted at the start to ask you why the Hindu in quotes but someone else did it before me. Now I know why? BTW, caste doesn’t matter to this non-brahmin.
- Maybe not. But Caste as a function of social intercourse with Muslims and allied minorities including within “Hindus” themselves is a living reality.
********
++Pretty sad that you can’t muster facts to counter my arguments and have to rely on hyperbole. At least first try to name the problem that Islamic terrorism is a reality in India. Do you agree with this statement without justification and apologetics? These Ahmed jokers have punctured many of your tall ‘claims’ about ‘religion of piece’. In the end, they became bombers just due to their fanaticism towards an ideology of murderous hegemony i.e. Islam. Beat that!
- What “facts” do you want mustered? Islamic terror can strike anywhere. Even in places where there are no Muslims. Since I am not much induced into black and white scenarios, I have never claimed Islam or any religion to be a religion of peace. It is a religion that over a billion believe in, nevertheless.
Apart from impotent rantings, where are your ideas?
In case you are bereft of them….at least tell me what you did with Muslims in your neighbourhood? Please don’t just bawl and cry like a baby!
*******
++You really are unable to read in complete sentences(deliberately), aren’t you? You forgot that I mentioned god/apostle of god. Mohammed declared himself Rasulallah (apostle of god). Let me spell it for you, Gandhi is a human being and Mohammed is an apostle of god, so comparisons between the two are wrong. Better educate yourself and try to be sincere before giving the same advice to others.
- Fair enough. Do you then want a comparison of one “apostle” against another? One “god” against another? Will you be able to handle all that? Does it make sense to face off a Rangeela Rasool with a Riddles in Hinduism and then say….”There! Answer that!”
All right. Practical question – Muslims like to say they follow Mohammed in his tracks right? Well then, how many old Muslim men have you seen marrying children?
What are the statistics for Polygamy by community in India? What are the statistics by community for Child Marraiges/Brides in India?
******
I quoted from koran & ahadith and if you find that offensive, take your gripe to the Islamic types. Or is posting inconvenient quotes from koran that gets your goat and makes you squirm in your seat?
- Nope. Does not offend at all. It is there in the Koran/Hadith. However, must I not laugh at one who thinks on becoming a Muslim…I must perforce run off and marry a 9yr old child?
Get real Vikas!
9. July 2007 - 12:19 PM
>>> Noand an old Gandhi slept with two naked women. He called it his test of celibacy. No one….Not One…even of your H-Vadi heroes dared bring this up. Not when he lived…and not to this day!
I brought this up once earlier on GreatBongs post. You cannot blame us for your lack of awareness, can you ?
Anyway, to satisfy you, I say Gandhi was fooling the people, he was perverted. He was a jerk to lecture us on morality etc when he slept with two young women naked. (Maybe trying to emulate the great Bearded Prophet of the Religion of Peace
) And he said he did not do anything with them 
LOLzz.. India today once carried an interview with an old old secretary of Gandhi (obviously, he was forgotten by the congress, and living in poverty) who confirmed these acts of Gandhi.
9. July 2007 - 12:20 PM
I brought this up once earlier on GreatBongs post. You cannot blame us for your lack of awareness, can you ?
=============
What I wanted to say was that this topic has been brought up many a times on various blogs.
11. July 2007 - 12:06 PM
Shadows:
“Anyway, to satisfy you, I say Gandhi was fooling the people, he was perverted. He was a jerk to lecture us on morality etc when he slept with two young women naked. (Maybe trying to emulate the great Bearded Prophet of the Religion of Peace ) And he said he did not do anything with them LOLzz.. India today once carried an interview with an old old secretary of Gandhi (obviously, he was forgotten by the congress, and living in poverty) who confirmed these acts of Gandhi.”
- Missed my point again. It does not matter to me if Gandhi slept with two women or Mohammed wedded a 9yr old…or any other “ugly” reality. These were their own men.
What is important to me is to know this – If Muslims are so fanatical about their Hadith…then why are their old men not marrying 9 year olds as a matter of course? Why is it so difficult for you even to “google” for such information?
It is much like the article you posted above. You are intent on painting Muslims into such a tight corner, on the Koran and the Hadith, that at least theoretically, it is impossible for you to visualize a normal Muslim going about his daily life…just like so many million “Hindus” and Christians. It looks almost, like the moment you see a Muslim on your street….you think of him blowing himself up…or walking along with his 9 year old wife!
That is why it is very important for me to know what your experience has been with Muslims. Friends..colleagues..etc.
In so far as the American establishment is concerned…they did not seem to mind using the selfsame ideas with selfsame logical conclusions (?)…when they used Mujahids against the Soviets! Those were of course GLORY DAYS! No rotten Islam to bother their respective consciences! Was Islam good at least then??…barely 25 years ago?? When Osama was their partner?!
So…dear friend..it is not political correctness that impels me to defend Muslims. It is my sense of discrimination that impels me NOT to put them all in the same basket as the Jehadis. The key to your riddle or otherwise about Islam and violence is in the daily lives of its ordinary adherents. Why is THAT so difficult to understand?
All right…let’s suppose we skip the above “theory” with light at the end of this seeming tunnel…and look at your own. ie. Islam = Terrorists. What is your plan of action to deal with this “reality”? Mayura mentioned the Samjhauta Express…
11. July 2007 - 12:32 PM
Palahalli,
I feel I am wasting my time, but still, i have some to waste
>>> If Muslims are so fanatical about their Hadith…then why are their old men not marrying 9 year olds as a matter of course?
They do !! Some of them even make it to the news.. like Arabs buying children in India for “sexual pleasure” or as “camel drivers”. There were a few cases of old arab muslims marrying a minor in Hyderabad.
>>> It looks almost, like the moment you see a Muslim on your street….you think of him blowing himself up…or walking along with his 9 year old wife!
That is what you are imagining.. not me.
>>> You are intent on painting Muslims into such a tight corner, on the Koran and the Hadith
They themselves have done this, not us.
>>> That is why it is very important for me to know what your experience has been with Muslims.
Mostly bad. Most of them have been this radical types, beneath a facade of secularism or modernism.
>>> Was Islam good at least then??…barely 25 years ago?? When Osama was their partner?!
They may have been good for US then.. now US has realized it because they are facing the heat. Anyway, It does not matter – For us, they have been bad for over 800 years.
>>> It is my sense of discrimination that impels me NOT to put them all in the same basket as the Jehadis.
Where is this sense of discrimination when Hindus are labelled ??
>>> The key to your riddle or otherwise about Islam and violence is in the daily lives of its ordinary adherents.
I agree
The so called ordinary or moderate adherents that I have seen are mostly radical enough. Baat baat par islam islam karte rehte hain. I can imagine what terrorists would be like.
Ordinary adherents.. Once in my college days, we bunch of guys went to a restaurant which served both beef and pork fast food. a muslim guy , amongst us Hindus, ordered beef burger. I decided on Pork.. He was offended.. LOLzz…
Please Palahalli, spare your bleeding heart for some other day
11. July 2007 - 12:33 PM
>>>> There were a few cases of old arab muslims marrying a minor in Hyderabad.
Correction
marrying minors in Hyderabad.
11. July 2007 - 12:38 PM
>>> If Muslims are so fanatical about their Hadith…then why are their old men not marrying 9 year olds as a matter of course?
If Hindus are so secular, why are Hindus not attending madrassas as a matter of course ??
Or why is Sati or child marriage not a matter of course.
Palahalli, be very careful about what you say – it comes around to haunt you. You have to be consistent in your thoughts.
(Child marriage is another offshoot of muslim debauchery.. parents started to get their girls married much earlier to avoid them getting raped or kidnapped by muslims when they grow up… note that this custom is much more prevelant in Rajasthan, where the brave Rajputs fought the muslims. everything has a reason if you think about it.. its not Hinduism which states in any text that child marriage is valid.)
11. July 2007 - 12:40 PM
The probability of a muslim being a radical or a terrorist is much higher than the probability of Sati occurring.. (probability – OR instead, you may consider the ratio of incidents like sati or terrorist divided by the population )
11. July 2007 - 2:05 PM
Shadows:
“I feel I am wasting my time, but still, i have some to waste” – Allow me to humor you some more.
******
They do !! Some of them even make it to the news.. like Arabs buying children in India for “sexual pleasure†or as “camel driversâ€. There were a few cases of old arab muslims marrying a minor in Hyderabad.
* This is what you come up with? Ever heard of paedophilia? In India? In Kerala? In Goa? In Pondicherry? All Muslims? Or is some other “non-Indic” faith on the firing line to please your conscience? “Hindus” are involved. In greater numbers. Your logic should take me to their books. It doesn’t. Know why? I know criminals when I see them. I don’t run around branding everybody the same! And I have read of those cases in Hyderabad. There are Muslim children too. I have not noticed Allah’s joy on their parents’ faces with the prospect of such a “sale”!
******
That is what you are imagining.. not me.
* No…your words reveal your thinking.
*****
They themselves have done this, not us.
* Who is “they”??
*****
Mostly bad. Most of them have been this radical types, beneath a facade of secularism or modernism.
* Tough. Mine has been mostly good. A drink…pork and beef. Or beef being refused…and get this…beef not being ordered in the company of “Hindus”.
******
They may have been good for US then.. now US has realized it because they are facing the heat. Anyway, It does not matter – For us, they have been bad for over 800 years.
* “For us, they have been bad for over 800 years.” – Oh..you are such a tart! So considerate about people who don’t share your fanaticism.
And the US? Good?? Then?? Tell me this. What was the H-Vadi stance during that war with the Soviets? The US practically built the Al-Qaeda into what it became…and you say…”They may have been good for US then..”!?? Did the H-Vadi parties oppose this policy of the US? Then?
******
Where is this sense of discrimination when Hindus are labelled ??
* Ah…a basic grouse! Talk to me when you hear me rubbishing all “Hindus” along with criminals amongst them.
*******
I agree The so called ordinary or moderate adherents that I have seen are mostly radical enough. Baat baat par islam islam karte rehte hain. I can imagine what terrorists would be like.
* Allright…let’s cut to the chase. What’s your plan of action?
But more….
“If Hindus are so secular, why are Hindus not attending madrassas as a matter of course ?? Or why is Sati or child marriage not a matter of course.” – Please explain the connection.
****
“Child marriage is another offshoot of muslim debauchery..” – But of course. Islamic invaders made widely known the term “Hindu”. They must be the cause of all “Hindu” evils too…surely?
All this is so simple. Suits simple minded folk.
11. July 2007 - 6:21 PM
>>> beef not being ordered in the company of “Hindusâ€.
What about beef deliberately being ordered in the company of Hindus.. not by one, but by three muslims at three different times !!
>>> Did the H-Vadi parties oppose this policy of the US? Then?
Nobody ever predicted what would happen 20 years later !!
11. July 2007 - 6:36 PM
>> And I have read of those cases in Hyderabad. There are Muslim children too.
Whether muslim children or not,, they are emulating their prophet, arent they ?
>> >>> You are intent on painting Muslims into such a tight corner, on the Koran and the Hadith
>> They themselves have done this, not us.
>> * Who is “they�?
Please see the quoted context. I have clearly stated what I am talking about. Please re-read, in order, and you will get what I am talking about. Dont distort the topic.. And you ask me to apologise?
Pheww… i just cant repeat myself again and again, so that people get the context without reading the previous comments in the thread !!
>> So considerate about people who don’t share your fanaticism.
Labelling me as a fanatic , because of my religion, apart, why should I be considerate or non-considerate to them. Do you want me to abuse US ??
>>> Talk to me when you hear me rubbishing all “Hindus†along with criminals amongst them.
Reminds me of a quote from the vienna blog – all muslims are not terrorists, but most terrorists are muslims..
>> “If Hindus are so secular, why are Hindus not attending madrassas as a matter of course ?? Or why is Sati or child marriage not a matter of course.†– Please explain the connection.
Please explain why “not many old muslims not marrying 9 year olds” means that they are not fanatic? Thats what you stated, didnt you?
>>> Islamic invaders made widely known the term “Hinduâ€. They must be the cause of all “Hindu†evils too…surely?All this is so simple. Suits simple minded folk.
It is that simple.. do you want it to be complicated?
BTW, exaggerating a fact to ridiculous proportions, trying to relate unrelated facts (“islam making the term Hindu” and “reason for child marriage”) does not make the fact wrong.
Well, I feel I am going around in circles…
11. July 2007 - 7:51 PM
>>>Once in my college days, we bunch of guys went to a restaurant which served both beef and pork fast food. a muslim guy , amongst us Hindus, ordered beef burger. I decided on Pork.. He was offended.. LOLzz…
Nice one, shadows. One of my friend’s muslim boss stopped them from taking a break one fine day for they planned to visit a temple which this gentleman considered a frivolous(muslim judging other religion mind well) religious occassion. One brave lady confronted him by asking the utility of his unauthorized Friday noon-time breaks round the year and lo and behold the bigot receded into silence.
Muslim bigotry is demonstrated in small ways, even when they are in absolute minority. I know countless such examples as in friends refusing to give a lift to a friend in need(urgent medical visit) because it was prayer time, someone else dropping off other mid-way because they heard the mosque sirens etc. Just makes me wonder how these phoney secularists live obliviously to such demonstrated bigotry while picking up on every single Hindu infraction.
12. July 2007 - 2:00 AM
“Nobody ever predicted what would happen 20 years later !!”
- Never knew H-Vadis found Islam peaceful 20 years ago!
Socal/Shadows – Plan of action to solve the Muslim problem. C’mon. Let’s hear you logical balanced patriots come up with the plan.
12. July 2007 - 2:14 AM
And shadows: “Whether muslim children or not,, they are emulating their prophet, arent they ?”
- Selling their own children pleases the Muslims huh? They think they emulate their prophet when they see their kids being taken by old men?
Does this sound sane? Are you really so filled with this kind of hatred?
12. July 2007 - 3:26 AM
“BTW, exaggerating a fact to ridiculous proportions, trying to relate unrelated facts (â€islam making the term Hindu†and “reason for child marriageâ€) does not make the fact wrong.
- Child marriages you said???
This is kind of long….but do read., http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part18/chap6.htm
Maybe you will deign to explain how Sri Sri Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi MahaSwamiji can make such a blatantly anti-”Hindu” assertion? Or better still…how this Islamist fanatic came to be a highly respected “Hindu” Swami.
12. July 2007 - 12:32 PM
>>>> Selling their own children pleases the Muslims huh? They think they emulate their prophet when they see their kids being taken by old men?
Does this sound sane? Are you really so filled with this
=============
Palahalli,
They are selling their children !! Not kidnapped by the old muslims wanting young flesh….
>>> Does this sound sane?
Are you?
>>> Are you really so filled with this kind of hatred?
Hmm.. i suppose muslims killing Hindus in terrorist acts is not hatred… muslims advocating rule of islam over india openly via loudspeakers on mosques is not hatred.. muslims kidnapping and raping Hindu women is not hatred..
Yep, I am filled with hatred.. so now ?? Will you pass judgements on me.. go ahead ,, make my day
>>> Never knew H-Vadis found Islam peaceful 20 years ago!
Are you sane ?? Are you blind ?? Hindutva-vadis never found islam peaceful, even before 1947 and Partition.. forget 20 years ago.
Do you really know what you are blurting..
12. July 2007 - 9:18 PM
Amazing! So many new posts within a day! Sandeep your blog seems to be getting popular.
13. July 2007 - 1:38 PM
Palahalli:
-Islamic terror can strike anywhere. Even in places where there are no Muslims. Since I am not much induced into black and white scenarios, I have never claimed Islam or any religion to be a religion of peace. It is a religion that over a billion believe in, nevertheless.
++Comrade admits there exists islamic terrorism. Nice, lets move on. Also, it is not axiomatic that just because a religion has over a billion followers that it must be good.
*******
-All right. Practical question – Muslims like to say they follow Mohammed in his tracks right? Well then, how many old Muslim men have you seen marrying children?What are the statistics for Polygamy by community in India?
++If you have not seen it yourself, it doesn’t exist, correct? Do you mean to say that not one muslim man has married a girl child, there isn’t one single instance of polygamy in the muslim community {with the sanction of kuran, of course}? I am talking about the source of these despicable practices (kuran) not prevalence. Even one incident of polygamy or child marriage is enough to irk civilized peoples. Not quite sure what you intnd to do with the data?
*********
- Nope. Does not offend at all. It is there in the Koran/Hadith. However, must I not laugh at one who thinks on becoming a Muslim…I must perforce run off and marry a 9yr old child?
++When the new muslim’s sickening gene kicks in, he will have an koran sanctioned ‘legalese’ to marry a 9 year old and nobody can stop him. Islamic Iran says 9 years is girls’ marriage age. Ayatollah Khomeini (when 28 or 29 yrs of age) himself married a ten year old. In a civilized society, these perverts will be behind bars for these crimes. In India, ‘moderate’ AIMPLB (Diet Shariat) challenged the Child Marriage Restraint Act (21yrs for male & 18 yrs for fem). They wanted the girls marriage age to be lowered. No prizes for guessing why(it was against Islam). If you think nobody is running to marry underage girls, why did the AIMPLB seek to lower the marriage age for girls? Just for kicks.
14. July 2007 - 3:21 PM
Members:
Some clarification is in order;
1. Firstly, I am not a Communist or an Islamist or a H-Vadi. I do not think that any of these categories can be pinned on me based on my thoughts expressed here.
2. I am, if anything, an ardent votary of resonableness and practical thinking.
3. I am not in favor of blind hate against ALL people of a religion or nationality.
4. Somehow, it baffles me that folk who speak so much about “Hindu” openness and “Hindu” thought being in line with nature in terms of its propensity toward diversity, fail to recognize this self same propensity in human beings belonging to so called straight-jacket faiths. This kind of “thinking” in some members here, retards their thought process and blinds them to recognizable and available opportunities and breaches, in “straight-jacketed” faiths. By indisciminate hate and label mongering, they not only follow principles that they seemingly decry, but succeed in banding together, fanatics and resonable people, who are otherwise not averse to better advise.
5. This is most important; Recognize “enemies” but not know how to deal with the problem. I have repeatedly asked, what is the plan to resolve the Muslim Question? Apart from it’s ominous portents, this is on the minds of my dear opponents. However, none knows or wants to share. Only Mayura said…Samjhauta Express…and then did not care to clear some obvious doubts on its practicality…I will wait for his response. I understand that this discussion may turn out to be a wannabe “Wansee” Conference…but through it, I hope to convey it’s utter hopelessness and inhumanity. Any positive suggestions may generate a more healthy debate.
6. The feeling that the; Koran/Hadith = Muslim behavior = All Muslims are therefore, predictable *therefore* Koran/Hadith must be “derecognized” *then* Muslims will then not be; is a simple and lovable formula. Unfortunately, too simplistic to be real.
Let me touch upon two areas that have led to some heat.
1. Child Marraiges – Islam, purportedly encourages this system via the fact that Muhommed married a 9 year old. Muslims are supposedly in agreement too. Apart from some half hearted attempts by my friends, none have been able to prove this prevalent “fact” amongst Muslims. Children sold to some Arabs and Iran’s marriage laws supposedly prove this charge.
It is quickly forgotten that;
a. These children were sold by destitute and desperate parents. Such cases are rampant amongst our poverty stricken and not restricted to any one religion. That this practice (Child Marriage) need not have started with Islamic invasions is proved by the Kanchi Kamakoti seer upholding a “Hindu” case for just such a practice. Not surprisingly, this has been ignored by my friends.- http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part18/chap6.htm
b. I have also linked to a wiki page on Marriage laws across lands in order to prove that even Islamic or Muslim majority nations are diverse in their thinking. No matter what Mohammed might have ordered of his followers.- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age
2. Polygamy – Muslims are supposed…most married
au contraire..Actual Numbers show that there are more “Hindu” cases than Muslim, of polygamy. However, even amongst Muslims, it is not as common as propaganda allows. However, granted that even such cases are unhealthy. But restricted to Muslims? My freinds have made no argument about it again.
Apart from the above; My friends will do well to know what they talk about sometimes…atleast.
Case in point – “Hindutva-vadis never found islam peaceful, even before 1947 and Partition.. forget 20 years ago.”
- WRONG. One main and severe grouse Sita Ram Goel and Ram Swarup had against H-Vadi organizations is that they, while blaming Muslims…were ambivalent on Islam. That they in fact, readily bought into the “Islam is good..but Muslims are bad”…line of thinking, thus, getting themselves into an ideological smokescreen.
Please review – http://www.indianexpress.com/story/33157.html
More later….Regards,
15. July 2007 - 4:54 PM
Vikas,
From the official website of the Sringeri math,i found that many peshwas had high respect for the Acharyas,who toured maharashtra regularly.Some of their samadhis are near nashik.
The raid was an aberration.The offical website says that the image of Sri Sharadamba was reconsecrated.No major damage was done,perhaps.
17. July 2007 - 2:43 PM
1. Firstly, I am not a Communist or an Islamist or a H-Vadi.2. I am, if anything, an ardent votary of resonableness and practical thinking.
++If you are not C, I or HV, then why justify? Chor ki daadi mein tinka. LMAO @ “votary of resonableness and practical thinking”. Not that I believe what you wrote but I find ‘votary stuff’ quite refreshing from the “atheist rationalist”, one of the
biggest self-contradictions in innumerable discussions on religion.
**********
3. I am not in favor of blind hate against ALL people of a religion or nationality.
++Same here.
**********
4&5. Somehow, it baffles me that folk who speak so much about “Hindu†openness and “Hindu†thought being in line with nature in terms of its propensity toward diversity….
++Muslims got away with opression and butchery for hundreds of years. Shoe’s just comin on to the other foot now. Now muslims and their apologists will whine, snivel & snicker because it’s payback time and payback’s a bitch, comrade. Don’t like it? Tough but its not my headache. Amusingly, this is the reason I see you invoking Hindu ‘openness and thought’ which islam and your fellow comrades lack and detest. Such hypocricy is revolting.
**********
1. Child Marraiges – Islam, purportedly encourages this system via the fact that Muhommed married a 9 year old. Muslims are supposedly in agreement too. Apart from some half hearted attempts by my friends, none have been able to prove this prevalent “fact†amongst Muslims. Children sold to some Arabs and Iran’s marriage laws supposedly prove this charge.
++Firstly, children sold to some arabs, that is straight forward prostitution, isn’t it? NOT if done through NIKAAH, the Islamic rules of marriage and that was my point which you, for the nth time, chose to ignore. Islam allows child rape.
Secondly, I knew that our commie friend will not be convinced even if facts (girls married to old arabs and Iran’s marriage laws) are tossed on his face. Nothing can convince this votary of un-reasonableness and im-practical thinking’ because he has his own ‘ideological’ views and facts must be twisted to suit his ‘views’ not the other way round. Let me add to Iran’s marriage laws (girl 9 years old), other countries which have the same laws -> Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Brunei, Kuwait, Yemen, Sri Lanka(for muslims only) and the United Arab Emirates to name a few.
**********
a. These children were sold by destitute and desperate parents. Such cases are rampant amongst our poverty stricken and not restricted to any one religion.
++Let me clear up a few uncertainties of meaning here. A 54 yr old man having wet dreams about marrying a nine year old girl is paedophilia whereas a 8yr boy marrying a 7 yr old girl is child marriage. In Islam, it is OK for an adult male to marry 9 yr old girl (paedophilia). That is what the 60+ year old arabs sheikhs did with the help of Qazi Pimps and Khomeini too, all within the Islamic rules of marriage. Islam allows paedophilia.
**********
b. I have also linked to a wiki page on Marriage laws across lands in order to prove that even Islamic or Muslim majority nations are diverse in their thinking. No matter what Mohammed might have ordered of his followers.-
++Wiki is doubtful when it comes to history/religion in general. No data for Islamic Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates on this page?
You’ll believe Islamic nations are diverse in thinking only if you have been living under a rock. In Saudi Arabia, the leading light of islam, when a person kills another, there is a Diyya (blood money) to be paid:
——-
Indian Consulate General, Jeddah, S. Arabia Website
http://www.cgijeddah.com/cgijed/Welfare/deathbooklet.htm
Death Compensation in respect of a male person:
i. Muslim – SR. 100,000/-
ii.Christian/Jew – SR.50,000/-
iii.Other religions : such as Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, etc. – SR 6666.66
In the case of death of a female, death compensation allowed is equal to half the amount as admissible to males professing the same religion.
——-
Where do you think they got this idea of providing compensation? Maybe, koran? Isn’t it discriminatory towards Hindus and women irrespective of their religion? Hows that for ‘diversity in thinking’?
——-
Another ‘diversity in thinking’ from ‘moderate’ Malaysia, Revathi Masoosai’s 15-month-old daughter was taken by the Islamic Religious Department in southern Malacca state on March 26 and handed to Revathi’s Muslim mother. Why?
SHAH ALAM, Malaysia—A Muslim-born woman who was forced to spend six months in an Islamic rehabilitation center because she wants to live as a Hindu said Friday after her release that she will never return to her original faith.
Revathi Masoosai, 29, said officials at the center tried to make her pray as a Muslim, wear a head scarf and eat beef, a practice sacrilege to Hindus.
“Because of their behavior, I loathe Islam even more now,” she told reporters. “They say it’s a school, but it’s actually a prison.”
**********
2. Polygamy – Actual Numbers show that there are more “Hindu†cases than Muslim, of polygamy. However, even amongst Muslims, it is not as common as propaganda allows. However, granted that even such cases are unhealthy. But restricted to Muslims? My freinds have made no argument about it again.
++Again changing the topic, Muslimic koran allows polygamy. ‘Root cause’. Hindus will be jailed if found out indulging in polygamy, bigamy etc.
Hindu’s worldwide have more of cases of polygamy than the entire muslim ummah?? Thats a new one, put up or STFU.
**********
I’ve been to Hindu marriage ceremonies in Northern India which only take place during night time whereas in South, they take place in broad daylight. In the north, Hindu women wear the nose rings on the left whereas in South it is on the right side(or the other way round) along with stupidities like purdah. Little bird tells me these changes took place during our ‘golden’ era i.e. mughal days.
++++++++++++++++++
XYZ: Thanks a ton.
18. July 2007 - 6:53 PM
AAVARANA, a must read book for all the pseudo secularist.
23. July 2007 - 11:51 AM
Vikas: I apologize for the delay. There seemed to have been a miss.
Anyways…let me respond to your points..
1. The reason I “clarified” my politics is to try and make my stance clear. I hope you understand that you have still not justified your labels vis a vis me.
2. “++Muslims got away with opression and butchery for hundreds of years. Shoe’s just comin on to the other foot now. Now muslims and their apologists will whine, snivel & snicker because it’s payback time and payback’s a bitch, comrade. Don’t like it? Tough but its not my headache. Amusingly, this is the reason I see you invoking Hindu ‘openness and thought’ which islam and your fellow comrades lack and detest. Such hypocricy is revolting.”
- If this is a call for revenge, I hope you state it clearly. “Hindu openness..etc” is so claimed by H-Vadis as their positives. Post that call for revenge, forgo this claim too.
Yet again, for you, ALL Muslims are the same.
3. “++Firstly, children sold to some arabs, that is straight forward prostitution, isn’t it? NOT if done through NIKAAH, the Islamic rules of marriage and that was my point which you, for the nth time, chose to ignore. Islam allows child rape.
- Really? And this from someone who conveniently ignores an entire article full of “Hindu” justification for Child Marriage?! What you miss, within your blinkers is this. Human beings cannot be straight jacketed. Muslims are as diverse as any other religious group. If the Prophet married a 9 year old…and even if a country or countries legalize this age of consent, you will still not have men marrying children. Perverts amongst them in any case will. These perverts btw are from all shades/religions. Did you know that a Child Marriage cannot be annulled by law? In India? Even though it is illegal in its inception?
Please use a better argument to demonize an entire community.
4. “….and facts must be twisted to suit his ‘views’ not the other way round.”
- So you admit to twisting facts? Well, if you are so unswerving in your “demonizing” project, I challenge you to list the Ages of Consent across all nations on earth and show me that ALL Islamic nations or nations where the majority is Muslim, indeed permit men to marry children. All of them without exception. I will be “happy” if you provide even 50%. But then, if you cannot, accept that your project stands on flimsy grounds. In the meanwhile, would you like a list of Non-Islamic nations where the Age of Consent is as low as 12 yrs?
Is all of your “theses” on demonization based on the fact that the Koran and the Hadith is revered by the Muslims and these contain some unpalatable facts too? Where do you think most of the pedophiles come from to India? Who do you think arranges for all those kids? All Muslims?
You speak of Nikah…I have yet to see a marriage ritual where the Age of Consent is verified and made certain that it is suited to the law of the land. Of course the Qazi, on “good†money, will oblige! This 14 year old girl in Hyderabad was “married†off four times before she walked into a police station! Her parents collected quite a lot of monies. But of course, in your warped worldview, such things are patently Islamic! Never happens amongst folk of other religions! But maybe you want to tell me why these Arabs cannot find kids back in Arabia….to “marry� Why look for “greener†pastures? After all, as per your blinkers, this seems to be most Islamic?!
5. Rotten practices in any country must be opposed. If you have read the Khaleej Times on the Malaysia issue, you will have noted that there are Federal Judges who have opposed what has happened there.
Go ahead….read this twist in another tale from Malaysia – http://www.suaram.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=111&Itemid=30
Admittedly Saudi Arabia is a harder nut to crack…complicated further by US support for its regime….much like Pakistan. Most terrorists are financed by the Saudis too.
To my mind, Islamist terror cannot be fought by assuming ALL Muslims as the enemy. If we do that, logically, we assume a very dangerous situation that must be confronted on our streets. We also perforce, relinquish any support we find amongst Muslims. Why would ordinary Muslims support an initiative against Islamists if we do not care to differentiate?
So, all at once, instead of dealing with a situation intelligently like human beings, we become a pack of dogs on the prowl.
6. You are so stuck on the Koran’s influence. The common Muslim shows that though he reveres the Koran, he does not go in for young flesh, multiple wives and cutting the throats of infidels on his way to work in the morning!
Why do you think Islamists have to indoctrinate their cadre? Per you, they already are!
Something I found on the net…..Muslim girls chatting about marriage – http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=234924290
These are the kind of folk we will be alienating if we follow “your†mindless and blind hatred.
But Sir, you still don’t have a plan to address the Muslim Question.
Maybe you need a spur? – http://www.ghwk.de/engl/kopfengl.htm
So long!…regards’
23. July 2007 - 4:04 PM
@Palahalli : Dude, sorry to barge in again, but you are actually raising topics that have been long answered, and some of them by people more competent than us – scholars of Islam like Ali Sina, Ibn Warraq and Daniel Pipes.
I would suggest that you go thru the following links
http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/
http://thereligionofpeace.com/
http://www.danielpipes.org/art/year/all
The first of these sites, faithfreedom.com is run by an Iranian ex-Muslim called Ali Sina (pseudonym), who is a legend in his own right. He is among the most famous of Muslim apostates and he has made it into a personal mission to educate the world about the cult of Islam.
Daniel Pipes is one of foremost experts on Middle East and Islam, while thereligionofpeace is a website that brings daily news of Muslim atrocities from across the world. They keep a track of Islamic terrorist acts since 9/11, which now no close to 9000 (averaging 1500 per year, a remarkable achievement one must say).
If you go thru these sites you may be enlightened with the truth about Islam, and you may just figure out that acting as an Islamic apologist or placing Islam on a platform equal to the other religions is about the worst thing you can do.
Peace be with you!
24. July 2007 - 1:11 AM
Mathurji: I am not unaware of all that you have pointed out to.
Amongst the worst sufferers at the hands of Islamists are Muslims themselves.
As a student of history, I am also aware of the humongous role that our dear Western “friends†have played…and are still playing…in sheltering Islamist regimes across the globe.
So, what is the solution?
Do you think expulsion of all Muslims will solve the problem? If yes, then where would you want them to go?
Do you think all Muslims can be converted to “Hinduism”? If yes, do you think we can retain their loyalty post that? To make certain that “loyalty” is retained…are we prepared to commit the necessary resources? In what shape or form will this happen?
Do you think we should retaliate? 10:1? Or more? If yes, do you really think this will stop the killing?
Do you think we should contain Muslim immigration? I noticed that on one of the websites.
Do you think we should stop imports and exports from and to Muslim countries? Do you think starving these nations will do the trick?
What about Nuclear weapons? Maybe tactical bombing of Afghanistan? Get rid of Osama? Given the barrenness of the Afghan-Pakistan border, it may be pretty feasible. Why is the US hesitating? Where is Osama?
But then, does the US really want to get rid of Osama?
Who is supplying arms to these people? Who are the BIG political players?
Who sheltered Khomeini in his pre-revolutionary days? Answer – France!
Coming to France, I note Vikas talking about revenge against Muslims for “their†past crimes. The same language is used by an online Islamist and he says…â€The French are crying now? They deserve what they get! Remember Algeria??â€
Who supported Saddam Hussain in his accession to power?…and thence, in his unprovoked war with Iran? You may not know it…but a secular Baa’thist Saddam turned Islamic hero when the US turned against him post Kuwait. Are we now saying that the US was unaware of Saddam’s plan to invade Kuwait? Many years since that war…the US again invaded and this time, stayed on in Iraq. WMDs! They said. Colin Powell is shamefaced today! Who is responsible for the Iraqi mess?
Why was Palestine left to fester? The PLO was not an Islamist organization. That is one of the reasons why Hamas fights it. The West wants democracy. “Palestine†votes. Hamas wins….and the West is worried about democracy?? If these numbskulls are not careful, Turkey will go the same way! Nothing can get closer to the “West†than Turkey….land border and all!
Why did the US continue to support a Pakistan that supported a Taliban that strung up a Najibullah for five whole days and nights? The same Taliban that in it’s heydays was converting football stadiums into slaughter stadiums that would put ancient Romans to shame?
What about Saudi Arabia? A great friend of the US….whose Islamists composed 70% of the 9/11 bombers? And the assholes invade Iraq instead??!
Today…the Bush administration is contemplating invading Iran. Is that what you think will work? Invasions? This kind of “regime change” from the outside?
What is the answer Mathurji?? More harebrained websites? More nonsense about a non-existent “Hindu†defense? Our great H-Vadis go into fits while talking about “their own†Dalits….and they will achieve the moon with the Muslims??! They do not know the meaning of acceptance and making friends!
These fellows….my debating friends can breast beat all they want. But it’s a shame they cannot figure out why their cause is friendless inspite of all the fear Islamists have managed to instill.
Please let us not talk about apologetics anymore!
24. July 2007 - 8:32 AM
While googling for Nilagriva, I discovered your website on Malleshwaram and from there Avarana.
Good pics and very good review
24. July 2007 - 9:37 AM
Its convenient to blame the US, Europe and the biggest culprits of all – “the Jews” for all troubles in the Islamic world. I guess someday the Muslims will say that the hateful verses in the Koran have also been inserted by CIA due to a deep rooted conspiracy.
Meanwhile something else for you to chew on :
http://markhumphrys.com/islamism.nightmares.html
The possible fallout scenarios due to terrorism in the coming decades. One of these scenarios has come from a full length book called America Alone by Mark Steyn. The scenarios are fun to read
. And we of course know what the Indians will do, considering the secular combo of Left + Congress ruling the Indian psyche.
24. July 2007 - 10:16 AM
Mathurji, let me try again. What is the solution that comes to your mind? Is it there…somewhere on my list above? Or…do you suggest another?
Regards,
24. July 2007 - 11:01 AM
@Palahalli: Dude there is no easy solution that will work with little or no collateral damage. Since I am much less knowledgeable on this issue as compared to Ali Sina or Ibn Warraq, let me in a nutshell tell you what they think.
1. Islam is a barbaric cult, just like Nazism and Communism, and it must be destroyed just like those cults were. Does this necessarily mean killing all or most of the Muslims? No, definitely not! As you had earlier pointed out Muslims are the biggest victims of Islamism. Liquidating the Soviet Union and the “Evil Empire” did not involve killing too many ordinary citizens, and I don’t see why we should not be able to eradicate Islam without too many casualties.
2. The swiftest and most painless way to destroy Islam is by disseminating information about it to the entire world. Fact is, not too many Muslims read the Hadiths and not too many of them understand the Koran either. Once the truth gets out that Mohammad was a rapist, paedophile, mass murderer, schizophrenic, epileptic, delusional, megalomaniacal bigot most educated and intelligent people will want to distance themselves from him. This is already happening. Go to the testimonials section of Ali Sina’s website to find out what Muslim apostates have to say about Islam.
3. We will need to stop treating Islam with kidgloves and reserve for it the contempt that we had earlier dished out to Communism and Nazism. Once Hitler was defeated, the allies discredited Nazism to such an extent that even inside Germany it was no longer fashionable to call oneself a Nazi. In Soviet Union, Marx and Lenin and Stalin are no longer heroes. Similarly we need to discredit the ideology of Islam, so that Islam is viewed by people as a disease and Mohammad is viewed as a psychological oddity. All we need to prove is, Islam has not come from God. Discrediting Mohammad is enough to achieve this end.
This is the easy and time consuming way out. The difficult way is the military option.
The third way is non-cooperation. It can be achieved in this way :
1. Deport all Muslims back to their countries of origin and mainitain a moratorium on further Muslim migration. If they hate the West so much they might as well stay in their own countries.
2. Most Muslim countries suffer from misgovernance, high birth rates, extreme poverty and a propensity towards violence. Immigration to the West acts as a safety valve which absorbs some of these pressures. Stopping immigration will cause Muslims to start killing each other (witness what is happening in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq) and a tremendous turmoil will result in the Muslim world. Possibly some of them may come to the conclusion that Islam is the cause of their problems and they may want to root out the filth of Islam.
The fourth way is, help the moderate Muslims (Daniel Pipes prefers this way). It is now generally acknowledged that Iranians are tired of their Mullah led government, and as many as 85% of them may opt for a secular, non Islamic way of life given a chance. An outright invasion (Iraq like) may not work, but if the US provides military help to dissident factions within Iran, it may be possible to overthrow the current regime.
If Iran falls, the repercussions will be widely felt in the Muslim world. The entire Muslim world depends on the logic of nos – argumentum ad numerum (1.2 billion people cannot be incorrect). Rejection of Islam by Iranians will sow the first seed of doubt in the minds of the Muslims.
24. July 2007 - 12:34 PM
Mathurji,
Thank you. You have at least attempted to formulate solutions.
Can we wait till our other friends respond before we continue?
Only one point of order though. You have kept the “west” in mind. I hope you have considered the Indian situation too.
On an allied note, I will, for the sake of this discussion, assume your observation of Mohammed and Islam to be true and factual. That way we can proceed further…
Thanks again Sir.
Regards,
24. July 2007 - 12:45 PM
“You have kept the “west†in mind. I hope you have considered the Indian situation too.”
Dear Palahalli: No, I have not considered the Indian situation. Its obvious isnt it, that we are a nation of Dhimmis, who will crawl if we are asked to bend. I dont expect any contribution, even nominal from India’s political class in the battle against Islam.
Regarding my descriptions of Islam and Mohammad, you need not assume that they are true. Please read the Koran and the hadiths, you will get the true picture. And the true picture is worse than I can portray in such a limited space.
I dont know how appealing this discussion would be to other visitors of this blog. If someone objects we can always shift the discussion to a different forum.
26. July 2007 - 1:13 PM
1.Methinks people have wised up to your commie crap and that is why you need “justifications” like ‘votary of BS’. OTOH, people living in glass houses…not throw stones… You paint everyone a hindutvavadi, right wing and posts churlish insults but when responded in kind, start crying. Mommy must be proud of your tantrums. If you can’t take it, don’t dish it out, simple.
———-
2.Where have I said revenge? Putting words in my mouth, again. Hindu ‘openness and thought’ are for people who show reciprocity. Tolerance doesn’t mean acceptance of everything under the sun.
———-
3. Hindu ‘justification’ for child marriage, why criticism against muslims brings up Hinduism? Moral equivalence(TuQ)? Is islam so shallow/weak-kneed that it cannot withstand scrutiny on its own legs without equating it with Hinduism or any other religion? Jihadi igno-ranter ‘Dr’ Zakir Naik made these same ‘arguments’ on child marriages, polygamy in Hinduism. Zakir and you forget that in islam, Hindu is an infidel (Kufr) & Hinduism=haraam. Exceptions are only when it suits y’all. Naik will conveniently wash his hands off Hinduism if the topic of rebirth etc comes up. Why? Not there in islam, so no use. Anyway, on child marriages amongst Hindus, you have answered your own question(illegal), read it once again. Secondly, no ifs and buts, there is no doubt that paedophile pretend-prophet married a kid-girl..tell any muslim about this and enjoy the show. ROFL. For islamic paedophilia, scroll down.
———-
4.Paedophiles come to India from various parts of the world irrespective of religion, quite true. Pls let me know who, amongst them, ends up getting married to the kids they abuse and divorced within a few days/weeks? Muslims. Which law do they follow in marriages? Sharia? Our legal system will prosecute those who indulge in paedophilia. What does Islam do to prevent it? Zilch, it encourages it and provides a ‘halal’ label to this blatant prostitution. What are ordinary muslims doing about these medieval ‘laws’? Nothing, apart from releasing hot air when a case like this comes up now & again. Why can’t ordinary muslims change them? Wha…change pretend-prophets ‘laws’. Why arab sand rats come here may depend on many things, economics (cheap), ‘taste & variety’, parents who think sheikh-bin-dick will marry their daughter and help them, servile pimps oops qazis?
Reg age of consent, marriage ceremony/ritual is not the end all of things. Registration of marriage is compulsory irrespective of religion. Take a guess who might be objecting to it.
State govts wary of hurting Muslim sentiments(ToI, Jul 24 2007, scroll to related stories)
http://tinyurl.com/2a7byr
———-
5. Did not see you mention these rotten practices when you said muslim countries have diversity in thinking? I agree to US’ support for S. Arabia, paki but that was not the point. Point being, where does the ‘inspiration’ for Diyya in Saudi and Revathi’s case(conversion from islam to Hindu religion) in ‘moderate’ Malaysia come from? Kuran?? If Hindus cannot construct a temple, take his religious books etc. to Saudi or set foot in Mecca-Medina, if Malaysia can demolish Hindu temples on flimsy grounds whereas ordinary muslims here are busy demonstrating against Israel,US, peado Mo’s cartoons and rioting while advancing ummah-cause. Can Hindus give them a taste of their own medicine here since I too feel the pain of Hindus being wronged in Islamic countries? Hindus get treated like dirt and are murdered, raped & kidnpped in Paki and Bangladesh whereas muslims here are thriving, copulating and populating like rabbits? If the Hindu openness, thought and tolerance is not going to be acknowledged,leave alone, reciprocated, why the duck should I even try it on these babboons? In this process, I don’t care if we make 1 million or 1 billion enemies. So you see, Hindu openness, thought & tolerance is not a one way street. You give me respect, I’ll accord you the same.
Why should the onus be on me to differentiate between jihadi and ‘ordinary muslim’? You yourself were tripping over pebblestones when I asked you about ‘how to differentiate between modearet muslim and a jihadi’ many posts back? Why don’t the ordinary muslim confront the jihadi scum amongst them? It hasn’t happened in the last 60 years, fat chance, it’ll happen now.
———-
6.Well jihadis too draw their inspiration from the same koran. The jihadis quote it while going for suicide bombings, killing and beheading non-muslims. Read the views of ‘our’ moderates below.
http://tinyurl.com/2hcgbw
Per you, are they ‘moderates’?
cheers!
9. August 2007 - 2:07 AM
Hello. The post http://underway.wordpress.com/2007/06/06/o-privire-asupra-literaturii-indiene-anantha-murthy-si-bhyrappa/
is written in Romanian. If you want, i will ask Diana to get you an English version of it. We can translate it if you want…
10. August 2007 - 12:30 PM
@Palahalli and Mathur:
Your discussion on the Muslim problem, I found very useful.
A small doubt about “If Iran falls, the repercussions will be widely felt in the Muslim world. The entire Muslim world depends on the logic of nos – argumentum ad numerum (1.2 billion people cannot be incorrect). Rejection of Islam by Iranians will sow the first seed of doubt in the minds of the Muslims.”
Iran is not friendly with any other Muslim country because its majority population is Shia whom Sunnis do’t consider as Muslims at all.
So, how does that help?
10. August 2007 - 8:27 PM
Islam’s terrorist dogma in Muhammad’s Own Words
http://prophetofdoom.net/Prophet_of_Doom_17_Good_Muslims_Kill.Islam
14. August 2007 - 9:45 AM
Mathurji,
Sorry, but work kept me away.
However, I did discover Lawrence Auster. Not too sure you’ve heard of him.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/008567.html
Now to your post; I might lean on Auster while responding since he takes the same “expulsion” position as you seem to do amongst other options;
1. “Islam is a barbaric cult, just like Nazism and Communism, and it must be destroyed just like those cults were. Does this necessarily mean killing all or most of the Muslims?….”
- Let’s say I agree with your proposition that Islam indeed is the same as Nazism and Communism and it must therefore be destroyed likewise. How were these two ideologies “destroyed”? Nazi Germany was militarily defeated and its leadership decimated itself, or was executed. There was a great effort at “de-Nazification” invested in by the allies, particularly the Western allies.
Aside – However, quite “amusingly”, allies on both sides…â€West” and “East” spirited away valuable human (Nazi) material to their own sides of the “curtain” for immediate and future “useâ€.
But still, Nazi Germany was comprehensively MILITARILY defeated and militarily occupied. The allies did not have to prove Mein Kampf a piece of trash. Nazi defeat proved it to all much earlier.
The Soviet Union crumbled because of internal decay. Its people turned against the State. Gorbachev greatly helped by de-fanging this State of its coercive apparatus. The “Western” victory, if it can be called that, over the Soviet Union and Communism was non-Military and greatly depended on critical/key members of its (Soviet) leadership. All this apart from a weakening Warsaw bloc.
The contrast with China and the US willingness to engage it, is striking. Inspite of its (China’s) own “Evil Empireâ€.
But, here again, in addition to the Nazi situation, your “Expel and Isolate” and thence destroy Islam, is unlikely to afford useful precedents. On the other hand, mass slaughter will become unavoidable…either willfully…or circumstantially. Collateral if you please.
******
2. “The swiftest and most painless way to destroy Islam is by disseminating information about it to the entire world. Fact is, not too many Muslims read the Hadiths and not too many of them understand the Koran either….”
- Very well then. If this is workable…why “Expel and Isolate or Decimate”? Education should do. But what you also implicitly admit to is…â€not too many Muslims read the Hadiths and not too many of them understand the Koran either”. So, your target is narrowing already. I have gone along with this option before.
****
3. “We will need to stop treating Islam with kidgloves and reserve for it the contempt that we had earlier dished out to Communism and Nazism. Once Hitler was defeated, the allies discredited Nazism to such an extent that even inside Germany it was no longer fashionable to call oneself a Nazi.
This is the easy and time consuming way out. The difficult way is the military option.”
- I would prefer to skip this part…but I wished to point out some “problems” in your thought process/facts.
Nazism and Soviet Communism DID NOT fall due to them being “discredited” by the West. They fell because of their own deficiencies. They also fell because of the disillusionment caused due to continuous Nazi defeats in war, post early 1944…and the crumbling of the Soviet system plus Gorbachev’s welcome subversion from within. I doubt if a capitalist critique of Das Kapital really helped in its final collapse. Nor did any number of Soviet citizens gain access to such studies. As for Islam, there are plenty of studies that show Islam as man made and Mohammed more a military leader than a Prophet of Allah.
You spoke of the Military option. I would like to hear about it.
*****
Non-Cooperation:
1. “Deport all Muslims back to their countries of origin and mainitain a moratorium on further Muslim migration. If they hate the West so much they might as well stay in their own countries.”
- Apart from forgetting about non-Western, non-Muslims, this does not address the issue of naturalized citizens..inhabitants with ancestry in the West, who also happen to be Muslim. Is it proposed that these be forcibly converted? What are their choices? On deportation, the grounds would be “race”? “religion”? “nationality”? I am assuming that ALL these Muslims will be deported to their countries of origin. Mainly centered in the ME and NA.
****
2. “Most Muslim countries suffer from misgovernance, high birth rates, extreme poverty and a propensity towards violence. Immigration to the West acts as a safety valve which absorbs some of these pressures. Stopping immigration will cause Muslims to start killing each other (witness what is happening in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq) and a tremendous turmoil will result in the Muslim world. Possibly some of them may come to the conclusion that Islam is the cause of their problems and they may want to root out the filth of Islam.”
- This is interesting. A theoretical equivalent of keeping/containing the Nazis and the Soviets within their domains.
Is the killing in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq due to a blockage of immigration?
But, your point seems to be that there is bound to be tremendous pressure on Muslim national resources to feed and support reverse immigrants including host populations and then a general mayhem is predicted, until such time as Muslims “possibly” open their eyes to the cause that is Islam.
Please allow me to dwell on this a little longer. Forgive my mild outburst though…
In your above model, you visualize a neat compartment on Earth that you will label “Islamic Land” and place ALL Muslims there expecting them to savage themselves like caged dogs. Of course, you assume that all of these Muslims quite suddenly, will turn amnesiac about all the knowledge and science and serious facilities they have accumulated thus far. That countries such as North Korea and China and even Russia…apart from a host of former Soviet Republics-now Islamic *where would these go?* with messy weapons in their midst, will simply agree to a pan-Western program of global scale Islamic exclusion/isolation?
Wonder what Israel would do with such humongous trouble all around its borders?
How would India have to react? Ah…Muslims to Pakistan of course. But first, revoke citizenships and pick and push them right across Kanyakumari…right through the Vindhyas and into the deserts and plans of Rajasthan and Punjab. Hmmm…What if Pakistan stops them at the border? Start firing? Of course, such a global operation cannot be a secret for long. And Pakistan would know that its game…so to speak…is up. Are we forgetting those happy benign Islamic bombs? Hell…you haven’t even had the Eastern non-Muslims within your scope!
******
The fourth way is, help the moderate Muslims (Daniel Pipes prefers this way). It is now generally acknowledged that Iranians are tired of their Mullah led government, and as many as 85% of them may opt for a secular, non Islamic way of life given a chance. An outright invasion (Iraq like) may not work, but if the US provides military help to dissident factions within Iran, it may be possible to overthrow the current regime.
- This is somewhat more practical. But as “Aram” has pointed out, not without its pitfalls too.
*******
If Iran falls, the repercussions will be widely felt in the Muslim world. The entire Muslim world depends on the logic of nos – argumentum ad numerum (1.2 billion people cannot be incorrect). Rejection of Islam by Iranians will sow the first seed of doubt in the minds of the Muslims.
- The Iranians did not “reject” Islam under the Shah. The Turks did not “reject” Islam under Kemal Pasha…where is the guarantee that a change in regime will provoke a change in faith?
But, I urge you to study Auster’s blog. It’s an education in itself.
Regards,
And oh…Vikas…nice going!
16. August 2007 - 3:46 PM
@Palahalli: You dissected my points and tried to raise objections to them. Fair enough! But I assume that since you have gone to the trouble of dissecting these points, but you have raised the issue of necessity of employing these measures, you admit that Islam IS a problem.
Once we accept that, the task becomes easier. First of all if we equate Islam with cancer, which in a way it is, we will figure out that its not possible to fight cancer by any one mean. The disease is terrible, it takes a big toll on the body by eating it away from inside, and often the body is terribly weakened in the process of fighting the disease. We cannot have a peaceful battle against Islam – the term itself is a oxymoron. There will be casualties in a battle, and there will be collateral damage as well. What is important is to recognize that the alternative will be much worse. If I have to choose between an Islamic world and a world under American hegemony, I will choose the latter every time, but that is not important.
To come back to the measures, I had never said that one measure will work all the time. Different measures will have to adopted in different parts of the world. But each measure will work in some small way to end Islam as an ideology.
You say “Of course, you assume that all of these Muslims quite suddenly, will turn amnesiac about all the knowledge and science and serious facilities they have accumulated thus far.” YOu are not serious are you? What kind of knowledge and science has been acquired by Afghanistan, or Iran or Iraq or Saudi Arabia? Take out all foreign workers from saudi and stop it from exporting oil (using alternative energy sources will serve a dual purpose, it will halt global warming and it will stop Saudis from acquiring money and using it for terrorism) and Saudi will revert back to a savage, medieval bedouin land. None of the Muslim countries have made any advancement in science because they contend only Quran is true. And the only thing for which Quran is useful is for wiping your ass in the lavatory. You may want to check the article by Pervez Hoodbhoy in last week’s outlook in which he talks about abysmal state of scientific research in Muslim countries.
You say “Is the killing in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq due to a blockage of immigration?” Unknowingly you are strengthening my argument
. To the best of my knowledge not much immigration happens westward from the badlands of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. So all these places have a high concentration of Muslims who are barred from doing anything else apart from reading the Koran and squabbling with each other. The violent verses of the Koran result in hate mongering and killing.
You say “The Iranians did not “reject†Islam under the Shah. The Turks did not “reject†Islam under Kemal Pasha”. There was a qualitiative difference between the Shah’s regime which was merely corrupt and the present regime which is not only corrupt but also oppressive.
You say “As for Islam, there are plenty of studies that show Islam as man made and Mohammed more a military leader than a Prophet of Allah.” How many Muslims accept such studies? I would suggest that you go to the Friday prayers in some mosque and make this suggestion. And if you have any dependants at home don’t forget to get your Life Insurance done before you embark on this suicidal mission
.
You say “Apart from forgetting about non-Western, non-Muslims, this does not address the issue of naturalized citizens..inhabitants with ancestry in the West, who also happen to be Muslim.” Are you aware that most Muslim migrants who live in the West are just that – immigrants. They are not citizens. For the time being leave the citizens as they are and get along with deporting the temporary migrants. Muslims seek safety in numbers. Once the Muslims are hopelessly outnumbered in Western lands due to deportation, the remaining will behave quietly like lambs.
Your point about India is valid. We are so inured to vote bank politics, that our politicians will do nothing to address the Muslim problem. They will stoke the fire if necessary to get votes. I had stated earlier that in this cataclysmic battle against forces of barbarity, I expect India to be either a mute bystander or a minor hindrance. The battle will largely be fought by the US, Israel and perhaps some European countries. China and Russia’s roles will be important. Russia has a Muslim problem of its own in Chechnya and China has trouble brewing in some provinces.
I will go through the link I have sent you. I couldnt give a more detailed point by point rebuttal due to shortage of time. Besides, I wonder why didn’t you seek to provide your own solutions since you are well aware of the problem.
16. August 2007 - 3:54 PM
@Palahalli : I glanced through Auster’s blog and I didnt find anything revelatory in it. Perhaps you can send me some specific entries that you think would be of interest or which put together a fundamentally different agenda regarding dealing with the Islamic issue.
16. August 2007 - 4:46 PM
@Aram: Just saw your post on the issue. You say ” Iran is not friendly with any other Muslim country because its majority population is Shia whom Sunnis do’t consider as Muslims at all.
So, how does that help?”
They might be Shias and Sunnis to each other, but to us kafirs they are Muslims. Both of them worship the same paedophilic cult leader, both of them sing paeans to their mafia lord Allah and both of them are filled with the same hatred for the world at large. When Iran falls, it will not be Shias leaving Islam, it will be Muslims leaving Islam.
And mind you, whatever little cultural accomplishments Muslims can boast about, have been courtesy Iran (Persia of old) not Arabia. Iranians are the only Islamic nation who dont seek to Arabise themselves. They have an old civilization, and they take pride in its accomplishments. Believe me, Iran falling will be a big blow to the Muslims world. But direct US intervention should be avoided. It will be better to fund pro democracy dissidents.
17. August 2007 - 2:40 AM
Mathurji,
I will be responding to your posts in some detail a little later.
Off the top, I would like to clarify that when I responded to your post I made the assumption that I will agree with your diagnosis..Ie.Islam being the “cancer”. This much I had stated earlier also.
Secondly, my manner of resolving this issue would be to bring in more openness in religion and by protecting all dissenters. Abide by the law of the land. I know that such a stance is generally met with cynical hysterics *Im not thinking about you*…but my point is, if governments and peoples do not, today, seem to have the guts to uphold their existing fair laws…then how can anybody expect this selfsame human material to bring about the kind of “revolutionary” change that you envisage? I feel it is utopian. But of course…you are thinking of a paradigm shift in leadership. Hmmm
Thirdly, about Lawrence Auster. If you peruse his blog and follow his thought processes..you will find that he is your ally as far as “expulsions” go. Dan Pipes is mild…when compared to Auster. Anyways…Auster’s pitch is centered around the following;
1. Preservation of a “White” Western Christian Civilization. He calls himself a “Traditionalist”.
2. He is not only against Muslims; he also includes “other” Americans. E.g. Hispanics and Blacks.
3. He is fine with such “Hindu” specimens that will subserve to the concept of a superior White Western Civilization. To him, the “Non-West” may as well be the abode of the barbarian. He has in fact, used these and such terms for non-Whites. Sometime back, he took to task Canada’s Prime Minister for visiting a Gurudwara and praying like our Sikhs do.
4. He believes in “Civilizational” ghettoes. He feels each “Civilization” must maintain and confine itself to its “landmass”. “Vasudaiva Kutumbakam” is for the birds.
5. He does not support US intervention in the Middle East because he feels it is useless. Won’t do it(US) any good.
There are many more such observations. Recently, he posted an article about disenfranchising women. He feels that the presence of womenfolk in the political process “feminizes” politics and makes it veer toward “safety” and “security” thereby, disallowing tougher and more ruthless action in the domestic and international spheres…which are necessarily fraught with certain (male/masculine) risks.
The reason I found Auster so relevant is because…I have found a similar trend in our native conservative politics. Especially the manner H-Vadis have taken to the “clash” of civilizations. What is in fact hidden from many of us is the ugly underbelly of people like Auster.
I reckon, it will be only folks like Auster and Co. who will be capable of implementing the “expulsion” policy in the US and the “West”. That comes with a price tag for all of us “browns”. You have admitted as much when you spoke of accepting US hegemony.
51st State of the United States…but brown. We can always call it…Totally Tanned
..But “Hindu”? None can say.
I will return..as promised, in order to address your other points.
17. August 2007 - 11:29 AM
Ahh you fill me with despair. When I saw a couple of Auster’s blog entries I thought he was just a traditional right winger. Now he seems to be a bigot and I have no use for such people.
All I want is to live in peace, and in order to do that I am willing to make compromises with folks having sub-70 IQ who believe in 72 virgins, 7 layered skies and flying horses. I will not try to show reason to them if they dont molest me. But even that looks like a pipe dream. Sighhh.
17. August 2007 - 2:08 PM
No…this guy Auster is very good at his job. He is cold and logical. Reading him, you realize why the “West” is mostly on top. It was essentially built by folks with the “Auster” outlook.
Another reason why China and Russia will forever be apart from the “West”.
5. October 2007 - 8:13 AM
Any update on the English translation of Aavarnaa?
26. November 2007 - 12:04 PM
READ ABOUT SEXUAL SLAVERY PRACTISED BY THE MUSLIMS ON HINDUS IN MY WEBSITE
http://groups.google.co.in/group/cyber-hindu-warriors?hl=en
IN SEXUAL SLAVERY ………………..
MORE THAN 100 MILLION , ABOUT 10 CRORE HINDUS HAVE BEEN SLAUGHTERED BY ALLAH’S ASSHOLES.
ALSO READ THE TYRANT OF MYSORE : TIPU SULTAN ….. THE BASTARD WHO KILLED MANY AND SECULARIST WANT TO PROJECT HIM AS
15. July 2008 - 3:06 PM
I admire Ravi Belegere as a novelist. he has written quite good novels such as “MATAGATI” , “MANDOVI”, “HELI HOGU KARANA” these are really excellent work. I really do not even bother about the his writings about crime, politics which give me nothing.
am fan of him, that does not mean i do not read novels of others.