Whitewashing with a Straight Face

Introduction

A pattern seems to have emerged over the past decade or so in the US. Each time any U.S-based Hindu organization(s) hosts a fairly well-attended event, alarm bells sound off from the expected quarters. These expected quarters wake up and emit a major stink about the–yawn–dreaded Hindu communalism/fascism/quest for revenge… The yarn is the same, only the hues are different. And so it is with this latest piece de disgrace (requires free registration to read) by Vijay Prashad, a well-known Hindu baiter, and rabid Marxism-retching machine stationed in the US. He is also a co-founder of a rather aptly named organization called FOIL (Forum of Indian Leftists). Frankly, I’m not as charitable as Rajiv Malhotra who engaged him in a debate in Loutlook Outlook India in 2004. It’s pointless to debate with avowed Marxists becuase you already know their “methods” of analysis and “mode” of reasoning.

The current occasion that rudely shook him awake concerns a fund-raising event in the US to build a Hindu Holocaust museum in Pune. That a whopping $50000 was collected in these recessionary times probably added to Prashad’s fear-ridden angst.

The Hindu Holocaust museum is a project pioneered by Francois Gautier who has written about it on several occasions. Gautier wrote some of the initial pieces on the subject some six years ago. However, Vijay Prashad wakes up only now.

Given his ideological propensities, Vijay Prashad naturally feels:

  • There was no Hindu Holocaust–or the largescale massacre of Hindus is exaggerated
  • Islam didn’t spread in India through violence
  • Hindus (Kings) were equally if not more violent than Muslim conquerors
  • Hindus and Muslims regarded each other as brothers

Pretty much what we can expect from his ilk. But it’s one thing to state these misleading assertions in casual conversation and another to actually present it as truth in face of a mountain of evidence against it. Let’s examine Vijay Prashad’s assertions first and then his “evidence.”

Unfounded Assertions

Viraat Hindu Sabha (VHS).. claim that over the past thousand years, millions of Hindus were killed, with the intention to wipe Hindus off the map.

The numbers are vague, as one might expect, but the culprit is precisely defined: Islam. The VHS uses the phrase “Islamic genocide of Hindus” to make its case. To me this is remarkable stuff. It reduces the complexity of the subcontinent’s rich history into a simple morality play that has only two characters: the Hindu and the Muslim. The latter is the invader who has come and killed the former. Nothing else matters. The idea of the Hindu Holocaust casts the Hindu as history’s victim, who should now become history’s aggressor to avenge the past.

The numbers are definitely vague but not quite how Vijay Prashad puts it: when millions are killed, it is humanly impossible to get an exact body count. Does Vijay Prashad really expect historians to give us a figure like 2634581 instead of saying 2 million? I’ll recount what I had quoted in an earlier opinion piece on the same subject:

In his Growth of Muslim Population in India, Prof KS Lal estimates that the Hindu population decreased by 80 million between 1000 AD and 1525 AD, an extermination unparalleled in world history…The conquest of Afghanistan in 1000 AD saw the annihilation of its entire Hindu population. Even today, this region is known as the “Hindu Kush,” which literally means “Hindu slaughter,” named after that massacre. In 1399, Taimur killed 1,00,000 Hindus in a single day, and the Bahamani Sultans made it a sacred duty to kill 1,00,000 Hindus every year.

A standard cloak behind which every Leftist/secularist hides is the “complexity of the subcontinent’s history.” In other words: I will not tell the truth much less accept that any such thing could have ever happened. Additionally, the reductionism that Prashad talks about is actually his fellow-travellers’ work: by cleverly diverting any attempt to critically examine Islam’s history in India into the Hindu vs Muslim “morality play” he refers to. Much of serious scholarly work on Islam’s history rightly places the critical lens on Islam’s foundational doctrines rather than on Muslims as a people.

To set the record straight, Hindus were, and continue to be victims of Islamic aggression. Every single contemporary history written by court hagiographers of various Sultans repeatedly refer to cleansing the land of infidels, breaking their false (idols) Gods, converting the “idol-temples into Masjids,” wiping out the religion of darkness, in exalted language. Vijay Prashad can supply us with the appropriate phraseology to describe the plight of the people who were thus cleansed, their beliefs violated, their lands usurped, and their way of life chopped off: victims seems a sensible word to me.

The idea, as Prashad says, is not to become aggressors or avenge past wrongs. A whole load of very good revival work is done simultaneously in many areas of human study to recover the wealth of knowledge contained in the Hindu past: archeology, metallurgy, architecture, and polity. The idea also, of the Holocaust Museum is to show what is possible under fanatical regimes and rulers like Aurangzeb. None of these efforts can be remotely called aggression.

But all of this is just the beginning.

Historical (non) Evidence

The actual story unfolds when Vijay Prashad embarks on an Islamic whitewashing spree.

If you read the historical records carefully, you will find that many Hindus participated in the slaughter of other Hindus, and that the Hindu Buddhist battles of the ancient world were perhaps more bloody than anything that comes afterward. Or indeed, that the systematic violence against dalits and other subordinate castes should hold our attention far more than it does.

This is a classic.

The louder scholars like Prashad stress on reading historical records, the more our suspicion tends in the opposite direction. Hindu kings did slaughter other Hindus but in this context, it conceals a very vital point that Prashad wants to sweep away. The motive for infighting among Hindu kings was not religious conquest or domination. The Hindu-Buddhist “battles” were mostly fought in scholars’ assemblies and not on real battlefields. Whatever the actual, physical battles that occurred can hardly qualify for something as severe as “more bloody than anything that comes afterward.” At the least, Vijay Prashad should provide one shred of evidence to back this up. Equally, the “systematic violence” against dalits is largely exaggerated and terminologically incorrect. First, there was no “caste” or group of people called “dalits” in the period Prashad refers to. Shudras were the “lowest” caste. Besides, we have numerous examples of Shudras who later became kings. Prashad would have us believe that “systematic” violence is the same as what Islamic kings did to the native Hindu population. The good professor of South Asian History should not be reminded of basic principles of logic.

Let’s see what he says about how Islam came into India.

When Islam enters the subcontinent, it does not come in the saddlebags of the Ghaznis or the Ghouris, but amongst the rumble of goods brought by traders. Early conversions are not by the sword but by the merchants.

Prashad very conveniently refuses to put even an approximate timeline to “when Islam enters the subcontinent.” Instead he talks about Ghaznis and Ghouris. I hate to disappoint him but this particular morsel of history dates farther back than Ghaznis and Ghoris. As early as CE 664, Abdur Rahman, an Arab invader took Kabul (then part of India). However, it took at least two centuries for Mohammad Bin Qasim–an Arab again–to successfully occupy parts of Sindh around CE 711-712. Subuktgin and his prodigious son, Mohammad of Ghazni, and then Mohammad Ghori were all Turks. I leave it to the reader’s intelligence to deduce from this piece of historical evidence that Qasim, Subuktigin, and the two Mohammads were merchants.

What comes next is even better.

There was killing, but that was as much for reasons of warfare and plunder as for reasons of God and tradition. An interested reader might want to look at the distinguished historian Romila Thapar’s superb book “Somnatha: The Many Voices of a History” (Penguin, 2005). There, Professor Thapar shows us that Mahmud Ghazni’s destruction of the Shiva temple in 1026 was driven not so much by a fanatical religious belief but because his father, Subuktigin, needed money to sustain his faltering kingdom in Central Asia. Now it is certainly true, as historian Mohammed Habib put it, that there was “wanton destruction of temples that followed in the wake of the Ghaznavid army.

Let’s look at what these early gentlemen, “merchants” of Islam did, in order of their time in history.

  • Abdur Rahman: Forcibly converted a few thousand people to Islam (Tarikh-i-Ferishtah, Persian text, Nawal Kishore Press, Lucknow 1865, Vol.1, p.16.)
  • Mohammad Bin Qasim: He established mosques, appointed Muslim governors, and propagated Islam in cities and towns like Alor, Nirun, Debul and Multan. In Debul, he enslaved and converted women and children, and left a 4000-strong Muhammadan garrison at the place. In Multan about 6000 persons were forcibly converted to Islam. Al Biladuri’s narrative points to large-scale conversions in Sawandari, Basmad, Kiraj, and Alor (Chachnama, Futuh-ul-Buldan).
  • Mohammad Ghazni: Starting with his first attack around 1000 CE, this darling of secular historians has left behind a wealth of Hindu skulls and converts in the general region of Peshawar to Kanauj (in the East) and to Anhilwara (in the South). In terms of numbers, all inhabitants of the populous town of Bhera (whose ruler, Maharaja Jayapala and his 15 chiefs were taken captivej and either killed or converted), and some 10000 people in Baran (Bulandshehar) were forcibly converted to Islam (those who refused were killed). For city-wise conversion statistics, see Utbi’s Kitab-i-Yamini.
  • Mohammad Ghori: His massacre of Hindus at Kol (today’s Aligarh), Kalingar and Varanasi is one of the unparalleled achievements of Islamic invaders of India. He slaughtered some 20000 Hindu prisoners and offered their heads to crows. He also holds the distinction of destroying Buddhist stupas, shrines, and monks on an industrial scale. Equally notable is his victory over Prithviraj Chauhan and the sack of Delhi, which he reduced to ashes and killed around a lakh people (Taj-ul-Maasir and Takikh-i Fakhrud-din).

I’ve purposely not included other luminaries like Allah-ud-din Khilji, Qutub-ud-din Aibak, the Bahamani Sultans, and the vandals of the Mughal empire in the interest of adhering to Prashad’s timeline.

It is unsurprising that he refers us to the 4000-Rupee lunch historian, Romila Thapar’s book, which issues the requisite character certificates for these invaders. I hate to shatter Prashad’s heroine worship, but the Expensive Lunch Professor’s Somanatha book has already been ripped to shreds critiqued very competently by Meenakshi Jain. Which is why, Vijay Prashad’s parroting hurts the ear:

When one looks at the sources contemporaneous with the Ghaznavid attacks, one finds that they mention these but only as a series among many. There was nothing about them that merits the term “Holocaust,” even as they were certainly destructive of the temples and of the people who worshipped there. What Thapar points to is that this was not all done by the Central Asia marauders.

We’re talking about at least 800 years of Islamic rule in India, not just the Ghaznavid period, Mr. Professor. It that combined period Gautier talks about in the context of Hindu Holocaust. This does not include the 1-3 million Hindus killed by the Pakistan Army in the 1971 massacre of (the then) East Bengal. Nandan Vyas, in his Hindu Genocide in East Pakistan (Young India, Jan 1995) pegs the figure at 2.4 million Hindus. This figure is alone enough to call it a Hindu Holocaust but perhaps the good Professor won’t be satisfied unless he sees heaps of millions of slaughtered Hindus to grant us the usage of this term.

Negationism Redux

Actually Vijay Prashad’s intentions are quite noble. He wants to stop communalism in its tracks at all costs. And so he slips yet another serpent out of the Marxist bag.

Indeed, there is little evidence of animus between Hindus and Muslims in the few hundred years after the entry of Ghazni. In the 13th century, a local raja, Sri Chada, granted a merchant from Hormuz the right to build a mosque on temple land. He also provided the mosque with a disbursement for teachers and preachers, for the daily reading of the Quran and for the celebration of festivals.

Hormuz is a straight import from Romila Thapar’s textbook on Somanatha, which as I’ve noted earlier, presents some problems.

Thapar makes much of a land grant by the Hindus of Somanatha to a trader from Hormuz for constructing a mosque some two centuries after Mahmud’s raid. Yet this Hindu gesture only reinforces the opposing perspectives of the two sides. While the Arab trader wished Somanatha might come to Islam, his Hindu hosts showed no desire to convert him, and facilitated the construction of a mosque so he could properly adhere to his faith. Thapar’s shoddy insistence that the gesture was dictated by the greed of Hindu traders for a share of the Arab trade is typical Marxist drivel.

For a more detailed (and tragic in the end) history of the Hormuz affair, see this, which Prashad naturally doesn’t tell us because whitewashing of Islamic atrocities prohibits mixing any other colour. Negationism in other words. Negationism also takes the garb of presents a phony history where Hindus and Muslims had nothing but brotherly love for one another. Ordinary Hindus were little better than slaves–dhimmis, under a Muslim king whereas Hindu kings allowed their Muslim subjects to build Mosques and generally let them be. Elst explains this quite well:

Note that attempts are made to deny this history. In Indian schoolbooks and the media, an idyllic picture of Hindu-Muslim harmony in the pre-British period is propagated in outright contradiction with the testimony of the primary sources. Like Holocaust denial, this propaganda can be called negationism. The really daring negationists don’t just deny the crimes against Hindus, they invert the picture and blame the Hindus themselves. Thus, it is routinely alleged that Hindus persecuted and destroyed Buddhism; in reality, Buddhist monasteries and universities flourished under Hindu rule, but their thousands of monks were killed by Ghori and his lieutenants.

Note Elst’s mention of primary sources. We have “historians” like Romila Thapar who write ancient Indian history with zero knowledge of Sanskrit, and medieval Indian history omitting histories/sources that quote from primary sources. And we have Vijay Prashad.

Preempting Tactics

Vijay Prashad is quite expectedly, derisive of the likes of Gautier and Elst. He does nothing to conceal it.

Gautier came to India from France about 30 years ago, and settled in Pondicherry. He has written a few tracts and writes occasionally for the newspapers. His work reads like another European apologist for extreme Hindutva, Koenraad Elst. Both went to strict Catholic schools and now hold a deep animus against Christian missionaries, but seem to take their venom out mainly against Islam. Gautier and Elst want to make plain the “Muslim genocide against Hindus.” But neither is a serious student of history, with little idea of how to read historical texts. They draw more from a misplaced passion than from a real, sober scientific exploration of the facts.

There are a few factors at work here. One of them is along these lines: how dare these Westerners come here and examine the primary sources instead of relying on the native “interpreters” of India to the West? The attack of obvious choice: label them as Hindutva apologist. I suspect the learned Professor Prashad has even read what Elst has written: he doesn’t take his “venom out” only against Islam but against all Prophetic religions. And then the condescending: not-a-serious-student-of-history, etcetra line as if it’s somehow enough to discredit all their work. But in a way, Prashad is right. They have little idea of how to read historical texts: by reading what’s not there, inserting what is “required,” or by omitting what doesn’t “fit,” a la secular historian.

But the eminent professor should answer how he expects us to believe his assertions galore, without a shred of evidence to back them up. Or at least tell us what his definition of “scientific exploration” is. Faith in him?

His designation reads: George and Martha Kellner Chair in South Asian History and Professor of International Studies.

Technorati : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Del.icio.us : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

29 comments for “Whitewashing with a Straight Face

  1. JITENDRA
    January 30, 2011 at 7:10 PM

    Pinkos and muslims, though apparenently antagonist share many common thoughts and patterns. History is interpreted by both with their own mode of resoning and by rationalization of all what they did bad in past. Both are exclusivist and beleive in infalliability of their scriptures. Both are under false impression that they are cahmpions of humanity and last but not the least, Pinkos supercede only muslims in murders, tortures , unlawful imprisonments , poalitical and cultural expanionism.

  2. December 7, 2009 at 9:24 AM

    The following caught my attention:
    There was killing, but that was as much for reasons of warfare and plunder as for reasons of God and tradition. An interested reader might want to look at the distinguished historian Romila Thapar’s superb book “Somnatha: The Many Voices of a History” (Penguin, 2005). There, Professor Thapar shows us that Mahmud Ghazni’s destruction of the Shiva temple in 1026 was driven not so much by a fanatical religious belief but because his father, Subuktigin, needed money to sustain his faltering kingdom in Central Asia. Now it is certainly true, as historian Mohammed Habib put it, that there was “wanton destruction of temples that followed in the wake of the Ghaznavid army.

    Sabuktigin died much earlier, in 997AD. So not only is this a shameful attempt an at apology, it is factually incorrect. Indeed, the raid on Somnath was fairly late even in Mahmud’s career – his first raid into India was in 1000AD. Also, pl. do visit my blog at dharmaveer.blogspot.com.

  3. Gujjubhai
    October 3, 2009 at 7:41 PM

    The worst part is that not only are these guys denying history, they are also whitewashing the present. I am amazed at the political and PR might of the Roman Catholic Church – any other organization that has laundered mafia money, colluded with dictators, actively engages in genocides and provide protection to child rapists within its ranks would have been in so much trouble. Continuous intellectual brainwashing done in universities by wretches like this Vijay Prashad creature is certainly a part of the explanation but there’s gotta be much more to it.

    Meanwhile, in breaking news, yet another child porn peddling bishop is caugh – this time in Caanda.

    http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091001/national/catholic_bishop_porn

  4. Ot
    September 30, 2009 at 2:15 PM

    Seadog4227,

    >>Has anyone ever seen a commie smile?

    Excellent point. Commies have no sense of humor. They are incapable of having fun, or of generating and enjoying a lighter moment. It is not just Arundhati Roy’s rambling writeups that sound like a vomit of pent-up bile. It is true of all fundies and dogmatists. The underlying reason, I believe, is that hatreds, phobias and insecurities drive every moment of their existence.

    It is not probably a coincidence that the most interesting people are atheists. (Commies don’t qualify, their pretense of being atheists notwithstanding. Leftwing ideology is a lot similar to faith-based religions). Several standup comedians in the West are atheists and the potshots they take at religion constitute some of their best work.

  5. prachetas
    September 30, 2009 at 12:45 PM

    Great to see many many new people exposing the marxist slime bags to newbies who dont know about their whole shadowy business model. I am sure that the slimes wud be tossing around all nite without mental peace for getting exposed. Down with fake experts & anti-nationals

  6. OverTheHill
    September 30, 2009 at 12:03 PM

    @seadog4227:
    The circular validation is a form of garbage recycling.
    Sort of like coroutines without a basis, you have to wait for the stack to overflow for the whole circus to crash.

    - s

  7. seadog4227
    September 29, 2009 at 12:02 PM

    The way this group of “eminent” historians and frauds ( Romila Thapar, Harbans Mukhia, Irfan Habib, Vijay Prasad, Angana Chatterji, Akhila Raman, Amartya Sen, Gargi Chakravarti etc) assist each other and are also assisted by the Slimes of India, NDTV, Loutlook etc is almost predictable. You see , ALL OF THEM are experts on EVERYTHING, including Hinduism.It does not matter that they don’t know sanskrit, have no formal learning, or basic knowledge, but Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels have given them divine ,oops, deep inspiration. Has anyone ever seen a commie smile?

  8. Ot
    September 28, 2009 at 9:12 AM

    AA,

    >>The reasons can no longer be solely attributed to an external cause- Islam; but have to be looked within as well.

    One important reason for the fall of the Hindu civilization is the complete Hindu ignorance of Abrahamic faiths. Hindus tend to look at another belief systems through an Indic lens, and attribute to it with the same spiritual value and goodness as their own. This attitude is touted as a virtue by some; in matter of fact it is stupidity. Islam and Christianity are not Sikhism and Jainism. Theologically, their absolutist truth claims are unappeasable except by unquestioning acceptance. Politically, they are exclusivist, expansionist faiths that feign a willingness to coexist only when in adversity. Their real aim is world domination and destruction of other faiths. Hindus never understood this, and still do not understand it.

  9. Incognito
    September 27, 2009 at 5:43 PM

    nice pics linked by Amrit Hallan.

    perhaps those pics frightened the dhimmi regent to say that muslims would have first right to nation’s resources.

  10. Anon
    September 27, 2009 at 2:43 PM

    Typo in post above – please read “civilization” instead of “civization”. First line.

  11. Anon
    September 27, 2009 at 2:40 PM

    AA asks -

    “What was it about their civilization that made them vulnerable to Islamic conquests? The reasons can no longer be solely attributed to an external cause- Islam; but have to be looked within as well.”

    The major reason for the downfall of Hindus was their civization, their human values, their compassion. Kshatriyas were mostly rulers, and they always fought with their code – man to man, armed to armed. Nowhere in pre-islamic history do we find that women and children were killed by Kshatriyas. Hindu kings defeated the invading muslims who had already run over Persia (modern day Iran) and destroyed the Persian civilization (the Parsis fled and sought shelter in India) but they failed to annihilate the defeated islamic armies.

    It took the Hindus more than 1000 years to learn that muslims can only be defeated by the final solution – and the Marathas under Shivaji and the Sikhs under Guru Gobind Singh did exactly that. Did not take any prisoners. Did not leave a mullah alive to preach the jihad as written in the koran some time later. The Marathas were muslim hunters, and two of Shivaji’s generals were responsible for cleaning up central India – Holkar (king of Indore), and Shinde (later on Scindia) from Ujjain to Gwalior.

    You can go through the site below for a history of jihad, not only against Hindus, but the entire humanity.

    http://historyofjihad.org

  12. AA
    September 27, 2009 at 1:33 PM

    There is a reason that we need to talk about Hindu genocide which may sound music to the ears of the good secularists. I think it is a point mentioned by Naipaul in his writings, if I am not wrong. Only after the devastation caused by Islamic conquest is acknowledged, Hindus will be ready to look into the causes behind the demise of their civilization. What was it about their civilization that made them vulnerable to Islamic conquests? The reasons can no longer be solely attributed to an external cause- Islam; but have to be looked within as well.

  13. September 26, 2009 at 7:20 PM

    Its not Francois Gautier that is organizing this it is an hindu organization based in US called the Global Hindu heritage foundation GHHF. He was just a speaker. Same folks that run the SAVETEMPLES.ORG organization to the chagrin of the now dead Evangelist AP CM. RIP – Rot In Piss.

    This Vijay Prashad is the same guy that lead the signature campaign against Modi getting the FDI award. These hindu haters are so obvious a simple google name search will show up their kartoots.

    For a extensive list of FREE ONLINE BOOKS on Islam’s ‘glorious’ blood thirsty past

    http://www.geocities.com/voi_publishers/Online.htm

  14. brahmakShatra
    September 26, 2009 at 4:12 PM

    It is due to the conspiracy of the subversionist mleCchas that people like Prashad can easily get professorships in universities.

  15. OverTheHill
    September 26, 2009 at 1:32 PM

    Note the following line from the ‘eminent professor’ (if Sandeep is not being sarcastic he is being too kind):
    ” … Both went to strict Catholic schools and now hold a deep animus against Christian missionaries …”.
    Trinity is a Catholic school – Prashad is a propagandist shill, he knows what to say and what to leave out.

  16. Joe stalin
    September 26, 2009 at 10:42 AM

    David Horowitz does great job of exposing left wing apologists for the jihad who attempt to pass themselves off as academics

    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/

  17. ramkumaran
    September 26, 2009 at 9:34 AM

    Good coverage of one of false propaganda by marxists and their historian goons sandeep. When Francois Gautier tried to hold a fair in Chennai and in Kerala demonstrating the well documented attrocities committed by Aurangazeb, islamists protested and our minority pampering state governments made their best attempts to thwart the show with brute police force, unless v get rid off such minority pamperers people like prashad will keep cockering, the book written Indian Muslims Who are They written by b.k.lal & published by Voice of dharma details how the benign religion of peace spread through the most violent means in our bharthavarsha. The pdf version of the book can be downloaded from here http://www.scribd.com/doc/13502374/Indian-Muslims-Who-Are-They

  18. larissa
    September 26, 2009 at 1:40 AM

    larissa says:

    Why is the Hindu Holocaust museum being built by a Frenchman? Says something about HIndus.
    How about HIndus give more money to build something like this?
    How many Hindus know that Qutb Minar which many HIndu ignorantly admire as an architectural masterpiece was built over the remains of 27 Hindu and Jain temples to commemorate the victory of Islam in the area by the Ghorids?
    The sister of this monument is found in Afghanistan and called the Jam Minaret. The entire city where this minaret remians was destroyed by the Mongols later but this minaret survives. The Ghorids were also a mountain peoples. I would not be surprised if they had been Hindus who earlier had been converted to Islam in Afghanistan.

  19. larissa
    September 26, 2009 at 1:39 AM

    Why is the Hindu Holocaust museum being built by a Frenchman? Says something about HIndus.
    How about HIndus give more money to build something like this?
    How many Hindus know that Qutb Minar which many HIndu as an architectural masterpiece was built over the remains of 27 Hindu and Jain temples to commemorate the victory of Islam in the area by the Ghorids?
    The sister of this monument is found in Afghanistan and called the Jam Minaret. The entire city where this minaret remians was destroyed by the Mongols later but this minaret survives. The Ghorids were also a mountain peoples. I would not be surprised if they had been Hindus who earlier had been converted to Islam in Afghanistan.

  20. September 26, 2009 at 1:29 AM

    When I was a child I visited with my parents the Sikh history meusiam in Gurudwara Bangla Sahib’s basement. Visit it. The stuff there you see is unbelievable. Here are some photographs from the Amritsar collection:

    http://www.shunya.net/Pictures/NorthIndia/Amritsar/Museum04.jpg
    http://www.shunya.net/Pictures/NorthIndia/Amritsar/Museum02.jpg
    http://www.shunya.net/Pictures/NorthIndia/Amritsar/Museum07.jpg (Sikh mothers were garlanded with the severed heads of their children)
    http://www.shunya.net/Pictures/NorthIndia/Amritsar/Museum08.jpg

    You can see more at
    http://www.shunya.net/Pictures/NorthIndia/Amritsar/Amritsar.htm (you’ll need to scroll down)

    Although I’m not posting these photographs to spread hatred and repulsion, but this is a reality. The Muslim atrocities on Sikhs are a part of the daily Sikh prayers; I wonder why the secularists don’t object :-)

  21. prachetas
    September 25, 2009 at 10:01 PM

    Rajan Zed is i state of Nevada ad he was the priest who opened the senate house session with a hindu prayer. Some Russian American christian rightists interrupted the ceremony with slogans hailing jesus and abusing zed & hindus. He thus became famous and hence a public face.

  22. September 25, 2009 at 9:29 PM

    Oops..Rajan Zed.Yes, a player who behaves like a comic caricature of Hindutva-vadis.Of course, the media in US calls him up for any issue that has the Hindu or Indian tag.

    Any way, the bigger battle is in India.

  23. Palahalli S
    September 25, 2009 at 9:02 PM

    Oh..Rajan Zed? Seems like a player.

  24. Palahalli S
    September 25, 2009 at 8:49 PM

    Kumar, who is this guy? He doesn’t sound Hindu.

  25. September 25, 2009 at 8:30 PM

    It is time the ‘right’ in India demand and achieve ‘centres of dharmic studies’ setup in major Indian universities.We should also encourage privte sector to setup such centres.After all, we as a nation are defined primarily by the Hindu dharma and if we don’t create scholars of repute (on a large scale) and define the dominant themes of how Bharat and its history/culture need to be understood, sepoys like Vijay Parshad will go around claiming scholarship and dissing the real scholars like Elst.

    Also, how do we ensure people like Razan Zed don’t get identified as the primary spokespersons for Hindutva? With friends like him…

  26. September 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM

    Sandeep: Great post…Someone I knew had forwarded me Vijay Parshad’s article requesting a rebuttal…

    But I would not have come close to your masterly job.

    Thanks.

  27. Kedar
    September 25, 2009 at 1:28 PM

    Sandeep:
    A minor correction:
    “Mohammad of Ghazni” should be “Mahmud of Ghazni”

  28. Ot
    September 25, 2009 at 11:31 AM

    What’s new? Commies _are_ Islamists’ bitches.

    That point apart, 50K is a pittance. It takes just 500 people to contribute $100 each to raise this sum.

  29. Palahalli S
    September 25, 2009 at 8:18 AM

    This guy, Prasad, is a professor?? I never knew this.
    All the free world is in this suicidal habit of breeding and rearing scum of the 1st order.
    I cannot understand why.

    At the very least these louts should be exposed to the fullest public glare and questioning.

    That can only happen when we have more and more “Sandeeps” exposing them relentlessly.

Leave a Comment