Death of a Pervert: May His Soul Burn in Hell

Death totally destroys any sense of perspective in most people. The more famous a death is, the greater the perspective-destruction. Every idiot will become intelligent in death and the vilest degenerate will be sanctified. It’s not their fault, it’s the fault of the everyday idiots who are still living, who want to sound composed and dignified and saintly and even philosophical. The evil that men do lives after them, and the good may or not oft be interred in their bones but what of a lifetime spent in the limelight behind which lies some shrewd deception ? Death doesn’t somehow automatically nullify that.

And so Baba Ramdev, Anna Hazare, the Maran Bros, Kanimozhi, and Karunanidhi can now take the much-needed commercial break: the old pervert is finally dead.

Renowned artist MF Husain, whose paintings made waves and also stirred controversies, passed away in Royal Brompton Hospital on Thursday. He was 95.

May his soul burn in hell. Whatever be his technical expertise and skill at painting and the rest, he was primarily a pervert who created a fake aura around himself and routinely hid under the blanket of freedom of expression he selectively applied to himself. It is for this reason barring all other reasons that this man deserves nary a kind word. Even in death.

I’ve done justice to M F Husain’s “art” on several occasions on this blog so I don’t need to repeat all that now. What should interest us now is his career as a painter/artist. The Times of India report (linked above) gives us his career-sketch thus:

Husain’s initial success as an artist was in the late 1940s. In 1947, he joined the Progressive Artists’ Group, founded by Francis Newton Souza. This was a group of young artists who wished to break with the nationalist traditions established by the Bengal school of art and to encourage an Indian avant-garde, engaged at an international level.

And therein lie the roots of the grossly disproportionate and wholly undeserved acclaim that he received throughout his career. In exactly one word: progressive. The whole hoopla about “young artists who wished to break with the nationalist traditions” only confirms what we always knew about progressives and Husain, specifically. Husain is not alone in the mindless adulation heaped upon him. Take any field: the early birds, the founding fathers and the battle-hardened veterans—the U R Ananthamurthys, Girish Karnads, Vijay Tendulkars and so on—continue to enjoy similar adulation. They did their best to wreck ancient Indian values and the maximum height that today’s Pankaj Mishras and Arundhati Roys can hope to rise won’t cross the knee-level of these Original Sinners.

See how clear things suddenly become when you have this background to examine the now-deceased barefooted profligate?

These Original Sinners laid the foundation for perverting public discourse. They laid the rules as to what constitutes freedom of expression. They defined Progressiveness. They gave us stuff like “the goal of art” and gradually, defined art itself. Look at any field in the Humanities: they’ve held sway for almost four decades. After the “early days,” they began to breed like pigs and bred tirelessly until they pretty much converted all universities, institutions, boards, history and culture departments to huge, smelly sewerages the stink of which endures to this day. And they were fiercely protective of their own. More on that in just a bit.

Now when we trace Souza’s Elite Art Club, we notice that he attained literary fame by being published by that Communist poet, Stephen Spender. Husain was indeed in the company that mattered. He was also at right time and place: it was just the beginning of politicization of art (and everything) and he was an early bird. You had to be a Communist or a Congress party member. The former had a bloody ideology and the latter had power. I don’t know if Husain was a card-carrying communist party member but he was a Progressive Artist and that Explained Everything. The Theory. The Answer. In any case, associating with Newton Souza proved richly rewarding for the then still-formative pervert. He dabbled in that art-film equivalent of juvenility called avant-garde, which was in essence public masturbation accompanied by a noisy symphony of likeminded wankers who dreamt of social and reform through masturbation. And he got invited to the Big White Art Exhibitions and made his name. And then the money rained in torrents. Husain became unstoppable till merciful death finally took him away today.

The Phenomenon was at work in his case: impress the White Man so you can earn the licence to look down upon your own and spit on them. What’s even better is the said inbreeding gave rise to a class of folks who glowingly reviewed such spit. It doesn’t matter if the reviewer knows nothing about the subject he/she is reviewing. He/she has “earned” the “right” to review because the badge reads Progressive. And so everybody’s grandmother and that ex-Filmfare guy Khalid Mohamed has an opinion on Husain. To be fair, we don’t know Khalid Mohamed’s political leanings, but in that interview, it’s obvious that the Mohamed is asking inoffensive questions lest the iconic pervert’s aged sensibilities be breached.

In reality, Husain’s art isn’t art: it’s painting, and in some cases, actually multi-hued bullshit on canvas. Exhibit 1. Compare with this poster of Gone with the Wind and draw your own conclusions. But then it’s a free country and while he’s free to daub paint on shit, people are free to buy that coloured shit. Husain’s art isn’t art—and this is in Husain’s own words—because if he had followed the dictum of traditional Indian art, he’d have never joined agenda-pushing groups like Progressive Artists-whatever. An artist typically works alone and he neither belongs to clubs and societies nor seeks their endorsement much less pushes an agenda or theme. In traditional Indian art (for which Husain professes great respect), the idea is to subsume one’s ego to the work of art one is creating. The thousands of sculptures and miniature paintings and similar works that we see in our temples and palaces and antique places are created by artists who never made their name public. Which makes it clear that M F Husain apart from being a non-artist, was a hypocrite. Free expression works both ways: if you claim the freedom to offend, be ready to be offended instead of running to Momma (read: the lib-secular-free speech thugs).  If you want to paint Hindu gods and goddesses in a perverse light, you must have similar guts to stand by your atrocious Meenaxi when offense-seeking Mullahs bay for your blood. If you want Sita to sit suggestively on Hanuman’s tail, you mustn’t shy away from painting the Prophet’s (PBUH) Holy Trysts with Young Ayesha and recite an appropriate surah justifying it in the name of serving Islam, etc.

Let’s think about the whole eruption of the Husain controversy. When can we reasonably date Husain’s run-ins with the deadly Hindu groups? Answer: the mid-90s. But these paintings were first done by the arch-degenerate sometime in 1970. A Hindi magazine ran these pictures in 1996 terming them offensive. So why didn’t anybody take notice of his pictures for 26 long years? The answer: politics, control of information and the Progressive clique. The ‘70s was truly the most oppressive decade since Independence. And look what happened after the Communists and Congress lost ground ever since. A good case is how the “art” films died as quickly as they were born. Subsequent political and social developments broke this control and voices previously unheard began to spread throughout the country. An indicator of these developments is the fact that the Progressives were at their rabid worst in the ‘90s, which was the decade when there was a resurgence of sorts among Hindus.

But then the pervert painter couldn’t be let down at any cost. His “art” had by then been solidly fed into the public imagination along with his image with all the trappings—the typical queer, badly-dressed barefoot artist-genius who cared for nobody, who lived his life on his own terms and whose art was great because nobody understood it but the art critics nevertheless praised it and the said painted perversions earned millions of bucks. Everybody got rich in their own way. It’d be insane to allow a few loony Hindu fanatics to spoil the kind of stuff at stake.

Equally, Husain had become a law unto himself. Answerable to no one. Well, if you think I’m exaggerating, what explains this?

…a court case related to the alleged obscene depiction of Hindu goddesses in his paintings resulted in issuing a non-bailable warrant against Husain after he failed to respond to summons.

I’d have said this was a case of bad behaviour but this isn’t merely bad behaviour. Every society grants a wide latitude to its men and women of the arts. Normal societal mores don’t apply to them because they have earned the right to indulge in bad behaviour, immorality, etc—or so goes the general reasoning. Which is perfectly fine. But then they’re citizens first and nobody is above the law of the land. Even the Icon of Artistic Debauchery. But that’s not all: this arch-pervert not only does not disregard the law, he flees the country, takes a Qatari citizenship and whines via remote control about how his right to free expression was constantly threatened in India. But the real reason is the fact that he’s above the law to appear before any court. Ok, I made that up. A non-bailable warrant means spending some time behind bars. The very thought is sufficient to sully his fair name. And when does his remote-control whining happen?  After he has received long years of singular support from the secular-liberal brigandry, after he’s accepted both the Padma awards from the government, after he has sat in the Rajya Sabha and after he has savoured the magnanimity of a majority of Hindus throughout his career. Hussain was not only a coward but a deeply ungrateful person who bit the hand that fed him with a golden spoon.

May his soul burn in hell.

214 comments for “Death of a Pervert: May His Soul Burn in Hell

  1. rajkamal
    June 19, 2011 at 9:19 PM

    ??? ?? ?? ????????

  2. rajkamal
    June 19, 2011 at 9:16 PM

    ?? ??????? ?????? ?? ?????? ??

  3. Amit
    June 19, 2011 at 7:57 PM

    Loneranger wrote:
    “Drone attacks have really made america the no.1 enemy of even liberal/ordinary pakistanis. Whatever good or bad , they are an independent nation and no other nation has the right to do what americans are doing there. “

    America is not holding a gun to Paki head and asking it to collaborate. The Pakis are getting billions of $$$ in aid every year for allowing America to run rough-shod over its territory. It takes two to tango.

    “Do you know how many civilians are killed on a daily basis? Do you feel it is justified because some terrorists are also killed? What about the children maimed or widows left behind? “

    It is not my priority to think and worry about Pakistan – Pakistanis should take care of their own country. Perhaps you could bleed your heart for the non-Muslim minorities in Pakistan which have been reduced to a single percentage digit since 1947, and the atrocities on these non-Muslims (including widows and children maimed), by those for whom your heart bleeds so copiously, continue to this day.

    “If one’s mind if filled with hatred, they are bound to say things like that and one should take it in the literal sense. Cirumstances are like that. Now, dont say its of their own making. That is another issue altogether “

    Yes, the ideology of the great religion of peace is never to blame for the state of Pakistan – it is the fault of America and others. We liberals must never hold people accountable for their own actions, be ready to give weak and lame excuses for them and always find others to blame.

    When you get a chance, read up a bit on Stockholm Syndrome.

  4. NASH
    June 19, 2011 at 6:45 PM

    projection

    the inactions and missed opportunities which
    played out here will not be the same in europe.

    the faceoff that will occur in europe between the
    two communities is to watch and learn.

    would this fight be on basic resources(water,land ,
    education and healthcare)

    societal norms (population inequality,cultural custom
    disparity)

    or in the crude form (violence,plunder n going
    against the law of the land)

    over to europe for the next fifty years

  5. neelkanth
    June 19, 2011 at 6:31 PM

    @rajkamal

    Funny how some people have convinced themselves that napkin doodles have any real value.

  6. Amit
    June 19, 2011 at 5:41 PM

    rajkamal wrote:

    “funny how some people have convinced themselves he was a bad painter also. i truth, he could have bought each of these people with just a napkin doodle”
    __

    Yeah, since Islam, along with the other monotheistic Abrahamic religions, is famous for making slavery legal. Didn’t know you were such a huge fan of slavery. Are you sure you’re “rajkamal” and not “ajmal”? ;-)

  7. SB
    June 19, 2011 at 1:53 PM

    “bought each of these people with just a napkin doodle” ..

    Isn’t that just what makes people like you give him respect ? You must really envy Aurangazeb who could have “bought” Hindu women for his harem. You must really feel a great deal of reverence for dogs who can “buy” your sister. You should at least thank us that we will rather spit on these Mussalman dogs and have them lacerate our bodies than have them have their way.

  8. June 19, 2011 at 6:13 AM

    @Sandeep FYI
    You are comparing an abstract paint against a poster when you compare poster of Gone with the Wind and Exhibit 1. It takes a bit of perversion or inclination, however you want to take it, on viewers part to see “perversion”. Abstract paints hide details to make way for interpretation and help viewers find a way to relate to. Nevertheless, I also believe Husain is part of ‘Liberal Opportunists’ and questioning his credentials is a good way to start.

  9. June 18, 2011 at 11:04 PM

    I glad Hussain left this world. I hope things will finally change now. But I wonder if that will happen before I die myself.

  10. rajkamal
    June 18, 2011 at 9:22 PM

    funny how some people have convinced themselves he was a bad painter also. i truth, he could have bought each of these people with just a napkin doodle

  11. NASH
    June 18, 2011 at 8:23 AM

    late shri sita rama goel and other writers of past decades
    have recorded the hindu-muslim encounters.the factual
    account of those encounters is there for all to see.
    the gist of all that writings is “the fundamental psyche
    of the muslim is at odds or at variance with the general
    society”.

    if that is taken as a given the present europe comes to the
    same conclusion independent of indian experience.
    one to one they match in their behavior.
    the conclusion of european writers are just in a span of
    50 years of living together.

    the present article does a paradigm shift in its conclusion.
    earlier it was just recorded and the fundamental idea
    presented to the community.here it blames fair and square
    in no uncertain terms.in war they would call it SHOCK AND AWE.
    it does not mince words where it is due.
    i think this could be the begining of that elusive
    grouping of the hindu community

  12. Amit
    June 18, 2011 at 2:12 AM

    Loneranger, you might want to read this. BTW, it was written by an ex-Muslim.

    Islamophobic? There’s no need to apologise

    We all know that the label Islamophobic is bandied about freely and quite deliberately in order to make the person to whom it is being applied feel guilty as the not-so- subtle implication is that he or she is prejudiced against Muslims and is, therefore, a racist. I think that Islamists are pastmasters at exploiting the guilt feelings of people who are conscious of and care about the raw deal that Muslims do sometimes get. In his excellent book, The Islamist, Ed Husain describes how, in colleges and universities, Hizbut Tahrir, an organisation to which he once belonged, employ a strategy which not only tries to make the authorities feel guilty, but at the same time produces feelings of persecution among the Muslim students. They ask for facilities for prayers, gatherings etc, and if those requests are readily met they then increase the demands deliberately to such an unreasonable level that they know the authorities will have to reject them. Once that happens, they accuse the authorities of racism and Islamophobia and at the same time point out to the students that the treatment which is being meted out to them is but a very small example of the way Muslims are being treated the world over; citing the examples of Iraq, Palestine etc.

    I think that this free use of the word Islamophobic is meant to achieve the same two ends. It is intended to make liberal people like Polly Toynbee (who in 2004 was declared Islamophobe of the Year by the Islamic Human Rights Commission) experience feelings of guilt, and is also meant to make Muslims feel persecuted. By thus silencing liberal opinion the Islamists try to achieve their desired aim of stifling any criticism of Islam – at least from that quarter.

    As an ex-Muslim I am quite happy to be described as Islamophobic; and all the ex-Muslims I know, I am sure, will say the same. We surely know more than anyone else that, when it comes to Islam, we have so much to be phobic about! We are not, however, Muslimphobic. We couldn’t be when we are all aware that those who are nearest and dearest to us are Muslims.

    My point is that we should not at all recoil from being called Islamophobic. We should readily accept the label, but should hasten to point out that it does not mean that we are Muslimphobic, and prove it by our conduct. And we should try to give currency to the word Muslimphobia and make the distinction between Islamophobia
    and Muslimphobia widely known and appreciated. This should also help in exposing the BNP for what they are. At present they, like Polly Toynbee, are labelled Islamophobic but they are not. They are Muslimphobic.
    In an excellent pamphlet which the National Secular Society has produced on the subject, it is acknowledged that many Muslims face discrimination and bigotry and may be victims of racism, and it is correctly stated that Islamophobia is not an appropriate description of this problem. It is suggested that the expression anti-Muslim
    bigotry is a more suitable alternative, or where race is really the issue, just racism. I think that I am proposing the term Muslimphobia as a synonym for anti-Muslim bigotry because it rolls off the tongue more easily but, more importantly, since the word phobia is commonly being used and not bigotry, then it would serve a useful
    purpose if it is made quite clear that in some cases the appropriate word is Islamophobia and in others Muslimphobia.

    We saw during the last election campaign how the BNP specifically employed Muslimphobia in addition to their usual racism. They targeted those constituencies which have sizeable Muslim populations and tried to make people fear a future in which they claimed Muslims and Islamic values will dominate. As the target here was not other Asians like Hindus or Sikhs but only Muslims, racism does not cover this situation.I think that the BNP should be accused of both racism and Muslimphobia, whereas journalists who whip up the fear of Muslims by talking about Eurabia are clearly only being Muslimphobic.

    The NSS pamphlet to which I referred, points out “ While people should be protected from persecution and discrimination, ideas are fair game.Like Christianity, or Buddhism,or Scientology, Islam is just a set of ideas … It should be considered no worse questioning an Islamic idea than it is critiquing a political party’s election manifesto”.

    I think that we protect Muslims by categorically stating that Muslimphobia is unacceptable but at the same time by accepting the label of Islamophobic, clearly stating that we will criticise Islam, as we may criticise any other ideology, because we think that there is so much in Islam which should be criticised.The message we will thus give to Islamists is that we see through their game; that we will not let them deter us from criticising Islam by making us feel guilty because we know that being Islamophobic is not the same as being Muslimphobic and we are not Muslimphobic.
    -Asad Abbas

  13. Amit
    June 18, 2011 at 1:16 AM

    Wow my Momin Loneranger!! You’ll even outdo some Muslims in defending Islam. :)

    BTW, don’t you see the inherent contradiction between your two comments (Posted June 17, 2011 at 11:41 PM | and Posted June 17, 2011 at 11:33 PM |) towards your (confused) views of Muslims??

    Loneranger wrote:
    “let us not keep on pointing wrong doings in history”

    You just don’t know when to quit, do you? In spite of my repeated comments that we’re NOT discussing history, but CURRENT EVENTS AND CURRENT ATROCITIES OF ISLAM, you still keep ignoring that point and keep repeating “history, history, history.” Do you have a reading comprehension problem or are you being intentionally dense? It seems like I’m talking to a robot who keeps on repeating the same line irrespective of what is said to him.

    Loneranger wrote:
    “I have repeated this so many times that we need to show by our approach, tolerance, patience, equamnity, generosity that we are progressive and they need to evolve.”

    Yes, you’ve repeated this ad infinitum as if by repeating it enough number of times, it will become the truth, but haven’t given one single sensible reason as to why you adopt this different approach towards Islam whereas you support “a strident approach” and violence towards MNCs. What you’re saying is that you’re OK with more divisions of India just because you want to appear to be generous and patient, and keep appeasing Muslims, no matter what the cost. That’s nothing but sheer lunacy.

    Loneranger wrote:
    “It is wishful thinking for you but anyday better than asking someone to get out.”

    No, it’s wishful thinking on your part not mine, because you have given not one proof, not one single reason nor analysis – other than your desire to become a saint and a Grand Nurturer – that this approach will result in anything positive and a bond will develop.

    Anyway, it seems like I’m wasting my time as you don’t really have the capacity to actually read or understand what I write.

  14. kaangeya
    June 18, 2011 at 1:01 AM

    Let’s call a timeout on this kambalpitai/dharmadi/voting session please!

    The main difference between Indian art and Western art is that in the West, after the Renaissance, they had the Impressionists, then Cubism and so on. We, however, had already passed those stages. They were not necessary, because in our Indian folk art and tribal art, we had all these elements, and we have them even today. It is a living art form. After the Renaissance, artists in the West were concerned with depicting space and matter. We had already gone beyond that in our sculptures and paintings. When Michelangelo and others were trying to create the human form, we had passed that stage. The image of Nataraja is the highest form of art; it corresponded to the cosmos.
    The West claims modern art as its own. This is wrong. It is Eastern, they took it from Japan and from Africa. Because their media are strong, they have dominated the art scene.
    Also, we do not have a single person, a writer, who has a historical vision of our culture and can make people aware of it. After Ananda Coomaraswamy, there has been no such person. Luckily, in the last four or five years, we have been asserting our presence through our festivals and after Sotheby’s and Christie’s started auctioning our work.

  15. Loneranger
    June 17, 2011 at 11:41 PM

    d. You haven’t answered the two questions I asked you, and avoided them like the plague. Here they are again:
    (i) What do your Muslim friends think of you nurturing their religion?
    (ii) Why do you not care for the human rights of those who have to experience the atrocities of Islam till it reaches some nebulous stage by your nurturing? Is that “collateral damage” in your desire to be the Grand Nurturer?

    Answer : My friends are aware of the delicate situation wherein one wrong step can demolish everything. When I said delicate stage, it means that with extremism increasing due to variety of factors, one needs to say ok hold on here let us not be aggressive , let us not keep on pointing wrong doings in history, let us not say what is wrong in the religion , let us not say everyone has extremists tendencies, and let us bring up controversial/misinterpreted tenets and twist it. There are times when one has to have a dialogue, debate and engage in fruitful converstations so that they themself realise the right path. If you are going to be strident in approach, an ordinary man will say the extremists are right and go to them. I have repeated this so many times that we need to show by our approach, tolerance, patience, equamnity, generosity that we are progressive and they need to evolve. Once, that bond is developed then automatically changes will take place. It is wishful thinking for you but anyday better than asking someone to get out.

  16. Loneranger
    June 17, 2011 at 11:33 PM

    b. Re: public support, surveys after surveys – from different countries, show that Muslims in general support jihad, think favorably of Osama Bin Laden and his terrorist acts (including your secular party-walla Digvijay Singh with his asinine “Osama Ji”), think it’s OK to kill Ahmaddiyas (in Pakistan), think that the killer of Salman Taseer did the right thing etc.

    Answer : Show me some proof of your above statement except one odd survey in pakistan. Be it egypt or turkey or syria, muslims dont want to support any extremists group. As far as that one survey goes, you have to look deeply to know why it is so. Drone attacks have really made america the no.1 enemy of even liberal/ordinary pakistanis. Whatever good or bad , they are an independent nation and no other nation has the right to do what americans are doing there. Do you know how many civilians are killed on a daily basis? Do you feel it is justified because some terrorists are also killed? What about the children maimed or widows left behind? If one’s mind if filled with hatred, they are bound to say things like that and one should take it in the literal sense. Cirumstances are like that. Now, dont say its of their own making. That is another issue altogether .

  17. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 11:02 PM

    Loneranger wrote:
    “i.e liberals and progressive minded people like me. “
    __

    Those are just labels used by people who like to imitate the west without any analysis or thinking or understanding the context/history of these labels. I’ve repeatedly shown the shallowness and illogic of your numerous comments, and if this – your thinking – is what goes under “liberal thinking” then it’s nothing to aspire towards or to admire. In your comments you have demonstrated that you don’t speak the truth, you equivocate about your support for violent actions of Maoists, you avoid answering questions and indulge in intellectual dishonesty, you want to nurture a regressive ideology, you call yourself secular yet think Haj subsidy is OK – I could go on. I doubt that those are the characteristics of liberalism/progressivism. Or maybe they are, in which case, I think that liberalism is a disease of the mind, and these labels are worn as a result of blind faith with a desire to be part of the cool in-crowd – and not because most of those who call themselves “liberals” have arrived at that stage after some careful analysis, introspection or thinking.

  18. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 10:51 PM

    On Muthalik & Taliban comparison,

    a. Yes, you’d mentioned that big “if” – which remains just that. Yet you seem to shout the loudest about Muthalik and want to “not be strident” towards the Taliban-mindset. So, you are more concerned about some hypothetical threat in the future -which may or may not happen – while you ignore the current and very real threat. Does that approach sound rational to you? It doesn’t to me.

    I mean, where is Muthalik and his group today? Have they won some seats? Changed laws in favor of their views?

    b. Re: public support, surveys after surveys – from different countries, show that Muslims in general support jihad, think favorably of Osama Bin Laden and his terrorist acts (including your secular party-walla Digvijay Singh with his asinine “Osama Ji”), think it’s OK to kill Ahmaddiyas (in Pakistan), think that the killer of Salman Taseer did the right thing etc.

  19. Loneranger
    June 17, 2011 at 10:05 PM

    Really? You think that Muthalik – a small fish
    a. whose actions were criticized by all, including BJP, and
    b. who has absolutely no scriptural support for any of his theories, and
    c. whose actions were limited to only one city in India

    is the same as Taliban and Salafi Muslims who
    a. not only have a lot of wealth (and are using them to spread their ideology),
    b. but also have scriptural support for their violent actions, and
    c. have a global reach (terrorist acts in Bali, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, USA, Spain, UK, Holland, Sweden, Afghanistan) with their actions???

    Answer : I had mentioned categorically if muthalik had the same resources an islamist extremist organisation does, he would have been doing the same things they do. His thinking is same. I am sure one day in the future these extremists from islam and hinduism will join hands to kill the common enemy. i.e liberals and progressive minded people like me. After that they can fight among themselves.

    Taliban and salafi muslims too dont have the support of their community at large. Yes, they have a much bigger support than muthalik but with things going on now, it may not be far off when he will also have similar support and that is the worrying part.

  20. Loneranger
    June 17, 2011 at 9:58 PM

    Malavika – It is futile to argue or discuss with someone who has a closed mindset. I discuss/debate with many people but atleast they are open to it , whatever ideology they may have. Here, you are not only intolerant but you are proud of it in the same way a al-qaeda operative is proud of his sick ideology. He is proud of the fact that women is not equal to men , he is proud of his misinterpretation of islam, he is proud of his narrow/myopic vision. Like Amit talked about educated muslims being part of extremist movements, I am sure you are a similar kind but of another religion.

  21. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 6:43 PM

    Sabu Dana wrote:

    “Loneranger’s comments interest me in their premise, ie. no matter how many of us are killed/maimed/tortured or how badly our sensitivities are hurt, what’s important is that our image in front of the West (this is left unsaid of course) must be maintained.”
    __

    Sabu Dana, in one of the previous comments, Loneranger did express concern about the image of Hinduism in the eyes of others. :)

  22. Malavika
    June 17, 2011 at 5:54 PM

    @LR (Loathsome R)

    Yes, I am intolerant of pedophilia, bestiality and porn.

    So, you are tolerant of the above, implies you are a criminal and liable to be punished because having possession of above is a crime.

  23. NASH
    June 17, 2011 at 3:44 PM

    sabu dana

    if the first principles are not addressed ie equality before law then the arguments
    take the course of individuals perception.
    our constitution i presume is ok in that regard.

    the aggressions that have been mentioned in the past posts here should refer to
    those laws that have been abrogated.well that is not possible so we recourse to common sense.

    as i see it the equality of law has NOT been UPHELD (we the aam admi feel n experience that way)

    the implementation of that law selectively is causing the havoc.

    when that law of equality was implemented that MFH had to leave india,not because of intolerance

  24. Sabu Dana
    June 17, 2011 at 12:41 PM

    “assume they are intolerant …”

    Subhan Allah, some light is shining through.

  25. Sabu Dana
    June 17, 2011 at 12:30 PM

    Loneranger’s comments interest me in their premise, ie. no matter how many of us are killed/maimed/tortured or how badly our sensitivities are hurt, what’s important is that our image in front of the West (this is left unsaid of course) must be maintained. I assume that he thinks the merit of a civilization rests in the prestige that one is able to pull off in front of pompous sounding conferences in the West with one of the following words: “South Asia”, “rights”, “equitable”.

    What better example can there be of how us natives are measuring ourselves in terms of Western narrative (a good native is a docile “tolerant” native).

    Carry on.

  26. Loneranger
    June 17, 2011 at 11:52 AM

    Chalo, at least you admit that Muslims are intolerant

    Answer : Amit, It was meant in response to people here who keep on giving past, present examples of happenings about some small incident to highlight how intolerant muslims are. It could be the example of hand chopping, kuwait lady, or something else so I said fine let us hypothetically assume they are intolerant then what? Do you want to get to the same level? I got my reply when Malavika said she is proud of being intolerant. Therein rest my case on intolerance. I will reply to your other points slowly over the day.

  27. NASH
    June 17, 2011 at 11:45 AM

    sabu dana
    that is plain prostitution regulated by the government if it comes into effect

    what will happen to the kids that are born to them

    assuming that no one claims them so some orphanage will take them
    there living will become like beggars, so these people have to be culled if they claim any rights
    or they become drain on the economy.
    that is the course it might take

  28. Malavika
    June 17, 2011 at 11:14 AM

    @ Sabu Dana

    “Hussain’s attitudes towards Hindu Goddesses is characteristic of Islam.”

    Not just him resident Islamofascits who are most eager supporters of Hindubaiters and Hinduphobes get their inspiration from the same ideology.

    A cleric in Egypt is telling his followers that Muslims are poor because they do not follow Islam properly. If they did they would go on Jihad and then they will have wealth(loot) and slaves (POWs). These Pows can be sold in slave markets, and then the Umma will even more wealthy. Actually, when these Muslim fascists attacked India and took POWs the value of a Hindu slave was less than that of a Camel.

    Luckily the Kaffirs are getting wiser in spite of taquiyya by the usual suspects.

  29. Sabu Dana
    June 17, 2011 at 9:11 AM

    Hussain’s attitudes towards Hindu Goddesses is characteristic of Islam.

    Please read the following article:
    http://www.meforum.org/2930/muslim-woman-seeks-to-revive-institution-of-sex

    This is about a Kuwaiti woman parliamentarian who wants to revive sex slavery (especially of non-Muslim women). Judge the degraded perversity of this religion for yourselves.

    (from the article:)
    Directly from her speech:

    “A Muslim state must [first] attack a Christian state—sorry, I mean any non-Muslim state—and they [the women, the future sex-slaves] must be captives of the raid. Is this forbidden? Not at all; according to Islam, sex slaves are not at all forbidden. Quite the contrary, the rules regulating sex-slaves differ from those for free women [i.e., Muslim women]: the latter’s body must be covered entirely, except for her face and hands, whereas the sex-slave is kept naked from the bellybutton on up—she is different from the free woman; the free woman has to be married properly to her husband, but the sex-slave—he just buys her and that’s that.”

    She went on to offer concrete suggestions: “For example, in the Chechnyan war, surely there are female Russian captives. So go and buy those and sell them here in Kuwait; better that than have our men engage in forbidden sexual relations. I don’t see any problem in this, no problem at all.”

    Mutairi suggests the enslaved girls be at least 15 years-old.

    She further justified the institution of sex-slavery by evoking 8th century caliph, Harun Rashid—a name some may recall from Arabian Nights bedtime stories; a name some may be surprised to discover politically active Muslims modeling their lives after:

    “And the greatest example we have is Harun al-Rashid: when he died, he had 2,000 sex slaves—so it’s okay, nothing wrong with it.”

    ….

    Mutairi concluded by piously supplicating Allah: “Oh I truly wish this for Kuwait, Allah willing—Oh Lord, Lord, you are bountiful…”

  30. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 4:14 AM

    Loneranger,

    One last point regarding the false moral equivalence that you draw between Muthalik and Taliban, or between ‘Muslims’ and ‘Hindus who criticize Islam (“we’ll become like them”)’ . Following your logic, “ASI Tukaram Omble & Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan” are equally culpable as “Kasab and his gang,” because both groups indulged in violence, used guns and killed humans. Or the 9 terrorists who were killed were also martyrs, just like Major Unnikrishnan – since all of them died for what they believed in. Right?

    Anyway, this is my last comment for a while as I’ve written a lot. :)

  31. Indian
    June 17, 2011 at 4:09 AM

    @Bhagwad Jal Park, I guess Amit gave a fitting reply to your insane logic.

    By your logic, I can badmouth you and get away simply because I am no longer linked to what I said.

  32. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 3:37 AM

    Bhagwad Jal Park wrote:

    “I’m puzzled over why people focus more on the person rather than the paintings. Once a painting has been created, it’s no longer linked to the painter. Most of the discussion focuses on Husain which is illogical. Discuss his work. It’s irrelevant to me what his motives were.”
    __

    You will remain puzzled because you cannot tolerate a view-point that’s different than yours. Empty that cup.

    And once a painting is created, it is no longer linked to the painter? Good to know. So when MF Husain’s painting sells for millions, the money goes into someone else’s bank account than Husain’s (or his son’s)? Wonderful!! Does this logic extend to books and software too? I guess if I buy a Microsoft software, I should inform the vendor that the software is not linked to Microsoft anymore and that whatever money I paid, should be re-directed to my account.

    You self-confessed liberals really write hilarious comments displaying your asinine logic. :)

  33. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 3:29 AM

    Loneranger, BTW, if you are so shocked and angered by what you perceive as Hinduism condoning caste atrocities, or at the actions of “cunning” Baba Ramdev (no doubt because he’s a Hindu yoga guru), where’s your shock and anger at Islam and Christianity which legalized slavery till not so long ago (it still continues in Saudi Arabia and a few other countries), and presently do not even have any respect for non-believers and categorically reject their faith as false. Where’s your context, your perspective when you criticize Hinduism freely but want to nurture Islam and not be strident towards it? Why so much self-loathing?

  34. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 2:17 AM

    Loneranger wrote:
    “If not, then accept you are as intolerant as muslims in this regard and we can close this topic after your acceptance. “
    __

    Chalo, at least you admit that Muslims are intolerant. :-)
    (Though I’d disagree with you and would not lump all Muslims together, but that’s for another time.)

    If according to you, Muslims are intolerant (including your liberal Muslim friends? Or excluding them?), the question arises – what makes them intolerant? All humans are born the same, so where does that factor, which makes Muslims intolerant, come from?

  35. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 2:12 AM

    My question was:
    I’m still waiting for your one example where conciliatory approach by progressives/liberals has resulted in some flaw of Islam being removed. One example. Shouldn’t be that hard to come up with.

    Your answer:
    “In the slums of dharavi, people celebrate each others festival and feel happy. this is because no one is forcing their views on each other . This is the concilatory approach.”
    __

    How is what you state above (people celebrating each other’s festivals) an example of a flaw in Islam that has been removed by the efforts of liberals/progressives? Did the people in Dharavi not use to celebrate each other’s festivals before the liberals interceded? Were they sworn enemies before?

    Which flaw of Islam has been removed?

  36. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 2:08 AM

    Loneranger wrote:
    ” Sir, I dont support the violence of maoists. Let us be clear on this point. I said why they are taking up arms and how MNC’s and government is exploiting them. In life unless, things happen to you, you dont realise the gravity of it. It is like if today you see a child fall down, you will sympatheise but wont feel the pain. But, if your own child falls down , you will feel the pain. When your lands and houses, are teared down and taken apart, some will migrate , some will fight it out. To build your own personal coffers, the government is indulging in so many illegal activities that you will feel shocked. They bring in people from outside to build something or the other and these people indulge in molestations, rapes and what not. Why should maoists adopt a coincilatory approach? Let me tell you my friend, in another 10 years the whole tribals and lands will be wiped out if things continue like this. “
    __

    a. So what exactly do you support about the Maoists? Their ideology? Their philosophy? What is it?

    b. Yes, I’m aware of the impact of personal experience, but you still haven’t answered my question – why not take a nurturing attitude towards those evil MNCs, just like you advocate towards Muslims and Islam?

    c. You wrote: “Why should maoists adopt a coincilatory approach? Let me tell you my friend, in another 10 years the whole tribals and lands will be wiped out if things continue like this.

    Bingo!! Perhaps now you can start to understand why some Hindus are concerned about Islam when we see passivity, double-standards, appeasement, hypocrisy, self-loathing (by Hindus), hatred (of Hindus), cowardice hiding under tolerance from many Indians and our institutions who/which otherwise claim the label of secularism and liberalism.

    Analyze your own views and comments that you’ve written here and you’ll find in them, more than a few of the characteristics that I mentioned above. And the problem is that you seem to think that there’s nothing wrong with such double-standards and appeasement because you think you’re a liberal and rest all whose views differ from yours are troglodytes or spewing venom, or worse, saffronites. You have been very parsimonious with the truth, dance around the bushes, don’t call a spade a spade, and your views regarding Islam have to be painfully extracted from you, bit by bit. Maybe you should reflect on why your liberalism has made you such so that you are afraid to openly state the obvious truth.

  37. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 1:55 AM

    Loneranger wrote:
    “What is the difference in the theories propagated by your muthalik or taliban except the killing part? Both are illiberal and want to take everyone back to the stone age. They feel beating up people who dont agree with them is the way forward. Women are treated as people to sit at home and procreate only. The ideology is same but since muthalik types dont have the purchasing power of taliban they are not into arming their supporters. Today, if an extremist hindu group gets the same amount of funding as any of the extremist islamist group, I am sure they will do the same thing here to people who disagree with them, convert other religion people, insult women etc,.”
    __
    Really? You think that Muthalik – a small fish
    a. whose actions were criticized by all, including BJP, and
    b. who has absolutely no scriptural support for any of his theories, and
    c. whose actions were limited to only one city in India

    is the same as Taliban and Salafi Muslims who
    a. not only have a lot of wealth (and are using them to spread their ideology),
    b. but also have scriptural support for their violent actions, and
    c. have a global reach (terrorist acts in Bali, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, USA, Spain, UK, Holland, Sweden, Afghanistan) with their actions???

    So you think that Muthalik is the same as Taliban, and that’s why you want to nurture the Taliban type and not upset them by criticizing them (“we must not take a strident tone”), but want to shout the loudest at Muthalik types – a small fish? I’m amazed by your scintillating logic, Mr. Grand Nurturer.

    I’ve only one word to describe your stance: pusillanimity. And an allergy to stating the truth.

    Loneranger wrote:

    “Go to theni in TN or go to etawah in UP to see how deep rooted caste system is. It is easy sitting in a metro city or in Seatle to talk about caste system in india. But, the way the lower castes are treated is like how you would treat a street dog. Unless you exprience all this first hand, reading or discussing is futile. I have travelled extensively in villages where a dalit is still treated as pariah and how they are shooed away from sight.”
    __

    a. Who is denying that injustices due to caste don’t exist? You and I are discussing it without anyone threatening to blow the other person up or kill someone. I have nowhere claimed that Hindu society is a perfect one with no problems whatsoever, so that’s a straw-man of your making.

    b. And seeing these atrocities fills you with so much self-loathing and hatred for Hinduism & Hindus that you want to do nothing and be passive (“infinite tolerance”) when it comes to protecting Dharma? Vinash kaale vipreet buddhi.

  38. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 1:43 AM

    Loneranger wrote:

    “India is at a delicate situation today and the ground realities are not based on historical wrong doings. We are surrounded by rogue elements outside the country and fighting them is not the solution. To arouse passion and create strife amongst the people living here is the main agenda of few separatist forces and to defeat them , we need to think differently. Lot of muslims here are not educated and they get their basic understanding through people whose outlook is outdated. We need to nurture those poor people and give them a modern outlook. The more we try to talk about wrongdoing in the past, the more we try to say their religion has such and such tenents will only strengthen the rogue elements. There is no precedence and why should there be a precedence for everything ?”
    __
    a. Fighting rogue elements is not the solution? So what is? Letting our soldiers get killed? Letting our innocent citizens – including those poor Muslims you seem to care for – die in bomb explosions and terrorist attacks? It’s people like you who make the country weak.

    b. You do realize that most of the Islamic terrorists have well-educated (college degrees) and came from well-off or rich families? I’ll be happy to provide you a list and you can double-check the names on it. This “they become terrorists because they are poor” is a lie and not backed by facts.

    c. If as you stated, “a lot of Muslims are not educated and they get their basic understanding through people whose outlook is outdated” how does “your secular and liberal party” making madrassa certificate as equivalent to CBSE certificate help?

    d. Sure, there doesn’t have to be a precedence for everything, but I was curious to know whether your Grand Nurturing Scheme was grounded in facts, reality or analysis; or whether it was simply wishful thinking. Looks like it’s the latter.

  39. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 1:31 AM

    d. You haven’t answered the two questions I asked you, and avoided them like the plague. Here they are again:
    (i) What do your Muslim friends think of you nurturing their religion?
    (ii) Why do you not care for the human rights of those who have to experience the atrocities of Islam till it reaches some nebulous stage by your nurturing? Is that “collateral damage” in your desire to be the Grand Nurturer?

  40. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 1:28 AM

    Loneranger wrote:

    “The unfortunate part of the whole affair is since you people dont have any moderate liberal muslims as friends, you are unaware of their efforts in trying to modernise certain aspects in the religion. There are many liberals who are working at the grass roots level but they are shouting about it and hence you dont know. This is a process and you dont get results overnight. “
    __

    a. No, the unfortunate part is that you keep making irrational assumptions about others. And where did “you people” come in from? Who is this “you people”?

    b. If they are shouting about it, shouldn’t I know it? If they were silent, then I wouldn’t know. And to use your logic, isn’t “your party” in power – and has been in power for 50+ out of 60+ years since independence? That seems like enough time to bring about any positive change. So why doesn’t “your party” – a secular and liberal one – encourage these liberal Muslims you speak of? Same goes for the media which loves to paint itself as “liberal” – why don’t they give voice to, and encourage your liberal Muslim friends and highlight their work?

    c. Do any of these liberal Muslims have a blog or a website that I (and others) could check? Exactly what’s the nature of reform that they’ve tried?

  41. Amit
    June 17, 2011 at 1:21 AM

    Loneranger wrote:
    “Answer : Look, be rational here. Everyone is equal no doubt but when you know in the neighbourhood there are people ready to pick on any small opportunity to forment trouble, we should not give any such opportunity to the. The more strident approach we take , the more people we will send into the hands of extremists. Why should they go anywhere? They were born here and want to make their livelihoods here without any trouble from RSS or SIMI. Already they are caught between the devil and deep sea and if people like us dont give a helping hand , it will end in a catastrophe. “
    __

    a. In other words, if someone bullies you, instead of responding to that bully and putting him in his place, you would appease that bully? And what happened to law enforcement? Shouldn’t that be made stronger along with other institutions – so that bullies are kept in their place – instead of diluting the ideals of a democratic society and continuing to weaken institutions?

    Or, don’t make a big deal of your liberal badge and accept that it’s fake and you put it on just because it sounds cool.

    b. BTW, why are RSS and SIMI the only two choices? That comes across as false dichotomy.

    c. Yes, they were born here, but if they want to live under Islamic law, it’s best that they move to an Islamic country instead of causing strife in a democratic and secular country. Let them live in peace under a system that they like, and let the rest of use non-Muslims live under a system that we prefer.

    d. My point regarding 1947 was that we already had one partition to appease and placate those who wanted an Islamic country. So why should we keep appeasing Muslims today? That will only lead to yet another partition. The situation is already approaching that stage in West Bengal and Assam.

  42. NASH
    June 16, 2011 at 9:42 PM

    anand n amit

    take the case of present article ,what does it do ?
    it has angered us ,so we are arguing about with whom who does not agree.
    what would u do if there is a throw up again?
    will the same arguements hold?(if u have read the australian government removing aruna n kashmir from there map)
    so these throw ups are happening in various forms all the time in various forms against hinduism
    we have numbers and so far away from each other and not conslidated.
    (what does far away mean here ? we might have come together on this issue ,on aruna n kashmir map we may not see eye to eye)
    the inference is how as an individual u can put up with this?
    i also noticed the present type of articles bring some of us together,
    notice earlier article by sandeep on MFH had different set of visitors

  43. NASH
    June 16, 2011 at 9:10 PM

    anand n amit

    its ok with me if u guys dont participate

    because down the road there would be more questions ( i dont have answers to them myself) but a larger picture

    may unravel( i hope so)
    thanks anyway

  44. NASH
    June 16, 2011 at 9:03 PM

    amit

    can u join too

    anand,

    this is all purely hypothetical and arguement sake

    what would you do if MFH was living next to your house ?

  45. NASH
    June 16, 2011 at 8:43 PM

    anand,

    this is all purely hypothetical and arguement sake

    what would you do if MFH was living next to your house

  46. Anand
    June 16, 2011 at 8:05 PM

    Hello Comrade Ranger,

    Missed this gem! -> “but the caveat is islam has to reach that stage and for it to get to that stage we need to have patience and nurture it. ”

    I don’t quite understand. I believe it was you (or was it Com Park?) who said that all religions are the same, terrorism and extremism have nothing to do with Islam etc. Not true any longer? Is Islam now in an earlier stage of evolution than Sikhism? Is Islam primitive compared to Buddhism and are Muslims yet to reach that stage of civilization of Hindus where they start appreciating ideas like freedom of expression?

    That’s a bit puzzling. Now if you want to insist that Muslims in some Muslim countries like Pakistan or Saudi are in a neanderthal stage, I won’t quibble, but surely, Muslims in places like India or US or Europe are living in the same secular, liberal, democratic environment as the people around them? What makes you think they will go mad if Quran is burned or prophet is the subject matter of Hussanian art?

    While on the subject, do liberal Muslims agree with you that Muslims are on a hair trigger and therefore they need to be nurtured, nourished, and fed bananas etc?

  47. Amit
    June 16, 2011 at 7:00 PM

    Loneranger, your use of “we” is a symptom of your problem and why your world view is so askew. Please stop speaking for OTHERS and start speaking for YOURSELF. Or, please identify which group or organization you are speaking for.

  48. Amit
    June 16, 2011 at 6:57 PM

    Loneranger, appreciate your response. My responses follow.

    You wrote:
    “The more strident approach we take , the more people we will send into the hands of extremists.”
    __

    1. Why does it apply only to Muslims and Islam?
    2. Has any Islamic terrorist mentioned that he became a terrorist because of strident approach by “us”? Was Taslima Nasreen attacked because of strident approach? Was the lecturer’s hand chopped off because of strident approach? Did Kasab attack India and mercilessly gun down people on the street because of strident approach? I still have to hear that explanation from any Islamic terrorist, whereas The Book is often cited as providing validation for their violent actions.
    3. And why do you keep using “we”? Who is this “we”? As I wrote before, you don’t speak for me. And neither are you the appointed spokesperson for the society or for non-Muslims.
    4. I still don’t understand why pointing out the problems with Islam and its flaws, and discussing them on blogs is considered as “strident approach” by you. Similarly, why is abolishing Haj subsidy – a decidedly communal act masquerading as secular – a “strident approach”? Is application of principles of equality and secularism, or trying to enforce the law considered “strident approach”? Does not make any sense.

  49. NASH
    June 16, 2011 at 5:54 PM

    loneranger
    Answer : Look, be rational here. Everyone is equal no doubt but when you know in the neighbourhood there are people ready to pick on any small opportunity to forment trouble, we should not give any such opportunity to the. The more strident approach we take , the more people we will send into the hands of extremists. Why should they go anywhere? They were born here and want to make their livelihoods here without any trouble from RSS or SIMI. Already they are caught between the devil and deep sea and if people like us dont give a helping hand , it will end in a catastrophe.

    take the present article into consideration,
    now let us say it is inflammatory,so muslims will feel enraged and jump
    into extremists so earlier where there were 20 now some increased
    number because of the article.
    this is what u mean is it?

Leave a Comment