Managing Pakistan's failure

[RajeshA]

Muslim Pride

The connecting link between Muslims is not piety, but the live experience of strength. Their whole narrative revolves around strength, the strength of faith being just one, but the more basic element is to associate Muslim identity with Muslim strength.

That strength is expressed through historical narratives, where the Muslim invaders came and killed off hundreds of thousands of Kufr; where they destroyed temples; where their glory and sword, prompted the Kufr to accept Islam; where the neighborhood gangs of Muslims intimidate others; where non-Muslim girls go out with Muslims; where a Muslim country can brag about nukes, etc.

Being Muslim is all about feeling strong, about being TFTA.

It is about showing the others as weak, and also ugly, and dirty and funny.

As long as at a personal level a Muslim can feel strong, he will stay Muslim. The whole Muslim society is geared to bringing Muslims closer together, be it by praying together; going to Hajj together; marrying their women only within the society; or simply neighborhood kids hanging out together; simply to convert principle to reality, togetherness into collective strength. Muslim society is geared to do propaganda about the strength of the individual Muslim be it through the myths about one Muslim being equal to 10 Hindus, or doing body-building; or by perpetuating the myth of the irresistible Muslim male.

Often Muslims would provoke others, pick a fight, and I am not talking about India in particular, but generally. Any fight with others, allows them to demonstrate to themselves and to other Muslims, that they are strong. Even elder Muslims would not really stop them, because by such demonstrations they are showing that to be Muslim means to be strong. Even in "cultivated" gatherings Pakistanis would show themselves arrogantly and expect the Hindus to accept their attitude.

When Osama carried out 9/11, every single Muslim on the planet was happy somewhere. That was the demonstration of ultimate strength, for a Muslim hit the world's superpower right at the core. Every day, Osama escaped American hunt, was a day of rejoicing by the Muslims world over. Of course, the more educated and wise Muslims knew that they would have a tough time from now on in the West, but still they rejoiced. There was nothing holy about the deed, but it was a display of strength. When Osama was killed by the Americans, Muslims were saddened, because the revenge was extracted. Osama's death is perhaps not on the scale of Bangladesh breaking away, but it is still "traumatizing" for the Pakis. The person in whom they had projected the strength of their qaum was gunned down mercilessly. That is also the reason why some Muslims interviewed after the Osama kill were dismissive of him. It is simply because they don't want to let the weakness of the moment of Osama's death be associated with them, with their personal sense of strength, so better to disown him if need be. And many Muslims hold Pakistani Army responsible for allowing Americans to make the kill.

If a Muslim drinks but says no to pork or salami, it is simply because being Muslim means being brave, brave enough to even flout Islamic injunctions, but by refusing to eat pork, he wants to make a conscious display of his Muslim identity and to admonish others for not acknowledging it, knowing that through admonishing he again shows strength. In fact, it could just be the other way round, and it would still be okay.

In Pakistan, where the minorities have disappeared, the same dynamic is still in force, but now they have to knock each others heads to feel the same pride, the same strength.

Being Muslim is about feeling personal strength, be it as an individual or in a group. It is not about piety.

So those Indics who feel that they can persuade Muslims to rethink about their faith, etc. by lecturing them about spirituality stuff, they are missing out on a big part of the puzzle. When the Indics learn to neutralize the personal experience of strength in Pakistani Muslims, they would be one-step closer to converting them to Dharmic fold.

That is why the wound of surrender of 93,000 Pakistanis to the Indian Army in '71 sits so deep. That is why every time the Pakistani cricket team loses to India, Pakistanis start dying of heart attack.

[svinayak]

Rajeshji
How many Pakistanis do you meet on a regular basis. What is your experience with them on a personal level. You have a good clue on their behavior pattern

[RajeshA]

Rajeshji
How many Pakistanis do you meet on a regular basis. What is your experience with them on a personal level. You have a good clue on their behavior pattern

My study group was Turk gangs in Germany and some Pakistanis in Britain. Otherwise much of the gyaan is BRF gyaan, with some reconfiguration.

[Agnimitra]

So those Indics who feel that they can persuade Muslims to rethink about their faith, etc. by lecturing them about spirituality stuff, they are missing out on a big part of the puzzle. When the Indics learn to neutralize the personal experience of strength in Pakistani Muslims, they would be one-step closer to converting them to Dharmic fold.

Dear RajeshA ji,

1. Those Indics who are talking about "lecturing" totally acknowledge that it goes along with cutting down the bullying hubris of Islamism and its sense of imperial destiny. No one suggested otherwise.

2. You are also focussing on just one aspect of Islamism. There is the other aspect symbolized by Hossein and his 72 companions at Kerbala. This was the oppressed (mazloom) alter-ego standing up to the bully. Please note that Mohandas Gandhi said he chose 72 companions for the Dandi March in remembrance of Hossein's confrontation with oppression.

3. You are also focussing on just one ethnographic among Moslems. Arabs, Turks and their ethnogenetic extensions in various Moslem nations are like tentacles that hold large numbers of docile converts hostage, at varying degrees of self-awareness and stockholm syndrome identification. To give a counter example: Persians are very aware of the physical and cultural assaults they have endured for the last 1400 years, at the hands of Arabs, Mongols and Turks. They have survived decimation and worse; worse than Indics actually. Persians often talk of Turks, Afghans and Pakis in much the same tone as you did above. Suggestions to note and use these distinctions are not idle talk, IMHO.

4. Closer home, in India, large numbers of SDRE IMs are perpetually at the other end of the stick, and fear Hindu gangs during riot season. I've seen the fear in their eyes. The "Allah" they turn to is very different from the TFTA war god. Not surprisingly, they always bear the brunt of the backlash. The TFTA rascals usually escape the brunt of rioting. They remain powerful as manipulators, agents provocateur and demagogues. Many SDRA IMs also worship differently, very humbly, in a different mode and mentality. I've seen them stand apart in mixed congregations in the US, too. As someone here said, their's is an "Indian Allah". I've also heard them quietly complain about the attitudes of the TFTA co-religionists back in India. Don't underestimate these differences, especially when they're pretty conscious differences. All these divisions and distinctions are to be noted.

Both, "lecturing" and kicking a$$ are great, as long as we're kicking the correct a$$ and talking to the correct face. No point raging at TFTA bully types but taking it out on poor SDRE types. If we can appreciate these distinctions more clearly, then a more co-ordinated strategy is possible. Otherwise a$$-kicking is counter-productive because it drives a potential ally further into the arms of the enemy captor.

[RajeshA]

Carl ji,

When I wrote that post, I did not have you in mind. Sorry you felt that way.

BTW, I spoke of "feeling of personal strength" also as a PART of the whole.

Just wanted to clarify.

As far as Islamism is concerned, I would not consider it to be equivalent of "feeling of personal strength"!

[Agnimitra]

^^^ Gotcha

[NikhilB]

I don't want to go into manish sharma v/s rajeshA debate, and I have admired some very good essays from RajeshA in the past, but I must say that, I find some of RajeshA's ideas as unrelaistic and absurd.

Some lenghty essays on how we should marry their woman, how we should invite them, how we should become one country are meaningless and very sucidal for India. We should be careful on this line of thought.

I am not against IM, they are our brethern, but to understand phyche of muslims, you have to consider them as whole. RajeshA jii - it's your own post that you have summarised that so well, about muslim's TAFTA attitude. then why so niceness in inviting them, selectively.

If we repeat mistakes of our ancestors one more time to invite islamic hoards cross this border again, we will have to wait another 500 years to see indic civilisation rise. Let us learn to be somewhat rude and cruel - crush the enemy, no refugee, no women, no humantarian crisist etc. We do not want a single paki or BD person in India. Period. We have had enough, spare us with these thoughts in disguise of some "strategic thoughts" - they are not.

[Prem]

Kuffar moderating influence does make difference proportional to the TFTANess of Kaffirs. SDRE morphing into LDRE hawwa hope/help to establish the right equilibirum.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

RajeshA jii - it's your own post that you have summarised that so well, about muslim's TAFTA attitude. then why so niceness in inviting them, selectively.

If we repeat mistakes of our ancestors one more time to invite islamic hoards cross this border again, we will have to wait another 500 years to see indic civilisation rise. Let us learn to be somewhat rude and cruel - crush the enemy, no refugee, no women, no humantarian crisist etc. We do not want a single paki or BD person in India. Period.

NikhilB ji,

1) The Global Perspective: If we have no ambition to be the Prime Superpower of the world, no ambition of having our culture and philosophy dominate the minds of humankind, and if we are satisfied with our little nukkad, then it is okay to put up walls around us, and to isolate ourselves from the rest of the world.

But if you want India to go into a new orbit, then we need to solve the problem next door. Pakistan blocks our land routes into Central and West Asia. Pakistan would continue to be used by the world powers to keep us down. So Pakistan must go. It is as simple as that. And huddling ourselves under the blanket is not going to make it go! So Isolationism is bullsh*t advice!

2) The way Pakistanis are procreating, they would have reached around 357 million by 2050. Not to forget on the other side you have Bangladesh, which too could have a population of around 220 million by 2050. And just because Indians are huddled up under a blanket, does not mean they would stop procreating or trying to get into India.

3) If you had just read the topic heading of Pakistani women solution, you would have read "Close the Paki Factory". The main thrust of the argument was to take away their women, so that Pakis cannot procreate anymore. With Indian money, this has become possible, and that too without bloodshed, something to which every Government in India would be averse.

4) The point was to turn Pakistani women dharmic once they came to India and married Indics. I am unable to understand the fear of some here, that Indian men would not have control over them and the religion of their offspring. Any Indic who suggests to me, that they would somehow destroy Indian society, I must say he needs a course somewhere how to feel like a man, and not some weakling scared piece of sh*t.

5) Why do you say, I am inviting Islamic hordes here across the border? I have explicitly said, that no men would be coming over to India, except the fathers once in a while and that too when they are older than 55. And if they knew what is good for them, they too would behave themselves. That is the only exception I made. Otherwise, the policy I am suggesting is many many times stricter than what we have today. Today any Pakistani who has some relation here can simply come over. Even others for some reason or the other - for business, for shopping, etc. I am demanding a stop to all that.

6) If you just read "Muslim Pride", you would have understood that for Muslims, especially the TFTA types and the very pious types, giving their woman away to a Kafir, is worse than death. Any Muslim family found to have deliberately married off their daughter to a Kafir would really have it hard coming. So if you want to weaken a Muslim's bond to Islam, you should tempt or force him to swallow his pride and to marry his daughter/sister to an Indic. It is not the Indic who is suffering in his Dharma from getting a Pakeezah, it is the Muslim whose deen you are destroying.

7) When one talks of Indic civilization, then I consider the lands to the West, Pakistan, Afghanistan also part of the Indic Civilization. If you are suggesting that we give up on those lands, then you don't really as yet appreciate your civilization. Those lands have to reconquered, one way or another. We cannot retreat behind our borders and forget about them. And not just that but the 97% of the Pakistani population, which does not have Central Asian genealogy, but are of the Indic stock but have become captive of the Islamists, have to be liberated and to be reclaimed back into the Dharmic fold. brihaspati garu has some good suggestions about that. Of course that has to be done without jeopardizing our security or our Dharmic rooting.

We have had enough, spare us with these thoughts in disguise of some "strategic thoughts" - they are not.

8 ) Nobody needs to follow up on my suggestions. WTF is with sparing you? You don't want to read, just skip! The only ones who can tell me what not to write are the mods. You have no such requests to make, so desist from such language! If you have any of your own proposals, better proposals, go ahead write them up and share them with us.

[Theo_Fidel]

Historically Muslim countries have struggled to support their large populations once external/internal tribute and favorable trade withered away. The populations of most Arab states withered away (starvation and war) over time.

The big one would be a damming situation on the Indus. The Indus is long overdue for a major landslide that will dam the river for 5-10 years. The last one was about 2000 years ago while geological records indicate a frequency of 500-700 years long term. Such a situation would truly set the stage for border invasion.

Pakistanis like to imagine they were this formidable force but the truth is that the 180 million today is descended from about 10 million in 1900. They have no memory of civilization and no knowledge of how to run a state wisely, carefully and prudently because they never did so in the past.

To expect different of them now is foolishness.

[RajeshA]

Muslim Pride

X-Posting from Islamism & Islamophobia Abroad - News & Analysis Thread

Being Muslim is all about feeling strong, about being TFTA.

It is about showing the others as weak, and also ugly, and dirty and funny.

ramana garu,

Just wanted to highlight something. The TFTA Muslims use words like weak, ugly, dirty, funny to describe Indics and feel strong. But that narrative doesn't cut with Whites. For we know of Mullahs describing the hoors in paradise, where he basically spells out, that they are white and even blond, much like European women, so they can't be weak, ugly, dirty and funny. So they need a new narrative.

And the narrative with Whites is always that they have no morals, their men don't mind others having fun with their women, and hence they are not really men; and that White women have even less morals and are nothing but prostitutes. And it is because Muslim men do not allow their women to become prostitutes, that they are better than the White men, that they are stronger because they have a stronger grip on their womenfolk.

As the news of Pakistani men enslaving young white girls for prostitution broke in the UK, one was wondering how can Muslims, who are somehow automatically considered pious, do something like this. Isn't it against their religion? The reason that Pakistani men were doing this and feeling good about it, and I would claim, feeling good about it as Muslims, was that through this racket, they could further feed that narrative that white girls are just prostitutes and nothing more. These girls would have gone through many Pakistani hands, and every time the message would have reinforced that Muslims are better than Whites, for Muslim men ensure that women stay at home and don't do something like this. Should tomorrow Muslims stop being Muslims, their women too would become prostitutes.

These Pakistanis tried to do this with Hindu and Sikh girls as well, because the message needs to be reinforced that only Islam gives protection to the womenfolk.

So basically Pakistanis were doing all this in the service of Islam only!

[shiv]

Being Muslim is all about feeling strong, about being TFTA.

It is about showing the others as weak, and also ugly, and dirty and funny.

ramana garu,

Just wanted to highlight something. The TFTA Muslims use words like weak, ugly, dirty, funny to describe Indics and feel strong. But that narrative doesn't cut with Whites. For we know of Mullahs describing the hoors in paradise, where he basically spells out, that they are white and even blond, much like European women, so they can't be weak, ugly, dirty and funny. So they need a new narrative.

And the narrative with Whites is always that they have no morals, their men don't mind others having fun with their women, and hence they are not really men; and that White women have even less morals and are nothing but prostitutes. And it is because Muslim men do not allow their women to become prostitutes, that they are better than the White men, that they are stronger because they have a stronger grip on their womenfolk.

As the news of Pakistani men enslaving young white girls for prostitution broke in the UK, one was wondering how can Muslims, who are somehow automatically considered pious, do something like this. Isn't it against their religion? The reason that Pakistani men were doing this and feeling good about it, and I would claim, feeling good about it as Muslims, was that through this racket, they could further feed that narrative that white girls are just prostitutes and nothing more. These girls would have gone through many Pakistani hands, and every time the message would have reinforced that Muslims are better than Whites, for Muslim men ensure that women stay at home and don't do something like this. Should tomorrow Muslims stop being Muslims, their women too would become prostitutes.

These Pakistanis tried to do this with Hindu and Sikh girls as well, because the message needs to be reinforced that only Islam gives protection to the womenfolk.

So basically Pakistanis were doing all this in the service of Islam only!

These are astute observations. But control of women and restricting women is part and parcel of the feeling of strength. It is only advertised as "respect for women" which is a load of bullshit. The "respect for women" exists only for women who conform to the rules laid down in Islam for Muslim men. As long as a woman accepts her place she is "respected"

Is it any surprise that this culture uses DIY kits for human genome a decade after anyone else does it and claims its a "first for Muslim thing" Or manufactures JF_17 from China made kits and say "Indigenous manufacture". These morons do not allow anyone to step out of the mould and explore and have to resort to lies and self deception or conspiracy theories to explain why they get butt kicked.

The idea is to promise everything that is desired in this life to some date after death and demand that pain and suffering be deliberately endured for that. This is not a bad policy for people who live in harsh circumstances, but the policy falls flat as circumstances get better. Islamic control suddenly demands that people avoid everything that is sensual in this life for some afterlife thingy and start looking for a fight with others so that the suffering and privation actually occurs as a result of a self-provoked fight. What a stupid scheme of things.

As long as war can be provoked and people kept in misery - they can be told that misery is because other seek to suppress Islam and that Muslims must suffer and reserve their hard-ons for hooris in the afterlife. A scheme of con men leading the conned. Just listen to those liars talking about sexuality of pigs in the video above! And Pakistan is implementing this scheme on a nationwide scale.

[RajeshA]

Muslim Pride

Disclaimer: I am limiting my comments here to Pakistan only, even if they are generally expressed.

Islam may or may not have spirituality as a component of religion. I am sure many can justifiably claim that it does.

But one message that keeps on repeating in Islam is that of women! Islam revolves around control over women, conquest of women, and gifts of women. Islam has in fact simplified religion to a simple matter of man's virility - his prowess to subdue his own women; his prowess to conquer the women of his enemies, be it through his sword or his sex-appeal; and his reward for his loyalty to Islam in afterlife - the award again being women. Even in this life, the Muslim man is tempted with as much as four wives. Islam has been successful because it tunes in into the most basic characteristic of a male - his virility.

Much in Islam revolves around pumping up that sex-drive, and then creating a discrepancy between promise and availability. Since usually all Muslim women are safely tucked away, and forbidden to intermingle with the men, Islamic society ensured that Men remained hungry for women, and that hunger was channelized by Ghazis to attack the Kufr by promising their soldiers, what they most desired - women. By promising four wives at any given time, Islam in fact strengthens the notion that a man's virility need not find closure in the love of a single woman, but should keep on burning for more. Even with four wives, a man need not look for satisfaction, for he is again offered the easy route of talaaq. And as the great prize for a man's services to Islam, he is promised 72 beautiful virgins in the thereafter. Should the man have doubts in himself and his virility, his capacity to enjoy women, he is also promised the virility of a 100 men in jannat.

A Muslim man is told that he has infinite virility because he has the strength of a Muslim, and that he has infinite sanction in religion to conquer women. The trick then used is to tell him that he can show his virility only with non-Muslim women, for they all crave for the virile Muslim male. Other men are weak and cannot satisfy the cravings of the woman. Only Muslim man has what it takes. All myths created make the Muslim man believe that his strength as man derives from the sanction given to him by Islam. In fact he owes his virility to Islam.

Why else does Islam talk of virility and virgins?

There is a story I heard about the life of a demon trapped inside a parrot. Can't find any link. Well that is what Islam is, or at least the TFTA Islam. Islam's life is trapped in the Muslim woman.

The day Muslim (Pakistani) women start leaving Pakistani men and running towards Indians, the whole facade of Islam in Pakistan would start crumbling.

Veena Malik's foray into India and her flirtations with some India on Big Brother caused a very deep rumbling protest in the edifice of Islam.

Basically the weak point of Islam, Islam's engine, lies right in front of our eyes, but Indics fail to see it, because for us, who are taught about the virtues of celibacy, led by leaders like M. K. Gandhi and A.B. Vajpayee, male virility is something to look away from as beneath our class, unworthy of intellectual indulgence. And conquest of Muslim women, is something also beneath our values, because we hold women in such high regard. And so Islam's Achilles' Heel remains untouched and safe.

Instead one is told by those who don't understand the beast, that should we touch their women, we will all become Mlecchas and Indic Civilization will self-destroy, blah, blah.

[Lalmohan]

yes but... increasingly young muslim women in western muslim societies are turning to more conservative and militant forms of islam... even 'south asian' women are increasingly wearing arab female attire and head dresses... something that was never done even in 'south asia' a few years ago...

[RajeshA]

Muslim Pride

yes but... increasingly young muslim women in western muslim societies are turning to more conservative and militant forms of islam... even 'south asian' women are increasingly wearing arab female attire and head dresses... something that was never done even in 'south asia' a few years ago...

The weaker the Muslim male becomes viz-a-viz men from other cultures, be it in prosperity, even physically, or as being those whose asses are getting kicked by Americans all over the globe, the more vulnerable he feels, the stronger will be the drive of Muslim men to secure their women.

Muslim men would think, that if others are stronger the chances are greater that they could steal their women, so better to protect them, and hijab and burqa are means of doing that. With their mental set up, that is understandable. And their women would follow suit, because the men control the propaganda in the Muslim societies.

[shiv]

I think Rajesh's insight is perfect - although change will not come directly via the women. The women are too protected. The men have to come under attack directly and they have to be defeated, discredited and shamed in all ways so that their grip on society becomes weaker allowing some men to start escaping, taking women and children with them.

Islamism has used up its last trump card - the "Wajib ul Qatl" card. Their ultimate answer to all dissenters and objectors is death. Defeat them at that game and they will lose.

[RajeshA]

Muslim Pride

Since in Pakistan, much of society's psyche still revolves around the issue of Muslim strength, Muslim male's virility being a major part of it, it is appropriate to pose the question whether Indians can do something to break this myth, that the Pakistani Muslim is stronger, more aggressive, has more sexual appeal than the Indian Hindu.

There would be many suggestions on this issue, and everybody can contribute to the list.

1) In Pakistan, Indian culture continues to have strong support, especially the part of Indian culture which pertains to entertainment - Bollywood, Music, Television, Product Ads, Cricket IPL, etc. In many ways, Indians are delivering the subtle message that the Indian male is in fact macho, and virile. However much of this is still make-believe and Pakistanis at some level don't buy the propaganda. But it is still important because it affects their subconscious.

2) India's Sporting Strength - Nothing else convinces the world and not just Pakistanis about our alleged lack of physical strength of Indians as our lack of a good performance in the Olympics, or other Sports Events. In India sports, other than cricket, are not given due importance, are not financed, and then we see India performing dismally. In 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics, Abhinav Bhindra won India's first gold medal and we won another two bronze medals Sushil Kumar (Wrestling: Men's freestyle 66 kg) and Virendra Kumar (Boxing: Middleweight 75 kg), and we came in 50th position. The only winning grace was that Pakistan did not win any medals at all.

Now if India can turn herself into a hard as nails competitive society and we start winning Olympics medals, perhaps coming among the first five, then we can really start rubbing it in to the Pakistanis, that they are a country of wimps.

Right now even if they won no medals, we cannot say that.

So would it be too much to ask the Indian government and the state governments to jack up their budget outlays for sports. In fact sports could become a lucrative industry in India. Just look at cricket.

Published on Feb 26, 2010
Sports budget reduced for 2010-11: India Today

Now people would say, what nonsense! How can India getting more medals in the Olympics bring down Pakistan? It is a normal question, but we must understand that our minds are simply so full of old-mentality cobwebs, full of civil servant to the British mentality, that we forget that the image of a strong nation with strong people requires strong showing in all competitions which require physical endurance.

Pakistan endures because it has successfully spread within its populace the image of the weak Hindu. A good showing at the Olympics and other sports events is the most peaceful, the most cost-effective means to show them, that they are talking bullsh*t. "How come then Indians came third in the Olympics, whereas Pakistanis won no medals?"

Indics look at the myths Pakistanis have built around themselves and about their superiority over the Hindus, and say they are just nonsense myths and we have a laugh about it, but we don't prove them wrong. That is what we have to start doing - we have to prove them wrong.

If Indics can show in the Subcontinent, that being Indic is all about being rich, being beautiful, being strong, being successful, being respected, being clean and most importantly being craved by women, especially Muslim women, and sometimes about being brash, then the Muslim Elite lose anything and everything they could sell to themselves and to the large numbers of docile converts held hostage by them.

Indics have to work on our external image, for it is a potent weapon, which we still do not realize.

[RajeshA]

Muslim Pride

3) TFTA vs SDRE - For many years, BRFites have worn the label SDRE as a badge of honor, and we have used label TFTA to make fun of the Pakis and their superficiality. For many in India, who have the mistaken notion that fair and tall is necessary better, SDRE label shows them a hand and tells them to stop and think it over - to feel pride in what we are - we are people with more melanin pigmentation and generally have shorter stature. We claim that in case we see shorter stature as an impediment, at least we balance that out by having superior intellect. The narrative is good for our self-confidence and it has worked in our favor.

The narrative however is insufficient to cope with the challenge of making Pakistanis look pitiable. The image that they have created for us, that of weak, ugly, dirty, funny needs to be projected back at the Pakis. In fact, it need not even be all of Pakis, it suffices if it is just the Pakjabis. We have to keep on pounding that they are weak, they are ugly, they are dirty and they have funny habits.

As far as funny habits are concerned, BRF has done tremendous work in "educating" the public! The whole imagery with "animal sex Google searches", Khushboos, is simply brilliant.

But other notions like weak, ugly and dirty too need to be pushed relentlessly. That we are not doing. Perhaps we consider that too superficial and racial and we don't want to do it, but that would be wrong strategy. For Pakistanis it is important that they be accepted by the world as tall, fair, handsome, beautiful, attractive, strong, and clean, whereas the Indians be looked upon in just the opposite way. For them it is important, perhaps it helps them to keep the flag of their identity flying high. If it is important to them, then that is exactly where we need to attack.

So calling them tall and fair really doesn't help. We call them that in sarcasm, but they accept it as compliment. They don't understand the sarcasm at all.

Similarly, we have to accept ourselves as the true walking and talking beauty on earth, regardless of how corny it sounds. And we have to keep on enforcing that message.

Black is beautiful was perhaps the most successful campaigns ever undertaken in the world. A similar campaign needs to take place in India as well.

I am not saying it is not taking place, but the campaign should be taken consciously and seriously (but with some fun too).

India is in the process of rebranding herself, and it needs a lot more support.

Suggestion: Do away with TFTA, and just call them "Kross-breed Rat People With Allures" (KuRuPWA), something like that.

[shiv]

Rajesh - Paki men need to be hit at the core of their identity. Islam. Today the Pakis have themselves made it easy to do. Everything else is just added value.

TFTA has indeed become popular - but the terms were coined to raise Indian pride which was literally down in the dumps when BRF was started. You cannot see what is wrong with being proud of TFTA if you carry the burden of imagining that SDRE is bad. Once you are proud of SDRE it is easy to mock TFTA.

I am particularly interested in showing that they are racists, which they are. I am trying to find derogatory references to Africans by Pakistanis and spreading that among African forums on the net.

[ramana]

Shiv, The Pakis often call Africans "habshis". Its a corruption of Abyssinians. Recall the Razia Sultana episode. She was murdered because her courtiers were jealous of her relationsship with an African. In face to face interaction they call them kallus but not just based on color but in the same sense as the N word.

[Agnimitra]

TSP racial identity issues are neurotic. I just googled racist attitudes in TSP and found this on a Paki forum no less:

"Effect of Pathan racism on Pakistan"
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/culture-lite ... acism.html

Some nuggets
Typical a-hole called "Afghan Prince" writes:

Before 1947 pashtuns were considered noble people becauz of their noble qualities,. They ruled india 3 times {huh?} and were as ruling and warrior people. As they were dominant on Indian races therefore this brought them to consider thereselves superior to locals. At their peak of power in India they used to pray in separate mosques instead with locals. In their initial colonization of India, the half pathans were not considered as equal as pure pathans. Pathans raised mutiny against sikndar lodhi, the ruler of India, just because his mother was Indian.
Pathans of N.w.F.P were more strict and turned against syed ahmad shaheed bcozhe demande pashtun wives for himself and his Indian mujahideens from locals.
That’s why there are so many khans in India bcoz low caste hindus after converting to islam used khan surname and called theseves pathans bcoz pathans were superior people and were feared by locals.

But today being pakistnai they are now in defensive mood. They are selling their daughters to punjabies. Many modern and educated pathan families are hiding their pathan idenititu bcoz they have become symbol of backwardness.

Sensible guy called safar777 educates the rest:

Pathans have a habit of over glorifying themselves and interpreting history to suit their overblown egos. A lot written by 'Afghan Prince' is based on his ethnic racism and pride and the hurt to his ego because some Pathans are marrying with Punjabis (and Balochis, Sindhis, Muhajirs).

If you look at History Pathans never ruled India 3 times. 10 years of self styled Sher Khan does not constitute a Dynasty.

If you go to original sources of history not to fairy tales you will see what happened and what is still happening. Pathans have won and have been defeated like all other communities however Pathans have made their defeats into fairy tales. Case in point when Babur pillaged and crushed the Pathans in the present tribal areas he demaded the daughter of Shah Mansur Yusufzai as submission from the tribe. However the Pathans have made that defeat into a fairy tale of Babur dressing up as a qalandar and wooing Bibi Mubaraka which no historian agrees to. Even the modern Pathans don't agree with this.

If you start with Ghaznavi, they were 100% Turk tribes. In fact they fought against Hindu/Buddhist/Atheist/Animast Pashtun tribes to control these areas. The founder of the dynasty was Sebüktigin (ruled 977–997), a former Turkish slave who was recognized by the Samanids (a Persian Muslim dynasty) as governor of Ghazna. As the Samanid dynasty weakened, Sebüktigin consolidated his position and expanded his domains as far as the Indian border.

Muslim historians Ibn Haukal, Utbi and Alberuni are ALL unanimous that uptill the time of Mahmud Ghaznavi i.e. almost four hundred years after the death of the Prophet, most of the Afghans were still non-Muslims. Mahmud Ghaznavi 'had to fight against the infidel Afghans in the Sulaiman mountains.' Even 200 years later in the encounter between Mohammad Ghori and Prithviraj in 1192 A.D., according to Farishta, Hindu/Buddhist/Animist/Pagan/Shamanist/Zoroastrian Afghans were fighting on the side of the Rajput Chief. The cavalry flank of Prithvi Raj Chauhan was made up of Afghans.

After that Mongols invaded these lands and ravaged and pillaged Herat, Balkh and most of Afghanistan. After that the Timurid dynasty rose who was a Tatar/Mongol with strong backing of Uzbek Turks. Again nothing to do with Pashtuns. Prior to arrival of Mughals even Kandahar was ruled by Arghun who are Mongol (ILKHanate) tribe.

Afterwards you had Babur the Mughal invading. He was a Chughtai Turk and even documented the pillars of Afghan heads he created in his own book "Tuzk-e-Babri". In his own book Babur writes:

"...Marching out of Kohat, we took the Hangu-road for Bangash. Between Kohat and Hangu that road runs through a valley shut in on either hand by the mountains. When we entered this valley, the Afghans of Kohat and thereabouts who were gathered on both hill-skirts, raised their war-cry with great clamour. Our then guide, Malik Bu-sa'id Kamarl was well-acquainted with the Afghan locations ; he represented that further on there was a detached hill on our right, where, if the Afghans came down to it from the hill-skirt, we might surround and take them. God brought it right! The Afghans, on reaching the place, did come down. We ordered one party of braves to seize the neck of land between that hill and the mountains, others to move along its sides, so mat under attack made from all sides at once, the Afghans might be made to reach their doom. Against the all around assault, they could not even fight; a hundred or two were taken, some were brought in alive but of most, the heads only were brought. We had been told that when Afghans are powerless to resist, they go before their foe with grass between their teeth, this being as much as to say, " I am your cow." Here we saw this custom ; Afghans unable to make resistance, came before us with grass between their teeth. Those our men had brought in as prisoners were ordered to be beheaded and a pillar of their heads was set up in our camp..."

You can read his biography where he writes about his war on the Yusufzais, quite different from the Pashtun fairly tale of Babur dressing up as a Qalandar.

Moving on, when Babur invaded India and fought an epic battle with the Rajput Chief 'Rana Sanka' (considered a battle betweeen Muslims and Hindus) , the Rajputs had with them Mahmud Lodhi, out to avenge his father's defeat with 10,000 Afghans. Most of the Afghan perished along with the Rajputs defeat against Babur's army.

When Akbar was the emperor of the Mughal empire and this included Kabul and Kandahar there were two rebellions both were crushed by Rajput armies of the Mughals. Even in the twilight of the Mughal empire, Emperor Aurangzeb sent in Rajput chief (Raja Jaswant Singh) to punishing the Afghans for their rebellion.

Finally the favourite of Pashtuns, Ahmed abdali came on the heels of Nadir Shah Afshar Qazilbash (the Persian King). However right after the death of Ahmed Abdali the ares East of Khyber were quickly lost to the Ranjit Singh's army.

When the Sikh were fighting their 3rd and final battle against the British the Afghan king even sent a 5000 strong cavalry (hoping this alliance would help them take Peshawar), however as soon as the Sikhs were defeated the Afghan cavalry ran back to Khyber non-stop!

Later on the British even helped supported the Afghan kings in their war against Persia (First Ango-Persian war which took Herat from Persia for Afghans) and even gave money and arms to the ruling Afghan dynasty as part of their great game strategy against Tsarist Russia and Iran. Until 1910 the foreign policy of so called Afghanistan was controlled by British empire and the so called Afghan king was given a Stipend by the British every year.

However if you talk with Pakistani Pashtoons or Afghan Pashtuns they seem to claim to rule the moon and sun. Similar to Bibi Mubaraka-Babur fairy tales.

[RajeshA]

Muslim Pride

Rajesh - Paki men need to be hit at the core of their identity. Islam. Today the Pakis have themselves made it easy to do. Everything else is just added value.

Sometimes, I think, Islam has created a sort of house of mirrors around it. One goes inside with a stick and one hits at Islam, but one finds out it was simply a mirror, with a reflection of Islam in it, and it has resulted in not even a scratch on itself.

Actually Islam has a very simple but durable shield - Whenever one starts criticizing Islam, Muslims start with the usual "torn shirt, open fly" argument. When one persists, they just say, you are a Islamophobe, you hate Islam, and use your criticism of Islam as a rallying cry to unite the Muslims. So criticism of Islam does not really get through the brain-washed skulls of Muslims (Pakistanis).

As far as spreading awareness of the threat of Islam and the "peculiarities" of Pakistanis go, I think there is a healthy movement both in the West and among Indics as well. And that movement should continue.

As far as effectively attacking Islam is concerned, so that its adherents and "docile hostages" start leaving it, that would require

• negating the psychological support that Islam gives - community, collective strength, ego boost, promise of women
• negating the fear that Islam asserts - decimating and uprooting the Islamist networks consisting of dawas, madrassas, mosques, Islamist political parties, other Islamist groups (The Brihaspati Doctrine), also using strong measures against Muslim gangs and Parental Suppression of Muslim girls in the West
• increasing the cost of staying in Islam - discrimination from other people due to suspected threat or for other reasons, no job prospects, poverty, cultural suffocation
• cutting the financing of Islamism - Gulf money, remittances, drug money, piracy, organized crime
• administrative curbs on aggressive Islamist memes in non-Muslim countries - constitutional means, better policing, no Islamist-appeasement

In the last posts, I have been speaking on how to negate the ego boost that Islam gives to Muslim men.

TFTA has indeed become popular - but the terms were coined to raise Indian pride which was literally down in the dumps when BRF was started. You cannot see what is wrong with being proud of TFTA if you carry the burden of imagining that SDRE is bad. Once you are proud of SDRE it is easy to mock TFTA.

As you say, SDRE label has done a tremendous job in reinvigorating Indic morale. I agree wholeheartedly with that. This is true when the message is directed at Indians themselves.

My comment pertained to our message to be directed at the Pakistanis. There they would not really see any sarcasm in being called TFTA. They will hear "tall and fair" and simply feel self-affirmation. So I think the message we should send to them should be something more hurtful, which nibbles at their self-image as a superior race.

I am particularly interested in showing that they are racists, which they are. I am trying to find derogatory references to Africans by Pakistanis and spreading that among African forums on the net.

I too feel, that Pakistanis deserve to get a regular thrashing for their racism, and getting it from Africans would do them really good. Being mugged every single day on one's way to school and college is just what the doctor has prescribed for the Paki.

One notable feature about the Pakis is that should one criticize them for their behavior, their attitude, their world-view, their intellect or lack of it, it has absolutely zero influence on them. It doesn't bother them one bit. They just feel enamored by it, that they were able to get somebody's attention and were able to intimidate somebody. You say they are racist, and they feel proud, because they hear they are racially superior.

I would say, the whole world needs to be made aware of the nutty nation, but if we want to attack Pakistanis sense of self, we have to do it at a more baser level - their genealogy, their race, their physique, their strength, their echandee, their appearance. That is the only place they are vulnerable.

[Agnimitra]

^^^ Sounds like a reverse-dhimmization of Pakis. Maybe that's why Israel is such a big slap in the face of Moslems in general. Inflicting dhimmitude on someone has to be total, not just verbal. Only the West has been in a position to do that today.

It doesn't bother them one bit. They just feel enamored by it, that they were able to get somebody's attention and were able to intimidate somebody.

In my interactions with Pakis, I find that they have a deep-seated inferiority complex, esp. vis a vis Indics. Sometimes its obvious, other times it comes out only occasionally. At a personal level I'm usually very appreciative of other cultures and people, I like to learn and mix freely with all, though obviously I have my own chosen path and historical views which I don't hesitate to express and discuss. For some strange reason, this is even more intimidating to them. Taken out of his mob, confronted calmly by an Indian, man to man, the Paki is a bundle of nerves. At best, he can become a Turk's or Arab's capable sidekick, at worst, a pathetic c0ck-sucker. What H&D is there to destroy? India's independent progress is enough to force him to confront his true image, even before our soldiers actually reach the River Sindhu again.

In the meantime, we can be aggressive in ensuring a correct representation of history (minus the fairy tales manufactured to protect H&D and project their own humiliations on others). That's a campaign for academic integrity, against Nazi-like psychohistory. IMHO, no need for any Pak-specific propoganda campaigns, because, as you pointed out, it feeds his agitated little vital. Independent pressure groups and anti-fascism watchdogs, preferably Western-based, should bring to light the crazy history textbooks and social discourse of TSP and other middle-Eastern countries. Asma Jehangir should be given international awards and relevant parts of her work highlighted, just like Shirin Ebadi was recognized from Iran. Etc, etc.

[ramana]

Carl, Plese psot the Pashtun contra-narrative in the Af-Pak thread too.

[Prem]

If some one want to study the Paki Djinnomic self respect then watch the fun when Poak meet an indian with same last name, specially from Jatt or Rajput tribe.The pride and the shine in the eyes of Indian is in 400% contarst with Poakerman's demeanor . Inside the convert lurks big a vaccume and doubt whic require constant filling and supression. The signs of conflict comes out on face in such meeting.

[shiv]

Actually Islam has a very simple but durable shield - Whenever one starts criticizing Islam, Muslims start with the usual "torn shirt, open fly" argument. When one persists, they just say, you are a Islamophobe, you hate Islam, and use your criticism of Islam as a rallying cry to unite the Muslims. So criticism of Islam does not really get through the brain-washed skulls of Muslims (Pakistanis).

Rajesh I do not want to discuss this further. Islam is a mirror of the life and mind of its founder. That is exactly what is protected by the death sentence, because that, and not God or his diaphanous sex starved hoors constitute the weakest point, and are therefore given unreasonable protection by killing at the slightest criticism. You tear that down and the mirrors have nothing to reflect.

The secular world had reached a sort of uneasy agreement with Islam to "respect all religions" and therefore respect the life and mind of the founder. If Muslims break the covenant by taking paranoia too far against any faith the founder's credentials will be ripped open and entrails thrown to the scavengers. Its a case of "My respect for your view goes only so far as your respect for my views", Torn shirt vs open fly is a game that two can play.

Pakistanis are making it very very easy to tear down the fundamental tenets of Islam by behaving like murderous rapist goons and then telling the world that they are good Muslims and that a good Muslim lives his life like the prophet of Islam. Thank you for this opening Pakistanis. Thank you for educating us.

[Guddu]

Mods: Would it be practical to provide links to some of RajeshA's solutions (as well as those of some others), on the first page of this thread, ala TSP thread. I believe we need a ready reference source for journalists and scholars interested in the subject.

[RajeshA]

The secular world had reached a sort of uneasy agreement with Islam to "respect all religions" and therefore respect the life and mind of the founder. If Muslims break the covenant by taking paranoia too far against any faith the founder's credentials will be ripped open and entrails thrown to the scavengers. Its a case of "My respect for your view goes only so far as your respect for my views", Torn shirt vs open fly is a game that two can play.

Pakistanis are making it very very easy to tear down the fundamental tenets of Islam by behaving like murderous rapist goons and then telling the world that they are good Muslims and that a good Muslim lives his life like the prophet of Islam. Thank you for this opening Pakistanis. Thank you for educating us.

shiv saar,

I was not aware that we were talking about the Rasool. Yes the Rasool critique really gets their goat. What Muslims however sometimes feel, is that one (non-Muslim) is attacking the Rasool, out of the blue, simply because on hates Islam, and they can't make the connection that they are themselves to blame, because they physically abuse non-Muslims or their Ulema are constantly making fun of theology and the religious practices of others faiths.

It will be more useful to preface all criticism of the Rasool with the charge-sheet against their Ulema. If they make fun of "idol worship" others will attack "Rasool"!

[Airavat]

If a Muslim drinks but says no to pork or salami, it is simply because being Muslim means being brave, brave enough to even flout Islamic injunctions, but by refusing to eat pork, he wants to make a conscious display of his Muslim identity

Alcohol, sex, rich food, perfumes, costly garments, etc are to be avoided (parhez) on earth, because the ghazi will receive them manifold in paradise, where he can indulge endlessly without any consequences on his body and mind. On earth he has to lead the life of a simple soldier and obey orders.

Pork on the other hand is explicitly forbidden on earth and will not be served in paradise.

[shiv]

I was not aware that we were talking about the Rasool.

Denial, lies, murder, rape as revenge, rape as punishment are all aspects of Pakistani behavior. And Pakistanis are pure Muslims. And pure Muslims model their lives on their Prophet.

Everything else is a house of mirrors. Pakis need to understand that if they represent pure (Paki) Islam as they claim, they are a reflection of Islam, and since they are supposed to lead lives like the founder-prophet, we must assume that Pakistani behavior mirrors that.

In fact this is the very argument that is killing Pakistan. You see - if Muslims live like their Prophet then Pakistanis who swear to be Muslims must be living like him. If he is not like Pakistanis, then Pakistanis are not good Muslims and need to change their behavior to become like him. That is what drives their desire for more and more and more and more and more purity in Islam.

The argument that rape and murder and denial occur in India and elsewhere is a useless argument here. No one other than Pakistanis are claiming to be pure Muslims. If they are not pure Muslims, then we support their quest for purity. But in becoming pure they must stop rape and wanton murder which "everyone" commits. Or else their argument is bullshit.

If Pakistanis are becoming purer in Islam, Pakistani behavior today must be a closer image of the ideal than it was say 30 years ago. If you criticise Pakis today - it cannot be because they are bad, but because you are an Islamophobe. These guys have painted themselves into a corner where they need to be skewered and finished.

[RajeshA]

I am particularly interested in showing that they are racists, which they are. I am trying to find derogatory references to Africans by Pakistanis and spreading that among African forums on the net.

shiv saar,

I did look around the Internet. My first impression is that along with Pakistani racism, you will also see reports of Indian racism towards Africans and Afro-Americans, something we may not like, but it is still there.

We ourselves still have a long way to go!

[shiv]

I am particularly interested in showing that they are racists, which they are. I am trying to find derogatory references to Africans by Pakistanis and spreading that among African forums on the net.

shiv saar,

I did look around the Internet. My first impression is that along with Pakistani racism, you will also see reports of Indian racism towards Africans and Afro-Americans, something we may not like, but it is still there.

We ourselves still have a long way to go!

Rajesh if Indians are racist it does not mean that Pakistanis are not racist. There is absolutely no need to follow a policy of "Doosron ke jai se pehle khud ko jai karein". We can point out Paki racism even as we correct Indian racists.

[Aditya_V]

It is also the Deep Supremism which the AIT develops in people, somehow everything Gora is good and there is nothing else in the world to appreciate.

[RajeshA]

Rajesh if Indians are racist it does not mean that Pakistanis are not racist. There is absolutely no need to follow a policy of "Doosron ke jai se pehle khud ko jai karein". We can point out Paki racism even as we correct Indian racists.

I merely pointed out that those links I found, had reports of racism from both Pakistanis and Indians against Africans, and could not have been used.

If you find links, with reports of only Pakistani racism, please do post.

[ajit_tr]

one important thing to learn from civilizational history of humans and the saying of some wise man that-"If you cant defeat them then join them".sobetter way to manage Pakistan is to join them.Thats what even earlier Indians did.

[RajeshA]

one important thing to learn from civilizational history of humans and the saying of some wise man that-"If you cant defeat them then join them".sobetter way to manage Pakistan is to join them.Thats what even earlier Indians did.

Who says it is difficult to find humor in the Muslim world. Just because some sh*t is proving to be a bit too sticky and hard to wipe, Indians should opt to become sh*t too.

[hnair]

ajit_whatever is really a funny bunny

[sum]

sobetter way to manage Pakistan is to join them.Thats what even earlier Indians did.

What is this supposed to mean in normal English ( not Pinglish)?

[archan]

one important thing to learn from civilizational history of humans and the saying of some wise man that-"If you cant defeat them then join them".sobetter way to manage Pakistan is to join them.Thats what even earlier Indians did.

Too bad (for you) that you and your ilk are in a very small minority. You want to be just like pakistan - an irritant, and hope that the rest of the civilised population will give you more than you deserve just to avoid embarrassment and irritation. Reminds me of the modus operandi of a people of certain "profession".

[Prem]

Dont Dismiss Deer ajit_tr
RajeshA has already proposed joing with few choicest percentage of Agyani Pakistani Jnani in wholy purchased "matri-money". IMHO, Pakis are clever rats, after ruining the reputation of islam, they now run away from any islamic tag given by kaffirs. Carl Mahasya mentioned taking "Kande se Kanda out". Pakistan is Islam and Islam is what Pakistani do is the Kanda to take Pakistan out of Islam or islam out of Pakistan. But Carl forgot to mention that after taking the "Kanda' out with othe Kanda , both are to be thrown in the garbgage for either reprocesing by Kabarris or dumping for good by good old sanitary worker.