Tackling Islamic Extremism in India

Locked
indygill
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 17:53

Post by indygill »

How does Islam reconcile when criminals named of their holy persons commit crimes? Every one of those hijackers was named after some koranic name
But is it really a crime in the eyes of Islamists????

Even in India one can easily see Muslims coming out for support of Osama... In Bihar state election one could see osama look alike following Lalu around during campaine time.......

There are instances Indian muslims naming their kids after those hijackers and even Saddam.............

For them they are fighters of Jihad and they died for faith.......and ofcourse in their eyes they are justified to be named from quran
surinder
BRFite
Posts: 1464
Joined: 08 Apr 2005 06:57
Location: Badal Ki Chaaon Mein

Post by surinder »

vsudhir wrote:Let me quote from memory one of IG's more underhanded foreign policy actions. She had India apply for OIC membership early in the group's formation as a (get this) 'semi-izlamic state'. Her arguments mirror many you made - that we allow (limited) sharia, that muzlim rights (including jizya, perhaps) are protected etc. TSP went nuts and started its "IM==rented muzlim" cam-pain in KSA.

Thus you have a strong PM, the only man in her cabinet no less, declaring openly India==semi izlamic to get into the OIC. What would you expect from lesser parties?

Vsudhir:
Interesting. If you can find any reference to it in printed material or Web, that would be most helpful. This is something to be remembered. She knew something, we are just discovering now.

By the way, I have seen many web sites and articles claim that Indira married a Muslim, not a Parsi. Feroz Gandhi. What is the truth? Why did Mahatma Gandhi supposedly adopt him and give him the name of Gandhi if Feroz was a Parsi. Nehru was athiest anti-Hindu. He would not have minded Feroz being Parsi.
Surinder
surinder
BRFite
Posts: 1464
Joined: 08 Apr 2005 06:57
Location: Badal Ki Chaaon Mein

Post by surinder »

shiv wrote:At a national and international level India allows islamists to gain space and points.
India is a giant that acts like a dwarf. When it is treated as a dwarf by others, India does not like it. Germany & Japan are also two countries that act as dwarfs while being giants. But they are that way because they are carriying the guilt of WW-2. What guilt does India have to carry? That the Hindus exist? That they are breathing and living?
surinder
BRFite
Posts: 1464
Joined: 08 Apr 2005 06:57
Location: Badal Ki Chaaon Mein

Post by surinder »

While thinking about the India being Islamic, a thought occured to me. It is more accurate to describe India as not Islamic, but as being Dhimmic. But being a Dhimmi has a very special meaning in Islam. Theoretically it is how Islam sets down some clear rules for non-Muslims to live and breath in a Muslim state. But Dhimmi is not a permanent state of peace and existence. It is only a temporary truce to keep peace for the time being. When the situation is more opportune and it Muslims have regained strength, then an "invitation" to Islam is to be made. This "invitation", if rejected, is to be followed by some specific actions of violence to get the non-Muslims to accept Islam. So basically a Dhimmi is only a temporary non-Muslim. It is a temporary half-way state to being a Muslim. In that sense, Shiv is right. A Dhimmi nation = Islamic nation. Our Dhimmic traits are basically indications of a future full-fledged Islamic traits. So one can call India either as an Islamic State of India, or as a Dhimmic State of India. The first name is pedantically more correct, the second is more a statement of wisdom.
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Post by vsudhir »

surinder wrote: Vsudhir:
Interesting. If you can find any reference to it in printed material or Web, that would be most helpful. This is something to be remembered. She knew something, we are just discovering now.

By the way, I have seen many web sites and articles claim that Indira married a Muslim, not a Parsi. Feroz Gandhi. What is the truth? Why did Mahatma Gandhi supposedly adopt him and give him the name of Gandhi if Feroz was a Parsi. Nehru was athiest anti-Hindu. He would not have minded Feroz being Parsi.
Surinder
Here's what Wiki has to say. My other comments are a recollection from a printed column I'd read yrs back. Shall provide links if I find some.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizati ... Conference

Oh wait, here's more from a simple google search. Nindu sanitizes the dhimmitude IG displayed but read on for the basic facts as they appear.

http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/30/stories ... 291000.htm
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Once again we must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

We may have no Hindu Owaisi to angrily pour fire and brimstone on unbelievers but we do have a dhimmedia and Barkha who ask more questions than the GoI or you or me ever asked in public.

It was "We the People" on NDTV last night and the discussion was about dress code for women, and whether there is compulsion in Islam and whether there are double standards for men and women.

There was a cross section of Muslims, including our man Owaisi our very own sophisticated fundoo of the clean shaven upper lip plus beard a la Mohammad.

The ladies included fully covered types to some delectably uncovered types.

Midway through the show Barkha Dutt began grilling a young fully covered girl (except face) about the fact that Shah Rukh Khan is an icon. Before the girl could reply that she actually likes SRK - rescuer of islamic women's morality Owaisi thundered, out of turn, away from camera, across the room, "The Man we admire most is Prophet Mohammad" - in almost a command to the young Muslim girl to say that (or else.. of course).

I noticed an interesting phenomenon on the show. Ina mixed group the people who are most likely to raise their voices and speak in thunderous tones with wagging index finger and eyes on fire are the Muslim fundoos. They are taught to do that as part of the body language of insisting that Islam is always right. This falls well within my earlier observation that Muslims are required - in fact commanded to be this way rather than the weak "Any which way is OK" philosophy, and non requirement of fervor of your 5000 year old timeless faith. Both Owaisi and a fully covered up (except eyes) dame were that way. "Harun gharrahharan dharrumphparhhumph!" their voices said to the audience - finger wagging vigorously. No need to understand the words - the intonation tells you who you need to listen to!!

In the end Owaisi said "Read the Quran with an open mind"

But that statement left me with questions:

1) If you read the Quran with an open mind you find a lot of stuff that requires explanation from the Hadits. So you have to read the hadiths as well. If you read the Hadiths as well you find a whole lot of stuff that is considered "weak" and "strong. The weak ones are applied less than the strong ones, but there is no bar on any one applying them Ultimately you can read the Quran till you are green in the face but only what the Mullah or Owaisi says will go. So this read the Quran stuff is yet another Mullahnic statement that is meaningless like "Religion of Peace" and "No compulsion in Islam"

2) If you read the Quran and Hadiths you find things like "Wear a beard but not a Moustache" because the Mouche will filter your food which will rot - or some such explanation. You will also learn that you have to clean your bottom with a stone, brick or sand, but not bone. You will read that you must not urinate standing up because the Prophet did that only once in his life. You will read that you must shave your armpits at lest once in 3 weeks because that is the longest period the Prophet went without shaving his armpits.

The question is - if these are not strong rules that are meant to be forced - why are they there? If they are there in order to teach you how Mohammad lived his life, surely anyone who does not follow them is not leading his life the way Mohammad lived his life. Surely that person can then be accused of being an improper Muslim. If that is the case then there certainly IS compulsion in Islam. He has to use sand/stone, not bone, pee sitting down, shave armpits etc. Or else...

For too long "Read the Quran" has been a killer of all argument. In this day and age translations are freely available and they raise uncomfortable questions. Owaisi types, for all their modern appearance and eruditon are still giving the old standard answers.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

surinder wrote:While thinking about the India being Islamic, a thought occured to me. It is more accurate to describe India as not Islamic, but as being Dhimmic. But being a Dhimmi has a very special meaning in Islam. Theoretically it is how Islam sets down some clear rules for non-Muslims to live and breath in a Muslim state. But Dhimmi is not a permanent state of peace and existence. It is only a temporary truce to keep peace for the time being. When the situation is more opportune and it Muslims have regained strength, then an "invitation" to Islam is to be made. This "invitation", if rejected, is to be followed by some specific actions of violence to get the non-Muslims to accept Islam. So basically a Dhimmi is only a temporary non-Muslim. It is a temporary half-way state to being a Muslim. In that sense, Shiv is right. A Dhimmi nation = Islamic nation. Our Dhimmic traits are basically indications of a future full-fledged Islamic traits. So one can call India either as an Islamic State of India, or as a Dhimmic State of India. The first name is pedantically more correct, the second is more a statement of wisdom.
Absolutely. Very discerning.

For this reason it is absolutely absurd for some Hindus to go around claiming that they are less dhimmi than others.

The fact is they may believe they have less dhimmi thoughts (as if they can read the other dhimmi's mind) but having thoughts is all that is allowed in the dhimmi state. One does not get out of that state by cursing other dhimmis, but by working, using force, subterfuge and making alliances as needed to empower the dhimmi. Power for non dhimmi thought and action is more important than finger pointing and mocking at other fellow dhimmis.

All that we have achieved so far is point fingers and mock at other dhimmis.

Any movement out of dhimmitude is, after all extremism. Is it any surprise than an admission that you are Hindu is labelled "extremism"? Our dhimmi mindset is so deep that one person who did not consider himself a dhimmi asked me when my thoughts "turned"? Our dhimmitude is so deep that finding any evidence of original belief in anyone is seen as surprising. That is the degree of confidence we have in each other. That is the degree to which one's own culture has to be kept hidden.

Unless someone can do something to empower dhimmis they will continue to be called "extremist" and trodden upon. Unless you can do something to bring about empowerment, stop pulling others down and calling them dhimmis. Their disease is no worse than yours, and your power to make a change is no greater than theirs. Accusations are easy but can YOU change anything? If you can't, stop mocking. What sort of behavior do you expect from a dhimmi who is mocked by an Islamist and by you (who claim that you are not a dhimmi) You are losing a fellow dhimmi ally in your need to boost your own weak ego to show your are not dhimmi. Oh but you are! Just look at the state of your nation? Are you separate from your nation?

What a bunch of weak pretenders we are. Our competition is with each other, not with what controls our thought. That is real dhimmitude.
Last edited by shiv on 03 Dec 2007 05:53, edited 1 time in total.
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Post by vsudhir »

Prophet picture row in West Bengal
(TOI)


More tamasha from the rule-igion of professional grievience mongers.....
KOLKATA: With the West Bengal capital barely having recovered from the November 21 violence over dissident Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen's visa — as also due to the firing in Nandigram — a fresh controversy is brewing in the state over a book, 'Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan', brought out by a New Delhi publisher. In the eye of a storm is a "picture", said to be of Prophet Muhammed, published in the book.

Written by G Parthasarthy and published six months ago by Delhi's publisher Vijay Goel and sold all over the country, the book appears to have created a controversy only in West Bengal, a state that is turning out to be rather sensitive to communal {commie-nal??} issues in recent times. State minister for minorities' development Abdus Sattar spoke to chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee telling him that publishing such a picture is "wrong and uncalled for" as there cannot be any "picture" of Muhammed.
Well, bhat kind oph picture are you guys drawing with your behavior and words?? :roll:
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

vsudhir wrote: More tamasha from the rule-igion of professional grievience mongers.....
...

Well, bhat kind oph picture are you guys drawing with your behavior and words?? :roll:
In case people have not understood so far the picture that is being drawn is quite clear. It is as follows:

Even if you are normally friendly, even if you mean no harm, even if you do not want to get into a fight, even if you have made a genuine error, we reserve the right to get angry with you accuse you and fight you for insulting religion

We will pick a fight with you without showing sensitivity or consideration for any previous behavior is the hallmark of Islamism.

It is the Hawk that stands up an challenges the other "Fight or submit!"

Each time this occurs it is one iteration of prisoners dilemma. each time you back down, you may be gambling that the other guy will back down next time. But he will not. He will challenge you again.

The only change we can get out of this age old game is to stand up and challenge back and say "Bugger off. If you want to pick a fight you get a fight. Not submission. Who the hell knew that your leader did not like photographs."

Notice how all of Islam thinks it is OK to pick on innocent people who mean no deliberate harm while we are oh so sensitive about hurting the sentiment of innocent Muslims. Why not just go ahead and hurt everyone's sentiment. Because your sentiment is not going to be respected.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Post by Sanku »

shiv wrote: Midway through the show Barkha Dutt began grilling a young fully covered girl (except face) about the fact that Shah Rukh Khan is an icon. Before the girl could reply that she actually likes SRK - rescuer of islamic women's morality Owaisi thundered, out of turn, away from camera, across the room, "The Man we admire most is Prophet Mohammad" - in almost a command to the young Muslim girl to say that (or else.. of course).
.
So SRK now has competition finally; and that too from Proh. M (PBUH) :rotfl: :rotfl:

Man he is one good actor I tell you!!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why didnt Burqa Dutt ask him why was a Prophet being compared with a ordinary actor who claims Indian heart and soul and sings very Kuffr songs??

I would have liked to see his face then? The way to tackle these A******* Owaisi kinds they aspire for H&D puntcure their ballon with ridicule show them no importance let them deflate themselves all the way back to Arabia.
indygill
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 17:53

Post by indygill »

vsudhir wrote:
More tamasha from the rule-igion of professional grievience mongers.....
...

Well, bhat kind oph picture are you guys drawing with your behavior and words??
Abdus Sattar wants to Ban the book because it is against his religion. Fine

But the irony of the fact is that he is “card holderâ€
Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Post by Murugan »

How does Islam reconcile when criminals named of their holy persons commit crimes? Every one of those hijackers was named after some koranic name.
Har roz Paanch Baar Namaz Padhe to Khuda Laakh Gunah Maaf Kar Deta Hai!

(Sania Mirza can now play tennis with scantiest clothes becaue she offeres namaz five times a day, she is thus a pious muslim)
Last edited by Murugan on 03 Dec 2007 14:08, edited 1 time in total.
Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Post by Murugan »

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1136646

10 days Fist Islamic Peace conference is currently being held in Mumbai.


See the chust namazi can get away with anything:

quote from above link
We must change ourselves
I do not know much about the Taslima issue but clearly what she has said has nothing to do with her being a woman. India is a democracy but that is no excuse to say what she wants. No one, man or woman, has the right to abuse the prophet.

Muslim religious leaders in this part of the world appear to be cut off; they tend to speak only the local language and are not aware of events around them. Therefore, are they qualified to really lead? The prophet himself was never isolated from his people. He interacted with them and also performed various tasks. Leave it to Muslims to change their system in a peaceful way. You can’t have contradictions in your society, where you let Taslima say anything she wants and then you want to intervene in our education.
— Dr Jaafar Idris,
Islamic scholar from Sudan
:evil:


And there is no female participating in the conference!


***
Terror is not part of Islam
Terrorist acts have taken place for decades and people of all communities have been involved. Terrorist activities in Ireland were never termed Catholic terror war or given a religious identity. Why are some Muslims’ acts labelled Islamic terror?

Islam is a moderate and progressive religion. Just because some have turned away from Islamic ideals, it is unfair to label them as Muslim terrorists. Take, for example, the LTTE. They aren’t called Hindu terrorists; just Tigers or LTTE. :roll:
— Mahroof Haj Mhideen,
President Islamic Research Foundation (International)
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

I see a lot of confusion on this forum (and outside) on questions like "Who is a dhimmi?", "Who is not?", "Who is a Hindu fundamentalist?", "Who is not?", "Who is a Hindu revivalist?""Who is not?" etc.

For example I have been described both as a Hindu rightwing fundamentalist as well as a Macaulayite dhimmi for saying the same things. I am sure others would have faced a similar situation.

These questions have answers, but those answers can come only with some idea of how Hindu society has developed and moved over many more centuries than Islam.

I will try and put down some thoughts but the post promises to be a long one.

Let me start with an analogy to describe societies. Most people are likely to have played with marbles. If you have a marble on the ground and you hit with another, the first marble moves off in some direction or the other. A similar analogy would be balls on a billiard table.

Imagine a huge billiard table (maybe 100 km long) with a 50 Kg billiard ball rolling on it. (Unlike real billiards the ball is rolling, not still, but hey you don't get 50 Kg billiard balls on 100 Km tables)

Anyhow this 50 Kg ball is rolling along the 100 Km long table. Now if you hit this 50 Kg ball with a standard billiard ball (using a cue) you will hardly notice a change in the movement of the 50 Kg ball. If you are serious about changing the direction of movement of the 50 Kg ball using your only tool - billiard balls, what you need is the cooperation of 25, or 50 or 200 billiard players who all aim to hit the 50 Kg ball from one side. Each hit makes only a slight difference - but after 100 hits the 50 Kg ball will be moving in a slightly different direction. And if you can see the 50 kg ball after it has moved along this new direction for 25 km, you will find that it has strayed far from its original path.

You may never see the ball in its changed path. But in order to make it go on a changed path you need to know
a) Where the ball is coming from to predict which way it is going
b) Which way YOU want the ball to go
c) A means to hit the ball many times with the little strokes at your disposal to achieve the end result.

Huge societies are like this 50 Kg ball on a 100 Km long table. Small frequent strokes change their path and the changed path is visible only tens of kilometers (centuries) down the line.

Why centuries? Was that a typo? No. It does take at least a century to make major changes in a really huge society. Let me quote a medical example. Despite modernity, international travel, net savviness and awareness of the world, many Indians still carry with them memories of medical myths. Without going into details, many Indians believe that action X causes disease Y, which is complete nonsense. Changing that belief will take centuries for a simple reason. Each person who believes that myth today has heard it from a grandparent - and has therefore been primed with misinformation that is at least 60 to 70 years old. This person has often already fed that misinformation to his children and grandchildren, ensuring that the 70 year old misinformation is propaganted for a further 50 to 70 years. Changing this requires multiple acts of correction and everyone in the chain has to be told that the info is wrong or that some new info is correct. Achieving this sort of change often requires at least a century, sometimes more.

If most Indians are dhimmi today. it is because of attitudes that were instilled centuries ago. It is worth trying to look back at what happened to understand where we are today. Only that will give us an idea of where we are heading and any direction changes hat we may seek.

By the time Islam came to India the civilization had already been chugging along for over 2000 years. Things had happened, Buddhism and Jainism had arisen and spread their wings across India or outside. All three religions survived and there were and are similarities in the worldview of all three. None of them sought by written code to impose death sentences or slavery on practitioners of the other and conversion form one to the other (for convenience or political gain) was not punishable by death.

Then Islam came in and it was a totally new ball game. As it spread its tentacles and rulers settled in, the first dhimmis started being produced. Over a span of centuries Islam came to control most parts of modern India for at least a while, during which populations who had no place to flee had to submit to dhimmitude.

Dhimmi attitudes became commonplace in India. Cover or hide yer wimmen. Do not dispute anyone who says anything good about Islam. Accept without murmur criticism of your faith. Practice it in the background. Perhaps it took several centuries for this process to happen, but it happened alright. In the meantime, new hawks developed in India who figured out the weaknesses of the Islamic kings. The Mughal empire started cracking up with Hindu upstarts challenging their hegemony. But there was probably no stability of the sort needed for a gradual rollback of dhimmitude - for attitudes once established need centuries to remove wholly.

It was about this time that the British came to India. Their style was completely different and their technology better. They found a fissured land divided up between warring Kings and played one against the other. As long as they got the loot they wanted they did not bother whether the supported Muslim kings or Hindu kings. In some places such as Mysore state, they replaced a Muslim ruler with a Hindu one. In other places they may have favored a Muslim for their convenience.

The British did not ask for dhimmitude per se, but once again they did not specifically foster an environment to remove it. They were interested in wealth and loot and created conditions to foster that. In fact they may have perpetuated Hindu dhimmitude, as I will speculate.

I believe the British actually helped to make allies out of Muslims and Hindus in a way different from the ruler-dhimmi relationship that had existed previously. British rule upset the ruler-ruled equation in India so thoroughly that Hindus and Muslims got together to throw out the British. But something happened that caused exactly the opposite as well, almost simultaneously.

Britain fostered its own agenda to "educate Indians to appreciate British goods" as Macaulay intended. The education of Indians started with the creation of Bengali babus. The English education and Macaulay-ization was taken up with enthusiasm by some Indians because it offerred a route of economic release for them. Macaulay-ization as we know was not taken up with the same gusto by Muslims who tended to go towards Madrassa education. This led to a split between Hindus and Muslims because dhimmi former subjects of Muslims were getting empowered, while the act of Macaulayization was seen as a threat to Islam. Hindus, who were already dhimmified, did not see much of a threat to Hinduism by Macaulayization, as their faith was already crushed in their dhimmi minds.

However the need to get rid of the British did unite Hindus and Muslims for a bit. Hindu dhimmitude no doubt assisted in maintaining communication and trust while there was cooperation, but the increasing Macaulayization and power of Hindus was noted with alarm by some Islamists. After all, "Macaulayization" was not just creation of a class of Britain lovers. It was also the creation of borrowed British institutions, particularly secular rule of law and democracy with elections that would ensure that any majority bloc would win. When independence became a distinct possibility, these Islamists realised that their old power - the old "Muslim ruler-Hindu dhimmi subject" would be gone. That was unacceptable and the idea of Pakistan was born from this.

The important point to note here is that Muslim-Hindu cooperation during independence revolved around the old ruler-dhimmi relationships built up during the earlier Islamic era. This old ruler-dhimmi cooperation was a useful unifier in British rule, but the Macaulayization of Hindus was advanced enough to favor British style democracy and government and not a return to the old Islamic state. In fact even the existing Hindu Kings in India opted for democracy and to join the Indian union.

The most rabid Islamic elite ran off to Pakistan but the old Islamic power base in many India states remained. Also remaining was a natural and deep dhimmitude of most Hindus. It was this dhimmitude that probably aided harmony and the development of early post independence India, while commitment to Macaulayization stabilized the democratic system.

Pakistan was Islamist from the word go. they had no need for British democracy and values. And any remaining kafirs in Pakistan were treated just like Islam treats kafirs.

I think that if Pakistan had not been rabidly Islamist, and had not constantly tried to arouse Indian Muslims to rebel India dhimmitude would have gone on much longer. But it is going.

But dhimmitude will take more than a century to go, and if dhimmitude in a fellow Indian bothers you, it is worth remembering that it is a deeply entrenched and centuries old mindset that was created by the need to survive under murderous Islamic kings. It will not go away soon, and people who show dhimmitude need to be seen with sympathy as well behaved and non aggressive (dove) survivors rather than mocked as being stupid.

People need to be gently lifted out of an anachronistic dhimmi mindset and not coerced into thinking something different. That coercion leads to cognitive dissonance, anger and rebellion. That is why, when you mock a dhimmi sufficiently, he will call you a Hindu extremist. If so called clever Hindus have any brains - they will display patience and understanding about an age old mental process and change it in gradual steps rather than by aggressive mocking. The latter is a self goal that Hindus have no business scoring when they are getting the first chance in centuries that they can actually do something useful in the world. A hurried change in dhimmi mindset cannot occur. You are only making things more difficult for yourself by cursing an Indian as being a dhimmi and accusing him of dancing to the tune of his lords. He can't help it. If you are intelligent - you can help.

I have had my say. i have no idea whether anyone will understand, but I feel better for having said it.
indygill
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 17:53

Post by indygill »

That is why, when you mock a dhimmi sufficiently, he will call you a Hindu extremist


Sadly......Meanwhile lets see whats going on in around us

First in Bengal Taslima and now ban on book that somehow has a Mohmads portyal


http://in.news.yahoo.com/071203/43/6nzoc.html

The Supreme Court Monday temporarily suspended the death sentence of Pakistani national and Lashker-e-Toiba (LeT) militant Mohammad Arif alias Ashfaq who was held guilty for the December 2000 terror attack at the Red Fort here.

--------------------------------


LINK

Terror strike in Delhi within 2 weeks, warns IB

The Capital has been put on alert after police received inputs from the Intelligence Bureau about the possibility of a terror strike in the near future by Lashkar-e-Toiba and Harkat-ul-Jihadi-al-Islami militants.

Police have already deployed bomb disposal squads, quick reaction teams, dog squads and extra personnel at prominent places like markets, malls, and rail, bus and metro stations

------------------------------------------------

And Above all like Murugan mentioned a

Islamic Peace Conference in Mumbai !!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1136646
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16267
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Post by SwamyG »

Thanks to folks who answered my question. Irrespective of how we differentiate, the IM do not seem to have that perspective - at least the rabid ones.

A couple of such incidents, a few burnings of missionaries, a Godhra and a Babri Masjid is all that is required (apart from the age old Caste system) to result in a harangue against the Hindus. When the causes for those very acts are pointed out we are told we are secular and this land belongs to everybody ithyadi.

As Shiv pointed out immediately the Hindu is branded an Hindutvadi, an RSS sympathizer, a BJP supporter. This upsets several Hindus and now they take a step or two back. It is my opinion that Hindus should reply "Yes, so what!". But the Kafur Doves never want to acknowledge the Kafur Hawks. Hindus are the harshest to fellow Hindus than to any one else. Probably to improve and move the community more towards 'moksha'. But pretty soon that path is going to be filled with thorns and bushes if not totally cut.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

As Shiv pointed out immediately the Hindu is branded an Hindutvadi, an RSS sympathizer, a BJP supporter. This upsets several Hindus and now they take a step or two back. It is my opinion that Hindus should reply "Yes, so what!". But the Kafur Doves never want to acknowledge the Kafur Hawks. Hindus are the harshest to fellow Hindus than to any one else.
In ancient times, it was because of fear of reprisals. See the movie Prahaar and the reaction of the mob to the Army man..very accurately portrayed imho, have seen the same behaviour many a time..
This craven fear (one Gurus body was left unclaimed till his 2 Hindu disciples crept out in the night and spirited it away for cremation) was why the Khalsa kept such a distinctive appearance...you grow up with the open proclamation that your faith is what it is and you will accept the consequences..
Probably to improve and move the community more towards 'moksha'.
No, post independence Nehruvian Hinduism...where Hindus grow up believing that they are oppressing minorities and constantly feel the need to patronize the latter and "act against communal forces"...grow up on a diet of INC textbooks, Frontline and Hindu and you'll have such views by default...any hawk is automatically a RSS/ BJP man..

Basically, dhimmitude was officially sanctioned and encouraged.

While growing up, I remember many of my classmates had a visceral dislike of Hinduism...based on school book knowledge...they were all upper class, hindus..so no vestige of discrimination etc. Parents may have been conservative/ good people or whatever...their attitude was shaped by what the books said.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

Shiv, Thanks for the long post. I was asked a question as to seeing the jinnah didnt suppor the Khilafat movement, why did Gandhiji support it? I gave an unconvincing answer about his idea of fostering Hindu-Muslim amity in the freedom struggle against the British.

However after reading your post I can see that there is an element of dhimmitude in that espousing the Khilafat movement and was a regressive step in the long view in casting of the dhimmi yoke.

JCage is correct that the post Independent India officially enforced dhimmitude
No, post independence Nehruvian Hinduism...where Hindus grow up believing that they are oppressing minorities and constantly feel the need to patronize the latter and "act against communal forces"...grow up on a diet of INC textbooks, Frontline and Hindu and you'll have such views by default...any hawk is automatically a RSS/ BJP man..
Basically, dhimmitude was officially sanctioned and encouraged.
My question is were they being dhimmi while deluding themsleves that they were Modern Macaulayites who were beyond all this dhimmitude?


Could they have concsiously sanctioned dhimmitude to avoid the immediate strains on Indian society?

Also I understnd the need to rewrite the NCERT history books by JCage's observation
While growing up, I remember many of my classmates had a visceral dislike of Hinduism...based on school book knowledge...they were all upper class, hindus. Parents may have been conservative/ good people or whatever...their attitude was shaped by what the books said.
To support the official dhimmitude there is a need to have pacificst dhimmis who are self loathing.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

My question is were they being dhimmi while deluding themsleves that they were Modern Macaulayites who were beyond all this dhimmitude?
Exactly.

In the view that was propogated, religion was an artificial fancy..used by fuddy duddies to spread discord, superstition...all our books were full of references to caste system, bride burning, "andh vishwaas"...but funnily enough, Islam was never criticized. Not one social practise, not one reference to bigotry...never.

Even hindi books were full of stories from authors around above..history was also carefully sanitised...there is/was no overarching meta narrative..hindus are like accidental visitors to india...shivaji/ rana pratap et al are insurgents...i am not kidding you...i read amar chitra katha and was shocked to know that these guys were actually kings in their own right...the books state it with so many mea culpas...that you regard them as inconsequential...it also causes muslim revanchism..i remember some muslim kids who used to routinely declare we ruled india for x hundred years...and so the books said..

Class 8 IM guys used to remark that "we never burnt our women"...
Could they have concsiously sanctioned dhimmitude to avoid the immediate strains on Indian society?
Yes, that was one reason...plus IMHO, Indian academia was hijacked by the deracinated elite post independence.

It has taken me a decade to evaluate my experiences and analyze my own "gut reaction" to certain thoughts and where this "gut reaction" comes from...then see how my peers were..

I & my peers were big fans of "discovery of india" and "my experiences with truth"...i still think the latter is remarkable...but today, I think it depicts Gandhijis struggle to find a POV and it is not a Bible...as kids we didnt have that sense..

DOI is frankly....an attempt to manufacture an idealistic history where everyone lived in harmony and while laudable in one way, it is unfortunately, dismaying in how Nehru is critical of hindu society and culture repeatedly, albeit couched in euphemisms...while refusing to take a stand on Islam..and many of his critiques of Hindu society and culture dont hold up to either logic or historical record...they are quite idealogical..

And frankly, shiv is right...the hawks have been bred out of India...to a very large extent...at least in the upper class/ elite...as a very basic example: if you plot communal violence...its often the OBCs/SC-STs et al who go for the fight, this is not to justify violence but to point out that...the elite just watch and tut tut and exacerbate the situation by pushing a david vs goliath scenario...its a very conscious byproduct of survival imho...if you wished to survive...you had to be dhimmi...and erect rigid barriers of "caste taboos" et al around you to retain your culture..

That way you dont offend the "overlord" whether he be white or turkish..but muddle along.

They leave you alone as long as you dont cross the "boundaries"..

At several MNCs, you can see open posters for "prayer meetings" conducted by evangelical churches..they are not regarded as impolite..even though they market themself as "youth meets" with "music"...now please imagine if that was a RSS poster..and therein lies the difference. One is acceptable...the other isnt. And that has been inculcated in many "studious boys and girls" who aspire to be modern...and the funny part is that India had no huge power grab by the Hindu spiritual/social orgs which invited such a backlash...say for eg in the UK where the Church provoked a secular backlash..

In India, this instinctive contempt is manufactured, from our education, from what we are told (how to be modern..) and so on.
We are manufactured pacifists. I and my peers were ...but I think my interest in military stuff made me escape full conversion..Several of my peers regarded Hinduism as an unfashionable, artificial construct and those who swore by it as fanatics and fundamentalists...
Last edited by JCage on 03 Dec 2007 23:48, edited 2 times in total.
indygill
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 17:53

Post by indygill »

Hindus are the harshest to fellow Hindus than to any one else



It seems the end game towards Dhimmis is the same…

A peculiar practice developed in Yemen, where Arab tribes collected jizya from Jews, offering them protection. If a Muslim from one tribe killed a Jew protected by another tribe, then the other tribe could retaliate by killing a Jew protected by the tribe of the murderer. As a result, two Jews were murdered, while no direct sanctions were imposed on the Muslims.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16267
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Post by SwamyG »

CORRECTION
As Shiv pointed out immediately the Hindu is branded an Hindutvadi, an RSS sympathizer, a BJP supporter.
A correction, now reading my post I can see it can be viewed differently. Read the above as just this
Immediately the Hindu is branded an Hindutvadi, an RSS sympathizer, a BJP supporter.
I was connecting couple of things in my mind..... and hence the shoddy work.
Abhijit
BRFite
Posts: 530
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Bay Area - US

Post by Abhijit »

Shiv, outstanding post.

My question is, what is it that keeps the deep dhimmis still in the Hindu fold? Why don't they simply do a mahesh bhatt on themselves? Is there something in the society/family that makes them fear a conversion out of hindu dharma? is it just a matter of time (maybe a few centuries unless islam self-destructs by then) before the deep dhimmis throw away the 'yoke' of 'hinduism'? How about accelerating that process? Once a dhimmi converts and takes the kalima, things will be much easier for those who are trying to get out of the dhimmitude from the other direction.
i know that this suggestion is fraught with dangers but it is much better in the long run.

indygill pl. edit the long url. thx.
Last edited by Abhijit on 03 Dec 2007 23:53, edited 1 time in total.
indygill
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 17:53

Post by indygill »

In India, this instinctive contempt is manufactured, from our education, from what we are told (how to be modern..) and so on.
We are manufactured pacifists. I and my peers were...but I think my interest in military stuff made me escape full conversion
Should Brhamo Samajs role in this regards be ignored????? Or you think Brahmo Samaj was only a Sub-set of Macaulism with Indian Flavor...
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16267
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Post by SwamyG »

i read amar chitra katha and was shocked to know that these guys were actually kings in their own right..
ACK..... I grew up on that. Along with Chandamamma it reinforced the values of our culture. I used to enjoy Champak too, but it was nothing close to Chandamamma. My very first ACK was about 'Mahabharatam'. I still remember parts of that evening decades ago.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16267
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Post by SwamyG »

We are manufactured pacifists. I and my peers were ...but I think my interest in military stuff made me escape full conversion..Several of my peers regarded Hinduism as an unfashionable, artificial construct and those who swore by it as fanatics and fundamentalists...
At several MNCs, you can see open posters for "prayer meetings" conducted by evangelical churches..they are not regarded as impolite..even though they market themself as "youth meets" with "music"...now please imagine if that was a RSS poster..and therein lies the difference. One is acceptable...the other isnt. And that has been inculcated in many "studious boys and girls" who aspire to be modern...and the funny part is that India had no huge power grab by the Hindu spiritual/social orgs which invited such a backlash...say for eg in the UK where the Church provoked a secular backlash..
If that is the case, then Hinduism can be manufactured to be Hip, Modern & Current. Positive psy-ops is needed to raise pride in our own culture to tackle Islamism.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

I think Brahmo Samaj was the last...but it wasnt a concsious one. The British had introduced a lot of ideas and thoughts, some of which were necessary and some which were subversive.

Many of us would find that era very hard to manage, with gradually entrenching taboos about caste, widow marriage, and sati..in such a milieu, the desire to reform hinduism by throwing the baby out with the bathwater would be a natural reaction for some...so while Roy spoke passionately about "social ills" with good reason...he was equally obdurate about "idol worship" and didnt even sponsor his mother to go on a pilgrimage...liberal fanaticism is as dangerous as religious fanaticism, and since it is grounded in self righteousness, folks like these are hard to convince otherwise. So Raja Roy and his peers were a product of the times, and were definitely influenced by what others thought of Hinduism and comparative religious study which put idol worship into the "unthinking primitive behaviour" category.

It is worth remarking that traditions evolve over centuries, but the explanation of the "how and why" is often not sought nor propogated. And hence, some traditions even if they developed from a sophisticated understanding of nature and spirituality (seeking a physical conduit for devotion) end up appearing like primitive practises to those who engage in a deep study of comparative religions and dont find anything similar.

Even so, Brahmo Samaj did a lot of good, including campaigning for an end to sati. But its leaders could not reconcile themselves to the differences they had with mainstream Hinduism and that is something that dogged the movement for many years. IIRC there was even a court case by some to get themselves readmitted into the Hindu denomination, at least officially...what a weird turn of events.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

If that is the case, then Hinduism can be manufactured to be Hip, Modern & Current. Positive psy-ops is needed to raise pride in our own culture to tackle Islamism.
Yes, but it will be a very uphill struggle, which imho will not occur easily because of a variety of factors:

- JNU sociologists and similar gents in positions of power throughout the media and academia. Overwhelmingly, the arts community and liberal community are filled with folks who grew up as I mentioned.

- Hindu orgs themselves have picked up many Islamic traits, as Shiv mentioned..unecessary prudishness, group think and a belief in age trumps mediocrity ..as a result of which these orgs are often led by foggies who think that a paean to Golwalkar and prancing around in 1910 fashion balloon khakhi shorts is what modern Indians should do and their idea of economics is, to say the least, absolutely obsolete. Very little introspection about how times have changed and that how the message is sent is as important as what the message is and that their beliefs need to undergo change too.

- Politics which ensures that pandering to fundamentalist minority elements is acceptable, and that the status quo is maintained. The Congress will lose all elections if the majority community votes en masse. It is to their eternal interest (and to the RJDs, SPs etc) that caste politics are encouraged.
This basically means that caste violence will continue and hence irrespective of how "cool" theoretical Hinduism may be, actual Hinduism as practised on the ground will give ample ammunition to the proponents of Group 1 to portray it as a fascist, intolerant creed.

Please remember there is one group in India which can influence events totally...to a very large extent...that is GOI.

And GOI has promoted dhimmitude for well nigh fifty years on account of single party rule.

It is social engineering on a massive scale, since the elite, those who shape opinions have been grown on a single idealogy. It wont disappear overnight and especially because each time the Congress/Left gain control over the GOI, they will reverse all previous decisions.

Ultimately, it is like Shiv said...if dhimmitude is fought against every day and every minute...the results will be visible only a 100 years from now.

Its the work of generations. And generations of us, have wiped out the civilizational memory of genocide by Islamism from our thoughts.

No other culture has done this.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16267
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Post by SwamyG »

Just a quibble, while some of you insist it is ALL because of dhimmitude, I contend that it was not caused by any Islamic invasion or influence, but it was just part of our culture.

I say this because, Islamic hawkism has invoked and will invoked Kufur Hawkism in India, it is the Modernist Hawkism that does not create the Kufur Anger.

There are just more than two entities involved. If Islam is the hammer, the iron the Hindus, then each time the hammer hits the iron, the iron creates an impact on the hammer. The iron is made hot not by the hammer, but by external factors {fire} - Modernism, Pseudo-Secularism, Lack of Historical Knowledge.

All that the Islamists are doing is hitting with the hathoda at the right time, to reform the iron. Remove the fire, the iron will become a hammer by virtue of its strength.
Last edited by SwamyG on 04 Dec 2007 03:08, edited 1 time in total.
Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Post by Sumeet »

Commie using taslima issue for votebank politics.

And MF Hussian should still get ravi rai verma award. Isnt it you scumbag CPM. Note in case of taslima court was not the final decision maker. These lowlife congressi and CPM goons did it by applying pressure.
Of course but this standard will not be applied to Sikhs or Hindus.


Will they ask MF Hussain to destroy all the offensive paintings and not bother about judicial processes ?
Will they ask Karunanidhi to take back his statement or leave office ?

Benefits of mob mentality of people who rise united as a group is once again proven beyond doubt. When hindus unite that will be first dent in ship of islamism in this country.



Taslima withdrew one chapter, CPM points to others
New Delhi: The CPI-M on Monday appeared unimpressed with Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen's decision to withdraw controversial pages from her autobiography, saying there were 'many other books' too.

In reply to a question on the party's view on Nasreen's step, Left Front chairman in West Bengal Biman Bose said, "It is for the people to decide, but she has written not just one book. There are many books."

Bose, who was in news recently for airing his views for Nasreen against her stay in West Bengal after demonstrations by Muslim outfits, declined to comment anything further on the issue.

Nasreen had on Friday issued a statement saying that she was withdrawing three controversial pages from her autobiographical novel Dwikhandito as they had evoked strong protests from 'a section of people in India'.

Her other autobiographical works are Amar Meyebela (My girlhood), Utal Hawa (Gusty wind), Dwikhandito and Sei Sob Andhakar (Those dark days), Ami Bhalo Nei, Tumi Bhalo Theko Desh (I am not well, you remain well my country).
Last edited by Sumeet on 04 Dec 2007 01:07, edited 1 time in total.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

SwamyG, dhimmitude is the primary cause of Indias strategic lassitude. It may not be the only cause...Hinduism has always had a very strong streak of self abnegation, which incidentally was the one thing that survived - with more taboos added- since it didnt upset the rulers cart.

And why dhimmitude? Simply the violence man...reading Indian history with a mind focused on what people went through is not a good thing to do...since its mind boggling as to the violence unleashed upon the Hindu community by Islam.

There is simply no parallel in the scale. With such repeated violence and mayhem, you learn over time not to speak anything critical of the likes of Mohammad and others. Its no coincidence that a resurgence in Indian spirituality with preachers like Vivekananda et al took place when the British were in power. During the ancient era they would be simply cut down moment they became popular and dared to question the Islamic rulers dogma. And such was the fate that befell the increasingly popular Sikh gurus.

We today, who are Hindus, are survivors of those who either escaped the violence by fleeing to other areas, or were in places where imperial rule didnt exist to that extent, or were dhimmis or were coopted. Even in vast country like India, significant swathes of the entire land were "touched" by Imperial Islam, and that touch was not humane and graceful when its authority was questioned. And rejecting Islam is questioning authority.
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Post by vsudhir »

Worst case, Hinduism will die. Folks here today will convert to whatever destroys Hinduism. Life will go on. Like it did in Indonesia and BD and Sindh and Pakjab. Scores of religions, faiths cults and systems have fallen by the wayside, unsung in history after x amount of centuries. Just because valimki said that "till the mountains stand and the ganges flows, the Ramayana shall be read" doesn't mean Hinduism as a life system need survive. Similarly, Shankaracharya estblished 4 dhaams to define the fortress boundaries of dharmic life and they still stand (uncannily so, Veraval is actually so close to the western boundary. Puri is still some distance frm the eastern one but with CPM ruling WB another generation, that will get there. The northern one is Badrinath and its below J&K).

Just rambling. All this dhimmi talk has been euphoric for the SDRE soul. Time to prepare to move on. Perhaps.

I pray a civilizational war happen between izlam and xtianity. The dhimmi macaulayites will hen be forced to choose sides - dhimma or mcaulay - and I'm hoping after the kuffr armies comprehensively beat and break izlam, we in India'll be rid of dhimmitude finally perhaps. Will take rivers of bloodshed to get there though.
JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Post by JwalaMukhi »

vsudhir wrote: I pray a civilizational war happen between izlam and xtianity. The dhimmi macaulayites will hen be forced to choose sides - dhimma or mcaulay - and I'm hoping after the kuffr armies comprehensively beat and break izlam, we in India'll be rid of dhimmitude finally perhaps. Will take rivers of bloodshed to get there though.
Yes sir, the EJs are salivating at that prospect. Only the difference will be choice is not going to be dhimma or mcaulay but dhimma or EJ fold. The predicament is dhimmis have consistenly chosen to postpone dealing with the problems as and when they happen and more manageable. This has led to a situation where options are being narrowed down and is forced to fight or seek a dishonorable exit. Dhimmis choice will be obvious.
Right now fighting Islamism, requires Islam as collateral damage. If left to progress, the options will shrink where not only islam but people also will become acceptable collateral damage. From being a weak islamic state to a complete islamic state will not guarantee peace to doves. Doves will be just hoping and praying that they do not fall victim to the next tribal leader's wrath.
Apu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 10 May 2006 11:02
Location: UK

Post by Apu »

Worst case, Hinduism will die. Folks here today will convert to whatever destroys Hinduism. Life will go on. Like it did in Indonesia and BD and Sindh and Pakjab. Scores of religions, faiths cults and systems have fallen by the wayside, unsung in history after x amount of centuries.
Vsudhir, I disagree...in my view most cultures/faiths experience a resurgence when cornered in terms of numbers or circumstance. My case in point being the Jews and Israel, note how circumstance (persistent persecutions etc) and a small population instilled a do or die instinct into israel. It is surrounded by islamic nations, yet single handedly maintains dominance over the region and that to overtly....

Similarly, if Hinduism is reduced in size (via forced conversions, stupidity of current politicians etc) or cornered, an instinct for survival will automatically be instilled and to assure survival all ills within a faith/culture are forgotten......
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7101
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Post by shyamd »

Apu wrote: It is surrounded by islamic nations, yet single handedly maintains dominance over the region and that to overtly....
Lets not forget, it is maintaining power only because of US.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

vsudhir wrote:Worst case, Hinduism will die. Folks here today will convert to whatever destroys Hinduism. Life will go on. Like it did in Indonesia and BD and Sindh and Pakjab. Scores of religions, faiths cults and systems have fallen by the wayside, unsung in history after x amount of centuries. Just because valimki said that "till the mountains stand and the ganges flows, the Ramayana shall be read" doesn't mean Hinduism as a life system need survive. Similarly, Shankaracharya estblished 4 dhaams to define the fortress boundaries of dharmic life and they still stand (uncannily so, Veraval is actually so close to the western boundary. Puri is still some distance frm the eastern one but with CPM ruling WB another generation, that will get there. The northern one is Badrinath and its below J&K).

Just rambling. All this dhimmi talk has been euphoric for the SDRE soul. Time to prepare to move on. Perhaps.

I pray a civilizational war happen between izlam and xtianity. The dhimmi macaulayites will hen be forced to choose sides - dhimma or mcaulay - and I'm hoping after the kuffr armies comprehensively beat and break izlam, we in India'll be rid of dhimmitude finally perhaps. Will take rivers of bloodshed to get there though.
Macauly Kupturs will become Muslim . Dhimmitude is much deeper than Macaulyism and easy way out as it will avoid bloodshed. Like fishermen with fish , DIEs are immune to the Islamist odor.
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Post by vsudhir »

Macauly Kupturs will become Muslim . Dhimmitude is much deeper than Macaulyism and easy way out as it will avoid bloodshed. Like fishermen with fish , DIEs are immune to the Islamist odor.
Perhaps but agian, perhaps not.

Which is why we wanna wish for talibanization of TSP and fullscale sharia application. Unless chopped limbs fly outta tv screens and the full bliss of izlamist theory and practice ain't revealed in its intended glory in Eastman technicolor, the dhimma will continue. Maybe it'll continue even then but then at least the high-moral horsiness displayed by typical psecs will be history.

IMO, we shud hope that izlamization proceeds to its logical conclusion in all dar-al-izlam areas as of now. Irani public apparently has seen an overdose of izlam. Not enough I reckon but let such treatment continue till some new equilibrium is reached.

Therein alone lies hope for redemption and meaningful reform, perhaps.

JMTs etc.
Santosh
BRFite
Posts: 802
Joined: 13 Apr 2005 01:55

Post by Santosh »

Abhijit wrote:The foregoing may sound inspirational or corny or both. But when I visit India during Ganapati or Navaratri or Diwali, I am overcome with joy and relief that my heritage is not just alive but kicking and ready to kick butt if need be.
Abhijit thankyou. The cacophonous double-speak, double-standard nonsense that people see on the media and live through every single day has to cause a resurgence of hinduism. I don't agree with vsudhir's worst case theory of hindus accepting the other dominant religion. Worst case would be a second partition of India. OTOH, Ganpati celebrations in Hyd are becoming more boisterous. Sign of good times? :D
alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Post by alokgupt »

Reply to Barkha Dutt "Degrees of freedom"
url

While I agree with her conclusion "Creative freedom cannot be applied selectively." But I am shocked that India's top journalist writings such superficial analysis. Here are the problems in the article:

1) "Nasreen may well be an attention-seeker who is compulsively provocative and over-simplistic in her formulations on Islam and women. Her literary worthiness could be a matter of legitimate dispute and her eagerness to reveal her personal sexual history a complete turn-off."
What has Nasreen done for her to be so critical of her while she has only nice words for MF Hussian? Why can we not write an article about freedom of expression without condenming Taslima while all articles I see praise MF Hussain? Just as Taslima might be attention seeker for all we know MF might not believe in secularism himself and rather be islamic zelot who might be doing "allahs" will to insult all pagan religious gods.

2) "Much the same arguments and adjectives (publicity-hungry, insensitive, arrogant, childishly provocative, etc) were used to justify the forced exile of India’s most celebrated painter, MF Hussain." Here she seems to compare what Taslima has done which is just to report facts of carnage in Bangladesh to MF Hussain painting not only nude and provocative Hindu Gods/ Goddesses but also do the same to "mother India." While Taslima is in hiding fearing for his life MF Hussain is enjoying his life in luxury. While MF has right to freedom of expression it does not suspend all responsibility. He still bears personal responsibility for his actions and it is OK for him to face public disgrace for exhibiting bad judgement. I have yet to come across a country where such a paintings under artistic license will get you a state prize (Kerala assembly) or will not invite public ridicule even from leading authors like you. Also if I remember the paper that published the cartoons of Mohammed in India were arrested and prosecuted. I have yet to see any newspaper or leading journalist come to their defense!

3) If you remember, the Prime Minister made it a point to take an official position against the Danish cartoonist who allegedly disrespected the Prophet. And it’s a matter of some irony that it’s under this government’s Home Ministry that Hussain was slapped with court notices.
Again you are contradicting yourself. While PM condemned Danish cartoons we have hardly heard anything against MF Hussain. If what Danish newspaper did was condemnable how come what MF Hussain did merit him an award? There in lies the duplicity of the so called seculars essentially led by Congress. PM would have stopped court notices if it was within his powers. But since courts don't work for PM in India he was "helpless".

Most Hindus are moderates and religion for them is about personal faith which unfortunately is unlike most Muslims. The "liberals" like Dileep Kumar are openly sympathetic to Pakistan and have a the level of sympathy Kashmiri terrorists as can be seen from numerous films which potray them as "heros" rather than "villians". So while moderates are willing to forget insults to Hinduism, they will not forgive insults to the nation!
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

ramana wrote: My question is were they being dhimmi while deluding themsleves that they were Modern Macaulayites who were beyond all this dhimmitude?


Could they have concsiously sanctioned dhimmitude to avoid the immediate strains on Indian society?
Both correct. They were being dhimmi alright and saw nothing wrong because dhimmitude has been a Hindu way of life for many centuries now.

So many centuries that any change from dhimmitude that leads to the questioning of that which is Islamic is seen as "extremism".

As a result, those who "sanctioned dhimmitude" were not sanctioning dhimmitude per se but were imagining that they were preserving the Hindu way of life and Hindu tolerance.

This perpetuated dhimmitude until Islamists misused too much of a good thing. I will come to that point later.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

People. Please don't get me wrong when I write about dhimmitude on a thread that is supposed to talk about "tackling" islamic extremism.

I have a reason for that. It is important to tackle dhimmitude simultaneously, and dhimmis offer an opportunity to play the game right.

Dhimmis are "moderate Muslims" in every way but faith. The faith does not matter because they will rise up to protect Islam no matter what their faith.

In a very profound sense, allowing dhimmis to survive was an acknowledgement within Islam that pure Islam needs dhimmis for survival. This was gamed out in earlier Islamism threads.

Forcing dhimmis to convert is a mistake. I request people to please not look at dhimmis as "others, not me". For a moment imagine your own mother or father, or yourself as a dhimmi. I am sure dhimmi behavior has been displayed by all. Do you want to convert? No. Then why imagine that "other" dhimmis would want to convert? Do not try and pretend that the dhimmi bug does not exist within you. It does - but you may be beginning to see some light while others are still feeling their way about. That does not make you a superior being.

Dhimmis are like the crusted and burnt layer of space shuttle heat shield that protects for a bit before it peels off. Both vital and disposable. The core remains protected.

But let me explain a method of handling dhimmitude.

Dhimmis display bimodal behavior. They object to Islamist excesses, including terrorism, women's rights and coercion but will not see the link between Islam and a call for violent Jihad, Islam and women's rights and Islam and coercion. The presence of a dhimmi in the court of an Islamic ruler (Caliph-lite) is itself proof to them that "Islam means peace. Islam means freedom of choice. Islam respects women"

If you curse a dhimmi, he will immediately seek protection under Islam's umbrella and accuse you of being extremist.

However the thing to do is not to curse the dhimmi. but use him. Support him when he recognizes and curses misuse of women's rights (eg sharia after rape by father/in law), or after a terrorist attack. Do not curse him. Make the dhimmi think that you see eye to eye and don't try to show your superiority and independence of thought. That may boost your ego, but it's an own goal.

This in fact can be gamed and I will show that in a separate post.
Locked