Its understood that since the Government of India is comprised mainly Hindus, it will automatically do what is best to protects Hindus worldwide
Cannot agree with this. Indian Govt is a secular entity and it does not automatically go around protecting the interests of 'hindus worldwide'. Indian govt's job is to protect Indians and POIs worldwide and not hindus of Nepal or Malaysia or Tamils of Srilanka. And they are doing the job irrespective of the religious orientation of the persons concerned as demonstrated in numerous instances including that of Mr.Mohammed Hanif in Australia.
I think this kind of thought is arising from Indian Muslim's pan-islamic sentiments irrespective national bounadires which makes them symapathise with Iraq or Palastine (not the general kind of sympathy anyone who knows their plight will feel but the activism kind of sympathy) and makes them put their religion to political use. And that doesn't look very nationalistic and secular, does it?
Actually the controversy of singing vandemateram is just a symptom, as most of the forum will agree.
The govt tried to placate muslims in this case by
i) removing the "hindu" lines
ii) making it not the national anthem but the national song.
The muslim response has been the fatwas by the mullahs.
I have seen many muslims right through my childhood sing this song, without a problem - so I agree when one says all muslims are not like those mullahs. The problem comes with their quiet acquiescence of the muslim "moderates" with these mullahs.
When the same muslims can organise giant rallies for the "ummah" cause of palestine, what stops them from organising the same against these mullahs asking for their removal.
I think you have it the other way round. He is saying the % these castes make up of the total muslim pop. in an area, not % of these castes that are muslim. It might very well be that 100% of a certain community is muslim, but what does that have to do with what fraction that community is of all muslims?
It has a table with two columns.
which portrays e.g Julahas as 95.5% adhering to Hinduism, which is incorrect. It should be the other way.
Please read the table in the link, and you will understand.
This was my response, dont know whether they will publish or not.
[quote]
I am sorry but I am quoting you in a somewhat random way.
“600 years that Muslims were in power in India most Muslim kings were moderatesâ€
G Subramaniam wrote:[quote="ShauryaT
.......
Lower Assam is near the second inflection point
In the 2004 national elections the BJP drew a blank in West Bengal, and Mamta was the lone winner from the Trinamool congress standing from South Calcutta.
In Assam, BJP got 2 out of 14. In Marigaon and Nagaon. Both of these do not border Bangladesh. Both are smack in the middle and have the whole state of Meghalaya as a buffer from the Bangladesh border. Their muslim population however are probably above 40%.
In Meghalaya, BJP again drew a blank
In Tripura, BJP drew a blank.
I am not disputing a consolidation of Hindu votes as a reaction to population demographies. But, it should be acknowledged upfront that it is only one factor in the overall electoral process.
The theory of 15-40% (as specific numbers), needs more legs to stand on, in my view.
--
I have a multiple page thread in IF 'myth of the muslim vote bank'
In regions with strong commie influence, hindu consolidation is weakened due to vote rigging
Tripura is commie ruled and no surprise that BJP did not win seats there
Further you are confusing between strong hindu vote consolidation and actually crossing the winning threshold
Even in WB, in 40% muslim Chandernagar, BJP got 40% of the total vote and lost
My model is based on muslim %, not proximity to BD border, while there may be an overlap effect
In Assam in Karimganj, bordering BD, 45% muslim, BJP got 40% of the vote and lost
In Assam in Dhubri, bordering BD, 75% muslim, BJP got 20% of the vote and lost
In Assam, BD infiltration is along river and deeply internal areas have been affected
In Assam, Kokhrajar, 20% muslim, BJP supported Bodo candidate won with 55% of the vote
In north east bihar, in proximity to BJP border
has 4 seats and BJP averaged 37% of the vote here and won 3 of the 4 seats. it however lost Kishenganj 70% muslim and still got 30% of the vote ( almost 100% hindu consolidation in kishenganj )
Consider that in 2004 BJP almost got wiped out in bihar
BD infiltration does not happen so much in hilly areas and Meghalaya is hilly. Also Meghalaya being 70% xtian is having an inherent anti-BJP bias
Getting votes may or maynot translate into wins
The muslim violence in punjab started in 1946
Partition was agreed on June 1947
Sikh-Hindu Counter violence started in Aug 1947
Even if the Punjabi sikhs and hindus had turned gandhist like the WB hindus, 65% of Punjab was already lost by june 1947, just like 65% of Bengal was lost
Whether or not counter violence was made, had no effect on the amount of land lost
Partition happened because the seeds were laid down 30 years earlier, coinciding with the arrival of Gandhi in India and the spread of Gandhist masochism
As Surinder said, partition was perhaps inevitable and beneficial in the long run, but hindus lost control of the process
Savarkar and Aurobindo who had started off as anti-british had wised up and turned anti-muslim by 1920. Hegdewar was a congressman
--
Some effects of the counter violence
1. Muslim % in residual India was reduced from 13.4% in 1941 to 10.4%
in 1951, and in 2001, muslims are back to 13.4% in residual India
It has taken muslims 50 years of excess fertility to come back to 1947
2. Thanks to the 1947 transfer of muslims, muslim % in residual India
will never exceed 19%, without the transfer they may have reached 24% , leading to a 1947 situation again by 2060
3. Muslims of east punjab and Delhi were heavily armed and the original pakistan plan was to grab everything upto Delhi, and this may have succeeded without the counter violence. Even in sep 1947, Sardar Patel had to call in the army to delhi to shoot muslim rioters
4. The counter violence has discouraged Illegal muslim immigration from Pakistan, unlike in west bengal, where without counter violence, illegal BD muslims do not fear to infiltrate. The pakjabi fears 1947 type reprisal by sikhs if they try to infiltrate5. In 1947, the area from Wagah to Delhi had 33% muslims and there were calls for an islamic corridor along the hindustan plains. This corridor has been de-islamised
5. The 1947 counter violence gave 30 years of relative communal peace in residual India, as muslims were more hesitant to riot
Can anyone deny that in the last 20 years , muslims are more prone to bomb blasts, and open threats and SIMI etc. SIMI was formed in 1977
There was no SIMI in 1957, because the sikh reprisals were fresh in their memory.
6. Thanks to the sikh reprisals, the muslim league was shut down all over residual India, and only exists in Kerala. IMs suddenly became secular and voted congress
7. Thanks to counter violence, there will be no more islamic partitions in western India. Counter violence has stopped any more loss of land.
8. Thanks to lack of counter violence, there will be one more islamic partition in WB and Assam
Of course counter violence is not a long term solution, but in the 1947 scenario, it had a salutary effect
Rudranathh wrote:
Cowards dont even the guts to face the reality and want to live in their ghettos with their 'everyting is fine with islam' mentality.
Rudranath - I think the situation may be more complex than this.
one of kallems complainst was "not enough scgools in Muslim areas"
this complaint has several problems
1) What is this "Muslim area" business? Recall that all of India was once Hindu area - so if you want to go up that path you have to be ready to face some tough truths.
2) As RaviKu said there are not enough schools in ANY areas
3) Why is it so tough for a Muslim to tarvel out of Muslim aeras as many do?
The problem may be that many Muslims don't mind doing that but "community leaders" discourage blending. This discouragement can be done by various punishments meted out to a Muslim for disobeying.
Now why would a community leader stop a Muslim from sending his child to a secular school outside the Muslim area?
Two reasons that both add up. One is it can be declared unislamic to mix with kafirs. This excuse has the useful side effect that the uneducated Muslim becomes dependent on the educated and wealthy Muslim community leader who gains influence and power in his community by making absurd rulings.
Among Muslims it is quite likely that leadership thrives on the backwardness of other Muslims. The Muslimwho is poor and uneducated may understand this but there is NOTHING he can do to complain.
In fact if we can provide a way for ordinary Muslims to live out their lives without the interference of the rich powerful ones whose political power comes from the poor there may be some progress.
The problem here is that the rich influential Muslim also has links with the Hindu political base in India, and therefore links with police and government. That makes him so powerful that nobody can touch him and he rules his "Muslim area" like a Sultan. Rahul Mehta was probably right - but that is a man who does not know how to communicate. "EQ problem."
If there are no schools in Muslim areas it is because the Muslim leader-thug and his henchmen are hand in glove with Hindu politicians and assorted Hindu thugs who will ensure that the Muslim area does not get a school, and the Muslim thug ensures that the votes are in the pocket of this man.
Unfortunately we "honest BJP supporting Hindus" who curse Muslims are not clued into the real dynamics and rant and rave about Muslims. Dharma means honesty and unless we look at the problem dharmically we will only get our asses bambooed. With the degree to which we are clued into the shit that is going on - no wonder we are getting screwed.
The Owaisis in Hyderabad beat up a Minister of State (link poster earlier on this thread) and yet the govt. will not prosecute these islamists challenging the Indian state because their ability to bring in muslim votes are important.
MIM beat up Ms. Tasleema Nasreen and have placed a bounty on her head, have managed to send her in fear of her life locked up indoors, while Owaisi clan that runs the MIM rule their little sultanate in Hyderabad that does not owe allegiance to India.
Will the Indian Muslims organize such large scale protests against Islamism?
When the terrorists in kashmir issued a fatwa asking women to wear burkha no muslim org protested against it. After a few acid attacks on women by terrorists, now most of the women are seen wearing either the burqa or the head scarf.
February 02, 2008 Ankara: Some 40,000 flag-waving secular Turks today denounced the Islamic-rooted government over its plans to lift a decades-old ban on Islamic head scarves in universities - a move the foreign minister said would expand Turkish freedoms.
The government has defended its plan as a reform needed to bring Turkey in line with European Union human rights guidelines, but many including the country's influential military establishment see the move as a serious threat to the country's secular traditions.
"Turkey is secular and will remain secular," the crowd chanted as they marched to the mausoleum of Mustafa Kamal Ataturk, the revered founder of modern Turkey and the symbol of its secular identity.
A parliamentary commission yesterday approved a legal amendment under which female students would be allowed to wear head scarves at universities as long as they tie them under the chin, leaving their faces more exposed. However the nuance was unlikely to win over many opponents who regard the head scarves as political statements.
Many fear the government is raising the profile of Islam in this secular country and rolling back gains of the secular republic against Islamic rule during the times of the Ottoman Empire. "I am furious over attempts to cover the republic itself," Sevgi Ozel, an author, told NTV television.
Senal Saruhan, head of the Association of Republican Women which organised the demonstration, accused the government of "exploiting religion."
G Subramaniam wrote:Partition happened because the seeds were laid down 30 years earlier, coinciding with the arrival of Gandhi in India and the spread of Gandhist masochism
Interesting!!! Did Gandhi and his movement lay the necessary groundwork for partition? Was there a cause-effect relationship? Please elaborate more.
G Subramaniam wrote:Savarkar and Aurobindo who had started off as anti-british had wised up and turned anti-muslim by 1920. Hegdewar was a congressman
For my own education, can you provide some link? Thanks.
G Subramaniam wrote:
Some effects of the counter violence
1. Muslim % in residual India was reduced from 13.4% in 1941 to 10.4%
in 1951, and in 2001, muslims are back to 13.4% in residual India
It has taken muslims 50 years of excess fertility to come back to 1947
2. Thanks to the 1947 transfer of muslims, muslim % in residual India
will never exceed 19%, without the transfer they may have reached 24% , leading to a 1947 situation again by 2060
3. Muslims of east punjab and Delhi were heavily armed and the original pakistan plan was to grab everything upto Delhi, and this may have succeeded without the counter violence. Even in sep 1947, Sardar Patel had to call in the army to delhi to shoot muslim rioters
4. The counter violence has discouraged Illegal muslim immigration from Pakistan, unlike in west bengal, where without counter violence, illegal BD muslims do not fear to infiltrate. The pakjabi fears 1947 type reprisal by sikhs if they try to infiltrate5. In 1947, the area from Wagah to Delhi had 33% muslims and there were calls for an islamic corridor along the hindustan plains. This corridor has been de-islamised
5. The 1947 counter violence gave 30 years of relative communal peace in residual India, as muslims were more hesitant to riot
Can anyone deny that in the last 20 years , muslims are more prone to bomb blasts, and open threats and SIMI etc. SIMI was formed in 1977
There was no SIMI in 1957, because the sikh reprisals were fresh in their memory.
6. Thanks to the sikh reprisals, the muslim league was shut down all over residual India, and only exists in Kerala. IMs suddenly became secular and voted congress
7. Thanks to counter violence, there will be no more islamic partitions in western India. Counter violence has stopped any more loss of land.
8. Thanks to lack of counter violence, there will be one more islamic partition in WB and Assam
Of course counter violence is not a long term solution, but in the 1947 scenario, it had a salutary effect
G. Subramanian:
You make good points in this list. I have agree with everything except the last point (i.e. "Of course counter violence is not a long term solution"). We have to give violence its due place in dealing with this world. Sikh Gurus taught us that, but so did the Hindu texts taught it very elegently. It is because we have forgotten violence and its rightful place that we have tagged violence as being 100% undesirable. Violence can be a legitimate means to preserve dharma, life, property, honor & justice. Forgetting this important lesson has lead us to the path of unending slavery, misery & confusion. Hence, I think violence is a indeed a long-term solution. Just like sex, it is to be excercised under the rubric of Dharama.
Back to the use of violence during partion. The Muslim League calculation in preparation for partition was that large scale rioting and violence will cow down the Hindus and others. They thought easy victories will fall in their lap (as promised by Allah). They wanted to cleanse Pakistan proper of Hindus/Sikhs. They wanted to preserve their presence in remaining India (esp. East Punjab). And, if possible, add territory to Pakistan purely on the basis of violence on this side of the Radcliffe line. What the Hindus/Sikhs did not know was the extensive preparation had been made by Muslims to achieve this aim. Young muslims had collected weapons, had learned the use of arms, and detailed plans existed for violence. When the Muslim violence broke out, initially the Hindus/Sikhs were taken aback and took heavy losses. Then the counter attacks began. The counter attacks in Punjab were lead mostly by Sikhs, and were vicious and savage. Punjab was cleansed completely of Muslims (save for the city of Malerkotla. But that is a separate story).
Muslims of Pakistan to this day are shocked by this. They did not expect such a fierce reaction. Special hatred is reserved for the Sikhs by the Pakjabis. (Though, it is not articulated). They had never imagined that Muslim cities of Amritsar, Ludhaina, Jallandhar, Gurdaspur, Patiala would be cleansed in such short time. By my reckoning (which is anecdotal at best, I should admit) ultimately more Muslims were killed in the process. Not difficult to imagine, because Muslims lived in poor packed mohallas, while Hindus/Sikhs in lived in spacious affluent colonies. Of course, Hindus/Sikhs lost more property.
Ultimately, all this sends a message. It creates a perception. Perception in war (and that is what it really is) is everything. Deterrence is basically a perception. That violence has deterred Muslims in North & North-West. It is not difficult to extrapolate that if this is the type of violence Hindus/Sikhs could throw up in 1947 while living under the watchful eyes of cunning British, how much more violence could we throw in if the demand for Pakistan-2 came up now or in future.
I do not beleive another partion on the Bengal front will happen. I think the Bengalis and Assamese will rise up to the occasion and inflict more volence if partition-2 is thrown up. I hold them to ultimately rise to the occasion (despite communist claptrap).
surinder wrote:
Interesting!!! Did Gandhi and his movement lay the necessary groundwork for partition? Was there a cause-effect relationship? Please elaborate more.
Read up on the khilafat movement, where for the sake of hindu-muslim unity in india, he developed the "great" idea, that hindus should support muslims for their extra-terrorital allegience - the califate.
Any good accounts of the terror unleashed by (what would later become Hayana) Jats?
While upper-most castes talk and agonise, the middle castes agonise in a very different sense-put their opponents in agony.
It is interesting that Islamic terror is unknown from the outskirts of Delhi to Wagah. I do think this is due to atavistic fears of the handlers in Islamabad.
surinder wrote:
Interesting!!! Did Gandhi and his movement lay the necessary groundwork for partition? Was there a cause-effect relationship? Please elaborate more.
Read up on the khilafat movement, where for the sake of hindu-muslim unity in india, he developed the "great" idea, that hindus should support muslims for their extra-terrorital allegience - the califate.
wiki is enough for starters on savarkar.
There is a background to the muslim appeasement of Gandhi
He was born in the Pranami sect
The Pranami sect, hundreds of years old, believes that the Koran and Gita are identical
and that is where Gandhi's idiotic Iswar Allah Tere Naam comes from
Next, Gandhi was deeply influenced by Tolstoy , who had a view of suffering as good for the soul, and had become a quasi-xtian of the eastern type. He was impressed by various hymns of jesus suffering on the cross. He took in a deeply masochistic slice of xtianity
Finally Gandhis early political experience was in South Africa, wherein both hindus and muslims suffered under the white regime and both were powerless. In that context, any concession and appeasement he made to muslims could not do much harm to hindus
Unfortunately he tried to carry forward his south africa experience where appeasement to muslims was harmless and did not understand that the situation in India was a zero sum game vs muslims
sanjaykumar wrote:Any good accounts of the terror unleashed by (what would later become Hayana) Jats?
While upper-most castes talk and agonise, the middle castes agonise in a very different sense-put their opponents in agony.
It is interesting that Islamic terror is unknown from the outskirts of Delhi to Wagah. I do think this is due to atavistic fears of the handlers in Islamabad.
The reduction in muslim % in Haryana from 33% in 1941 to 4% in 1951 was mainly done by Haryana Jats
farazhussain wrote:Also, while, IMO, Indian Muslims must go all out to meet the concerns of our compatriots, I am convinced that there are some who we can never satisfy, no matter what we do, because their problem is not with Muslims, but with Islam itself.
Faraz: I will encourage you to look at it this way. Some here do not have a problem with Muslims at all. I dine with muslims, have them as part of my extended family, work with them, play with them, etc.
The problem is exclusively with Islam. Indeed social and political Islam.
I will only encourage you to hang around here to understand, why some of us have come to this conclusion. Once you have understood that, then you can dismiss us as Hindu fanatics, muslims hating bigots or try to engage in some meaningful conversation with us, if you have anything to share.
I welcome your participation.
Last edited by ShauryaT on 03 Feb 2008 08:08, edited 1 time in total.
All the elements , people who stress upon understanding should know that if IIT gradualte like Kwaja living in WEST cannot see the world beyond the Arabic dogma of Islam there is no way Aam Muslims can see the light of reason. I still says Hindu/ Sikhs Punjabis made the right decision in 47. The Us Vs Them doctrine of Islam leave no room for accomodation in survival game Islam insist on playing.
They had never imagined that Muslim cities of Amritsar, Ludhaina, Jallandhar, Gurdaspur, Patiala would be cleansed in such short time. By my reckoning (which is anecdotal at best, I should admit) ultimately more Muslims were killed in the process.
---
Julunder was 70% muslim
Amritsar was 45% muslim and in march 1947, the muslims of Amritsar
went in a mob to destroy the Golden temple, but were defeated by a much lesser force of sikhs and some local hindus
I remember reading a news account of Savarkar taunting Nehru in 1947, who was in one of secular peace modes, that without the counter violence he would not be in his gaddi and Delhi would be inside pakistan
Per my reading of the census tables
MD .Srinivas book
10 million muslims disappeared from residual India
2 million in the east and 8 mil in the west
10 mil non-muslims disappeared from Pakistan
3.5 mil in the east and 6.5 mil in the west
--
What I am trying to convey is that use of riots is a very ineffective way of stopping muslim terror. Strict legal enforcement is often better
While the 1947 counter violence had a salutary effect,
In todays context, strict law enforcement would be better
--
Regardar Savarkar, look up google
Per my recollection,
Savarkar was one the few non-sikhs honored by SGPC
Also when Tara Singh was arrested by Nehru, Tara Singh offered to let Savarkar mediate
Savarkar de-islamised the british army
In 1940 the british army was 36% to 40% muslim
Savarkar recruited 2 million hindus to the british army and deislamised it in preparation for the coming civil war / partition
Regarding Assam and WB, a defacto partition is already happening
Muslims have learned from 1947, they keep their rioting below the threshold. They ethnic cleanse hindus street by street
30 miles from the BD border has been fully islamised
Last edited by G Subramaniam on 03 Feb 2008 07:32, edited 1 time in total.
G Subramaniam wrote:8. Thanks to lack of counter violence, there will be one more islamic partition in WB and Assam
Of course counter violence is not a long term solution, but in the 1947 scenario, it had a salutary effect
GS: You are getting the likely impact of the growth of muslim populations alright but do NOT agree with your view that counter violence has any meaningful role to play here.
How much of this residual reduction from 13.4 to 10.4 in 1947, came from non Border states?
G Subramaniam wrote:8. Thanks to lack of counter violence, there will be one more islamic partition in WB and Assam
Of course counter violence is not a long term solution, but in the 1947 scenario, it had a salutary effect
GS: You are getting the likely impact of the growth of muslim populations alright but do NOT agree with your view that counter violence has any meaningful role to play here.
How much of this residual reduction from 13.4 to 10.4 in 1947, came from non Border states?
The residual reduction was 70% due to east punjab / haryana / delhi counter violence
It is not difficult to extrapolate that if this is the type of violence Hindus/Sikhs could throw up in 1947 while living under the watchful eyes of cunning British, how much more violence could we throw in if the demand for Pakistan-2 came up now or in future.
---
Thanks to 60 years of secular brainwashing, IMHO hindus no longer have the stomach to resist
I am seeing open muslim communalism that were unheard of in the 1960s and 1970s
Open demands for another pakistan have been made for decades by Bukhari etc
Samar Abbas, a columnist at EPW in his dec 2000 article, has made an open demand for Mughalistan
An islamic corridor from Pakistan to BD
ShauryaT wrote:Then how do you explain the growth of a nationalist Hindu party from near death, in electoral terms in 1984 to close to 200 seats in 1999?
We need to look at the glass as half full and not as half empty.
The BJP is now as pro-hindu as the congress was in 1965
The congress has morphed into the muslim league
DAVANAGERE: Suspected terrorist Riyazuddin Nasir alias Mohammed Ghouse wanted to visit the United States and spread terror there, he has told interrogators.
Since it was difficult to gain entry into the US, Ghouse had twice pleaded with terrorist leaders to at least send him to Iraq to work as a fidayeen — an extremist who equips himself with arms and ammunition and strikes a target, causing mass destruction.
However, the terrorist leaders persuaded him to drop the idea as they thought "there is so much to do in India".
Ghouse, who was well informed about post-9/11 incidents, grudged the American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Investigations have revealed that Ghouse visited Mecca thrice for umrah (a pilgrimage undertaken during the non-Haj season), on a family passport that had a validity of 10 years up to December 2006.
He first visited Mecca as a child in 1996. In 2005, during his second trip, he met Abdul Samad, brother of South India's most wanted terrorist, Shahid Bilal, and reportedly expressed his willingness to go to Iraq as a fidayee to fight American forces.
However, his plan did not materialize. In 2006, Samad got Ghouse a fake passport and sent him to Pakistan. While undergoing training there, Ghouse again expressed his keenness to go to Iraq. But Bilal stopped him.
After Ghouse completed his training in Pakistan — from May 2006 to January 2007 — he was sent to India through the Nepal border with a mission: indulge in subversion and disturb peace.
Besides use of arms and explosives, Ghouse was trained in operating computers, reading and drawing maps, sketching and horse riding. "He has a graphic memory and is very quick in drawing maps," a police officer says.
Eastern range IGP H N Satyanaraya Rao says the local police have had a tough time extracting information from him. "He is a good catch, but a tough nut to crack. To question a terrorist, we need specialized agencies. The limited expertise of the local police has become a limitation. To extract one bit of information from him, we have to ask him 100 questions."
Ghouse had planned to blast the Andhra Pradesh police headquarters in Hyderabad. The arrest of his father and brother, and the case booked against him by the Hyderabad police, made a teenage Ghouse drop out of college and take the path of jihad.
A senior IPS officer narrates an argument he had with Ghouse on jihad. When the officer pointed out that Islam shuns violence, Ghouse is supposed to have said: "Jihad is a holy struggle in the name of Allah." The officer says: "After half an hour, I gave up because I realized it would be impossible to convince him."
Ghouse and his associate Asadullah Abubaker, who were arrested in Davanagere district on charges of terrorism, are in police custody.
Hmmm....This and Glasgow incidents show that the jehadis find US and UK more attractive than India.
However, the terrorist leaders persuaded him to drop the idea as they thought "there is so much to do in India".
Ghouse, who was well informed about post-9/11 incidents, grudged the American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is because Paki has invested too much to build terror infrastructure and is hell bent to use it against India.
prashanth wrote:
Hmmm....This and Glasgow incidents show that the jehadis find US and UK more attractive than India.
That city is a terrorist hub, after having lived there for 3 years, Puki's are more in number there, and they even shit radicalism. Britain will become a istan, pretty soon. What I am worried about is the Islamic nutjobs of this world, will make eurowussie's, loose their pacifist view of things and open the gas chambers again. And this time it wont be the jews.
ShauryaT wrote:Then how do you explain the growth of a nationalist Hindu party from near death, in electoral terms in 1984 to close to 200 seats in 1999?
We need to look at the glass as half full and not as half empty.
The BJP is now as pro-hindu as the congress was in 1965
The congress has morphed into the muslim league
What is the basis for this claim? I have read the works of Koenrad Elst and Goel on the their criticisms of the RSS. Still does not equate to, what you are suggesting.
Most of the office bearers of the BJP are also RSS members, in that sense, these fundamental characteristics of the BJP cannot be looked at in isolation, without involving the RSS. The RSS has a particular history as an organization, which is important to know, especially the periods 1948-49, when they were forced to accept certain compromises. The point - Any appearances of compromises are a result of the acceptance and the willingness to work, within the consitutional means available.
If you think that Modi, or Advani, or Vajpayee are fundamentally different - then I will wager, you are getting it completely wrong, just like our DDM.
Your portrayal of the current Congress is wrong. It is the leadership in the Congress that determines the character of this party. Most of the Congress is still Hindu. Change this leadership in the Congress and most of Congress will not have any trouble, to adopt a more dharmic centric view of India.
Are you scare mongering? Please do continue to use your statistics driven approach, but also be open to more holistic views of these events, than you try to portray.
G Subramaniam wrote:The impact of counter violence in reduction of IM population per 1951 census is 80%
Da...fools or complete immoral souls, will not fight back, when cornered. Even your own dog will fight back, when cornered and lashed at.
The counter violence story is not complete, till the costs in terms of the loss of land and the equal number of Hindus evicted and killed in their homes is not accounted for.
What does the balance sheet tell you, when all the things are accounted for?
The net result was the partition of this country! How can that EVER be a model for a future solution, I fail to see.
The way out is to realize that, by the time, it comes to the decision to retalite violently or not, it is too late. For you have failed to control events and your choices are extremely limited. This happens, whey you do not recognize the fundamental nature of the issues and the capabilities needed to address them.
I agree, that if India continues on this path of "secularism" then the chances of another partition in the east are high. If we do not get our act together now, and events go out of control, then all violence will achieve is some minimization of losses. But, we will only be talking about losses and not any gains. Ofcourse, weak minds will then say, good riddance, at least we have some part of India left....
ShauryaT wrote:
I agree, that if India continues on this path of "secularism" then the chances of another partition in the east are high. .
There is a difference between Secualirsm and Psuedo secularism.
If not the muslims, then there will others who will find some reson and get away from the union of India, Religion is not the only reason why people have secssionist behaviour.
why not we have a mallu land or something else for that matter. Why not a land for uppercaste or lower caste bullcrap, if you look at that why partion of Indian lands is always pausible scenario, that is the whole point of the puki thousand cut strategy. The only way to counter it is seculairsm, of the true kind.
As usual the moment, one gets critical, he is made to shut up in that indianmuslims.in blogsite. I had written two replies for them but they been "moderated", i.e. deleted.
So adapting the two comments which I had written there for here. Please note there might some leaps of thoughts as the audience there is different from here, for which the posts were written.
1. Regarding schools, note two points as I have stated and mr.shiv had reemphasized., there are not enough schools everywhere. Regarding the muslim areas, my experience is with hyderabad and I can attest that the govt is not in any way at fault here. The MIM thugs with full backing of the local area muslims stop any govt official movement. If even a semi level dignitary had to visit the area, without the support of hundreds of police - the next moment he will be dead.
2. I have with my own eyes seen their mayhem, in the middle of night during zumma ki raat or something like that, a procession was taken out and the procession was simply throwing stones to any direction they thought fit and the police could not take action because it was a "sensitive" area. I could not explain this thuggism in any way. This happened approx 2 years ago.
3. Regarding no riots before 1989 in Kashmir, I am asking what happened to these same muslims after 1989? Kashmir is the region with the least poverty, yet why were the kashmiri muslims ready to kill their hindu and sikh neighbors?
4. No, muslim children are not taught the discrimination in a blatant way, as I have said already it is in a subtle way. They are taught about dar-ul-harb, every friday they here about ummah blaring through speakers. They say idolatary is bad and not that muslims do not perform idolatary (though i do think they do it, it is a completely off-discussion topic anyway). In the mikes, they say islam is in danger in kashmir, palestine and where not. Processions are led with thousands participating and trying to destroy every thing in the way, because two cartoonists from a place where they cannot even point on a map - drew the prophet. An illiterate/volatile person adds 1+1 from above, I need not expend on the result, I think.
5. Casteism might be a problem in muslims in india, but the first action they have to take accept indian islam is "different". are the muslims ready to accept that and ready to accept if somebody points a finger at islam and says, "look, there is discrimination in islam and islam is not the panacea for all problems", because this question will naturally arise. Are the muslims ready to accept this flaw in indian islam?
Now come the list of standard excuses. here "you" is the blogger sometimes also used for an indian muslim.
i) 1992 and gujarat riots
You are talking about 1992 riots when even the 1984 anti-sikh riots havent been solved yet, the report is as at unimplemented. What about the godhra train burning where hundreds of muslims burnt alive 60 people and the excuse the muslim intellectuals gave was - these people did not pay for tea. One should burn 60 people if you do not pay for tea. Great sir, do you expect no repurcussions. Note even today the central govt is trying to coverup as if its an accidental burning, when even a child knows what happened. Note even today these godhra burners havent been brought to justice, but the gujarat rioters are being brought. How do you explain the bankruptacy and the psycopancy for muslim vote bank, when mohd afzal, who attacked the parliament - the very abode of our democracy, is not hanged - for only one reason, he is a muslim.
ii) unjustice and unfair treatment
Sir, before one starts harping about muslim problems, look around whether others are facing the same problems, how are they trying to alleviate their problems? Is there some thing one can themselves do before they can start asking for help from others, blaming others does not help.
Even look at the words you use "unjustice and unfair treatment" for a treatment given to muslims which is better than the treatment given to ANY minority in ANY islamic country, I do not think you will have any problems with my above assertion. You are painting muslims as a victim and then saying, you have to give this and that to the muslims.
iii)islam shouldnt be blamed for these ills
no doubt that religion in a spiritual realm is not to be blamed for economic and social ills. Is islam only in the spiritual realm? Islam is also in the social and economic realm. When something is in this realm, it has to be given credit or criticized for social and economic benefits/ills.
When a mullah says, a girl should not study infront of a male - the reason he invokes islam.
When a mullah says, do not get vaccinated - the reason he invokes islam.
When a mullah says, xyz -sh*t - the reason he invokes islam.
The muslims will not say to the mullah, you are an idiot, you are not fit for being a mullah and kick him out of sight and hand over him to police. The police are afraid to touch the mullah, lest what other muslims think - because the next day, there will thousands protesting and even more destruction. The reason the mullah and these muslim foot thugs invoke - again religious islam.
From where does this mullah derive his authority from? - islam.
When the mullah is made untouchable, the only attack left on him is to attack from where he derives his authority , i.e. islam.
Muslims all over the world will agree, when one says it encompasses every aspect of life - from religious, social to economic. You see, the problem is not religious islam as such. But when this religious islam is used as a cover for social issues, one has to deny it. There in lies the whole of todays friction. A secular country is supposed to guarentee only the religious islam and not the social aspects of it. But many muslims fail to understand this. A secular country need not guarentee that muslim women should move only in purdahs, it need not guarentee that when mullahs shout about attack on kafirs citing Quran, he will not be arrested.
iv) Only 1 to 5% are these radicals, you are blaming the whole of muslims for this.
Let me give the standard excuse given by muslims, it is only 1 or 2% who are radicalised and do this sh*t of terrorism and extremism/ dogmatism, but these 1 or 2% are more than enough to cause destruction on an unimaginable scale. All that Osama needed to destroy twin towers were hardly 25 men, which is somewhere around let me see 0.000001% of total muslims. When one sees this, the above excuse falls flat. The idea which these 1-2% muslims use has to be defeated. They cite islam, so now it is the duty of the 98% to differentiate between the two islams, instead of doing a protest in thousands when a prophet is drawn in a god forsaken country, how about a protest in thousands whenever a bomb blast occurs, how about a protest to detest whenever a terrorist organisation issues a threat, how about forcibly removing a mullah from a mosque for inciting violence?
No, the protests occur when one single page of quran is torn in some remote place of world. When a prophet is drawn, note only drawn, they occur around a world.
Compare the protests conducted above to the protests when 9/11 occured with Osama inciting islam.
At the end I want to put some symbolism, by which 95% muslims will not lose anything, but can put actually many problems which others cite to rest.
a)How about an excommunication that osama and his followers are not muslims? After all, in the excommunication of ahmedis, there is a precedence. Get the top mullahs of islam from soudi, egypt and other countries and say that Osama is not a muslim. Or even better, something in the reach as an Indian muslim, get the local imam to do it and try to get imam bukhari along with imams from all major cities to excommunicate him.
Are the muslims willing to go along this line, after all I am not asking something the muslims need to give up in any way?
Remember "silent majority" doesnt count. It is the muslims themselves who have to show the difference, otherwise for a non-muslim, all he sees is the active minority. When one doesnt talk, how am I to know what he actually thinks?
b) How about making "ajmer-e-sharif" or some other mosque a compulsory piligrimage every 5 years along with the once-ina lifetime haj?
Simple simple symbolism but will go a long way both in direction and tenor.
Adux wrote: The only way to counter it is seculairsm, of the true kind.
Do you know the history of secularism of how and why it was applied to the west (only in parts) and how and why and by whom was it implemented in India? Do you also know, how Secularism is practiced in the US, for example? Have you read any works on this issue, which go into details beyond constitutional laws of what is "cultural" America all about?
Psudo Secularism is outright appeasement of minorities and open discrimination against Hinduism. Secularism is bringing down Hinduism to an equal level to other, so called religions.
Bottom line: Which ever way you apply it, the loss is of the Hindus.
Adux wrote: I dont agree with song should be sung by everyone, but i respect it has had in our Independence struggle. Time to move on, and build a new india.
Why don't we start singing, God bless India, instead.....Here we have a modern Indian, with presumably no clue about his own Dharma and how religions and secularims is implemented and practised by others....
What is your problem buddy with Vande Mataram?
Every inch of my land, its rivers and its people are sacred to me. I have chosen to take the best out of the elements in nature and the spirit and chose to worship them. That is my duty, my dharma, my way to show my patriotism to my land and their people.
Vande MaTaram is a beautiful rendition, that captures the soul of the Indian nation well and here we have an avatar, willing to sacrifice the soul of the Nation, without reason or thought on some imported notions of equalities !!!! (If you were in front of me, I would not have used such kind words)
ShauryaT wrote:Do you know the history of secularism of how and why it was applied to the west (only in parts) and how and why and by whom was it implemented in India? Do you also know, how Secularism is practiced in the US, for example? Have you read any works on this issue, which go into details beyond constitutional laws of what is "cultural" America all about?
Stop questioning my intelligence and debate.
Psudo Secularism is outright appeasement of minorities and open discrimination against Hinduism.
Yes in its current form in India, it is discriminating against a section of our community which is Hindu.
Secularism is bringing down Hinduism to an equal level to other, so called religions.
So what, Secualrism is not meant to glorifiy Hinduism or Islamism. India is not Hindu by its virtue of creation. Most people of differnet religion in this country do trace their genes here and have been converted. The whole idea of Secualrism to keep your religion at your place. If Hinduism or Islamism or friggin scientology becomes extinct because of it, so what. There is only one important document in India, ie the Indian consitution.
Bottom line: Which ever way you apply it, the loss is of the Hindus.
India is not created for the welfare of Hindusim or any other religion.
HUBLI: Ominous signals are emanating from the jungles of Karnataka. Investigation into the unearthing of a terrorist training camp in Dharwad has led to more disturbing evidence: the location of another abandoned terrorist training centre, this time, deep inside the forest of neighbouring Uttara Kannada district.
Sources in the anti-terrorist cell said the camp was located in the midst of dilapidated temples belonging to the period of Chalukyas.
Going by the evidence they collected, an investigating officer said that the abandoned camp could be the first location of Riyazuddin Nasir alias Mohammed Ghouse and his accomplice, arrested recently. He said this could be the place where Ghouse worked on the elaborate recruitment process of jihadis.
According to the officer, the camp inside the jungle, which is roughly 5 miles from the Dharwad-Karwar highway, is hidden in a cluster of gigantic teak trees. After a closer look at the walls of the dilapidated shrines, the policemen found slogans written in Arabic.{ Wahabi influence that too in south India }
The officer said some locals told him that a year ago, a group of students frequently made weekend trips to the woods and held "classes". But they stopped it when some residents objected suspecting them to be indulging in illegal activities.
He said Ghouse and his aides admitted that they visited the place but denied they had indulged in terrorist activities.
The officers, however, suspect that Ghouse and his accomplice identified the "most able", particularly from professional colleges, invited them to weekend trips that involve trekking and water rafting.
This, they did to identify those that are especially aggressive or have leadership qualities to conduct their terror campaign. Eventually, this process led to terrorist training camps in Pakistan, as it was in the case of Ghouse.
