Musharraf’s Coup - Seven Years Later

Re: # 205

Why do some Indians refuse to see the truth, even though it is exploding in their own backyard everyday :


** Because the Indian Politicians are epitomes of truth & Honesty but are unfortunately routinely trapped in different scams (even asking money for questions in Assembly).

** Because the Brave Indian Army is not scared of Bangladesh/ Pakistan Armies.

** Because the honest & truthful Indian bureaucracy is not corrupt to the core and does not lose opportunity to make money even in purchase of Coffins for soldiers.

** Because in India, the enlightened popuilation does not believe in the caste system and Brahmins would gladly marry their children to Dalits.

** Because in India the truthful and honest Defence Minister Fernandes George can keep his Rakhail in his house to liaise with arms dealers and accept money on his behalf.

** Because India is a land of peace and harmony. The Hindu ULFA terrorists in the Eastern mountains or the Hindu Naxalite terrorists in Hyderabad or the Hindu Maoists in Bihar are actually Muslims in disguise all trained, armed and supported by the evil Pakistan.

** Because the great Indian middle class is passing on the right values of tolerance, intermarriage and peaceful coexistence to it`s young ones who are also as truthful as their parents.

** Because in India, Muslims were burnt alive in the Best Bakery and the only person to be convicted was Zahira Sheikh, the eye-witness.


.. the list is endless, my friends...

A gentleman said:

>>>.......sob has not made a transition from a dog to a human being.....<<<<

Cant agree more gentleman!

Masadi Mian,

Aap to beraham ki baat ka bhee buraa maan gaye !!!!

Stay Cool man....

behram writes <<< Dear Friend:

Coming from the slums of squatter land like mumbai you sure have the audacity to talk to a true Zoroastrian Persian. Do you forget how we treat you these days in the US? Have you not seen your hindoo eyes, with that ugly face, showing that crooked face, trying to socialize with Persians. Heck, even the Arabs hate your face and your mannerism. >>>

Note the level of bigotry and racism from this person who in many posts tries to tout his open mindedness and reasoning ability, which is no larger than a rat`s fart by the way. Before you listen to this a-hole, note that his statements reflect worse racism than the worst red neck you`ve ever met in your usa career, that is why I said earlier, this sob has not made a transition from a dog to a human being and given by the calibre of his posts, he never will. Race/nationality/color/religion does not determine a person`s worth, their acts and concern for facts and truth determine that and given those criteria those ``squatters`` you talk about, many of them here are much more ``human`` than you are. You`re a pos, and by that I do not mean point of sales, I mean a piece of ...... (fill in the blanks). Tahmed shares in your status.

#199 you have wasted your time writing this lengthy post, since i have not bothered to read it. The reason i have not bothered is because you have already made quite clear that you are an incredibly stupid man, even by chowk`s lax standards.

#197 by tahmed32

[kriishna #195 You did not provide an answer to my question, i.e. if the muslims burnt to death in gujerat were criminals. Your previous arguments (i.e. in justifying gujerat killings while at the same time saying that you are opposed to the murder of innocent people) clearly imply that they were.]


``The mind of a bigot is like a pupil. The more light you shine on it, the more it contracts. (paraphrase)``

I read this somewhere, and it seems paqrticularly apt dealing with muslims. The current argument with you is a good example.

My previous arguments DO NOT, of course imply that revenge killing of innocents is justified.

What my previous arguments imply is WHY it happened, factually. That is not the same as justifying it.

And I also make another point. That YOU, as a Pakistani, have no right to be showing India in a poorer light in this regard as compared to Pakistan, because had the situation been reversed, Hindus in Pakistan, BD etc. would have faced MUCH worse. How do I know this for sure? Because much smaller incidents in other countries have prompted Muslims in Pakistan and BD to kill Hindus by the hundreds and destroy their temples.



[The logical conclusion (not that you seem to understand what that means) is that the fact that they were muslim was enough to make them criminals in your view. ]

Well, why isn`t it surprising that this would be your ``logical conclusion``? After all, you are an Islamist. And carrying the Islamist agenda forward and propagating it at all costs IS your mission in life.

[It is not for nothing that an elected state chief minister (Modi) was denied entry to the US specifically on account of his being considered a hindu terrorist on account of the gujerat killings. That, to an intelligent man, would be an indication of what the ``whole world`` thinks. ]

Actually, I have answered this before. But you seem to not notice it, quite conveniently. When the US state department was asked to justify their position, they replied that THE ONLY thing they went by, in order to make their decision, was the Indian Government`s (the party of Lalu, Mulayam and Sonia) report on this matter. They thought, being a self-respecting country, an inquiry commission would not be lying through their teeth. Also, they probably made a political deal with Sonia`s ruling party. If someday Modi comes to power in India, they will apologize profusely and say that they made a mistake. Why is it, do you think, that no one has taken him to court over this, in India or internationally? The lefties and the Muslims have raised a lot of ruckus over this, but know that they cannot win a court case. Not only were they lying, the Lalu (U.C. Bannerjee) commission had no authority to investigate, it seems. It is now going to the Supreme Court for debate.



When two people are fighting, it seems from a distance that BOTH people are at fault. This is what you Muslims do to other societies. In a couple of years, the Buddhists of Thailand will seem to be just as bad as the Muslim ``insurgents`` who are fighting for their own pure land under Allah. As the fighting goes on, people are gradually going to forget how the whole thing started, and look at the fact that two communities are fighting - BOTH must be to blame.

They should step back and look at the bigger picture - around the world, the Muslim community is invariably the common denominator.


[The only thing that rings true in your posts is when you say that you hope for an end to Islam. I suggest you hunker down with a good book - since you will be wainting a long wait for that to happen. ha! ha!]

We shall see about that, won`t we? It worked in Spain. We have to adopt that model in the rest of the world. But it would take something big to turn the rest of the world off to Muslims for good. Osama and his N-bomb might be that final straw. Or maybe some confrontation with Iran and their buddy N. Korea.

I could be wrong. Maybe Muslims would continue to fester in the midst of decent humanity for ages. Both good and evil are always present in this world. Maybe Islam will always remain as one of the main components of evil in this world.

Only time will tell.

zeemax #196 You lost me on how underlying principles somehow make the suffering of muslims and hindus and sikhs in 1947 acceptable and make the suffering of the palestinians at that time unacceptable. The only underlying principle that would logically justify this claim is that palestinian lives have greater value than muslim or hindu or sikh lives. And such a principle is abhorent to Islam where all individuals are considered equal before God.

kriishna #195 You did not provide an answer to my question, i.e. if the muslims burnt to death in gujerat were criminals. Your previous arguments (i.e. in justifying gujerat killings while at the same time saying that you are opposed to the murder of innocent people) clearly imply that they were. The logical conclusion (not that you seem to understand what that means) is that the fact that they were muslim was enough to make them criminals in your view.

You also assure me that the ``whole world`` thinks hinduism is peaceful while Islam is violent, that evil conducted in the name of hinduism is your ``internal problem`` and nobody`s business. Who do you think you are fooling?? only yourself, rest assured. Not me, and certainly not the ``whole world``. It is not for nothing that an elected state chief minister (Modi) was denied entry to the US specifically on account of his being considered a hindu terrorist on account of the gujerat killings. That, to an intelligent man, would be an indication of what the ``whole world`` thinks.

The only thing that rings true in your posts is when you say that you hope for an end to Islam. I suggest you hunker down with a good book - since you will be wainting a long wait for that to happen. ha! ha!

#185 by tahmed32,

To quit flogging the dead horse, I will say the following:

Your argument in opposing the Pestinian cause on the basis of ``On the 2-nation theory - I pointed to the suffering of muslims (using my own family`s experience to provide an example) to illustrate why palestinians were not the only one`s who suffered in 1947``... is extremely weak. The question is not who suffered and how much; rather what is the underlying principle which makes/made this suffering acceptable.

And that principle, my friend, was the `Two-Nation theory` in case of Muslims/Hindus, while it is the `One-Nation` theory in case of Palestinian Arabs regardless of religion. If it wasn`t so, they would have accepted the two-state solution a long time ago for Palestine.

Here is where the vital difference lies, and why your Palestinian vistors said Paks have a country to go to while Palestinians don`t, and why Pak`s emotions will never be reciprocated by Palestinians beacuse they neither understand nor believe in this two-nation stuff. The concept is alien to them.

#183 by tahmed32

[#181 krishna: you claim `` Killing of innocents is never justified. And I was not justifying it, of course. ``

so who were those people burnt alive in their own homes in gujerat?? criminals?? ]

tahmed,

I am Hindu by birth and tradition. I won`t even go into any debates with you on this topic, but the whole world knows which culture/tradition is more peaceful in their approach towards life. Sure, the echobooms and the behrams will be pointing out sati and infanticide and beggars and squatting on the railroad tracks, but they are our INTERNAL problems. We are not pressuring anyone from outside to ``convert``.

I have been arguing with you guys on this website for the last few years. If anything else, it has only made it clear to me that there is no compromise possible with you guys. This is a lesson being learnt around the world as well. This ``good cop`` ``bad cop`` routine of the islamic ``moderates`` and the islamic ``radicals`` is only aimed at fooling the rest of the world. I am increasingly hearing on the radio here in America and in the rest of the media in Europe that they have caught on to this ``we are moderates - no relation to the radicals`` line of BS that you guys have been feeding the unsuspecting world.

Instead of arguing, I will only wait and see what happens next. I hope and pray that Islam is eliminated. You may say that I hate other religions - if that were true, I would say the same thing about other religions. But I don`t. The rest of the world doesn`t either.

Here`s hoping for an end to Islam - the scourge of humanity.

Anil -

[Regarding Buddhism, I personally feel that it the only religious philosophy which wants the person embark on such a discovery without any constraints or limits. ]

That`s beautiful. I do not disagree with you. The only thing is that it is not a universal fact that all those, who were born into buddhism, had or have the desire or took the initiative to go through the ``painful or enlightening`` process of self discovery. I have interacted with some born buddhists who were not practising. Based on our conversations, there was no flavor. It was like any other human being. The question is, why didn`t they embark on that journey?

So, if a human being has no such restrictions in their way to evolve (considering discovery leads to evolution), then why do some take that path whereas others don`t? Is it definite that people who follow a defined religion cannot evolve? They can pick and choose what appeals to them from a religion or multiple religions and disregard what does not. True? Shall we take it for granted that a hindu will follow everything prescribed by hinduism?

Anil - I am reading Carly Fiorina`s ``Tough Choices``. It`s very interesting that she talks about her painful process of self discovery in the first few chapters. It was an epiphany for her to realize that she needed to get out of the vicious cycle of making her parents happy and choosing a life that they had chalked out for her. You would think that this woman had everything perfect while growing up since she wasn`t from any repressive muslim society. I suggest you read through the first few chapters to get some insights into another interesting perspective similar to what we are talking about. She is a well traveled woman and talks about her experiences in Africa while she was a school-going kid. I want to quote a few lines from her book on her observations about other cultures - very insightful observation.

I wanted to buy the book or CD, but I have made a promise to myself to resist buying any more books for the next few months. My book shelves have no more space for another new book. I am training myself to finish reading books at the book-store`s cafe. In the end, I may end up buying the book since my heart is set on it. But it does not hurt to enforce self discipline. This was the long explanation of why I could not quote those lines. I will jot them down on my next visit to Borders and post them here. That visit my happen soon since I have only gone through seven chapters and desire to know more :)

Arjun -

John Wood, another Microsoft Executive, has started an initiative to educate the masses in Asia, Latin America and Africa. Nepal and India are the key countries from Asia. There are some interesting facts that were pointed out about India. I suggest that you put your energies in the right place and contribute to John Wood`s efforts.

http://www.roomtoread.org/countries/india.html

Good luck. Happy Reading!

Manto...(and aisha)...

Nowhere near

PAKISTAN is among the group of Asian countries that are lowest in terms of Millenium Development Goals, said the Asian Development Bank in a report on Monday. Both the current status and progress on these fronts leaves much to be desired. The MDGs are the result of a series of world summits in the 1990s. The summits, which were centred on the world’s main development challenges, aimed at leading towards a global partnership of sorts, which will help promote the said goals – promotion of, education, maternal health, gender equality, poverty reduction and combating child mortality, AIDS and other diseases. The MDGs have set a particular set of targets to achieve till 2015.
Pakistan’s MDG status is pretty bad. Our primary enrollment rate (one of the primary MDG yardsticks) is by and large the lowest in the region and its girls to boys ratio at the primary and secondary level are also amongst the region’s lowest nine. The health sector, the other key MDG concern, is also in a rut. The country has among the highest under-5 and infant mortality rates in the region, which are coming down too slowly to meet the MDGs 2015 target. Countries are classified into four categories as far as MDGs are concerned: Moving Ahead, Losing Momentum, Catching Up and Falling Further Behind. Pakistan features in the last category.
The report really does not spring much of a surprise. Our public expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP actually declined from 2.6 percent to 2.0 in 2004, going down till last year’s humble 1.42 percent. The health sector spending, following a similar trajectory, albeit in a worse manner, fell from 1998’s 1.1 percent to 2003’s 0.7 to this year’s pathetic 0.35 percent. Our government, with its fixation on glowing “macroeconomic indicators” should start doing some explaining. And that too, with real variables like infant mortality and enrollment rates rather than superficial ones, like the increase in cell phones that our Prime Minister is given to gloating about.

Babaji is releasing gas!! He is full of gas.

Re: # 189

Friend,

Whenever Effonjee gets effed, he releases the gas, foul gas........he considers it as elightened foul gas :-)))