Militant Liberalism
ahmad hayat May 9, 2007
#371 Posted by harimau on May 18, 2007 10:15:22 pm
Ref okhla99 @366
[So the only religions you want to survive are the ones in which you can ``Walk Tall``
and others would have to, in your own words, stay ``one respectful foot away``.
And off course, Haramimau, other religions which do not provide you the above facilities, need to be eliminated !!!!!!]
You are proving yourself to be complete idiot again but that is par for the course.
Christianity preaches equality during conversion but petitions the Indian Supreme Court for quotas for ``Dalit Christians``. At least their claim is that the converted Dalits still face societal discrimination.
On the other hand, Muslims, despite being direct descendants of Prophet Mohammad, Genghiz Khan, Babur, Taimur Leng, Nadir Shah, etc., and despite having ruled India for 1000 years while reserving for themselves all the plum jobs, are crying foul that they have been left behind in the education, social and economic fronts. Meaning, they are claiming basic laziness and stupidity as their excuse for demanding quotas.
Don`t you think any religion that instills stupidity in its followers should be eliminated?
That is my reason for banning Islam.
But you won`t understand it. Because you are STUPID!
[So the only religions you want to survive are the ones in which you can ``Walk Tall``
and others would have to, in your own words, stay ``one respectful foot away``.
And off course, Haramimau, other religions which do not provide you the above facilities, need to be eliminated !!!!!!]
You are proving yourself to be complete idiot again but that is par for the course.
Christianity preaches equality during conversion but petitions the Indian Supreme Court for quotas for ``Dalit Christians``. At least their claim is that the converted Dalits still face societal discrimination.
On the other hand, Muslims, despite being direct descendants of Prophet Mohammad, Genghiz Khan, Babur, Taimur Leng, Nadir Shah, etc., and despite having ruled India for 1000 years while reserving for themselves all the plum jobs, are crying foul that they have been left behind in the education, social and economic fronts. Meaning, they are claiming basic laziness and stupidity as their excuse for demanding quotas.
Don`t you think any religion that instills stupidity in its followers should be eliminated?
That is my reason for banning Islam.
But you won`t understand it. Because you are STUPID!
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#370 Posted by haji004 on May 18, 2007 11:42:57 am
Re: # 369
Parkash ...The answers to your questions are going to be much more philiosphical and abstract than the simple nature and phraseology of your question suggests.
First of all a critical analysis of my assertion that ``Pan-Islamism and Pakistani-Nationalism`` are the one and only thing must be done so as to understand the under-lying philosophy that renders both these theories same.
Secondly the ``Rise of Pan-Islamism`` and the domination of Pan-Islamism by ``Militant Islam`` must be taken into account.
The continuation of non-democratic governments that have resulted in the creation of a poiltical vaccum in Pakistan that has lured people into the hands of Militant Islam (That is merely a more militant form of Pakistani Nationalism) must also be taken into account.
I am afraid I won`t give answers to your questions because answering your questions is not more important than making you (and all the Indians that read this post...)realise that
``Almost all the people that pass as Pakistani Intelluctuals and Intelligentsia are urdu-speaking. Hence every solution of Pakistan`s Problems proposed by them is based on certain false premises (YLH`s sham article after the MQM carnage) that, owing to their ethnicities, they can`t get rid of.``
For example every urdu-speaking liberal would speak of restoration of democracy but would never talk about decentralization. Never would they talk about abolition of Feudalism in Pakistan and specially Punjab. Never would they take into account the fact that Pakistani-Theory , as it is now, erodes the indiginous notions of language, culture and region.
The reason for conveniently ignoring these facts is that a deepl analysis of the historical evolution of all thses problems...from non-democratic governments to corrupt bureaucracies and from centeralization of resources to non-abolition of Feudalism can easily and directly be traced to the
(A) Creaters of Pakistan
(B) Defunct Theory of Pakistani-Nationalism.
Every solution hence proposed by these so-called liberals thus circumvents the basic problems and tries to rectify the political situation without taking into account the anamolies and inaccuracies of the historical process. The only reason for this conscious neglect is that taking into account of these things would prove
(A) The Founding Fathers (and hence the founding party) and
(B) The Pakistani-Nationalism Theory
absolutely wrong. The theory in itself perhaps might have been made to work but the presence of a community that due to its very non-indigenous nature was bent upon the centralization of resource and rule-by-proxy (be it Feudal Politicians or Army/Bureaucracy) renders it completely void and sham.
The theoretical proof of non-feasibility of the theory is a reason solid enough not to discuss the historical evolution of Pakistan`s problems...This smoke-screen attitude and intellectual dishonesty again proves the maxim that every group of individuals is motivated by its ethnic interest and not by the so-called divine rules of religions or the sham socialist models of equality and fraternity.
Only after being congnizant of these facts can we address the issues that you have taken in your questions...
(1) Transition from Sufi to Militant Islam
(2) Notions of Ethnicity in Sindhis and Punjabis
I would like to calarify that Islam in Pakistan is a totally URBAN phenomenon. Be it ``Sufi or ``Militant``. Paksitan is much more than its Urban phenomena depict it to be.This is the problem that a Feudal society has. The rural masses are isolated from the political process since their electoral prowess is controlled by their Feudal lords and consequently cities become centres of power. Hence the flow from villages to cities (although it has many other factors as well)
For example people in cities (especially KARACHI) infested by this plague make women cover their heads so that their hair can`t be seen or make them wear burqas. None of the Women in Punjab and Sindh in the viallges does this. None of them. Rural Pakistanis, be it Sindh or NWFP or Baluchistan or Punjab, do not know Arabic at all. They can not read Quran, they can not say their prayers. Every village has a Maulvi that is called upon for marriages and funerals to recite the few verses of Quran that he knows.
Hence to say that Pakistan has passed from ``SUFI`` to ``MILITANT`` Islam in the past thirty years would be incorrect in many ways. Ruaral Pakistan was and is a-religious. They are Muslims but this is it. They are Punjabi/Sindhi/Baloch/Pathan first and Muslims later.
While in cities the situation is not the same. The cities have been thoruoghly put under the urdu-speaking minority culture. For example...Rural women in Punjab and many parts of Sindh wear Dhotis and Lehngas respectively...their urban counterparts...while being of the same ethnicity and same culture would never dream to wear dhotis and lehngas. A punjabi girl from Lakore or a Sindhi girl from Karachi, and I kid you not, would prefere to die than to wear a dhoti or lehnga and to go out with her friends. This is the cultural erosion that I am speaking off that has been carried out in the name of urdu-speaking standardization of dress code (Pakistani-Nationalism).
The consciousness of Punjabi/Sindhi culture in Punjab/Sindh in urban socieities is very insignificant compared to in the rural societies. But fortunately the majorities of Punjab and Sindh live in vaillages and Sindh and Punjab are basically rural communities. Punjab for the last 15 years has been trying to revive the nationalist fervor but since it is controlled by the Feudal lords who have everything to lose by this revival, Punjabi-Nationalism has majority of its critics in Punjab. Of course they are all Feudal Lords.
Sindh however has a significant nationalist stream and many Sindhis view even PPP as a nationalist party although it isn`t because it is a Feudal dominated party but in Sindh it sometimes acts as a Nationalist party to counter balance the original national parties such as ``Jiyay Sindh`` etc...
In any case SUFI Islam, since the time of Aurangzeb, has lost its political power and has never regained it. Why it has been so should be left for another time...although I can answer it...
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
Parkash ...The answers to your questions are going to be much more philiosphical and abstract than the simple nature and phraseology of your question suggests.
First of all a critical analysis of my assertion that ``Pan-Islamism and Pakistani-Nationalism`` are the one and only thing must be done so as to understand the under-lying philosophy that renders both these theories same.
Secondly the ``Rise of Pan-Islamism`` and the domination of Pan-Islamism by ``Militant Islam`` must be taken into account.
The continuation of non-democratic governments that have resulted in the creation of a poiltical vaccum in Pakistan that has lured people into the hands of Militant Islam (That is merely a more militant form of Pakistani Nationalism) must also be taken into account.
I am afraid I won`t give answers to your questions because answering your questions is not more important than making you (and all the Indians that read this post...)realise that
``Almost all the people that pass as Pakistani Intelluctuals and Intelligentsia are urdu-speaking. Hence every solution of Pakistan`s Problems proposed by them is based on certain false premises (YLH`s sham article after the MQM carnage) that, owing to their ethnicities, they can`t get rid of.``
For example every urdu-speaking liberal would speak of restoration of democracy but would never talk about decentralization. Never would they talk about abolition of Feudalism in Pakistan and specially Punjab. Never would they take into account the fact that Pakistani-Theory , as it is now, erodes the indiginous notions of language, culture and region.
The reason for conveniently ignoring these facts is that a deepl analysis of the historical evolution of all thses problems...from non-democratic governments to corrupt bureaucracies and from centeralization of resources to non-abolition of Feudalism can easily and directly be traced to the
(A) Creaters of Pakistan
(B) Defunct Theory of Pakistani-Nationalism.
Every solution hence proposed by these so-called liberals thus circumvents the basic problems and tries to rectify the political situation without taking into account the anamolies and inaccuracies of the historical process. The only reason for this conscious neglect is that taking into account of these things would prove
(A) The Founding Fathers (and hence the founding party) and
(B) The Pakistani-Nationalism Theory
absolutely wrong. The theory in itself perhaps might have been made to work but the presence of a community that due to its very non-indigenous nature was bent upon the centralization of resource and rule-by-proxy (be it Feudal Politicians or Army/Bureaucracy) renders it completely void and sham.
The theoretical proof of non-feasibility of the theory is a reason solid enough not to discuss the historical evolution of Pakistan`s problems...This smoke-screen attitude and intellectual dishonesty again proves the maxim that every group of individuals is motivated by its ethnic interest and not by the so-called divine rules of religions or the sham socialist models of equality and fraternity.
Only after being congnizant of these facts can we address the issues that you have taken in your questions...
(1) Transition from Sufi to Militant Islam
(2) Notions of Ethnicity in Sindhis and Punjabis
I would like to calarify that Islam in Pakistan is a totally URBAN phenomenon. Be it ``Sufi or ``Militant``. Paksitan is much more than its Urban phenomena depict it to be.This is the problem that a Feudal society has. The rural masses are isolated from the political process since their electoral prowess is controlled by their Feudal lords and consequently cities become centres of power. Hence the flow from villages to cities (although it has many other factors as well)
For example people in cities (especially KARACHI) infested by this plague make women cover their heads so that their hair can`t be seen or make them wear burqas. None of the Women in Punjab and Sindh in the viallges does this. None of them. Rural Pakistanis, be it Sindh or NWFP or Baluchistan or Punjab, do not know Arabic at all. They can not read Quran, they can not say their prayers. Every village has a Maulvi that is called upon for marriages and funerals to recite the few verses of Quran that he knows.
Hence to say that Pakistan has passed from ``SUFI`` to ``MILITANT`` Islam in the past thirty years would be incorrect in many ways. Ruaral Pakistan was and is a-religious. They are Muslims but this is it. They are Punjabi/Sindhi/Baloch/Pathan first and Muslims later.
While in cities the situation is not the same. The cities have been thoruoghly put under the urdu-speaking minority culture. For example...Rural women in Punjab and many parts of Sindh wear Dhotis and Lehngas respectively...their urban counterparts...while being of the same ethnicity and same culture would never dream to wear dhotis and lehngas. A punjabi girl from Lakore or a Sindhi girl from Karachi, and I kid you not, would prefere to die than to wear a dhoti or lehnga and to go out with her friends. This is the cultural erosion that I am speaking off that has been carried out in the name of urdu-speaking standardization of dress code (Pakistani-Nationalism).
The consciousness of Punjabi/Sindhi culture in Punjab/Sindh in urban socieities is very insignificant compared to in the rural societies. But fortunately the majorities of Punjab and Sindh live in vaillages and Sindh and Punjab are basically rural communities. Punjab for the last 15 years has been trying to revive the nationalist fervor but since it is controlled by the Feudal lords who have everything to lose by this revival, Punjabi-Nationalism has majority of its critics in Punjab. Of course they are all Feudal Lords.
Sindh however has a significant nationalist stream and many Sindhis view even PPP as a nationalist party although it isn`t because it is a Feudal dominated party but in Sindh it sometimes acts as a Nationalist party to counter balance the original national parties such as ``Jiyay Sindh`` etc...
In any case SUFI Islam, since the time of Aurangzeb, has lost its political power and has never regained it. Why it has been so should be left for another time...although I can answer it...
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
#369 Posted by Chennai on May 17, 2007 6:33:09 pm
#368 by haji004
Ahmad, What is the genesis of this Pan-Islamism in Pakistan and do the majority of Pakistanis accept it? In the early 50`s there was a more serene Sufi Islam practised in India & Pakistan; some of the religious practices were eerily similar to Hinduism.
Again when you say `` Pakistani-Ntionalism and Pan-Islamislm are in fact one and the same thing`` is there no identity as a Punjabi or Sindhi in Pakistan.
Regards
Prakash
Ahmad, What is the genesis of this Pan-Islamism in Pakistan and do the majority of Pakistanis accept it? In the early 50`s there was a more serene Sufi Islam practised in India & Pakistan; some of the religious practices were eerily similar to Hinduism.
Again when you say `` Pakistani-Ntionalism and Pan-Islamislm are in fact one and the same thing`` is there no identity as a Punjabi or Sindhi in Pakistan.
Regards
Prakash
#368 Posted by haji004 on May 17, 2007 7:24:59 am
Re: # 367
I an left with the unpleasant task to contradict you again and again. Ranjit, when you say
’’Somehow it has not afflicted India to the same extent as it has Pakistan’’
you expose a fundamental fallacy in your hypothesis...
The creation of Pakistan is the biggest manifestation and proof of the fact that Pan-Islamism/Muslim Nationalism (That’s the reason due to which I am crying on this Forum that Pakistani-Ntionalism and Pan-Islamislm are in fact one and the same thing) has affected India in the most brutal way.
Your heyposthesis about Muslim-Integration in India is cent percent correct. I am not going to challenge that. But these muslims that want to integerate into Indian dream are not the forllowers of Pan-Islamism, these are the ones that have understood that
’’The current Indian Eco-Boom is the result of the continuation of a secular-democratic process that allows everybody (as much as it could without compromising its existence) to retain their national identities to the highest extent possible.’’
So much so that the religious majority has sacrificed/compromised its numerical advantage to promote the vision of the founding fathers.
This spirit of Indian Republicanism allows North-Indian-Muslims to inegerate into Indian Society (of which some of them are not ethnically a part of. South Indian Muslims are in totality ethnically Indigenous.)
On the other hand we can not ignore the fact that North-Indian Muslims...under the influence of their non-indigenous leaders... have almost always voted as a block. This ’’Block Voting Trend’’ refers to the Pan-Islamist under-currents that are dormant only because they are politically un-implementable due to numerical inferiority of the adherents of this theory. They however make us realise that there is a muslim minority that considers itself non-Indian and sometimes even anti-Indian.
I was referring to this group of people.
those who would integerate would not be pan-Islamists and hence would come under the flow of National Thought Stream...
The social conditions of Pakistan that you have described...I hope...would not prevail in the post 2020 scenario because the new Punjab/Sindh would be built on the ruins of these sham-ideoliogies...
I would however say that there is a lot of truth in what you say...but you just somehow fail to take into account the demonizing effect that Pan-Islamic/Pakistani Nationalist thoery can have on individuals and communities...that places them on a fanatical palne where economic prosperity doesn’t matter...
you see the West Bengali fools who cry for URDU as their second language are Muslims...URDU is not even their native langauge...this demand is totally out of context and not in accordance to the Indian Republican Theory...but they do it...just because they have been infested with this Pan-Islamist virus that is an Arabic tool to destroy indigenous cultures...
Hope I have made my point...
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
I an left with the unpleasant task to contradict you again and again. Ranjit, when you say
’’Somehow it has not afflicted India to the same extent as it has Pakistan’’
you expose a fundamental fallacy in your hypothesis...
The creation of Pakistan is the biggest manifestation and proof of the fact that Pan-Islamism/Muslim Nationalism (That’s the reason due to which I am crying on this Forum that Pakistani-Ntionalism and Pan-Islamislm are in fact one and the same thing) has affected India in the most brutal way.
Your heyposthesis about Muslim-Integration in India is cent percent correct. I am not going to challenge that. But these muslims that want to integerate into Indian dream are not the forllowers of Pan-Islamism, these are the ones that have understood that
’’The current Indian Eco-Boom is the result of the continuation of a secular-democratic process that allows everybody (as much as it could without compromising its existence) to retain their national identities to the highest extent possible.’’
So much so that the religious majority has sacrificed/compromised its numerical advantage to promote the vision of the founding fathers.
This spirit of Indian Republicanism allows North-Indian-Muslims to inegerate into Indian Society (of which some of them are not ethnically a part of. South Indian Muslims are in totality ethnically Indigenous.)
On the other hand we can not ignore the fact that North-Indian Muslims...under the influence of their non-indigenous leaders... have almost always voted as a block. This ’’Block Voting Trend’’ refers to the Pan-Islamist under-currents that are dormant only because they are politically un-implementable due to numerical inferiority of the adherents of this theory. They however make us realise that there is a muslim minority that considers itself non-Indian and sometimes even anti-Indian.
I was referring to this group of people.
those who would integerate would not be pan-Islamists and hence would come under the flow of National Thought Stream...
The social conditions of Pakistan that you have described...I hope...would not prevail in the post 2020 scenario because the new Punjab/Sindh would be built on the ruins of these sham-ideoliogies...
I would however say that there is a lot of truth in what you say...but you just somehow fail to take into account the demonizing effect that Pan-Islamic/Pakistani Nationalist thoery can have on individuals and communities...that places them on a fanatical palne where economic prosperity doesn’t matter...
you see the West Bengali fools who cry for URDU as their second language are Muslims...URDU is not even their native langauge...this demand is totally out of context and not in accordance to the Indian Republican Theory...but they do it...just because they have been infested with this Pan-Islamist virus that is an Arabic tool to destroy indigenous cultures...
Hope I have made my point...
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
#367 Posted by Ranjit on May 17, 2007 6:38:28 am
Re:haji
[..given the differences in objectives of Pan-Islamism (Dominance of a pre-medieval code of conduct even if life has to be sacrificed) and current materialism (more money is more happiness is more social status is more fulfilment) ....]
Pan-islamism is a global threat these days. Somehow it has not afflicted India to the same extent as it has Pakistan, Middle-east or even Europe. The primary reason I feel is the failure of Pakistan to become a beacon of hope for muslims in South Asia. Muslims in India went through pan-islamism in the last century till 1947 and even won their own country - Pakistan. The conditions in Pakistan, related to sectrian/ethnic violence, feudalism, lack of democracy, has severely punctured any more pan-islamic dreams of indian muslims. I mean what would they want? Another Pakistan? Migrate to Pakistan where they would be unwelcome? I dont think so!! So pan-islamism doesnt hold much of a promise to indian muslims.
The other reason is that unlike in Europe, muslims are better integrated in India, especially in the economic area. They do not face mindless racism or discrimination in either social or economic activities. Political parties court them for their votes. There are plenty of successful muslim role models from cricketers, businessmen (richest Indian is a muslim - Azim Premji, owner of Wipro), movie stars, President of India etc. So again there is less of an incentive to go crazy about jihad.
[..given the differences in objectives of Pan-Islamism (Dominance of a pre-medieval code of conduct even if life has to be sacrificed) and current materialism (more money is more happiness is more social status is more fulfilment) ....]
Pan-islamism is a global threat these days. Somehow it has not afflicted India to the same extent as it has Pakistan, Middle-east or even Europe. The primary reason I feel is the failure of Pakistan to become a beacon of hope for muslims in South Asia. Muslims in India went through pan-islamism in the last century till 1947 and even won their own country - Pakistan. The conditions in Pakistan, related to sectrian/ethnic violence, feudalism, lack of democracy, has severely punctured any more pan-islamic dreams of indian muslims. I mean what would they want? Another Pakistan? Migrate to Pakistan where they would be unwelcome? I dont think so!! So pan-islamism doesnt hold much of a promise to indian muslims.
The other reason is that unlike in Europe, muslims are better integrated in India, especially in the economic area. They do not face mindless racism or discrimination in either social or economic activities. Political parties court them for their votes. There are plenty of successful muslim role models from cricketers, businessmen (richest Indian is a muslim - Azim Premji, owner of Wipro), movie stars, President of India etc. So again there is less of an incentive to go crazy about jihad.
#366 Posted by okhla99 on May 17, 2007 1:29:18 am
Haramimau,
So the only religions you want to survive are the ones in which you can ``Walk Tall``
and others would have to, in your own words, stay ``one respectful foot away``.
After all, you do recollect your own :
<<< when I come out of the temple, the sight of the sacred thread around my torso parts the crowd who stand a respectful foot away from me so that I won`t be defiled by their touch. >>>
And off course, Haramimau, other religions which do not provide you the above facilities, need to be eliminated !!!!!!
So the only religions you want to survive are the ones in which you can ``Walk Tall``
and others would have to, in your own words, stay ``one respectful foot away``.
After all, you do recollect your own :
<<< when I come out of the temple, the sight of the sacred thread around my torso parts the crowd who stand a respectful foot away from me so that I won`t be defiled by their touch. >>>
And off course, Haramimau, other religions which do not provide you the above facilities, need to be eliminated !!!!!!
#365 Posted by harimau on May 16, 2007 10:48:31 pm
Ref okhla99 #360
[HA HA HA!!!!!!! Haramimau talks of getting rid of religion. LOL !!! LOL!!! ROFL!!!!!
Haramimau, do you really want to get rid of religion ????]
Why don`t you first take a course in English Comprehension before you get near a keyboard again?
I very clearly said ``Time to get rid of every single religion other than those native to India. All imported religions ought to be banned and those who intend to continue practicing it can go to Saudi Arabia or Italy.``
The religions imported into India are Islam and Christianity.
Those are the religions I want banned.
Is the meaning now clear to whatever passes for a brain in your head?
[HA HA HA!!!!!!! Haramimau talks of getting rid of religion. LOL !!! LOL!!! ROFL!!!!!
Haramimau, do you really want to get rid of religion ????]
Why don`t you first take a course in English Comprehension before you get near a keyboard again?
I very clearly said ``Time to get rid of every single religion other than those native to India. All imported religions ought to be banned and those who intend to continue practicing it can go to Saudi Arabia or Italy.``
The religions imported into India are Islam and Christianity.
Those are the religions I want banned.
Is the meaning now clear to whatever passes for a brain in your head?
#364 Posted by haji004 on May 16, 2007 6:41:45 pm
Re: # 363
And one more thing...Good normal friendly relations are really difficult to have if the border between two countries is not a ``Natural Frontier.``
The importance of ``Natural Barriers`` should and can never be under-estimated.
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
And one more thing...Good normal friendly relations are really difficult to have if the border between two countries is not a ``Natural Frontier.``
The importance of ``Natural Barriers`` should and can never be under-estimated.
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
#363 Posted by haji004 on May 16, 2007 6:38:30 pm
Re: # 361
Ranjit your arguments are really solid and you speak with great lucidity. I agree with your assumptions. I also agree that you are in a good position to judge, being an Indian living in India. I however have to rely on secondary sources i.e. books, media and human interaction to guage the political atmosphere.
I should hence dare not differ but I am afraid that I must. In fact in my first post (regarding the issues of spill-over and drainge of muslim populations into/from India) when I pointed out to another muslim migration I implicitly referred to fanatic adherents of ``Pan-Islamism``.
It must be kept in mind that the adherents of ``Militant Islam`` and the theory itself are really dangerous because (I am going to quote from my article)
``...The fanaticism that empowers the followers of this creed with such a mental/psychological superiority that no amount of logic can change their beliefs and materialistic success that is the only base of every other alternative creed holds no value for them. Such is the morality of this new found independence that even life does not hold any significance for the followers of this movement.``
material success (the new global religion) doesn`t matter to them. Hence, those who do adhere strictly to this medieval philosophy would perhaps be more compelled to move out than to stay.
This is the reason due to which I asserted that they might not even stop in Punjab and/or Sindh (Punjab/Sindh won`t accept them either) and move on directly to NWFP or Baluchistan. Pan Islamic dominance and lawlessness would more than welcome them because Pan-Islamic Bolshevism transcends the barriers of race, language etc. and only requires fanatic loyalty.
You argument is based on the economic prosperity prevailing in India and the possibilities of a better future for those who work to have it. This argument is solid, please keep it in mind that I am not criticising it neither am I saying that Punjab/Sindh would become parts of India, but given the differences in objectives of Pan-Islamism (Dominance of a pre-medieval code of conduct even if life has to be sacrificed) and current materialism (more money is more happiness is more social status is more fulfilment) it looks highly probable that Extremist Islamist Element would filter out of India, whether ot not Punjab/Sindh confederate into India.
Those who would choose to rest would not be Pan-Islamist but would conform themselves to Indian nationalistic creed.
Personally I think that GOI would , in such circumstances, create an atmosphere that would accelarate this outward flow.
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
Ranjit your arguments are really solid and you speak with great lucidity. I agree with your assumptions. I also agree that you are in a good position to judge, being an Indian living in India. I however have to rely on secondary sources i.e. books, media and human interaction to guage the political atmosphere.
I should hence dare not differ but I am afraid that I must. In fact in my first post (regarding the issues of spill-over and drainge of muslim populations into/from India) when I pointed out to another muslim migration I implicitly referred to fanatic adherents of ``Pan-Islamism``.
It must be kept in mind that the adherents of ``Militant Islam`` and the theory itself are really dangerous because (I am going to quote from my article)
``...The fanaticism that empowers the followers of this creed with such a mental/psychological superiority that no amount of logic can change their beliefs and materialistic success that is the only base of every other alternative creed holds no value for them. Such is the morality of this new found independence that even life does not hold any significance for the followers of this movement.``
material success (the new global religion) doesn`t matter to them. Hence, those who do adhere strictly to this medieval philosophy would perhaps be more compelled to move out than to stay.
This is the reason due to which I asserted that they might not even stop in Punjab and/or Sindh (Punjab/Sindh won`t accept them either) and move on directly to NWFP or Baluchistan. Pan Islamic dominance and lawlessness would more than welcome them because Pan-Islamic Bolshevism transcends the barriers of race, language etc. and only requires fanatic loyalty.
You argument is based on the economic prosperity prevailing in India and the possibilities of a better future for those who work to have it. This argument is solid, please keep it in mind that I am not criticising it neither am I saying that Punjab/Sindh would become parts of India, but given the differences in objectives of Pan-Islamism (Dominance of a pre-medieval code of conduct even if life has to be sacrificed) and current materialism (more money is more happiness is more social status is more fulfilment) it looks highly probable that Extremist Islamist Element would filter out of India, whether ot not Punjab/Sindh confederate into India.
Those who would choose to rest would not be Pan-Islamist but would conform themselves to Indian nationalistic creed.
Personally I think that GOI would , in such circumstances, create an atmosphere that would accelarate this outward flow.
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
#362 Posted by Chennai on May 16, 2007 6:04:15 pm
Re: Haji & Ranjit
Wednesday May 16, 2007 3:01 PM
By AMIR SHAH
Associated Press Writer
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - About 1,000 Afghans shouting ``Death to Pakistan`` demonstrated in front of Pakistan`s embassy in Kabul Wednesday, blaming the neighboring country for some of the bloodiest border clashes in years.
Many of the demonstrators were from the eastern province of Paktia, where the fighting between Afghan and Pakistani troops killed at least 13 Afghan border guards and civilians so far this week.
The demonstrators carried banners and shouted ``Death to the ISI! Death to Musharraf,`` a reference to Pakistan`s intelligence agency and President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
Afghan police wearing riot gear guarded the embassy in downtown Kabul. There were no reports of violence.
``We`ve run out of patience with Pakistan,`` said Sultan Uddin, 50, from the Jaji district of Paktia. ``We`re requesting President (Hamid) Karzai to give us weapons and remove the border police. We know how to deal with Pakistan.``
Tensions have been running high between Afghanistan and Pakistan over controlling their 1,510-mile border, and stemming the flow of Taliban and al-Qaida militants who stage attacks inside Afghanistan.
The squeeze has begun!
Wednesday May 16, 2007 3:01 PM
By AMIR SHAH
Associated Press Writer
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - About 1,000 Afghans shouting ``Death to Pakistan`` demonstrated in front of Pakistan`s embassy in Kabul Wednesday, blaming the neighboring country for some of the bloodiest border clashes in years.
Many of the demonstrators were from the eastern province of Paktia, where the fighting between Afghan and Pakistani troops killed at least 13 Afghan border guards and civilians so far this week.
The demonstrators carried banners and shouted ``Death to the ISI! Death to Musharraf,`` a reference to Pakistan`s intelligence agency and President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
Afghan police wearing riot gear guarded the embassy in downtown Kabul. There were no reports of violence.
``We`ve run out of patience with Pakistan,`` said Sultan Uddin, 50, from the Jaji district of Paktia. ``We`re requesting President (Hamid) Karzai to give us weapons and remove the border police. We know how to deal with Pakistan.``
Tensions have been running high between Afghanistan and Pakistan over controlling their 1,510-mile border, and stemming the flow of Taliban and al-Qaida militants who stage attacks inside Afghanistan.
The squeeze has begun!
#361 Posted by Ranjit on May 16, 2007 2:58:56 pm
Re:haji#359
[..And as I have asserted before this could have the effect (although it is not necessary but in my opinion it is highly likely) to create a flow of non-Indigenous muslims from main-land India to the peripheral West-Punjab and Sindh or even perhaps to post-Integeration N.W.F.P and Balochistan ....]
While I agree with everything else you have written, I dont believe that there will be any migration out of India to anywhere else in South Asia, no matter what happens in our neighborhood. Frankly speaking the belligerent section of the muslim population, the UP elites or ashrafs, have already left India and are in your country. The muslims who are in India have voted with their feet to stay behind. If they didnt leave in 1947, why would they leave now given the conditions in Pakistan as compared to India? Secondly Indian muslims now are eager to join the mainstream, if they havent already. Most of them have seen the dream of Pakistan turn into a nightmare. Yes, India is a primarily hindu nation, but who cares if you have democracy and a good economy in which you can participate. You may not be aware but the muslim newspapers in India are focused on acadamic accomplishments of muslim students rather than jihadi nonsense. In spite of best efforts of LeT and other such organizations, they havent made much of a headway with Indian muslims.
Thirdly the red hot economy in India implies that there are opportunities for everyone. Its no longer a zero sum game between hindus and muslims. Everyone is now following one religion - how to make money!! Moreover, the key thing for foreign investment is a low risk environment. Both hindus and muslims have a vested interest in keeping political issues on a backburner, so that the economic juggernaut is not interrupted by violence, chaos, migrations etc. Thats why the BJP was booted out of power in the center. No one wanted the mandir related chaos any more, since they would bring it up 6 months before each election cycle and create communal nuisance. Bottom line, people in India will only do things that lead to economic growth, no more political BS that delivers nothing to the people. Both hindus and muslims are now aligned with the same objective.
As far as relations with current Pakistan or a future new Pakistan is concerned, as I said, we just want to have good, normal, neighborly relations. If we can trade, tourism, cultural exchanges, thats good enough. If Pakistan does degenerate into total chaos with warlordism, refugees etc, i.e. it becomes a new Afghanistan, then the situation might be differnt. Even then, India will not reoccupy anything but try to create some mechanism for political stability.
[..And as I have asserted before this could have the effect (although it is not necessary but in my opinion it is highly likely) to create a flow of non-Indigenous muslims from main-land India to the peripheral West-Punjab and Sindh or even perhaps to post-Integeration N.W.F.P and Balochistan ....]
While I agree with everything else you have written, I dont believe that there will be any migration out of India to anywhere else in South Asia, no matter what happens in our neighborhood. Frankly speaking the belligerent section of the muslim population, the UP elites or ashrafs, have already left India and are in your country. The muslims who are in India have voted with their feet to stay behind. If they didnt leave in 1947, why would they leave now given the conditions in Pakistan as compared to India? Secondly Indian muslims now are eager to join the mainstream, if they havent already. Most of them have seen the dream of Pakistan turn into a nightmare. Yes, India is a primarily hindu nation, but who cares if you have democracy and a good economy in which you can participate. You may not be aware but the muslim newspapers in India are focused on acadamic accomplishments of muslim students rather than jihadi nonsense. In spite of best efforts of LeT and other such organizations, they havent made much of a headway with Indian muslims.
Thirdly the red hot economy in India implies that there are opportunities for everyone. Its no longer a zero sum game between hindus and muslims. Everyone is now following one religion - how to make money!! Moreover, the key thing for foreign investment is a low risk environment. Both hindus and muslims have a vested interest in keeping political issues on a backburner, so that the economic juggernaut is not interrupted by violence, chaos, migrations etc. Thats why the BJP was booted out of power in the center. No one wanted the mandir related chaos any more, since they would bring it up 6 months before each election cycle and create communal nuisance. Bottom line, people in India will only do things that lead to economic growth, no more political BS that delivers nothing to the people. Both hindus and muslims are now aligned with the same objective.
As far as relations with current Pakistan or a future new Pakistan is concerned, as I said, we just want to have good, normal, neighborly relations. If we can trade, tourism, cultural exchanges, thats good enough. If Pakistan does degenerate into total chaos with warlordism, refugees etc, i.e. it becomes a new Afghanistan, then the situation might be differnt. Even then, India will not reoccupy anything but try to create some mechanism for political stability.
#359 Posted by haji004 on May 16, 2007 8:42:02 am
Re: # 357
I couldn`t agree more. I would however like to clarify that the nationalist struggles internal to Pakisatni frontiers do not view re-integration/reunion/reunification with India as their objective.
But
Having said that...It would be impossible for India not to intervene if the situation degenrates in Pakistan because a disintegrated Pakistan with internal strife would bring Pan-Islamism to Indias Borders, however an Indian Controlled/Influenced/Supported Western Punjab and Sindh, free of urdu-speaking bigotry and Feudalism and based on indigenous political theories of nationalism can restrict the over-spill of Pan-Islamism by restricting Militant Islam on the Natural Frontier of India...Indus that is...
And as I have asserted before this could have the effect (although it is not necessary but in my opinion it is highly likely) to create a flow of non-Indigenous muslims from main-land India to the peripheral West-Punjab and Sindh or even perhaps to post-Integeration N.W.F.P and Balochistan since the new Sindh and Punjab would base themselves on Linguistic ethnicity rather than religion and hence would not welcome this new wave of refugees...on the other hand Pan-Islamists, uptill now don`t care for ethnicity, nationality etc...so they might be tempted to welcome this flow...Although they`d realise in 30 years what sort of problem they have gotten themselves into...
This re-shuffling of frontiers can then hence serve to homogenise India even more (religiously) and hence eliminate the centrifugal tendencies in India related to Pan-Islamism...
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
I couldn`t agree more. I would however like to clarify that the nationalist struggles internal to Pakisatni frontiers do not view re-integration/reunion/reunification with India as their objective.
But
Having said that...It would be impossible for India not to intervene if the situation degenrates in Pakistan because a disintegrated Pakistan with internal strife would bring Pan-Islamism to Indias Borders, however an Indian Controlled/Influenced/Supported Western Punjab and Sindh, free of urdu-speaking bigotry and Feudalism and based on indigenous political theories of nationalism can restrict the over-spill of Pan-Islamism by restricting Militant Islam on the Natural Frontier of India...Indus that is...
And as I have asserted before this could have the effect (although it is not necessary but in my opinion it is highly likely) to create a flow of non-Indigenous muslims from main-land India to the peripheral West-Punjab and Sindh or even perhaps to post-Integeration N.W.F.P and Balochistan since the new Sindh and Punjab would base themselves on Linguistic ethnicity rather than religion and hence would not welcome this new wave of refugees...on the other hand Pan-Islamists, uptill now don`t care for ethnicity, nationality etc...so they might be tempted to welcome this flow...Although they`d realise in 30 years what sort of problem they have gotten themselves into...
This re-shuffling of frontiers can then hence serve to homogenise India even more (religiously) and hence eliminate the centrifugal tendencies in India related to Pan-Islamism...
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
#358 Posted by harimau on May 16, 2007 6:42:50 am
Ref ranjit #357
[....On every matter, there would have been demand for quotas based on religion.]
You don`t need to get Pakistan back into India for that.
Andhra passed a law mandating 5% reservation for Muslims in professional education. While it was overthrown by the State High Court, it has been appealed to the Supreme Court.
Bishop Davidson proclaims that Christianity has no castes when he preaches conersion but has filed a petition with the Supreme Court demanding reservations for ``Dalit Christians``.
Doctor Artist Leader Karunanidhi, chief minister of Tamil Nadu, promised to give quotas for Christians and Muslims.
Time to get rid of every single religion other than those native to India. All imported religions ought to be banned and those who intend to continue practicing it can go to Saudi Arabia or Italy.
[....On every matter, there would have been demand for quotas based on religion.]
You don`t need to get Pakistan back into India for that.
Andhra passed a law mandating 5% reservation for Muslims in professional education. While it was overthrown by the State High Court, it has been appealed to the Supreme Court.
Bishop Davidson proclaims that Christianity has no castes when he preaches conersion but has filed a petition with the Supreme Court demanding reservations for ``Dalit Christians``.
Doctor Artist Leader Karunanidhi, chief minister of Tamil Nadu, promised to give quotas for Christians and Muslims.
Time to get rid of every single religion other than those native to India. All imported religions ought to be banned and those who intend to continue practicing it can go to Saudi Arabia or Italy.
#357 Posted by Ranjit on May 16, 2007 6:28:53 am
Re:haji#356
[...I am equally surprised by the Indians; most did not want Punjab & Sind to rejoin India....This too from Ranjit who I think is a Sindhi.....What do you make of it.....]
Ahmed sahib, one of the very interesting side effects of partition was that hindus ended up getting a politically integrated nation state in India. The last time that had happened was in the times of Emperor Ashok of the Mauryas. Historically hindus have always been fragmented into small kingdoms in South Asia, which is perhaps one of the reasons for their repeated conquests. Hindus did not ask for a country, on the basis of hinduism in 1947. However, once the UP muslim demand for Pakistan was accepted, it was an obvious outcome of the situation.
The fact is that this unexpected, uncalled for outcome has turned out to be a huge blessing for hindus. Nehru had the wisdom of not letting us wallow in grief and hatred over partition. A secular system ensured that hindus could live in a system based on tolerance, which comes naturally to hindus anyway. The legal framework of secularism guarantees that. Secondly, we redrew the provincial borders, decentralized power and instituted democracy from the first day. People started feeling to be a part of a collective. The size of the country ensured that no one group could dominate anyone. As a result, ironically we have seen a willingness to voluntarily dissolve the sharp differences of ethnicity, caste, language. Today it is not unusual for Punjabis to eat idli-dosas or for Tamilians to do bhangra. Intermarriages have skyrocketed all across the length and breadth of India - a true sign of voluntary integration. A democratic framework gives a forum for people to address grievances, which has provided a way to resolve conflicts without taking up arms. Notice how even the centuries old caste barriers are dissolving as the backward caste people are getting into the game. Granted there are exceptions and one can point to insurgencies and all that, but given the size, heterogenity and population, we have seen a remarkable urge among Indians to forge a nation out of a diverse people!!
Thirdly, hindus have got a chance to shape their own destiny without being held back by any other community. We kicked out feudalism from day one and went for building a strong industrial infrastructure as well as focus on developing technical education. It was Nehru`s vision that led to the IITs and other institutes, that has now propelled India into a global leadership position in the knowledge economy. Again this comes naturally to hindus, the baniya instinct if you will. Hindus have always been good with numbers, education and so forth. The ability to make it a collective, national mission has literally taken that natural instinct and turned it into a force multiplier in the IT sector, Financial Services sector and so forth.
The bottom line is hindus are happy for the first time in centuries, rather millenia. We can lead our lives in peace and in our own way in India. Our future generations will lead a prosperous, free lives which is a blessing after centuries of imperial domination, subjugation and impoverishment, especially by the birts who literally turned us into beggars. Everyone is convinced that had partition not happened, the muslim opposition would not have allowed any of this to happen by playing a spoiler role and vetoing all reforms. Instinctively they would have opposed everything and fought tooth and nail on every matter, which is what the UP muslim led Muslim League did before 1947. There would have been a crazy, communal based half-democracy. Feudalism would have flourised. The focus on education would have to be tempered. On every matter, there would have been demand for quotas based on religion. We would be Lebanon on steroids tottering between full-scale civil war or an uneasy, cold peace. In other words, it would be an unhappy marriage at best. Hindus and muslims just have different vision for the future as a people. Therefore, as they say, if it aint broke, dont fix it!!
Since India is doing great and hindus are happy there, we dont want to screw it up by changing it. Bringing part of Pakistan into the mix, would change the character of India and bring us back to the pre-1947 days of constant hindu-muslim hassles, a nightmare scenario. If muslims have changed since that time, it is a different issue but all indications from Pakistan, especially by the actions of the UP muslims, shows that nothing has changed since 1947. For us hindus, the status quo in India is beautiful along with the natural advantages of having Pakistan as a buffer state. Having good relations with Pakistan is important, so that we can visit Lahore or Karachi and even participate in trade and commerce. But other than that, why change anything?
[...I am equally surprised by the Indians; most did not want Punjab & Sind to rejoin India....This too from Ranjit who I think is a Sindhi.....What do you make of it.....]
Ahmed sahib, one of the very interesting side effects of partition was that hindus ended up getting a politically integrated nation state in India. The last time that had happened was in the times of Emperor Ashok of the Mauryas. Historically hindus have always been fragmented into small kingdoms in South Asia, which is perhaps one of the reasons for their repeated conquests. Hindus did not ask for a country, on the basis of hinduism in 1947. However, once the UP muslim demand for Pakistan was accepted, it was an obvious outcome of the situation.
The fact is that this unexpected, uncalled for outcome has turned out to be a huge blessing for hindus. Nehru had the wisdom of not letting us wallow in grief and hatred over partition. A secular system ensured that hindus could live in a system based on tolerance, which comes naturally to hindus anyway. The legal framework of secularism guarantees that. Secondly, we redrew the provincial borders, decentralized power and instituted democracy from the first day. People started feeling to be a part of a collective. The size of the country ensured that no one group could dominate anyone. As a result, ironically we have seen a willingness to voluntarily dissolve the sharp differences of ethnicity, caste, language. Today it is not unusual for Punjabis to eat idli-dosas or for Tamilians to do bhangra. Intermarriages have skyrocketed all across the length and breadth of India - a true sign of voluntary integration. A democratic framework gives a forum for people to address grievances, which has provided a way to resolve conflicts without taking up arms. Notice how even the centuries old caste barriers are dissolving as the backward caste people are getting into the game. Granted there are exceptions and one can point to insurgencies and all that, but given the size, heterogenity and population, we have seen a remarkable urge among Indians to forge a nation out of a diverse people!!
Thirdly, hindus have got a chance to shape their own destiny without being held back by any other community. We kicked out feudalism from day one and went for building a strong industrial infrastructure as well as focus on developing technical education. It was Nehru`s vision that led to the IITs and other institutes, that has now propelled India into a global leadership position in the knowledge economy. Again this comes naturally to hindus, the baniya instinct if you will. Hindus have always been good with numbers, education and so forth. The ability to make it a collective, national mission has literally taken that natural instinct and turned it into a force multiplier in the IT sector, Financial Services sector and so forth.
The bottom line is hindus are happy for the first time in centuries, rather millenia. We can lead our lives in peace and in our own way in India. Our future generations will lead a prosperous, free lives which is a blessing after centuries of imperial domination, subjugation and impoverishment, especially by the birts who literally turned us into beggars. Everyone is convinced that had partition not happened, the muslim opposition would not have allowed any of this to happen by playing a spoiler role and vetoing all reforms. Instinctively they would have opposed everything and fought tooth and nail on every matter, which is what the UP muslim led Muslim League did before 1947. There would have been a crazy, communal based half-democracy. Feudalism would have flourised. The focus on education would have to be tempered. On every matter, there would have been demand for quotas based on religion. We would be Lebanon on steroids tottering between full-scale civil war or an uneasy, cold peace. In other words, it would be an unhappy marriage at best. Hindus and muslims just have different vision for the future as a people. Therefore, as they say, if it aint broke, dont fix it!!
Since India is doing great and hindus are happy there, we dont want to screw it up by changing it. Bringing part of Pakistan into the mix, would change the character of India and bring us back to the pre-1947 days of constant hindu-muslim hassles, a nightmare scenario. If muslims have changed since that time, it is a different issue but all indications from Pakistan, especially by the actions of the UP muslims, shows that nothing has changed since 1947. For us hindus, the status quo in India is beautiful along with the natural advantages of having Pakistan as a buffer state. Having good relations with Pakistan is important, so that we can visit Lahore or Karachi and even participate in trade and commerce. But other than that, why change anything?
#356 Posted by haji004 on May 16, 2007 1:43:34 am
Re: Question from ``Chennai``
I fear that Pakistan is not going to survive and whether India likes it or not will have to intervene for the cause of Punjab & Sind.
I am equally surprised by the Indians; most did not want Punjab & Sind to rejoin India....This too from Ranjit who I think is a Sindhi.....What do you make of it.
Answer:
Indians...as everybody else...depict through there utterances, political ideas and remarks the manner in which they were brought up. They (specially my generation of Indians that is not very conscious of the East-Punjab Insurgency) are brought up in a secular/decentralized India which is a very good thing. However it should be noted that
(1) In order to achieve decentralization, it was necessary to redraw the Provincial Frontiers on ``Ethno-Linguistic`` basis.
(2) These man-made frontiers, essential and un-avoidable as they might be, always have a spill-over effect.
Since my generation of Indians has grown with these man-made frontiers it is cognizant of the spill-over effects that decentralization has brought to India and hence it is vary of what the reunification with Punjab and Sind might bring to India especially in terms of militant Islam and Pan-Islamism.
Because in thier opinions NWFP and Balochistan (apparently the hotbeds of Pan-Islamism, I say apparently because most of the people don`t count Karachi in although it is) would then find themselves in direct contact with India.
I remember a post in which Ranjit said perhpas that he does not want any pakhtoon to blow himself in Delhi...The origins of this somewhat incorrect hypothesis lie in his up-bringing in a society where there were man-made frontiers that were visible only on the map and useful only for collecting taxes.
NWFP and Balochistan once separated by Natural Frontiers would exert as much influence on India as China does...also separated by a Natural Barrier. Does China have a cultural influence on India? Has cross-border cultural/sociological exchange ever been possible with China? The answer is no, because Natural Frontiers are the changing point of the Languages and hence effectively mark the territories of different linguistic (and more often than not Ethnic)groups.
Its you who asked me that question about ``Natural Frontiers`` I think...and this presence of natural frontiers is the reason that would keep Balochistan and N.W.F.P. at bay and would not allow militant-Islam or Pan-Islamism to enter India.
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
I fear that Pakistan is not going to survive and whether India likes it or not will have to intervene for the cause of Punjab & Sind.
I am equally surprised by the Indians; most did not want Punjab & Sind to rejoin India....This too from Ranjit who I think is a Sindhi.....What do you make of it.
Answer:
Indians...as everybody else...depict through there utterances, political ideas and remarks the manner in which they were brought up. They (specially my generation of Indians that is not very conscious of the East-Punjab Insurgency) are brought up in a secular/decentralized India which is a very good thing. However it should be noted that
(1) In order to achieve decentralization, it was necessary to redraw the Provincial Frontiers on ``Ethno-Linguistic`` basis.
(2) These man-made frontiers, essential and un-avoidable as they might be, always have a spill-over effect.
Since my generation of Indians has grown with these man-made frontiers it is cognizant of the spill-over effects that decentralization has brought to India and hence it is vary of what the reunification with Punjab and Sind might bring to India especially in terms of militant Islam and Pan-Islamism.
Because in thier opinions NWFP and Balochistan (apparently the hotbeds of Pan-Islamism, I say apparently because most of the people don`t count Karachi in although it is) would then find themselves in direct contact with India.
I remember a post in which Ranjit said perhpas that he does not want any pakhtoon to blow himself in Delhi...The origins of this somewhat incorrect hypothesis lie in his up-bringing in a society where there were man-made frontiers that were visible only on the map and useful only for collecting taxes.
NWFP and Balochistan once separated by Natural Frontiers would exert as much influence on India as China does...also separated by a Natural Barrier. Does China have a cultural influence on India? Has cross-border cultural/sociological exchange ever been possible with China? The answer is no, because Natural Frontiers are the changing point of the Languages and hence effectively mark the territories of different linguistic (and more often than not Ethnic)groups.
Its you who asked me that question about ``Natural Frontiers`` I think...and this presence of natural frontiers is the reason that would keep Balochistan and N.W.F.P. at bay and would not allow militant-Islam or Pan-Islamism to enter India.
Best Regards
Ahmad Hayat
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- MantoLives: The alliance my friend... Living Gandhi and King
- MantoLives: Dear Adam, Well neither... Living Gandhi and King
- MeiraJ08: If we want to... Fathers and Daughters
- thinkingstorm: "Art to the people"... Fathers and Daughters
- farras: Re: # 61 Thanks... MQM - History and
- pinku: #326 Posted by dost_mittar... Historian Amaresh Misra on
- pinku: I give a damn... Historian Amaresh Misra on
- pinku: #325 Posted by bulleya... Historian Amaresh Misra on
