Rest in Peace Pakistan (1947-1974)
Yasser Latif Hamdani June 28, 2007
#1119 Posted by MantoLives on July 8, 2007 8:49:05 am
Re: # 1118
No ... only you are stupid enough not to...
No ... only you are stupid enough not to...
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#1108 Posted by KaalChakra on July 8, 2007 8:16:12 am
Harimau # 1106
That`s like communal riots in India - Hindus going from one extreme to another.
That`s like communal riots in India - Hindus going from one extreme to another.
#1107 Posted by KaalChakra on July 8, 2007 8:11:25 am
Mohar, Muslim (as group, not individuals) view will change when Islam changes. When Islam changes, it will fall apart as the logically perfect social system it is and has been until now.
I don`t assign that a value judgment, since I am not a Muslim. Only what I know of the strengths of this powerful faith.
I don`t assign that a value judgment, since I am not a Muslim. Only what I know of the strengths of this powerful faith.
#1110 Posted by mohar11 on July 8, 2007 8:23:32 am
Re: # 1107
[....I don`t assign that a value judgment, since I am not a Muslim....]
But I do - and islam is NOT a ``logically perfect social system``...
You are squeamish, just like the hindu liberals you deride... you are afraid to make a judgement, you are afraid to take a stand... you are ready to give in, you are ready to give up in face of ``muslim point of view``... that`s even worse than the hindu liberals...
[....I don`t assign that a value judgment, since I am not a Muslim....]
But I do - and islam is NOT a ``logically perfect social system``...
You are squeamish, just like the hindu liberals you deride... you are afraid to make a judgement, you are afraid to take a stand... you are ready to give in, you are ready to give up in face of ``muslim point of view``... that`s even worse than the hindu liberals...
#1106 Posted by harimau on July 8, 2007 8:11:15 am
Ref kaalchakra #1092
[Gandhi`s belief that Islam and Muslims were somehow ``the same`` as Hinduism and Hindus cost India much.
The two were incompatible, and NO POLITICAL solution between them was possible, except the Cabinet Mission Plan type of an arrangement. Luckily or unluckily as naive and clueless a Hindu as Nehru rejected that.]
But the clueless idiots Gandhi and Nehru didn`t go for Jinnah`s solution of population exchange. If we had implemented that in 1947 whether it was orderly or bloodier than the population transfers that occurred during Partition, we would not be having the problems we are having today. Pakistan would be struggling with a population of 280 million in its present boundary, India would have 150 million less mouths to feed, clothe and educate, and everything would be hunky-dory.
The Spanish are the only ones in history who knew how to deal with the Muslims. They expelled every last one of them when they finally overthrew the Moorish empite in the Middle Ages. The only mistake they made was letting a few thousand in and they paid for it with the bombing of the trains in Madrid.
Time to quarantine all Muslims in inhospitable places like Arabia, Afghanistan and the Saharan desert.
[Gandhi`s belief that Islam and Muslims were somehow ``the same`` as Hinduism and Hindus cost India much.
The two were incompatible, and NO POLITICAL solution between them was possible, except the Cabinet Mission Plan type of an arrangement. Luckily or unluckily as naive and clueless a Hindu as Nehru rejected that.]
But the clueless idiots Gandhi and Nehru didn`t go for Jinnah`s solution of population exchange. If we had implemented that in 1947 whether it was orderly or bloodier than the population transfers that occurred during Partition, we would not be having the problems we are having today. Pakistan would be struggling with a population of 280 million in its present boundary, India would have 150 million less mouths to feed, clothe and educate, and everything would be hunky-dory.
The Spanish are the only ones in history who knew how to deal with the Muslims. They expelled every last one of them when they finally overthrew the Moorish empite in the Middle Ages. The only mistake they made was letting a few thousand in and they paid for it with the bombing of the trains in Madrid.
Time to quarantine all Muslims in inhospitable places like Arabia, Afghanistan and the Saharan desert.
#1105 Posted by KaalChakra on July 8, 2007 8:08:05 am
Harimau
Who is ``brining in`` Muslims as separate from Tamils?
Who is ``brining in`` Muslims as separate from Tamils?
#1103 Posted by KaalChakra on July 8, 2007 8:06:28 am
mohar # 1101
That`s the clearest enunciation of an intelligent Hindu`s view. Whether one accepts or rejects it will depend entirely upon whether one puts the Hindu or the Muslim cap on. :)
Liberal Hindus have no cap, so we will not bother about their delusions.
That`s the clearest enunciation of an intelligent Hindu`s view. Whether one accepts or rejects it will depend entirely upon whether one puts the Hindu or the Muslim cap on. :)
Liberal Hindus have no cap, so we will not bother about their delusions.
#1109 Posted by mohar11 on July 8, 2007 8:17:48 am
Re: # 1103
we have a common destiny... to be prosperous and free - to be free from dogma, poverty, deprivation, made-up differences and what not... that destiny should be identical whichever cap you have on...
Like I said - some muslims already see that... some don`t... nevertheless, we are going to take this forward... we have to...
Your reaction is to hindu liberals[commies] is understood... but you don`t have to go overboard to embrace the fundamentalist muslim point of view...
we have a common destiny... to be prosperous and free - to be free from dogma, poverty, deprivation, made-up differences and what not... that destiny should be identical whichever cap you have on...
Like I said - some muslims already see that... some don`t... nevertheless, we are going to take this forward... we have to...
Your reaction is to hindu liberals[commies] is understood... but you don`t have to go overboard to embrace the fundamentalist muslim point of view...
#1102 Posted by harimau on July 8, 2007 8:03:51 am
Ref kaalchakra #1096
[Harimau, I can`t explain it as a Hindu. I can if you are willing to look at the world through the eyes of Islam.
Question: In Sri Lanka, is there a ``third`` party, other than the Tamils and Sinhalas or not?]
There are only two parties to the conflict in Sri Lanka: the Sinhalese and the Tamils. Muslims are being brought in as being distinct from the Tamils just to skew the statistics on what percentage of Sri Lankans are Tamils.
Are they trotting out the Burghers as a separate race though they would be, being of mixed European-Sinhalese parentage?
[Harimau, I can`t explain it as a Hindu. I can if you are willing to look at the world through the eyes of Islam.
Question: In Sri Lanka, is there a ``third`` party, other than the Tamils and Sinhalas or not?]
There are only two parties to the conflict in Sri Lanka: the Sinhalese and the Tamils. Muslims are being brought in as being distinct from the Tamils just to skew the statistics on what percentage of Sri Lankans are Tamils.
Are they trotting out the Burghers as a separate race though they would be, being of mixed European-Sinhalese parentage?
#1101 Posted by KaalChakra on July 8, 2007 7:55:27 am
Philosopher, you must be among the very few people who believe I know anything about Islam. Hindus all seem to hate me, universally. So thank you :)
Bhai, I have been honest about it. I think Islam IS a perfect religion, IF you believe in. have full faith, in its basics. If not, one is fooling themselves and others, and God as well. :(
Bhai, I have been honest about it. I think Islam IS a perfect religion, IF you believe in. have full faith, in its basics. If not, one is fooling themselves and others, and God as well. :(
#1099 Posted by philosopher on July 8, 2007 7:48:45 am
kaalchakra various..
kaalji...Lets leave the analysis of Islam within its own framework...you understand it better than many pakistani islamic scholars....
What is it that makes you not to convert to Islam.(objectively speaking)
1)it has something to do with the islamic concept of God
2) Islamic social theory
3) Quarnic theory of knowledge
4)Or it has something to do with the concept of religion in general?
You dont have faith. what is that that can make you have faith???
kaalji...Lets leave the analysis of Islam within its own framework...you understand it better than many pakistani islamic scholars....
What is it that makes you not to convert to Islam.(objectively speaking)
1)it has something to do with the islamic concept of God
2) Islamic social theory
3) Quarnic theory of knowledge
4)Or it has something to do with the concept of religion in general?
You dont have faith. what is that that can make you have faith???
#1097 Posted by KaalChakra on July 8, 2007 7:35:50 am
LOL Mohar, I never say ``give in`` to it. There is NO chance of my converting to Islam, in this life or if I can, in any life whatsoever. That is just my personal preference, that is all. I don`t the faith.
I am suggesting we understand the Islamic point of view. THEN, we can either accept it or reject it. And either way, construct better, more peaceful, solutions in the presence of Islam.
I am suggesting we understand the Islamic point of view. THEN, we can either accept it or reject it. And either way, construct better, more peaceful, solutions in the presence of Islam.
#1104 Posted by mohar11 on July 8, 2007 8:06:53 am
Re: # 1097
[...I am suggesting we understand the Islamic point of view...]
We perfectly understand islamic point of view... and we do NOT agree with such views... we are ready to give what`s fair... we have already given what`s fair... But we have to do what we have to do... We have to seek our destiny...
we want muslims to be part of this journey... but if they don`t because they are a separate ``race`` - well, thanks for playing... if they are going to stuck up on your racial and identity politics - then we can`t make progress...
You are talking as if this so-called ``muslim point of view`` is some kind of line set in stone... it`s not... it is counter-productive and it does NOT work... this has to change...
[...I am suggesting we understand the Islamic point of view...]
We perfectly understand islamic point of view... and we do NOT agree with such views... we are ready to give what`s fair... we have already given what`s fair... But we have to do what we have to do... We have to seek our destiny...
we want muslims to be part of this journey... but if they don`t because they are a separate ``race`` - well, thanks for playing... if they are going to stuck up on your racial and identity politics - then we can`t make progress...
You are talking as if this so-called ``muslim point of view`` is some kind of line set in stone... it`s not... it is counter-productive and it does NOT work... this has to change...
#1096 Posted by KaalChakra on July 8, 2007 7:30:42 am
Harimau, I can`t explain it as a Hindu. I can if you are willing to look at the world through the eyes of Islam.
Question: In Sri Lanka, is there a ``third`` party, other than the Tamils and Sinhalas or not?
Mohar
Specifically, about Bengal, Mohar, see if the following makes sense:
(1) ``Bengali`` Muslims were in the forefront of separating themselves, seeing themselves as a separate race/ethnicity/nation, from Bengali Hindus. Let`s not speak of Bengali Hindus for now.
(2) After 1947, once Hindus were dominated through exclusion and politics, THEN Punjabi and Bengali Muslims naturally began to fight (FACT: differences of genetic race/cultural ethnicity never disappear - Islam merely presents itself as a ``super-race`` that claims to make other racial, ethnic differences ``irrelevant`` in the presence of people of other religions.)
(3) Once Punajabi and Bengali Muslims began to fight, Bengali Muslims were not averse to taking help from the same Hindus from whom they were the first to ask for a separate nation. Indira Gandhi was willing to offer that help, or may be the issue of refugees forced her hand - whatever.
(4) After Bengali Muslims got rid of Punjabi Muslims as oppressors, they would/will go back to being Muslims, a separate race and ethnicity than Hindus. They will end up closer to Pakistanis (as Muslims) now than when they were yoked with them politically.
Question: In Sri Lanka, is there a ``third`` party, other than the Tamils and Sinhalas or not?
Mohar
Specifically, about Bengal, Mohar, see if the following makes sense:
(1) ``Bengali`` Muslims were in the forefront of separating themselves, seeing themselves as a separate race/ethnicity/nation, from Bengali Hindus. Let`s not speak of Bengali Hindus for now.
(2) After 1947, once Hindus were dominated through exclusion and politics, THEN Punjabi and Bengali Muslims naturally began to fight (FACT: differences of genetic race/cultural ethnicity never disappear - Islam merely presents itself as a ``super-race`` that claims to make other racial, ethnic differences ``irrelevant`` in the presence of people of other religions.)
(3) Once Punajabi and Bengali Muslims began to fight, Bengali Muslims were not averse to taking help from the same Hindus from whom they were the first to ask for a separate nation. Indira Gandhi was willing to offer that help, or may be the issue of refugees forced her hand - whatever.
(4) After Bengali Muslims got rid of Punjabi Muslims as oppressors, they would/will go back to being Muslims, a separate race and ethnicity than Hindus. They will end up closer to Pakistanis (as Muslims) now than when they were yoked with them politically.
#1094 Posted by harimau on July 8, 2007 7:25:47 am
Ref kaalchakra #1081
[Have you Hindus never heard the concept of religion as race? Never heard of Tamils, Sinhalas, and Muslims of Srilanka? Never heard of .....well, so much much more.]
The Sinhalese of Sri Lanka are descended from Bengali immigrants...according to their legends. They do not call themselves a separate race because they are Buddhists but because Bengalis are not Dravidians, dark-skinned though they might be.
The Tamils of Sri Lanka are descended from the Dravidian Tamils of India. They don`t call themselves a separate race because they are Hindus...actually, some of them are Christians.
The Muslims of Sri Lanka are Tamil-speaking. But somehow they are a different race!
Explain that to me.
[Have you Hindus never heard the concept of religion as race? Never heard of Tamils, Sinhalas, and Muslims of Srilanka? Never heard of .....well, so much much more.]
The Sinhalese of Sri Lanka are descended from Bengali immigrants...according to their legends. They do not call themselves a separate race because they are Buddhists but because Bengalis are not Dravidians, dark-skinned though they might be.
The Tamils of Sri Lanka are descended from the Dravidian Tamils of India. They don`t call themselves a separate race because they are Hindus...actually, some of them are Christians.
The Muslims of Sri Lanka are Tamil-speaking. But somehow they are a different race!
Explain that to me.