Dodging Pakistani Sleuths to Cover a War and a Coup

#132 Posted by tahmed32 on August 28, 2007 8:09:26 am
Mr. Express: Would you have a link on treatment of India by muslims? Much obliged.
.......................................
How would subserviant minority matter ?

Naqvi Sa'ab is a journalist par excellence who is highly readable and much respected. If terms like Occupied Kashmir have been printed to denote Kashmir (Mind you, the whole of Kashmir is Indian) in pieces by him, then, indeed, Dawn is under censorship. Of course, he and Ayaz Sa'ab would have to take some nonsense from the Pakistani establishment, which must otherwise be very angry with the latter for signing on Naqvi Sa'ab in the first place. Knowing the India hating bureaucracy of Pakistan, they must consider unthinkable the idea of an Indian Muslim correspondent writing for a Pakistani newspaper. Ayaz Sa'ab rises in esteem even higher for engaging Naqvi Sa'ab.

#128 tahmed, I agree with your post in entirity. i am not a student of biology. My interest in it is just curiosity but it seems there is a lot more to be discovered in evolutionary biology.

dost-mittar
I am also talking of the 1930s. I am posting some things for you on UP which you could look at if you are interested.

Re: # 129
Dost Sahib:

Societies indeed make choices, however unpopular they may be. Slavery needed to be stamped out, even though ant-slavery was unpopular. Lincoln-Douglas debates are famous.

Twin evils of Indian society need to be stamped out too. Just as ruthlessly as Lincoln acted in the civil war. Although the origins of American civil war were economic, the north needed cheap labor to industrialize, while the south owned the cheaper labor as the property.

I cannot see any benefit in dividing today's India on regressive basis.

It seems you are buying Yasser's point lock stock and barrel when you imply Congress as the root cause. I dismiss this proposition.

The partition first happened in the minds. Therefore, it can at best be debated when the partition of India really began. I subscribe to the thought that it was when the first call was made for separate Identities. I believe this was in a letter to Lord Curzon in 1906. I have this letter somewhere in my disorganized library. At any rate this was long long before Jinnah became the proponent.

Religious identities were ground realities then. Both Gandhi and Jinnah proved it at different times.

Economic participation in Indian dream and Indian pie can be the ground realities now. Farzana and Bidwai are in my wrong examples. Just as Gujju Banias of Chowk are wrong example.

One, as I see belongs to a shell shocked generation which refused to convert their pain and hurt into progress, and instead chose to channelize limited resources and energies in creative work, social work. This generation, according to me refused to convert it into anger, else angry 20% India could have had a devastating effect. The other I am yet to figure if it is not an opportunistic journalism.

While India Shining was touted by the right. It is also becoming fashionable, especially among JNU types (come to think of it JNU was not even a University while I was a student in Delhi) to show liberal thinking through a kind of cynicism toward achievements of younger India. May be they cannot believe that this experiment is truly non-religious. Gladly none of the two you mention represent the mainstream today.

Bangalore phenomenon and Gurgaon phenomenon could not be imagined in late 80s and even early 90s. I know it, I was there. In fact these were put down.

None of these realities today have religious dissection. I am of Linclon, and not Douglas school of thought that evil must be confronted. India has twin evils to confront. Third - inequities in the distribution of wealth and opportunities - could be there in 15 years. It would be ugly and failure of current leadership, if 15 years from now it is portrayed because of religious divides.

Modern India has no use of religion, other than putting it in the personal mind space of its people. You cannot show me any good or positive factor that it gave to This India. Therefore, it pains me to see when someone tries to dissect today's India in terms of religion.

There are temples (probably mosques and churches too) in small villages that do not have schools. I call this temple a waste of real estate and amenities. School is the temple of today's India. Interestingly when we force religious divide, suddenly temple shines, and a pundit gains a voice. Although this voice was takencare of in U.P. elections. My point is that neither is urgently needed.

sadna#130:

I was thinking of the 1930s and not 1940s.

Mr. Express: Would you have a link on treatment of India by muslims? Much obliged.

Treatment of muslims in India

http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/47578/.html

dost-mittar #129
"Once upon a time, the Congress Party in India assumed it spoke for all Indians"

That was certainly the accusation made because it suited the political agenda of the man who made it and that of the historians who repeat this line as their propaganda. But it was not the reality ( that the Congress Party or its leaders assumed so).

anil#128:

I do not believe in creating differences where none exist. However, I do not believe that one should assume or impose a consensus where none exists. If you read the columns of Jawed Naqvi saheb, Praful Bidwai or our own Farzana Versey, you will notice that they do not share the celebratory tone which marks the dominant discourse in India today and is seen in abundance at chowk. Once upon a time, the Congress Party in India assumed it spoke for all Indians when it did not and the result was a divided country. It is important to learn our lessons from history.

dullabhatti: I have not read his book, and my scepticism was based on my understanding that Dawkins is an avowed atheist who are in the same group (titled "Confusers of Belief with Facts") as those who are sure that they have an angel sitting on each shoulder.

I am glad you take him with two teaspoons of salt and recognize his tendancy to stretch his interpretation of facts. Add a third teaspoon: despite continuing remarkable advances, our knowledge of the DNA and of the causal factors behind human behavior is very limited. Thus, when he wrote his book a few years ago, there used to "exist" large stretches of DNA that seemed to do nothing and so were called "Junk DNA" even by trained scientists who should have known better. In recent months, it has become clear that far from being junk, those stretches in fact determine how DNA info translates into human behavior.

His basic hypothesis (which I understand is that we humans are merely a means, kind of like the donkey pulling the cart, for the wily DNA to perpetuate its rule - which puts the DNA in the same category as Musharraf, but that is another story) is intriguing though and may be part of a bigger truth that we may uncover with scientific progress in the next couple of decades.

tahmed, I read Dwkins with 2 teaspoons of salt....but still evidence is overwhelming. he may be too far off the line in interpretation but not in facts.

Re: # 120

Dost Sahib:

"..only when it is germane to the issue being discussed. We are at chowk which is mostly, if not wholly, about religious and national identities of India and Pakistan."

One does not need to change values and ethics. Slavery and Caste Systems are abhorant no matter, we do not need to lower the values. It is very dangerous to dissect today's India on the basis of religion.

Paki media is free..to print paki fantasies..

http://www.hindu.com/2007/08/28/stories/2007082855781200.htm

Pakistan’s Islamist press calls for jihad

Praveen Swami

Fresh demands for violence against India escalated weeks before Hyderabad bombings

“Musharraf’s regime should discard the pro-U.S. policy”

“Make jihad, martyrdom part of the curriculum”

NEW DELHI: Pakistan’s Islamist media published a series of explicit calls for violence against India in the six weeks before the Hyderabad bombings — a development that analysts believe reflects the weakening of General Pervez Musharraf’s regime, and raises fears of a renewed wave of terror strikes.

In an editorial published in the Jamaat-e-Islami-affiliated Daily Jasarat’s August 19 Friday supplement, the newspaper demanded that the “slogan of jihad should reverberate in every nook and corner of Pakistan. If Pakist an allows jihadis to infiltrate into India then Kashmir could be liberated in six months.”

“Within a couple of years,” the newspaper asserted, “the rest of the territories of India could be conquered as well, and we can regain our lost glory. We can bring back the era of Mughal rule. We can once again subjugate the Hindus like our forefathers.”

Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, in turn, used the July 20 rape and murder of north Kashmir teenager to call for escalated violence. “The Indian Army,” he wrote in July 22 article published on the terror group’s website, “is raping the daughters of Islam. How can we tolerate this? We will kill every single soldier of the Indian Army and take revenge for the honour of our sisters. Let India deploy more soldiers in Kashmir so that our mujahideen have more pigs to hunt.”

According to Islamist publications, these calls for violence are legitimised by what they characterise as a global war against Islam and Pakistan. “India and other foreign powers,” Saeed told a congregation at Lahore’s al-Qadsia mosque on July 20, “are involved in the recent spate of bomb blasts in Pakistan. Only India could be behind the recent attacks because only a Hindu could do it. No Muslim can think of shedding the blood of another Muslim.”
The War Within

Much of the Islamist press’ ire is focussed on Pakistan’s own establishment — and the figure of President Pervez Musharraf.

Writing in the July 30 edition of the Daily Jasarat, which has an estimated circulation of 50,000, Lashkar deputy chief Abdul Rahman Makki demanded that General Musharraf’s regime “discard the pro-United States policy th at has weakened the Kashmir cause. It is time to adopt a pro-jihad and pro-jihadi policy. You give us the country for six months and we will conquer Kashmir. We will also force the Americans out from Afghanistan.”

In another attack on General Musharraf, published on the Lashkar website on August 8, Saeed asserted that “Muslim rulers have disappointed the Ummah [worldwide Muslim community]. It is time to wage jihad against them. They are not Muslims. They are the agents of Jews.”

However, Saeed was careful not to endorse pro-democracy protests. “The answer is not democracy,” he wrote. “The answer is the caliphate.” He followed this up with an appeal to Pakistan’s military establishment: “Remember, O foolish rulers, the United States is not going to help you. Jihadis are your true friends.”

Soon after, Makki launched an even more acidic attack on General Musharraf at the Madrassa Ayesha, near Rawalpindi. Pakistan, he asserted, “is ruled by Ahmadis at present” — a reference to a heterodox Muslim sect officially proscribed in Pakistan, and long subject to persecution by Islamists. “Most of the top Generals and bureaucrats,” he continued, “are Ahmadi.”

In order to counter this pernicious influence, Makki called for “jihad and martyrdom to be made part of the curriculum. They should be taught in textbooks at school, college and university levels.”

Several key members of the Musharraf regime have also been singled out for attack in the Islamist press. In an August 12 editorial, the Nawa-i-Waqt, which is estimated to sell some 2,00,000 copies daily, railed against Education Min ister General Javed Ashraf Qazi for the publication of a Grade II school textbook which omitted Jammu and Kashmir from a map of Pakistan. “The Education Minister,” it stated, “is a Jewish agent.”

urstruly #119: Dullbhatti #115 is right in saying you twisted his words. Would you care to acknowledge the obvious and then go back and respond to what he actually wrote?

dullabhatti: I think you should read Dawkins with a half teaspoon of salt.