Kargil and the Myth of Losing the Media War

TRUTH#104, As far as Pakistan is concerned,i dont know any thing at all,WHETHER they kill kafir or Ahmedia,demolished all Mandirs or did not upkeep them Is everyone including kafir have to read Koran????

And hypothetically if Pakistan is a devil land what diff. should it make, how India deal with other religous sEcts.The only thing the Indian Muslims share with the devil land is common religion,AND IT WOULD BE DAMAGING TO ALL IF HINDU IN ITS MIND ASSUME THAT THEY(mUSLIMS) ARE UNANIMOUS,AND TO OFFEND A MUSLIM WOULD BE TO AFFEND ALL MUSLIMS!I DONT THINK THERE IS THAT KIND OF COHESCION AMONG ANY SECT ,CERTAINLY NOT AMONG 4-500 MILLIONS MUSLIMS IN THE SUBCONTINENT,

I ALSO THINK, ABOVE MAKING OR DESTROYING ANY MOSQUE OR MANDIR IS HUMAN LIFE,ANY BODIES.

ZZ#103



i WOULD NOT LET YOUR LONG PARA ON RIOTS INITIATION,METHODS,CULPRITS & LACK OF RESTRAINT TO PASS JUDGEMENT IN HASTE ,GO BY WITHOUT STRESSING NEED OF PROOF.SAYing OF FACTS WHICH HAS BEEN ``PROVEN``Riots in India is not a new phenomenon,actually British as usual taught that by putting pig products in the kartoos of Muslim soldier &cow products in Hindu soldiers.Ever since the GADDAR of 1857 how many times pig head in Mosque court yard & gruesom mutilated cow carcasses in temples have been used .

On subject of allegations,You relate how cpm gives free raion card for votes from ``alleged bang,deshis``Are you not saying that because BJP is jelous and wants to break the partnership that hindu & muslim bengalis have formed spl.after 71,a positive turn for all muslims.

On the same subject,it is not Jinnah nor Patel partitioned, it always the british who have been playing wih us like doll.Do you think Mt. Batten gave choice (true) to any leader???Patel 7 Jinnah were glad as something is better than nothing for Jinnah,as for Patel he couldnt resist getting rid of the muslims,whom he had no affinity for!

How long would it take much brighter students becoming IPS officers,to connect the pattern of initiation of riots,when the dull perpretators doesnt even have the smart to alter his methods.I suspect the police force gets personal(they are redblooded hindu afterall)as was the case in Bombay.I am amazed if Abdu Kalam can solve all astro physics problem,yet a low tech technique of more than 14o yrs ago continue to defy solution.

In response to Kant Patel (Reply #: 102)

Dear Kant Patel:

In response to Jay`s statement that ``My [Jay`s] understanding is that in the present day it is appropriate for a hindu in Pakistan to be called a kafir, it is legal`` I wrote: ``. . . could you please identify the law in Pakistan that considers any non-Muslim as Kafir. Please provide proper citations.`` Now, you seem to believe that my statement is ``full of naivety.`` I was just responding to what Jay clearly maintained. Remember, he said, ``it is legal.``

In your post, you maintain that: ``The Kuran at numerous places define Kafir as non-believer.`` Let us stick to this definition. Do you think a Hindu is a non-believer? If a Hindu believes in God (Bhagwan, Krishan, Ganesh, or any other form of God in Hinduism), how he/she be a Kafir? I think, a simple dialogue on the issue of ``Kafir`` is not sufficient to resolve such unnecessary and unwarranted issues.

Remember, both Jinnah and Gandhi advised us ``to avoid in speech and writing, any words which might be construed as an incitement to . . . acts`` of violence`` (see Reply # 92). Are we really following their advise?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

ZZ#103

Well zz good to see you return,no matter what opponents, like BJP,may say it is tainted by obvious hatred for Muslims.Fact muslims in W.Bengal prefer CPM to any other party even our oldest allies,congress.No major riots,appointment of muslims in police force,going farther than central rule of congress by making Urdu 2nd language incertain areas,Bengali & urdu has found each others for rich language attract each other.You ask why not Hindu congress,BsP and you very diplomatically left outBJP.the answer is its not the Hindu name or part is not objectionable so mulim consider the CPM,JUST REASONABLE,PROGRESSIVE THAN ANY OTHER hINDU .Obviously even Joyti Da knows that neither he nor Muslims believe in total marxism of course not,

Statesman:

The destruction of Babri Masjid is not worth the death of even one person. I disagree with the destruction and will happily donate money to anybody seeking to reconstruct Babri Masjid and/or anybody working to stop construction of the Ram Mandir on that site. We have to distinguish two things: hurting a human being and hurting Babri Masjid. My point is that the Masjid destroyers were IN THEIR MIND trying to RESTORE a Mandir. Of course, one can argue that even if what they believe is true (that a Mandir existed), it was not worth destroying the Masjid. That would be my position. But how does one respond to somebody who says ``This was not to hurt Islam generally, it was to restore a Hindu place of worship.``? That is what I meant by saying that even now the language of the Indian communalists, in which category I include Ram Mandir supporters, is very different from the language of the mainstream of Pakistan where the superior position of Islam is a given. I hope you understand the distinctions I am making. I too was unaware of this controversy till the 1980s. It is a tragedy for our nation. As an Indian and a Hindu, I felt and continue to feel a little smaller after the anti-Sikh riots and Babri Masjid. It is a shadow over our country. The only true apology will be bringing the HKL Bhagats and Advanis to justice. Until that happens, we are all as Hindus, as human beings, as Indians, a little smaller, a little diminished.

bahmad: #100

In your response to Jay`s post, your reply: ``Regarding the word Kafir....identify the law...non-Muslim as Kafir``, is full of naivety.

As you must know, Pakistan is officially an Islamic country, as a matter of fact the name it goes by is Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The inference is that its laws and judicial system, along with day to day life, is governed strictly by the Islamic scriptures, hadith, etc. Per the Islamic tradition, there is no pick and choose method when it comes to following the Kuran. The Kuran at numerous places define Kafir as a non-believer, especially an idolator; also it deals in great detail how to deal with the Kafirs. Since Pakistan is officially an Islamic nation, it follows that all non-Muslims are, by definition, Kafirs.

Secondly, the proposed (or passed?) law criminalizing the act of calling a Muslim (and Muslims only) a `Kafir`, through sheer laws of Induction & Deduction, means if you call a non-Muslim a Kafir it is in fact OK, not a crime. So you would ask why? Again, with a little bit of logic you can infer that the reason being the system believes that non-Muslims in reality are Kafirs. They have committed Kafur- by not being believers.

You do not need a law to explicitly say all non-Muslims are Kafirs. When the courts of law of a country rules on an act of crime, they just do not read the law concerned literally, rather they infer, interprete, deduce, etc. So, when you take the constitutional aspects and the legal system of the country in consideration, you will realize who is really targeted as a KAFIR.

Sorry for such a long dessertation for only a five-letter word.

Kant.........

Mythbreaker#

I am happy,to read Omer Khalidis piece in Indian Express.I have known him personally for 15 years,and he will vouch i have been his benefactor in publishing books on Indian Muslims.I know that there is nothing he will write,whether i am aware of it or not,he would not make any wild claims either pro or anti muslim .In short all the FACTS are correct but he does not go into detrimental factors that have existed for muslims spl. after vivesection of both muslims & hindus ,whose only fault was that they were huddled to gether in the two wings of India,East & West!

As for the caught in between muslims in the rest of the country things have been on the downhill.I dont have govt. statistics,but even that can be inconclusive.

JAY #

May be you dont feel proud enough to feel insulted,whether or not i am ``famous``as i understand ,libel ,or character assassintation case does not require the plaintiff to prove if he is as famous as ex. P M Morarji Desai.You obviously have no experience how devastating it is for a muslim to be considered`` GADDAR``,not that i am insulted by you, but i do think ignorence on your part.See ,i am not talking of real ISI but you have no imagination what false accusation of this nature can do to the family.How would you like to wake up in the morning,to be raided by RAW & BSF ransack your house ON SUSCPISCION.And any Indian Muslim is vulnerable sitting duck.I have seen in other times,65,71 any bearded cap wearing men would be rounded on DIR,& now TADA etc.It may be status symbol for Pillo Mody(remember him in 60-70)would wear a cia badge to lok sabha riding a bullock cart.It is another thing to feel like Najam or Nasreen orSalman Rushdie in your own home,house &hearth.

TRUTH#99

``REVERSAL OF A WRONG AGAINST HINDUISM``

What is the wrong,done by whom & are you sure you are punishing the right guy.If you are concentiously fool proof of your conviction,then go ahead with your crime appropriate judgment it only will only rest on your conscious not only your life time but forever.I never heard HINDUS talk with this logic before 60-70 I never even knew there was a mosque in Ayodhya including my Hindu friends.Even if it was built on Hindu temple is it worth 1000s already dead & god knows how many more Hindu & muslims must die,because an embittered,refugee from muslim area is on a ego trip to feel we (hindu ) are the best & need to be RESTORED.

In response to Jay (Reply #: 98 and Jay`s other postings):

Dear Jay:

You have been consistently calling our attention to the rights of minorities (basically religious minorities) in Pakistan. You have also drawn our attention to the Eighth Amendment without even providing a short summary of this amendment. I am not a student of the Constitution of Pakistan, though my casual attempts to understand some parts of this document were generally not very successful. I have, in addition, been away from Pakistan for a pretty long time and during most of this time I was engaged in research that does not pertain to Pakistan. However, I have revived my interest in the political economy of Pakistan (and South Asia). During the past three months or so, I have written more than a dozen or so letters criticizing various aspect of the Pakistani state and political setup. I have published at least one letter that pertains to the rights of minorities in Pakistan (all kinds of minorities). I have also published a few short articles in a couple of newspapers. In addition, you may be aware of my postings on the Chowk and Indolink. I am prepared to learn about any issue of significance to Pakistan and her neighboring countries, particularly India.

In my reply # 95, I asked you a few questions which you have not cared to answer. These questions are important for a good a critique of the violation of minority rights in Pakistan. In your reply # 98, you have asked me to ask an additional question. Of course, we may need to ask many more questions in an attempt to develop a reasonable understanding of the situation.

Jay, if you really want to raise the consciousness of Pakistani citizens, then you need to be more concrete in your postings. If you don`t receive good answers of your queries, this may be because most of your readers are not fully aware of the problem. Or, they don`t share your concerns (rightly or wrongly). So, make them understand and also suggest them some ways of resolving the issue at hand. I think, Pakistan is in a mess but the religious minorities are not as repressed as you seem to believe. If I am wrong, make me understand.

Regarding the word Kafir, could you please identify the law in Pakistan that considers any non-Muslim as Kafir. Please provide proper citations. After you do so, I will send a letter for publication against such a law. This is my promise to you. I am a man of my words, but I would appreciate if you provide answers of my questions which you, to my regret, have chosen not to answer.



Regards, Bilal Ahmad

To bilal and statesman,

I am a firm believer in the notion 9of a collectve identity of a nation, and is represented by the legal system, institutions, customs etc. Whatever might be the original meaning of kafir, 1400 years ago, at present it has a meaning, as understood buy the people, and that is what matters. My understanding is that in the present day it is appropriate for a hindu in pakistan to be called a kafir, it is legal. If a muslim is called that, it is ilegal, and attracts imprisonment. I was only presenting this in the context of pakistan`s expressed desire to have kashmir as part of it, and what will be the fate of the minorities there. The 8th amendment and now the new law, are expressly antiminority.

Now, to statesman,

In the 1970s to call apublic figure a CIA agent was the ultimate insult. Now it is to be called a pak agent, which as an aside you can consider as a progress, pakistan is at par with what US was.

My understanding is that once Morarji Desai was called a cia agent and he sued the newspaper for defamation and he won, being Morarji, he asked for Re. 1 as compensation.

Now after the kargil and the wide spread havok being created by pak agents, i am confident that being called a pak agent with out basis could be construed as an insult and grounds for defamatory action. As it is usually the case, the person has to prove that he had some `fame` before and has been defamed.

I liked the imlication and the rationale behind `staesman` comments. To be a pak agent or not is an act of choice. Similarly to be a kafir or not is an act of choice. All that the hindus and christians of pakistan have to do, not to be insulted by being called a kafir is simply to change the Religion to islam. I didnt see coecieve aspect of the legislation, may be Bilal could ask a few more questions on this.

Regards

Here is an article Indian Express by a muslim scholar .fpr those pakis who are shedding crocodile tears for indian muslims.

The Muslim discrimination is a fantasy

Omar Khalidi

Every so often one hears of discrimination against

Indian Muslims in state employment, particularly with

regards to civil service, police and the armed forces.

Around election time, ``minority cells`` of all political

parties surface through the newspapers demanding

``justice`` and fair treatment to the minorities by the

Indian state. Is there real discrimination against

Muslims just because they are Muslims? Can the alleged

discrimination be established in a court of law? Or is

this merely a case of fantasy versus reality?

Historically Muslims have been less educated than

Hindus in modern education since the colonial times,

and therefore were in smaller number in the civil

service even during the British raj, except in U.P. and

Hyderabad state. The exodus of educated Muslims to

Pakistan contributed to the further decline of Muslims

in the civil service. As the educational backwardness of

Muslims persists even after independence, fewer

Muslims are in the government jobs.

Like other Indians, most Muslims, some 65 percent (as

against roughly 68 percent national average) live in

rural areas, and most are occupied in agriculture and

related fields. Only a microscopic percentage of the

total national population is employed by the state.

Educationally, more Muslims are illiterate than is the

national average. Within Muslims, a higher percentage

of women are illiterate. Because a higher percentage of

Muslims are illiterate, most do not even qualify to

compete for the higher echelons of the state jobs, much

less hired. Since most government hiring is through

competitive examinations held by roll numbers rather

than names, the likelihood of discrimination on the basis

of Muslim-sounding names is absent. However, where

interviews are involved, it is possible to discriminate

against not merely Muslims, but by caste as well since

the Hindu society itself is divided by caste and subcaste,

not to speak of language and region. If the absence of

Muslims in the civil service is attributed tolack of

education, what accounts for the absence of Muslims as

peons in say, the Central Secretariat in New Delhi?

In the armed forces, before independence Muslims

constituted around 35 percent of the total. Today,

guestimates number them around two percent out of a

total of close to a million. Why so few Muslims? Most

of the 35 percent Muslims in the army were recruited

from Punjab and nearby areas. Since those regions are

no longer in India, there are fewer Muslims, although it

is possible that some Muslims were not recruited in the

early decades of independence due to doubts about their

loyalty. But that era has long been over. Since 1989,

there is a policy to recruit soldiers from around the

nation by rejecting the theory of ``martial races``. If this

policy is followed in letter and spirit, there is no reason

why Muslims will be left out. However, the Muslims`

educational backwardness would still be an impediment

to commissioned ranks recruitment, which is through

competitive exams. Recruitment to the air force and the

navy has always been through exams and is unlikely that

Muslims were rejected merely on account oftheir faith.

In the police and the paramilitary, the story is different.

In U.P. and Hyderabad State, Muslims were

``represented`` in the police in larger than their

population percentage. Congress chief ministers in both

states did in fact curtail Muslim recruitment in the

police in the early years of freedom. But again that era

is well past us, much like the excesses of the Evacuee

Property law enforced between 1947 and 56, when

Muslims` immovable properties were seized by the

state.

It is unreasonable to expect that each religious group

will be ``represented`` in each service/occupation in exact

proportion to its population. This is not say that there

are no issues that are Muslim-specific and need to be

solved. The preservation and perpetuation of Urdu is of

special concern to those whose mother tongue it happens

to be, even as it interests some whose native language it

is not. The protection of Muslim personal law and

mosques are obvious issues dear to most Muslims. Yet,

it would be erroneous to claim that Muslims have any

economic and educational interest different from or in

competition with the rest of the nation.

The writer is a scholar at MIT, Cambridge, US

Copyright © 1999 Indian Express Newspapers

(Bombay) Ltd.

In response to Jay (Reply #: 94):

Kafir is derogatory word. It was used for the ``Kuffar-e-Mecca`` some 1400 years back. This word is often loosely and unwisely used by people who, in my view, lack an adequate understanding of the true spirit of Islam.

Jay has raised an important question. But, could Jay explain why the law makers have passed such a law? Is there any wisdom (or its lack of) involved in it? Is there any good that such a law could bring? Do we need to amend this law? What kind of conflicts should we anticipate if the law makers try to amend this law?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. In the present context, we need to exclude the word ``Kafir`` from our vocabulary.

Here is a paradox for the modern thinkers of pakistan. To call a person belonging to a sect of islam KAFIR has been declared an offence punishable by 15 years of imprisonment. I can reasonably conclude that the term Kafir is a highest form of insult in pakistan. So what is the status of REAL KAFIRS, that is the people who can be legally called KAFIRS with out invoking the penal sanctions in pakistan.

The following is from DAWN. Read before it is edited out

LAHORE, Aug 22: Branding any class of people or any individual belonging to any sect of Islam ``Kafir,`` is being made an offence punishable with 14 years` imprisonment plus fine.

Punishment for passing derogatory remarks against holy personages and the Ahle Bait is being raised from three years to 14 years.

In my reply #92, kindly read ``After the Noakhali and Bihar massacres. . . . ``

I regret for my sloppiness.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Dear Friends:

After the Noakhali massacre both Jinnah and Gandhi issued a joint proclamation (Robert Payne, The Life and Death of Mahatama Gandhi, p. 529). Both leaders said:

``We deeply deplore the recent acts of lawlessness and violence that have brought the utmost disgrace on the fair name of India and the greatest misery to innocent people, irrespective of who were the aggressors and who were the victims.

We denounce for all time the use of force to achieve political ends, and we call upon all the communities of India, to whatever persuasion they may belong, not only to refrain from all acts of violence and disorder; but also to avoid both in speech and writing, any words which might be construed as an incitement to such acts.``

What attract me most, in the present context, the part where both urged the people to ``to avoid in speech and writing, any words which might be construed as an incitement to such acts`` of violence. Do we really pay any heed to our founding fathers? Are we careful in our speech and writing?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Re Amit: ``There is an element of bestiality in our

desi nature....``.

While I applaud the humility and intellectual honesty which this statement reflects, I do not agree with it. If I can think of a really crippling desi cultural feature, it is caste. In Pakistan, I have seen people been designated as ``kammi``, ``lohar``, ``tarkhan``, etc; not only to refer to their occupation derisively, but also in

reference to their allegedly low caste status. In India, I believe, things are worse. As we look down upon those who perform productive labour in society, it is not surprising that our societies remain as backwards as they are.

Communal conflict, however, is another story. Our ancestors lived peacefully, side by side in their villages for centuries. Rulers fought eachother, the ruled did not. Modern communalism is more a colonial inheritance, as well as the result of middle class competition for state patronage. Human nature (including the desi one) is amenable

to calls for brutality when certain conditions are conducive to this. For example, social inequality, presence of grievances, avialability of potential scapegoats (Ahmadis, Muslims, Jews..), and above all the presence of elites ready to exploit the situation for political reasons. In these circumstances, people like Milosovich, maudoodi, and Advani find the most fertile ground.

Milovan Djilas has said that Serbian and Croation

nationalisms were not indigenous. They were 19th century Germanic cultural imports. I think we can say the same about modern Hindu and Muslim nationalism too. The type of nationalism which

preaches that one`s next door neighbour belongs to a different nation on account of his or her religion or language is potentially deadly, and should be rejected by all decent people. This is what recent history teaches us.

Re: Kashmir, India and Pakistan

Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.