India’s Communal Gamble

re: PM

{details like that wouldn`t be nearly as titillating s some of the other stuff (& nonsense) you`ve waxed eloquent on. yeeeeahh RIGHT!}

...you`ve been inflicting your nonsense on us since your unfortunate return to chowk a few weeks ago..but we haven`t complained...so why give this fellow a hard time?...

- waiting for your recycled comeback..(ps be careful, i hear DRUMZ is in your neighborhood)...

Eklavya #419 Pakistan is a great country. So is India. So is every other nation. And the reason is...(I am going out on a limb on this one): because mankind is a great species. We are so far ahead, we dont have a species that comes in even a distant second (this sounds chauvinistic, but it is true). The tragedy is that it doesnt know that. Otherwise, we would be forgetting about our little quarrels on earth, and busy ourselves with what is plainly within our reach: extending life indefinitely (no longer a pipedream); harness the energy of the sun; extract minerals from the planets and asteroids and moons of the solar system. And that is just what is now in the horizon. We`ll become truly great when we recognize how great we potentially are as a species. And stop trying to drag each other down.

Nuggets from the Urdu press



Advertise Here









America`s `baira` will be `gharaq`

Famous warrior and chief of Lashkar-e-Tayba Hafiz Saeed told Nawa-e-Waqt that there will be baira gharaq (shipwreck) of America at the hands of Allah. He said it was the religious duty of all Pakistanis to come to the defence of the Islamic government of Afghanistan. He said the crusades were on and the Christians would come to grief. He asked General Musharraf why he agreed with the American bombing of airports and power stations in Afghanistan since they were not hideouts for the terrorists. Mufti Shamzai of Banuri mosque in Karachi ruled that the government which supports the Americans should be toppled.

Mulla Umar is nuts

According to daily Din, Mulla Umar the caliph of Afghanistan was mentally sick and was given to bouts of madness during which he screamed like a child. It was his routine to lock himself inside a room which his followers thought was a kind of maraqba (spiritual vigil) but in fact he tried to hide his madness.

Journalist who ate five times a day!

According to Khabrain British journalist Yvonne Ridley writing about her arrest at the hands of the Taliban intelligence agency said that the statement of the Afghan spokesman that she was given five meals a day `because she was used to eating all the time` was false because she was not given any food and that she was on hunger strike during her captivity and had eaten only after being released. She added that she was made to walk 80 miles.

Mulla Umar`s teacher held

According to Khabrain, Mullah Umar`s teacher, 67 year old Maulana Ghulam Sarwar, was picked up in Quetta and held in custody by the Pakistani police. The teacher, after being arrested, immediately declared jehad on America. The arrest was made hours after the beginning of the American attack on Afghanistan.

Dr Israr`s pearls of wisdom

Quoted in daily Din, Lahore`s famous cleric Dr Israr Ahmad said that the attacks in New York and Washington on September 11 were carried out by the Jews. Next, the Jews will destroy Masjid-e-Aqsa in occupied Jerusalem. He said Israel will finally be conquered by the combined power of the mujahideen from Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Gul sways lawyers

According to daily Pakistan, ex-ISI chief General Hamid Gul told the Lahore High Court bar that the terrorism in America was actually the work of Americans and Jews. He said America wanted to end the power of China and Pakistan. After Afghanistan, America would end Pakistan. After his speech, the lawyers became extremely emotional and shouted that he should lead their procession against the government, but the office bearers of the bar succeeded in containing the fiery passions of the true Muslim lawyers.

Astrologers on Taliban crisis

According to Khabrain, a handful of astrologers in Lahore expressed conflicting views on the future of the on-going American attacks on Afghanistan. Almost all of them said that America will fail and that the Taliban will win and the Muslim world would unite, but disagreed in detail. One said that Pakistan will emerge from its own crisis in 2002, and another said that Osama bin Laden would leave Afghanistan but Mulla Umar would lose power in 2001.

A bungalow for Mulla Umar

Famous columnist Nazeer Naji wrote in Jang that Osama bin Laden came to Afghanistan and took control of it and in return built a bungalow for Mulla Umar. After that he got rid of Mulla Umar`s Afghan guards and appointed a new guard comprising the Bengali warriors of his organisation, Al-Qaeda. These were salaried men who had learned to hate Pakistan.

Jesus writes to Christians!

Columnist Ismail Qureshi wrote in Nawa-e-Waqt a letter from Jesus to his Christian followers wherein Christianity was accused of having imposed crusades on Muslims and then exploited the Muslim world in the 20th century, building its World Trade Center with the usury extracted from poor Muslim states. Then Christ sent ghaibi (invisible) power which destroyed the World Trade Center, after which Christianity declared war on poor Muslims. Jesus said that he could not remain quiet on this injustice and asked Christians to reform themselves and do penance.

The name of Osama bin Laden

Daily Nawa-e-Waqt wrote in its Sare Rahe column that Pakistan foreign minister Abdul Sattar returned from Doha and held a press conference at Lahore State Guest House but carefully avoided naming Osama bin Laden while the world was talking about him and President Bush was waking up at night crying Osama, Osama! The column called on the Taliban ambassador in Islamabad Mulla Zaeef to rename himself Mulla Qavi (powerful) because that was what was needed against the Americans. His name Zaeef means weak.

Gen Aslam Beg speaks again

Quoted in Khabrain, ex-COAS General Mirza Aslam Beg said that if the Americans sent land troops in Afghanistan tau oos kay hosh thikanay ajayen gai (will be brought to its senses). The last time he said this during the Gulf war, the Americans landed and Saddam Hussein was quickly defeated. But the genius of General Beg has remained undimmed in the service of Pakistan. Ex-ISI chief, General Hameed Gul said in Khabrain that America will never send land troops into Afghanistan. He said OIC was murda (dead). Maj-Gen (Retd) Tajamul Hussain Malik said not so originally that America wanted to take hold of Pakistan`s nuclear weapons and give them away to some other country. He said the war against the Taliban would be a long one and the Americans would run away after seeing dead bodies.

Praising great actresses

Film producer Khwaja Pervez wrote in Khabrain that a statement by actress Reema, Mira, Resham and Saima that they would die for Pakistan was a great gesture of self-sacrifice for the country even though the statement was the work of a destitute journalist sitting at his desk. He said Reema had made Pakistan famous by doing colossal shopping in America, thus picking up its economy and making it beholden to Pakistan. He said the debt of the tawaef (courtesans) was great on Pakistan since they sang all the TV songs. They should now be sent to America to persuade it not to kill the Afghans.

India will remember its `nani`

Quoted in Khabrain, General (Retd) K.M. Arif said that if India attacked Pakistan it will be made to remember its nani (grandmother). He said the Americans had superiority in the air but if they sent land forces into Afghanistan, then the Taliban will have superiority over them. Two superpowers (Britain and the USSR) have had themselves already defeated in Afghanistan. General Hameed Gul said that the Americans will soon learn the rates of atta and daal in Afghanistan.

Parachinar refuses asylum to Afghans

According to Khabrain, the tribal people of Parachinar in the Kurram Agency refused to offer asylum to the Afghan refugee fleeing their country `because the last we did that the Russians attacked us and killed 12 of us`. Seeing this, the political agent set up three refugee camps in the lower part of the Kurram Agency.

Osama like Napoleon and Quaid

Astrologer Abdul Wahab told Khabrain that the thumb of Osama bin Laden was like the thumbs of Napoleon and the Quaid-e-Azam. He said Osama was under threat till November 4, after which he will be safe. According to his lines, Osama was incapable of attacking America but he had a personality that attracted human beings like honey attracted bees. Osama did not bow in front of anyone and was a man of great determination, but he would meet a sad end.

`Reema lao!`

According to Khabrain a local theatre in Lahore was nearly put on fire by an angry crowd after film actress Reema failed to turn up in a show arranged in her name. After Reema failed to appear, the crowd shouted Reema Lao (bring Reema) and began to damage the property of the theatre. The administration said that though the show was dedicated to Reema there was no pledge by them to bring her to the theatre. After this the crowd tried to set fire to the theatre.

Americans eat sleeping pills

Great columnist Muzaffar Bukhari wrote in daily Din that America was worth pitying because 20 percent of the Americans were clinically mad and the rest took sleeping pills to go to sleep. He wrote that the Americans should read the following line of Allama Iqbal: tu agar mera nahin banta nan ban apna tau ban (if you can`t be mine be your own person).

Hekmatyar joins whom?

According to daily Insaf great Afghan leader and former ISI favourite Glubuddin Hekmatyar joined the Taliban with his men and all the weapons he had got from Pakistan`s ISI during the Afghan war. He was keeping the weapons as buried cache somewhere in Afghanistan. Other reports said that Hekmatyar had joined the Northern Alliance.

Mulla Umar`s family killed

According to Ausaf, the wife of Mulla Umar, one daughter and two sons, got killed during the American air attacks. The sons were injured on the first day of the attack. His close relatives were also either injured a or were killed by the American bombs falling on Kandahar.

GO TOP









Editorial



•

Afghan roadmap needed



Features



•

Girl Friday



•

Top Ten



•

My Week



•

Trends



•

Architecture



•

Snap Shots



•

Up and Coming



•

Interview



•

Photo Feature



•

Issue



Opinion



•

Why do ISI chiefs get into trouble?



•

Bin Laden wants last laugh



•

US fails against Taliban



News



•

Haq’s execution demoralizes opposition



•

ARD-PPP differences grow



•

Raiwind congregation has Govt on edge



•

Taliban refuse entry to Pakistani volunteers



•

Mian Azhar disappoints Government



•

Arab students suspected of links with Al-Qaeda



•

Banging on



•

Debt for human development swap



Special Features



•

Such Gup



•

Bush & Mush



•

True Lies



•

Nuggets from Urdu Press



•

Letters



•

Book Reviews



Top Home

Shah,

Is Afghanistan is a great country? I see Pakistan soon becoming a part of Afghanistan. After all, Pakistan has provided the Afghans with great strategic depth. Afghans have used Pak military and intelligence resources for their gain. Taliban supply lines (food, oil) come from Pak. Similarly, in case of drought or war, Pak is a good place to send its citizens as refugees. Pak also provides a never-ending supply of `jihadi` fodder if required to fight Taliban`s enemies.

The merger of Afghanistan and Pakistan will be great! After all, doesn`t the `A` in PAKistan stand for Afghanistan?

Re:Reply #: 422

vineet,

An interesting article. Sometimes ago in one of my posts i had wondered why the silent majority of good muslims are silent and remarked that their silence is really deafening!

The concept of Ummah is unique to Islam. It makes all muslims feel a kind of kinship to each other. I also see islam as a group religion, where muslims take pride in doing namaaz in a group. A hindu or a buddhist is taught to worship on a one to one basis. Most people may choose to meditate or worship in silence but there is generally no group worship (except during some temple Pujaas). There is of course no concept of Ummah in these religions.

This concept of Ummah has been used to advantage by muslim invaders like Mahmud of Ghazni. This man ransacked Somnath temple a number of times in the name of Allah but he went back to Arabia with loads of Gold. Many muslims consider him a hero. Ferocious muslim invaders have become legends in the country of their birth. Chengizh Khan is a legend in Mongolia. What is it in Islamic faith or in its people that attracts many of them to these ferocious and violent men. Islam unfortunately spread in most countries by violence. Of course many here may argue with this but are there any muslim missionaries like the christian missionaries?

The same people who consider Chengizh Khan and Md Ghazni as heros are now applauding OBL, while the silent majority has chosen to remain silent. How Islam will shape up in future (if it will be a peace loving religion or become a Talibanised version)will be decided by this silent majority. The question is are they really silent or do they silently acquiesce in the deeds of the evil one?

Sridhar

Re:Reply #: 419

Eklavya,

For that matter, every country on this globe has a claim to greatness. Pakistan is an offshoot of India and encompasses all its culture. There is nothing that Paksitan has which India does not have (this includes its religion, language etc). Pakistan is like the branch of a tree, India being the tree. Only in this case, the branch has been cut off the main trunk and is trying (desperately in my opinion) to grow on its own. So, by your logic, if Paksitan is great (you are entitled to your opinion), India is great a 100 folds.

The big question is what is greatness really. Is it economic power, scientific prowess, spiritual progress? What makes a country great? At times like these in USA, we see the face of a great nation. USA is quietly and rationally coming to terms with a great tragedy. It is my humble contention that greatness of a nation or a civilisation lies not in its abilitiy to reach pinnacles of glory but to survive and be able to outlive its success. Few civilisations have been able to do that. The early Romans, early Greeks, the early Egyptians, Aztecs, Incas, Babylon etc have all fallen by the wayside. To my knowledge, there are only 2 continuous unbroken living civilisations today viz that of China and India. These 2 pillars have stood the test of time and have successfully weathered all storms.

For centuries, invaders have come and looted, massacred and tried to destroy India`s culture but have failed. Hindus in India to this day worship the same God that they worshipped more that 2000 years ago. The Greek Gods, Roman Gods and Egyptian Gods are all in history books. To me, greatness lies in faith of a nation, faith in its culture, its religion. I think India has kept its faith for many centuries.

rgds,

Sridhar

TAhmed:

The strategy of natural/man made barriers is still in use. The Ffrench had the Maginot line, which was made insignificant by Guderian`s flank movement of his armored divisions.

I have also read in an Indian magazine that the Ichogil canal is also a similar line of defence against an Indian armored advance on Lahore. Would you be able to lend veracity to this report?

Waiting for the Hindu backlash

Counterpoint: Waiting for the Hindu backlash

Vir Sanghvi





Forgive me if you think I’m overstating the case but I’m beginning to get extremely concerned about the impact of the war in Afghanistan on communal harmony in India. It is not that I expect huge Muslim protest demonstrations of the kind we’ve been seeing in Pakistan over the last fortnight. Far from it.

In fact, it is not the Muslims I’m worried about, at all. It is the Hindus. Nearly everywhere I go, there’s always somebody who says something like, “My God! These Muslims are fanatics!” Or “How can Muslims possibly support the Taliban?” Or, “Islam is really a medieval religion!”

Naturally, I always protest against the generalisations and point out that to judge Islam on the basis of what Osama bin Laden is up to is a little like judging every Hindu on the basis of what V Prabhakaran is doing in Sri Lanka.

Or, to use an even more telling example: Hindu mobs dragged Sikhs out of their homes in Delhi in 1984 and then burned them alive. But that does not mean that Hinduism is a murderous religion. Nor does the demolition of the Babri Masjid prove that Hindus are intolerant people who destroy other people’s places of worship. Similarly, the assaults on churches and the rapes of nuns in 1998 reflected on the people who carried them out, not on the world’s oldest religion.

And as for medievalism, let’s not develop short memories. Till around a century ago, widows were still being thrown on their husbands’ funeral pyres. And can any religion match what Hinduism did to its dalits; people so unclean that not only could they not be touched but that brahmins had to rush to bathe if a dalit’s shadow fell on them? Religions are not bad; people are.

But no matter how much secular and reasonable Hindus may want to think otherwise, a climate of derision and fear of Islam is developing.

The last time this happened was in the late 1980’s when such issues as Shah Bano, the Satanic Verses and the alleged intransigence of the Babri Masjid Action Committee (at least from some Hindu perspectives) led to a deep schism between Hindus and Muslims. That schism led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid, to the slaughter of Muslims in the streets of Bombay and eventually to the rise of the BJP.

My fear is that neither Hindus nor Muslims have learned from history. And that we will begin the new century repeating the mistakes of the last one. What worries me most is the manner in which all Muslims, all over the world, are being treated by non-Muslims: as though they are somehow culpable for the death and destruction. This is not only tragic; it is unusual, if not unprecedented, at least for us in India.

Over the last few years Hindus and Muslims have both learned to treat terrorists as a breed apart; as beyond religion. There is now no doubt that the Bombay blasts were executed by the Dawood Ibrahim gang at the urging of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) to take revenge on Hindus for the Bombay riots. Despite this, there were no anti-Muslim riots in response. Both Hindus and Muslims were equally appalled by the destruction and few Hindus (and fewer Muslims) believed that Dawood spoke for his community.

Similarly, few Hindus see the Kashmir problem as reflecting Hindu-Muslim tensions in the rest of India. No Indian Muslim of consequence (not even the Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid) identifies with the terrorists — and this is despite the frequent use of Islamic imagery (jehad etc) by the militants. The truth is that a Muslim in Bihar or UP, (let alone a Muslim in Kerala) has little in common with a Muslim in Kashmir and the community has sensibly rejected all attempts to turn the conflict into a Hindu-Muslim affair.

Why, then, are we unable to make the same sort of distinction between bin Laden and our Muslims?

Part of the answer lies in bin Laden’s rhetoric. For years, Hindu communalists have told us that Indian Muslims are Muslims first, Indians second. Bin Laden’s statements feed those fears. He appeals to some pan-Islamic identity, to Muslims everywhere in the world, regardless of their nationalities. His call is always for all Muslims to rise up to fight America. And every murder is celebrated as a triumph of Islam.

Clearly the man is a psychopath and a massive embarrassment to Islam. But here’s the funny thing: at some level, Muslims all over the world are responding to him. You might expect protests in Pakistan but how do you explain demonstrations in Malaysia?

How do you explain the fatwa against Tony Blair issued by a British Muslim group? How do you explain the uproar in Indonesia? How do you explain Imran Khan’s comment that the longer the operation takes, the more of a hero bin Laden will become to the world’s Muslims? For Hindus — and that includes secular Hindus of the sort who wept when the Babri Masjid fell — all this is discomfiting. Is there, in fact, a growing international pan-Islamic identity? Is this identity so strong that even an operation against a psychopath and the world’s most barbaric regime can stir up such strong emotions?

Most important of all: are Indian Muslims reacting as bin Laden wants them to? Why were bin Laden’s portraits on sale in Delhi’s Walled City? Why has the Shahi Imam (as always, God’s gift to the Bajrang Dal) called for a jehad against America? And so on. My concern is that if these questions are not satisfactorily answered, relations between Hindus and Muslims will plummet again. So far, at least, the answers that have come from educated Muslims have been deeply unsatisfactory or incomplete.

Answer number one is framed in terms of the standard anti-American response: America has double standards. It was quite happy to look the other way when 6000 Iraqi children died because of the sanctions but now treats the 6000 deaths in the World Trade Center bombings as a holocaust. Or: it was the US itself that created bin Laden and his ilk to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. That conflict used Islamic imagery (mujahideen and jehad), so what right does Washington have to get so self-righteous now?

All this is valid but unsatisfactory because it does nothing to address the key issues of a pan-Islamic identity and bin Laden’s support among Muslims who have nothing to do with him. Answer number two is framed in terms of the targeting of Islam. These were acts committed by madmen, say many Indian Muslim intellectuals. And yet one of the world’s great religions is being attacked. This is a conspiracy to link Islam with terrorism on the basis of the actions of a few individuals.

The problem with this response is that it is not America that is identifying Islam with these attacks. It is bin Laden himself. And the assaults were carried out by a transnational network of men who had only one thing in common: their religion.

But there is also a third answer even if few Muslims are giving it. This states that it is a fallacy to imagine that Indian Muslims feel any kinship with bin Laden or the Taliban. Every religion has its share of fanatics and crackpots who take an extreme view. Islam is no exception. But these nutcases do not represent the majority, just as those who burned Graham Staines did not represent Hindus.

As for the pan-Islamic identity, this is difficult for Hindus to understand because Hinduism is not a global religion. But take Christianity, for example. Catholics all over the world will kneel before the Pope or prefer his edicts on divorce or abortion to the laws of their countries. Does that mean that there is a pan-Catholic identity that comes before patriotism? Some Hindus will retort: What about the Shahi Imam’s fatwa then? The obvious response to that is: Who is the Shahi Imam anyway? Who does he speak for? Who appointed him as the representative of Indian Muslims?

This is a more satisfactory answer because it seems to adequately address many of the non-Muslim apprehensions. Sadly, few Muslims are bothering to provide this kind of response and to explain what is happening in their community. Instead, we get knee-jerk anti-Americanism and daft allegations of anti-Islamic conspiracies.

The problem with India’s Muslims is that despite all our talk of secularism, the vast majority has decided that the best way to get on in this country is to avoid drawing attention to themselves. Even those who have done well feel more secure when they address issues in purely secular terms and do not speak from a Muslim perspective.

I am sympathetic to their plight but the unfortunate consequence of this stand has been that moderate voices within the community are hardly heard. This leaves the field clear for demagogues, rabble-rousers, mullahs and politicians. Because such people seek to win followers by inflaming the community, their rhetoric is often extreme and offensive.

And because there are few other voices, these views are taken as representative of the Muslim community.

During the communally surcharged days of the late 1980s and early 1990s, many educated liberal Muslims had recognised that they needed to speak up so that the whole country could hear them. Sadly, most of those voices have now lapsed into silence. And the fanatics are the only ones we hear.

This is dangerous. One reason why Sikhs were re-assured after the 1984 massacres was because so many Hindus made it their mission to bring the murderers to justice. Similarly, most of the condemnation of Dara Singh and the Bajrang Dal, in the aftermath of the Graham Staines murder, came from liberal Hindus who denounced the incident for what it was: a perversion of Hindu beliefs.

Liberal Muslims must do something similar. They cannot allow their community to be hijacked by the madmen and the rabble-rousers. Liberal Hindus can fight Hindu communalists. But we can only do this if liberal Muslims also fight their own fanatics. Otherwise, there is certain to be a Hindu backlash.

And all of us — Hindus, Muslims or whatever — will pay the price.



http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/141001/VIR39.asp

Re: Tahmed321

Nadir Shah`s sack of Delhi in 1739 (the immediate cause of which was to take back the Mughal city of Kandahar -- deja vu?) was primarily due to the fact that after Aurangzeb`s death, Mughal power had collapsed. I believe there were no less than 10 minor Mughal kings in a space of less than 15 years (each being killed/deposed by a successor, since Mughal rules of succession were purposefully never well defined). On the approach to Delhi from the NW, the first defensible feature is Attock (where the Mughals built a fort). If Attock falls, then the next feature is Panipat (80 miles north of Delhi, and where all major Indian battles have been fought). The last feature is The Ridge north of and on the outskirts of Delhi. All 7 empires/cities of Delhi (including the last British one with their cantt) were within The Ridge.

I do not think that Nadir Shah fought a pitched battle to take Delhi -- he simply negotiated his way in after it was clear to the Mughals that he had them surrounded. BTW, the British lost many men in 1857 at The Ridge and Kashmiri Gate (northern gate of Delhi`s walled city) trying to take Delhi. There is a memorial to the Mutiny on The Ridge not far from where Timur Lane also camped in the 12th century. Even in the 12th century, The Ridge gave Timur reason to pause.

As far as Bangladesh is concerned, the Pak Army`s strategy was the so-called `fortress strategy` (perhaps, Fuzair can shed some light). This meant denying any part of E. Bengal to be declared Bangladesh, by holding on to various `forts` -- it spread the Pak forces out very thinly all over the country. Dacca was one such fort. Indian forces simply went around these forts, without engaging any of them in a meaningful way. A defence for Dacca was never put up, but even if it had, it would resulted in wholesale slaughter (Dacca was surrounded by the Indian army, and the Pakistani army had no air support or supply lines). That strategy (ie. holding forts) proved to be flawed, not the defensive features of the geography of Dacca.

shammi #411 reason #415 and Stuka #416 Thanks folks for your posts which has certainly increased my knowledge. On the strategic position of Delhi, it is interesting that Dhaka also had similar natural defenses (with rivers cutting across all around it). In 1971, the ``military strategy`` of the Pak Army had been to retreat to behind these rivers and then hang on until some political developments ended the fighting. This was the fallback to the ``political strategy`` of defending every inch of the country. Niazi never was able to switch from the political strategy to the military strategy in a timely manner, and the rest is history. It seems like these natural defenses did not do much good for Delhi either - Nadir Shah I think was able to overrun it, as were some other invaders.

I see there has been a continuing side debate about whether or not Pakistan can be called a great country. Since I was guilty of setting off this little eddy in the murky waters of Chowk, here are my 2Cs.

I don`t care about whether Pakistan is a large country or small. Size alone has little to do with greatness.

I don`t care whether Pakistan is the second or third or fourth largest Muslim country. It might as well be a country full of people professing any other faith, or even full of people with two noses, for all I care.

I see Pakistan as a great country for its people. For the variety and richness of its many cultures. For its history, both of the period Pakistanis study, and the period that I am told, they unfortunately, don`t. I see Pakistan as a great land for its potential as a modern nation if it gets its house in order. In these essential things, Pakistan isn`t very different from India inspite of the dramatic differences we see today.

To deny the greatness of Pakistan will mean to deny the greatness of Sindh - the traditional land of Sufis and interfaith interaction based on love, not hate. I refuse to do that.

To deny the greatness of Pakistan will mean to deny the greatness of a large part of Punjab. That would be an absurd proposition.

To deny the greatness of Pakistan will mean to believe that those UP wallas who left for Pakistan somehow underwent a genetic transformation once they crossed the border. Having interacted with many, many, many muslim UPites, I can not find reports of such genetic change credible.

I am not just an idealistic person. I am a proud nationalist to the core. I understand all the difficulties both of us, Indians and Pakistanis, face today. But I also know how quickly immature minds descend into the darkness of facile demonization and damnation of the ``enemy.`` I wont be part of that process, and I hope that those of who you don`t plastic embedded in your backbones, won`t do so either.

Its from The Pioneer. The facts are interesting, but I would withhold judgement on the conclusions.

http://www.dailypioneer.com

TADA wasn`t draconian, people were
Rajeev Deshpande/New Delhi

The Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) has drawn political fire over its association with the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), frequently described as ``draconian`` and ``anti-Muslim.``

Fashioned to respond to terrorism in the mid-1980s, TADA lapsed in 1995 after a high-decibel campaign which billed the law as anti-minority, excessively restrictive and open to rampant abuse by the police.

But, which were the most obvious instances of TADA`s abuse and who was responsible for using the law for partisan ends? Ironic as it may now appear, it was the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which first protested the ``misuse`` of TADA in Gujarat in 1990-92 by the Chimanbhai Patel ministry.

In a stunning misuse of a law meant to curb terrorism, the Gujarat Government had jailed activists of the Bharatiya Kissan Union (BKU), a pro-BJP body comprising mainly of milk cooperative workers. Chimanbhai arrested a staggering 19,000 persons under TADA.

Chimanbhai had been readmitted into the Congress by then Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao who ignored the opposition of senior Congress leader Madhavsinh Solanki. Chimanbhai headed a Congress ministry.

The opposition to TADA began to snowball after the investigations into the March 12, 1993 Mumbai blasts case. But, by then the arrests effected under TADA had actually begun to show a downward trend. And, this came to light at the conference of chief ministers held on May 5, 1995 to study the demand for the law`s forfeiture.

Official figures showed that TADA arrests in 10 States in 1994 totalled to 535. There were 333 arrests in Assam, 142 in Andhra Pradesh and 42 in Maharashtra. Of the arrests in Maharashtra, most were in the Mumbai blasts case. And, of the total of 77,500 arrests made under TADA since its inception, Chimanbhai accounted for almost a quarter.

A look at the ``anti-Muslim`` factor is most revealing. In Jammu and Kashmir, most of those arrested were Muslims. They were linked directly to terrorist actions and included a large number of foreign nationals who had crossed over from Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh.

The percentage of Muslims arrested under TADA outside Jammu and Kashmir is 15 per cent. By the admission of the then Narasimha Rao Government itself, TADA was used indiscriminately in Gujarat. And, if the arrests in Gujarat are set aside - these included many Hindus as well as Muslims - then the percentage of Muslims arrested under TADA is 4.6 per cent.

The brouhaha over TADA was set off by the arrests made in the Mumbai blasts case in which almost all the accused were Muslims. But, the investigation had been most difficult for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) as many of the prime accused are simply out of India`s reach in their safe havens in UAE or Pakistan.

A good many of those still detained under TADA in Maharashtra in 1995 were accused in the Mumbai blasts case. There are 124 accused in the case, the investigation has recorded no less than 13,000 pages of evidence and there are 684 witnesses. The blasts killed 257 people, injured 713 and caused Rs 30 crore of damages to various properties and business. It is now expected that the trial will end in about six months. And, oddly enough, the number of those in custody is only 31. As the May 23, 1995, deadline for the expiry of TADA approached, the Centre sought the views of all the states on the question of re-promulgating the law. And, 17 of the 22 State Governments which responded said that they wanted TADA to remain. Arunachal Pradesh did not respond and the three states that opposed extending the life of TADA were Uttar Pradesh, then under the Mulayam Singh Yadav ministry, and the governments of West Bengal and Kerala. Bihar said it did not need a TADA-like law in the state, but had no objections to it being at the disposal of the Centre. Later, Bihar Chief Minister Laloo Yadav changed his position and said that letter to the Centre had been sent without it being shown to him.

TAhmed:

And do you remember the reason for shifting the capital?

My history is a little rusty. As far as I remember, the theory was that Delhi, being close to the north-west, was more susceptible to invasion. The new capital in the deccan would be more central and would offer geographic protection from the enemy.

Re: Tahmed

``shammi #402 (or anyone else on chowk): Didnt Mohammed Tughlak also introduce paper currency? I vaguely recall that he did, and that the paper currency idea did ot work either, just like the shift in capital. And do you remember the reason for shifting the capital? ``

The Reason tughlaq shifted his capital was for better control and adminstration of the empire . Many historians believed it was a good idea but the folly was moving the whole population .

As far i read , he did not introduce paper currency but he tried to introduce coins made of non precious metals .

Asif Nagshbandi Sahib:

I read with amusement your comments where you state that “… it is easier to remain ignorant and not challenge yourself mentally...that way you can justify your hatred to yourself …” and “…I don’t let my absolute conviction of the truth of Islam make me narrow minded …” (#314).

This is quite a contrast from earlier posts on other boards where you justified Blasphemy Laws on basis that the Prophet (pbuh) had people killed for blaspheming against him. In other words, anyone who blasphemes against the Prophet (pbuh) should be put to death according to your understanding of Islam.



This is incorrect, and it is a shame that Muslims of the world have sunk to such low levels. Such barbaric behavior has no basis in Islam. Quran commands the believers to only stop socializing with those who blaspheme against signs of Allah. Quranic message of compassion and love for others was practiced by the Prophet when he, on numerous occasions, forgave those who ridiculed him, blasphemed against him, tortured him, and drove him and his companions out of their homes. When stones were pelted on the dear Prophet (pbuh) in the streets of Taif, and his shoe got filled with his own blood, he had nothing but words of dua (invoking Allah’s blessings) for the enemy. Have the Muslims of the world forgotten these examples and the teachings of Quran …?

When the Islamic message of love for others, patience, and tolerance is ignored and people are savagely killed in the name of Islam, it corrupts and distorts the face of Islam. This corruption of its message is the real enemy of Islam. Such absurd laws do not instill respect for the Prophet, rather they insult the Prophet by showing disregard towards his message … the message he strove so hard to deliver … jeopardizing his own life in order to save the souls of others.

You cannot rightfully justify such violence in the name of Islam while claiming to be an open-minded Muslim. These two positions contradict each other.

Asad

tahmed123 (?) wrote:

[Only trouble is, these ``friends of God`` will not be around to come to your aid on Judgement Day (the Quran is very explicity on that) when you will face the music for your mischievous ways. In fact, they will be too busy trying to protect their own hides...]

that is your belief. it is not the orthodox islamic belief. you have misunderstood the qur`an. i can prove to you from qur`an and hadith that intercession [shifa`at] of the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam--followed by that of the other prophets, the awliya, the martyrs etc.-- is an integral part of orthodox muslim aqeedah which muslims have believed since the time of the Prophet himself sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

here are a few qur`anic verses for you to ponder over:

Verse No. 1: ``The time is coming when your Lord may make you stand at a place where all shall praise you.`` (Surah Bani Israel, 79).



(It is reported in Sahih Bukhari that the Holy Prophet (Sall Allahu Alaihi wa Sallam), the intercessor of the sinners (Sal Allah Ta`ala Alaihi wa Sallam) was asked,``What is the Place of Praise? He said, ``That is Intercession.``)

Verse No.2: ``And undoubtedly, soon your Lord shall give you so much that you shall be satisfied.`` (Surah Al Duha, 5).

Dailami has reported from Maula Ali (Radi Allahu Ta`ala alaih), the Commander of the Faithful that when this verse was revealed, The Intercessor of the sinners (Sall Allahu Ta`ala alaih wa Sallam) said, ``When Allah Ta`ala promises that I will be satisfied, I will not be satisfied even if one of my followers remains in Hell.`` O Allah! May Your blessings, peace and grace rest on the Holy Prophet (Sal Allahu Alaihi wa Sallam).

Tabarani in Ausat and Bazzar in Musnad report from Maula Ali (Radi Allahu Ta`ala Anh) that the Intercessor of the sinners (Sal Allahu Alaihi wa Sallam) says, ``I shall intercede fro my Umma until my Lord will call, ``O Muhammad! (Sall Allahu Ta`ala Alaihi wa Sallam) are you satisfied?`` I shall say, ``O My Lord! Yes I am satisfied.`` ...

...Verse No.5 ``And when they are told to come to the Messenger of Allah, (Sal Allahu Alaihi wa Sallam) so he may ask forgiveness for them, they turn their heads aside.`` (Surah Munafeqoon, Verse 5.)

I this verse the bad luck of the hypocrites is said to be their failure to ask for intercession from theprophet (sal allahu alaih wa sallam). Those who do not ask for intercession today, will not get it tomorrow and those who do not get it tomorrow, will never have it and will have no peace anywhere. May Allah Ta`ala benefit us with the intercession of the Holy Prophet (Sal Allahu Alaihi wa Sallam) in this World and Hereafter. If the disbelievers do not ask him today, they shall see much trouble on the Day of Judgement... [ verses and commentary from pages 13 to 17 of Imam Ahmad Raza`s book ``Forty Hadith on Intercession of The Prophet`` (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam), Raza Academy, UK.]

QED

:-)

I presume you can read Urdu. A verse, of Ala Hazrat`s for you:

``Aaj le Unki khabbar, aaj madad maang Un se

Kal na maaneingay qiyaamat mein agar maan gya!``