India’s Communal Gamble

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Asif Sahib,

I have shown that the Quranic verses you cited to support your position on Blasphemy Laws are clearly quoted out of context. I then quoted 2 verses from Quran that clearly support my position on this issue. I also cited some of the most commonly known traditions of the dear Prophet (pbuh) that agree with this position.

Your only remaining argument is quoting, what I call, obscure and questionable traditions of the Prophet (pbuh). I call these traditions obscure and questionable because they are against clear Quranic teachings (primarily) and also against some of the most commonly known traditions.

You have not been able to rationally deny the strength of my arguments. The closest you came (on another board) was to bring up the issue of abrogation of Quranic verses. Here you have opened a can or worms, which changes the nature of this debate, and every debate related to any Islamic issue.

You continue to reject my views on basis that Sattar is not a scholar. Here are some thoughts on this issue: It is worth noting that Muslims have been divided in some 70+ sects, with a large number of scholars in each sect. These scholars have devoted their lives to studying Quran, Traditions, works of other scholars, and more. Then why do they continue to differ amongst themselves and call each other non-Muslims and more?

You raised the issue of abrogation of Quranic verses. Are all ullema in agreement that Quran is “abrogatable”? Are they unanimous on which verses to abrogate? Are there different versions of Quran, each with some or the other verses abrogated?

I am not totally rejecting the works of scholars here. Lifetime of study of an issue by a scholar is worth consideration, but only and only if it is not against Quranic injunctions. If a scholar abrogates some Quranic verses, in essence he is rejecting Quran and deriving guidance from some other source. This is bound to mislead him. I say this with utmost confidence since Quran claims to be the “Perfect Book”, and Allah has promised that He is the Guardian over this Book. Even some of the staunch enemies of Islam have admitted, albeit grudgingly, that they have not been able to find any evidence of tampering with Quran; it exists in its purest form, the way it was revealed to the dear Prophet (pbuh).

Statements like these, esp. from the enemies of Islam, fill my heart with joy. They provide clear evidence of fulfillment of the Allah’s promise to the believers, and further strengthen my faith in Quran. Truly, all praise belongs to Allah Almighty.

Then I turn around and see Muslim “scholars” abrogating Quranic verses. Now this really breaks my heart. We should be extremely joyful that Allah has revealed this Perfect Book to guide us, and He continues to protect it … for you, for me, and for all others. Why would you or anyone want to abrogate parts of this Blessing from our Sweet, Loving, Merciful Allah?

Asad

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Concerned about the color of tiles used in a toilet and giving it a religious tone - how much more paranoid can one get. This man is totally zilch. India is presently the only country where minorities can live in relative peace.The fact that you are able to spew venom against Indian policy and still be around is indication of the freedom of speech you get here ( had this been Pakistan or other repressive countries, you would have ended in a electric chair ).

Sattar2 sahib,

Its been interesting interacting with you but i still do not accept your point of view vis-a-vis the penalty for the insulter of the Prophet alayhisalatosalaam as I think the scholars position is much stronger. One work you might want to see is ``Gustaakh-e-Rasul ki sazaa`` by Hazrat Sa`eed Ahmad Kazmi.Another--in English--and the one by the 14th Century Hijri `s greatest alim is--in its translation called ``The Penalty For Insulting The Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam by Imam Ahmad Raza Khan [Raza Academy UK].

BTW,you cannot dismiss the hadiths you do not like as being obscure just coz you might not be familiar with them!As far as i am aware you are not a muhaddith!Anyway, lets agree to this agree!

May Allah guide you to the Ahle Sunnah!

Asif Naqshbandi Sahib (#441):

Your mullahs have stretched the context of the verses you quoted and have come up with a very barbaric understanding of Islam.

In Surah-e-Ahzab, in verse 60 Quran refers to hypocrites, people whose hearts are diseased, and those who cause agitation in the City (by spreading rumors etc.). In the following verse, these people are cursed and believers are commanded to slay them.

Your mullahs failed to note one important, critical detail here. The earlier verses of this surah make it clear that the Quran is referring to the times of war, when the enemy has united against Muslims and is conspiring to annihilate them. In this particular case, it was the time of the Battle of Ditches. Then, the kuffar of Quraish, some Bedouin tribes, and some Jewish tribes had united, attacked the Muslims, and conspired to finish them off. The title of surah, i.e. “Ahzab”, meaning “Confederates”, makes the context clearer. It is in such times that those who conspire against the Muslim community are to be slain.

Moving on … I checked Quran translation by 3 authors. They have translated 51:11 as (1) cursed be the liars, (2) woe to the false-hood mongers, and (3) woe to the falsifiers. On the other hand, you translate it as “may the conjecturers be killed”. This again is a misinterpretation that you continue to follow blindly.

Other Quranic references in your post are meaningless. You have misunderstood them in the light of your misinterpretations that I have addressed above. You also quoted obscure, questionable traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) to support your argument. You have conveniently ignored some of the most commonly known traditions where the Prophet (pbuh) forgave his enemies and continued to pray for their well being. Such traditions also fit the overall message of Quran of mercy and compassion for all, and the traditions of all the prophets mentioned in Quran.

You have also ignored the clear Quranic commandments where believers are merely asked to sever social ties with those who blaspheme (4:140 and 6:68). Instead, you want to kill these people in the name of Allah.

You follow the corrupt, fanatic mullahs who have disfigured the message of Allah Almighty. They will only mislead you. Read Quran with an open mind. Have compassion and love for all of Allah’s creations … even those who blaspheme the dear Prophet (pbuh). Instruct them gently, with kindness and patience. Ask Allah to guide these people to the truth. If you are sincere, He will surely listen to your prayers and turn around the hearts of those who are misguided. It has happened in the past. You can make it happen again. Have faith in Allah’s help.

The answer is very clear. If you choose not to acknowledge it, it is your decision.

Regards, Asad

sattar2,

i hope this should convince you. but i doubt it.

consider this my last post in this matter. You will no doubt observe that the quotes are mostly fromthe QURAN. And truly guidance is only from Allah.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

startquote

The proof of the necessity of killing anyone who

curses the Prophet or finds fault with him

The Qur`an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorised as an unbeliever. The judgement of the unbeliever is that he is killed.

* * *

Allah says, ``Those who harm Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and in the Next, and has prepared for them a humiliating punishment.`` (33:57). He said something similar about those who kill the believers. Part of the curse on them in this world is that they are killed. Allah says, ``Cursed they will be. Wherever they are found, they are seized and all slain.`` (33: 61)

* * *

He mentions the punishment of those who fight, ``That is humiliation in this world for them.`` (5:45) ``Killing`` (qatl) can have the meaning of ``curse``.[6] Allah says, ``May the conjecturers be killed!`` (51:11) and ``May Allah fight them! How they are perverted!`` (9:30) i.e. may Allah curse them.

This is because there is a difference between their harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgement against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe - the death penalty.

Allah says, ``No, by your Lord, they will not believe until they have you judge between them in what they disagree about.`` (4:65) He removes the badge of belief from those who find an impediment in themselves against accepting the Prophet’s judgement and do not submit to him. Anyone who disparages him is opposing his judgement.

Allah says, ``O you who believe, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet and be not loud in your speech to him as you are loud to one another lest your actions fail.`` (49:3). Such an action only comes about through disbelief and the unbeliever is killed.

Allah says, ``When they come to you, they greet you with a greeting which Allah never greeted you with.`` Then He says, ``Jahannam is enough for them, an evil homecoming.`` (58:9)

Allah says, ``Among them are those who harm the Prophet and say that he is all ear,`` (9:61) and, ``Those who harm the Messenger of Allah have a painful punishment.`` (9:63)

Allah says, ``If you ask them, they will say, `We were only plunging and playing.` Say, `What, were you then mocking Allah, His signs and His Messenger? Make no excuses. You have disbelieved after your belief.``` (9:67-68) The commentators say, ``You have disbelieved`` refers to what they have said about the Messenger of Allah.

We have already mentioned the consensus. As for the traditions, al-Husayn ibn `Ali related from his father that the Messenger of Allah said in respect of this matter, ``Whoever curses a Prophet, kill him. Whoever curses my Companions, beat him.``[7]

In a sound hadith the Prophet commanded that Ka`b ibn al-Ashraf be killed. He asked, ``Who will deal with Ka`b ibn al-Ashraf? He has harmed Allah and His Messenger.`` He sent someone to assassinate him without calling him to Islam, in distinction to other idol-worshippers. The cause of that lay in his causing harm to the Prophet. That indicates that the Prophet had him killed for something other than idol-worship. It was for causing harm. Abu Rafi,` who used to harm the Messenger of Allah and work against him, was also killed.

Similarly on the Day of the Conquest, he ordered the killing of Ibn Khatal and his two slavegirls who used to sing his curses on the Prophet.

In another hadith about a man who used to curse the Prophet, the Prophet said, ``Who will save me from my enemy?`` Khalid said, ``I will,`` so the Prophet sent him out and he killed him.

end of quote (extract from Qadi Iyad`s Ash-Shifa)

Re Asif Naqshbandi (#439):

When Quran tells me something in clear language, I am going to stick with it, no matter what you or your “ullema” say! You have ignored the Quran and continue to chase obscure, questionable historical records to support your fanaticism. Quran gives us perfect knowledge, and all else is questionable (read this sentence again, if you did not follow it). You have given preference to the works of jahil “mullahs” over the word of God. What good is Quran if you ignore it and do the opposite simply because of what a mullah says? As a side-comment, there have been Muslim scholars throughout the ages who have disagreed with your position on this issue. However this not the crux of my argument.



With jahil mullahs like you around, it is no wonder that the Muslims of the world are in their current pathetic state. Their theories of jihad, jurisprudence, social norms and more have become corrupt, and that’s why they have been subjugated by other nations in all walks of life. Quran did not fail them … rather they did not make the effort to understand Quran.

Such jihalat was rampant when fanatic “scholars” like you persecuted the Prophet of Islam (pbuh), when scholars declared Issa-ibne-Marriam an impostor, when scholars declared Gallileo a heretic. Majority has been clearly wrong in the past … and it continues to happen even today. You fail to understand even this basic point. Your dogma has completely blinded you and turned you into a dogmatic mullah.

There is no power in this world that can make you understand if you ignore the clear Quranic teachings and continue to chase obscure historical records and listen to corrupt mullahs.

Asad

What you are basically saying is that your interpretation of the qur`an--based on your own (lack of) knowledge is correct and ALL the scholars in Muslim history are wrong INCLUDING those the Sahaba, Taba`in, Taba` Taba`in, Salaf as Saliheen! Well that is what a person who is arrogantly deluded thinks. Tell me, what makes your understanding of the Qur`an better?! Do you know more about Islam than Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar? Hazrat Uthman? Hazrat Ali? Hazrat Abdullah ibn Abbas?..etc.

The scholars are all humans and can be wrong...but you CANNOT be wrong?! Any sane person would rather trust what experts over 1400 years have continuously been saying rather than what an upstart, who i bet doesn`t even know the Arabic language, believes to be right simply because it doesn`t agree with his ideology (which is obviously beholden to western thinkers!). Well, I thought i could have a decent, intelligent debate with you on this matter but obviously not. You have your mind made up. you are happy to consign 1400 years of the most pious muslims ever to the rubbish bin to prove your own position to be right!

And then you show faulty logic by using totally unrelated issues such as Galileo`s heliocentric theory of the solar system in your argument; what has that got to do with the issue AT HAND?!

that is not an issue of aqeedaH--the respect of the Messenger sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam IS.

When Allah says, ``We have EXALTED for you your fame.`` Wa rafa`na laka dhikrak!``

Anyway I see that discussing with you is pointless until you learn the correct Islamic adab of respect for elders and admit that there are and were people who know infinitely more than us about islam.

Asif Naqshbandi Sahib (Re #437):

The scholars that you refer to are humans … and are prone to errors. Preference should be given to the Quran over the works of any ``scholar”. Quran was revealed not only for the “scholars”, but for all the believers, who are commanded to study and practice it. Quran is explicit in punishment for theft, adultery, treason and more. It is also clear in commanding the believers to stop socializing with those who blaspheme. The answer is quite clear!

Now, Qazi Ayad and others may twist the meaning of some verses, incorrectly apply some obscure ahadith and equally obscure rules of Arabic language, draw questionable inferences, make obscure references, and come up with completely opposite teachings. These are their teachings, and not the message of Allah. Quran is very clear on where it stands on the issue of blasphemy. It would make more sense if you completely give up studying the Quran and instead limit yourself to studying the works of the ullema only. That is exactly what you are doing anyway.

One can dedicate his life to studying an issue, and still remain a “jahil”. If the scholars deserve such high authority, then tell me why did such scholars oppose the Prophet of Islam (pbuh)? Why did such scholars declare Issa-ibne-Marriam an impostor? Why did such scholars condemn Gallileo for declaring earth revolves around the sun? You have kept silent on this issue. The answer is simple … these scholars were corrupt and they had twisted the teachings of the scripture. Same is the case with Qazi Ayad and others of his sort.



It is interesting to note the Blasphemy Laws in Pakistan were invoked when the nation was (and still is) at a low point … economically, socially, politically. The best the enlightened ullema could do at such trying times was to come up with Blasphemy Laws! Most of the country is still living in poverty with rampant corruption at all levels. There exists no infrastructure for education, medicine, R&D, urban and rural development, or any progress of any kind … these are signs that the nation is not following the message of Allah. Implementation of Blasphemy Laws further confirms absence of Islam from the society. I’ll remind you again that if Muslims of Pakistan and other nations were following correct Quranic teachings, they would not be in their current state of mess. Clearly Islam is the missing ingredient from the Muslim societies. This is the main reason of their downfall and this reason will keep them tucked in the bottom of the social order across the world. This is what happens when we ignore Quran and start following the teachings of these scholars.

Asad

sattar2 sahib,

if you had read the link i gave you will have seen that these scholars arrived at their verdicts [and ``these`` btw means virtually every single scholar from the time of the Prophet alayhisalatosalam till now] BASED ON THE QUR`AN and HADITH. you seem to imply that these scholars of religion did not read and understand the Qur`an properly-despite devoting their lives to it--and yet, you, 1400 years later, understand it more than all the hundreds of thousands of scholars before. Come on! The reason i didn`t paste the relevant section was that it is lengthy and i assumed you would at least be open-minded enough to read it.

Re Asif Naqshbandi Sahib (#435):

In your defense of Blasphemy Laws, you cited the support of the majority of Muslim scholars who agree with you. This issue should be resolved by using one’s common sense in the light of Quranic teachings, and not by a popular vote among “scholars”. Quran should be given preference over the works of any “scholar”. I hope you agree with me here.

It is worth noting that when Prophet (pbuh) started out on his mission to convey the message of Allah, majority of people and scholars were against him. When Gallileo declared that earth revolved around the sun, the majority of religious scholars condemned him. When Jesus Christ (pbuh) claimed to be the Messiah, the majority of Jewish scholars declared him an impostor. So, tell me … why should I ignore the teachings of Quran and follow the “majority” opinion in this case?



On at least two occasions Quran asks believers to sever social ties with those who blaspheme against signs of Allah (4:140 and 6:68), without prescribing any punishment for blasphemy. The dear Prophet (pbuh) forgave those who blasphemed against him on several occasions. Some well-known examples are the events of the city of Taif and at the conquest of Mecca.

You have ignored the obvious teachings of Quran and sunnah and instead chosen to follow these “scholars” who have passed verdicts counter to the Quranic teachings. If the Muslims of the world are following Quran properly, they would not be in their current state of misery. Think about it. Look at the condition of any present day Muslim country and you’ll see my point. Either Muslims of the world are not following Quran correctly, or Allah has forgotten His promise of success and glory for those who follow the message of Quran. Take your pick!

Quran teaches us the message of peace and patience. You, on the other hand, seem to be blindly following the mullahs who are giving you not the message of piety and patience, but the message of violence and barbarism … all in the name of Islam.

Asad

Sattar2 wrote:

[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.]

Actually it is not my understanding of Islam which says that the insulter of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam in an Islamic state should be killed if found guilty. That has been how traditional Sunni Muslims have *always * understood it from the Prophet`s own blessed era right through till today. And since Sunnis have always been in the vast majority, that means most of the Muslims have felt the same. In fact, I believe even in classical Shi`ite religious texts the punishment for the insulter of the Prophet alayhisalatosalam is also death. Even, Ibn Taymiyya, with his heterodox views on many issues--who is the scholar whom the Wahabis look to ideologically--on this issue is totally in agreement with mainstream Sunni orthodoxy. He wrote a book on this topic entitled, ``As-Sayf al Maslool `alaa shaatim ar-Rasul`` [The Unsheathed Sword Upon the Insulters of The Messenger]. * * In short my point is that this is not my personal opinion but what Muslims have traditionally believed from the early days of Islam right across the spectrum of Muslim sects * * * . The sole exception has been the handful of secularised modernists who have appeared in the 20th century and who want to secularise Islam to make it more compatible with the ideology of their Western heroes. They will be less than 1% if counted--if that!They do not represent mainstream Muslim thought. Those whom I have listed do.

For a scholarly and intelligent discussion of this issue which covers all the angles I guide you and anyone else to the excellent exposition by Qadi Iyad al Maliki al Yahsubi in his seminal work ``Ash-Shifa bi ta`rif Huquq al Mustafa (alayhisalato wa thanaa) which has been excellently and painstakingly translated into English by Aisha Bewley. The detailed article which is *the * classical orthodox exposition of this issue is available online at



http:// www.masud.co.uk

click on the section entitled, ``In honour of The Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam)``. Then scroll down till you come to the article I just mentioned. It is called, ``Excerpts from the Shifa` of Qadi Iyad: Part Four:`` and has 10 sections.

Of course I agree with the view elucidated in that article by Qadi Iyad [d. 1149 CE] that the insulter of Allah`s Messenger sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam is to be killed as this is the view of the orthodox Muslims.

And it is therefore, you, who is mistaken on this view. May Allah guide us all.

Gowardhan #428 ``Are Pakistanis confused? ...Now this Pakistani is crying that his only son was killed by terrorists and his back is broken.``

Pakistanis may or may not be confused. But you are definitely scum. No half-way decent individual would cooment in this manner about a father mourning for his son.

Sridhar,

I will make two quick comments, and come back later to expand on them, if you would want me to do so.

1. The concept of ummah is NOT a justification for anything, by Muslims or by non-Muslims. It is not a concept shared equally by every Muslim. Not by a long shot. I am well aware that some effort has been made recently to turn this somehow nebulous community of Ummah into a world-wide standing army of men, but there is no way that effort is going to go anywhere. Why? Because it does not make sense, and has never really made sense to Muslims. Just like Hindus are not just Hindus, Muslims are not just Muslims. Yes, from some close interaction with Muslims I can say that they do have a certain feeling of kinship and community, just as you and I may have a feeling of kinship with Hindus in Fiji or in Jawa. But that does not imply collective marching into an abyss. Please think about it; despite the fact that the talk of ummah creates some apprehension, we shouldn`t let it cloud our vision.

2. Sridhar, it is not a matter of which country is greater. See, all of us feel that our country is great. Many Pakistanis will naturally find the branch and tree analogy you suggested offensive. Wouldn`t you, if you were a Pakistani?

Sridhar, I dont recall exactly what ``complex`` Ferozek mentioned a few days ago, but he made an interesting point that the last thing Pakistanis want to feel is to be dominated by India. We have to understand historical reasons for it, and take into account national sensitivities. Even if you feel/we feel like a big brother, then we should learn to behave like one.

My opinion is that Pakistan is facing a great many problems - a fact many smart Pakistanis themselves realize. It is a country with more potential than it has had to show for its fifty plus years. The same charge could be made convincingly against India, though you and I, being Indians, will argue that we are a bit ahead. But that is not such a big deal. Countries go through ups and downs. For all you know, Pakistan may soon be sitting atop a few cool American billions, and you and I will be tearing our hair in jealousy! :)

Are Pakistanis confused? They tell us that terrorists are freedom fighters. Now this Pakistani is crying that his only son was killed by terrorists and his back is broken. Lock him up for treason and bringing Pakistani Islam in shame.

http://www.dawn.com/2001/11/02/letted.htm

An appeal

My son, Adnan Abid, 23, was a final year student in the Medical Academy of Bishkaka City, Kyrgyzstan.

On August 25, he was murdered by terrorists there. Adnan was my only son and was the hope for my old age. The death of my son has broken my back.

I request the president of Kyrgyzstan to bring the terrorists who killed my son to book.

ABID HUSSAIN

Gujranwala

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!``

harimau sahib.... *thanks * :-)

yeh, people often jump to conclusions; I have been guilty of that too in the past. But hey, we can always learn from our mistakes :-)

One of the great tragedies of Islam in this day and age is that it is greatly misunderstood; and the media only uses those people who will conform to the stereotype rather than allowing the *real * scholars of Islam to air their views. Having said this, at last, after september 11th, in the USA and the UK at least, real scholars of Islam like Shaykh Hamza Yusuf have been given quality air time...it is perhaps too little, but it is a start...

but most media people would rather interview an idiot like omar bakri muhammad making stupid statements just cause it makes for better viewing figures...

Not just Islam suffers from this. Most people nowadays just don`t read. They`d rather be spoon fed information and accept it as gospel. And Islam specifically stipulates that once you reach the age of puberty you are responsible for finding out about your religion for yourself. you are no longer considered under the religion of your parents...of course, Allah says in the Qur`an that if you do not know, ASK THOSE WHO KNOW [ie. the traditional ulama].

take care

asif

Re: Tahmed321

``Paper currency... And do you remember the reason for shifting the capital? ...``

I don`t know much about the paper currency bit (perhaps it failed because people would not put their faith in the government, and trusted gold/silver coins instead -- same reason as to why people prefer the US$ or Swiss Fr over Iraqi dinar s today).

Tughlak`s reason for shifting the capital flew in the face of strategic logic. Delhi`s location is important because it is in the crossroads of the northern plains between the Gangetic and the Indus river systems, and is protected by hilly ridges on 3 sides, and the river Yamuna on the 4th. Tughlak wanted a more `central (ie. to penninsular India)` location, and his choice of Daulatabad happened not to be on any major trade routes, far away from likely invasion routes (NW), and generally a terrible location. But worry not, Akbar made a similar mistake (though not on such a huge scale) when he shifted his capital from Agra to Fatehpur Sikri nearby. Akbar`s mistake was less colossal because Agra, Sikri and Delhi are nearby, not 1000 miles away like Daulatabad.

Even in Tughlak`s time, according to Battuta`s accounts, the writ of the government extended to only a few miles outside Delhi. Battuta`s royal caravan was looted within a day`s march from Delhi, when he first set out for China. He had to return in ignominy (that is why Battuta never returned when his fleet sank off Kerala!).

Ref wholly-precious-you #: 407

[harimau # 384

….two intelligible, non-hateful posts in a row???….who are you and what have you done with the real harimau?…:) ]

I have decided to become worthy of you ;-)

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?

Ref Asif Naqshbandi #: 404

[So you see, we do not believe in one law for ourselves and another for others.]

I am sorry you had to clarify this point. One could see that most Chowkies just jump to conclusions.

You and I may have a lot of differences on religion, Naqshbandi Sahib, but I must say that you have earned my respect by being an honest person.

People like Urstruly, YLH and quite a few others have a lot to learn from you.

harimau # 384

….two intelligible, non-hateful posts in a row???….who are you and what have you done with the real harimau?…:)

Shah #387:

``Layman#36

``Pakistan is a great country.``

Come again?



Layman,

Didnt you hear the man?

If you Dont mistake BIG with better .

Just now you were reasonable when explaining your misperception & you turn around ,& wont even acqnowledge tyour ignorence``

My misperception? On what? I was talking about how people in South and North India percieve each other.

Acknowledge my ignorance? Of what? Of how Pakistan is a great country? Would you care to enlighten me on that subject?

Some time ago I had asked (to clear my ignorance) Pak Chowkies to point out significant aspects of their culture that was uniquely Pakistani (not pan-Muslim, not pan-desi) - guess what, they came up with zilch. Now culture is not the only thing that makes a nation great (eg the US of A), so don`t lose hope. Maybe sometime, someday, Pakistan will become (a part of) a great country.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

sigalph mian,

[I wonder how much they`d scream if Europe and N America instituted canon law and decided to treat non-Christians as some kind of dhimmis whose rights were not equal to the majority Christians. LEt me tell you what will happen then: Asif mian and his `liberal` hating cohorts will make a bee line towards the courts, ACLU, parliaments, what not to `redress` their grievances. Not surprisingly all these entities are products of a `liberal democratic` set-up which scoffs at the idea that any religion is better than others. Lets see how these people react when Rome says that no mosques and no non-Catholics in that city, a la Mecca.

The integrity of these gentlemen(or lack thereof), stalwart in majority and mickey-mouse in minority, never fails to baffle me.

I will have more respect for their sharia cries when they readily agree to live under canon law in Christian countries, the Laws of Manu in India, and Confucian teachings in Japan.]

I cannot speak for anyone but myself and so let me tell you a) that I don`t ``hate`` liberals.

b) If the courts in Europe and the USA decided to introduce the laws you say I will not mind a jot.You see, I am a believer in fairness. If I want shari`at law in islamic countries then i am totally prepared to allow the countries you mention, or indeed any country, to introduce whatever laws they like. I am a citizen of the UK and by that alone I have to agree to respect British Laws, whether i agree with them or not. that too, good sir, is also a part of traditional islamic sha`riat, in case you didn`t know. If the situation ever arose where i felt i was not allowed to practise my religion freely anymore (and the UK authorities have complete rights to introduce whatever laws they like--it is their country after all! who am I to object?!) I would simply do what shar`iat says (you see, instead of being narrow, shar`iat has principles to cover all human situations): I would emigrate to another country. And if I wasn`t allowed to emigrate, whatever happened to me I would accept, insha Allah, as the will of Allah.

Having said that let me tell you that most Muslims, myself included, are law-abiding citizens of the UK and will not break the law even though we might disagree with government policy (the current war on afghanistan being an example); and i am totally prepared to accept, fully, the right of these people to choose any law they want no matter how adversely it may affect muslims.

So you see, we do not believe in one law for ourselves and another for others.

http://www.indian-express.com/ie20011031/top1.html

Re: Zafar

``...I can’t comment on Tughlaq, except to say that he was considered quite mad…and his decision to move the capital to the Deccan caused a lot of hardship. (Plus he had his mother killed – or was it his wife?)``

Zafarji:

Contemporary historians are lucky to have the account of Ibn Battuta who lived in Delhi for 14(?) years and travelled all over India during Tughlak`s reign. I have read Battuata`s book, and his account corroborates your observations, especially about the move to the Deccan. Apparently, a crippled person and a mentally-ill man were the only ones found wandering the streets of Delhi on the morning of the move after Tughlak`s order to have the capital moved was carried out. Tughlak had the men tied to the back of the caravan, and upon reaching Daulatabad, only a hand or a limb was left of these unfortunate souls. The move ultimately backfired because there was not enough water to support a city in Daulatabad.

Battuta himself was too afraid to return to Delhi to meet Tughlak`s wrath after his fleet sank off the coast of Kerala, and was happy to get away.

re Asif N posts

What bothers me so much about the likes of Mian Naqshbandi is that they want all the civil rights and liberties for Muslims in non-Muslim countries but are loath to provide the same treatment in reverse. I wonder how much they`d scream if Europe and N America instituted canon law and decided to treat non-Christians as some kind of dhimmis whose rights were not equal to the majority Christians. LEt me tell you what will happen then: Asif mian and his `liberal` hating cohorts will make a bee line towards the courts, ACLU, parliaments, what not to `redress` their grievances. Not surprisingly all these entities are products of a `liberal democratic` set-up which scoffs at the idea that any religion is better than others. Lets see how these people react when Rome says that no mosques and no non-Catholics in that city, a la Mecca.

The integrity of these gentlemen(or lack thereof), stalwart in majority and mickey-mouse in minority, never fails to baffle me.

I will have more respect for their sharia cries when they readily agree to live under canon law in Christian countries, the Laws of Manu in India, and Confucian teachings in Japan.

re shah

Funny, no reference for the article posted, no names of individuals cited, and no date given. And then the evergreen

``A retired military type, bushy moustache and all, was regaling us with his experiences of 1971. This character advises Khaleda on security issues and had the plum job of military attache in the Bangladeshi mission to a key neighbouring country during her first innings in power. Interestingly, though he fought on the West Pakistani side in that ‘liberation war’ and was a prisoner of war in India, he made no secret of it. ``

No names, no ranks, no official position. Don`t blame people if they suspect this `military type` is a result of the author`s overdose in Scotch at Dhaka Club!

``This is the new Bangladesh. People who scoffed at the idea of a Bangladesh in 1971 are now more comfortable, even boasting of their links with the pre-liberation regime. Though converted to their new-found nationalism, they do respond to ‘fraternal’ vibrations emanating out of ‘old Rawalpindi’. This is bad news for India.``

Yeah? A former minister and MP, Jehangir Adel, is facing sedition charges right now for having a Pakistani flag allegedly flying from his house on the eve of some cricket victory.

Yes, the BNP is a more broad-based party than Awami League. But only fools (and the artcile showed plenty amongst Indo-Pak policymakers)will assume to much. It is still the party founded by shaheed General Ziaur Rahman, the Hero of 1971 and the announcer of Independence. Nor will this talk of ISI-philia find much sympathy with Gen Z A Khan, Gen Mir Shaukat, Col Akbar Hossain, Major Haziz, Shahjahan Siraj, and Sadeq Khoka, all ministers now and all veteran freedom fighters.

This guy, whoever it is, needs to step out of the Dhaka Club and visit Bangladesh if wants to write honestly about it. Nothing against the Club(it is a precious little place), but it ain`t Bangladesh`s heartland!

Naqshbandi #377 ``Some amongst them, like Aurangzeb Alamgir are considered wali e kaamil [perfect sufi saints, friends of God] by us``

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...

RE: Reply #: 377 Asif Naqshbandi

``Some amongst them, like Aurangzeb Alamgir are considered wali e kaamil [perfect sufi saints, friends of God] by us. I did not choose them because they (supposedly) were bad to Hindus but because they ruled according to Shar`iat. I think Muhammad Tughluq was another such ruler.WE can argue about different versions of history for ever....:-)``

If these are the kinds of leaders that are looked up to by sub-continental Muslims, then I am not surprised at the pathetic state they are in.

Reply Asif Naqshbandi # 377

Asif Mian

“I will contest your view that the leaders I chose were scourges to Hindus. They were all practising, pious, Sunni Muslims. Some amongst them, like Aurangzeb Alamgir are considered wali e kaamil [perfect sufi saints, friends of God] by us. I did not choose them because they (supposedly) were bad to Hindus but because they ruled according to Shar`iat. I think Muhammad Tughluq was another such ruler.WE can argue about different versions of history for ever....:-)”

Yeh hi hai Chowk ka maza…er..I mean, of course these are debatable. Aurangzeb’s decision to knock down that temple in Kashi and build a mosque there was debated even then, with some ulema of the day saying that this destruction was against sharia. I can’t comment on Tughlaq, except to say that he was considered quite mad…and his decision to move the capital to the Deccan caused a lot of hardship. (Plus he had his mother killed – or was it his wife?) In any case, I wouldn’t use either of them as paragons of Muslim behavior. But as you say, we can dispute these things for a long time…and to what end?

“I am not calling for the destruction of the idolators. Neither does the Qur`an call for the destruction of unbelievers [except when they are the aggressors in a war]. I fully believe that orthodox Islam is a tolerant faith.”

Subhanallah! Sometimes, Asifbhai, you really put us close minded liberals in our place. We should all learn NOT to assume things about other people’s beliefs. You’ve shown us up this time – good for you.

“I thank you for your advice. I agree totally with you that Muslims desperately need scientific education but this does NOT have to mean abandoning traditional islamic thinking or doctrines. In other words we should learn science but not scientism--the belief that science has the answer to all our questions alone. As a practising scientist I reject that view totally.”

More good sense. May not agree with you on some details, but there’s nothing I can argue with here.

Now…I’m not sure that I will be able to keep up with you here, but what is current Sunni traditionalist thinking about ijtehad? Are there any sources on this that you would recommend? I’ve learned some from Tahmed sharing some of his knowledge (I alone am responsible for all misunderstandings!), but more is always good.

Thank you also for your reading suggestions about the Prophet.

Best wishes,

Zafar

PS “And if you can read Urdu...”

Sadly my Urdu is pretty rudimentary. My mother insisted on teaching me to read and write the language, for which I am grateful, but Shafiq ur Rahman was the profoundest I ever managed and from long years of disuse I’m afraid I couldn’t even read him properly any more.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re shah

``Iam discriminatory to muslims of any lingual persuasion but its a fact Arabic script which urdu is understood by most muslims.Rest is minority including bengali``

Pity that you never let facts bother you. There are more Bengali speaking Muslims than there are Urdu-speaking ones(and I say that as a great fan of Urdu). It is that kind of attitude that led to the carnage of Feb 21, 1952, immortalized today as the UN International Mother Language Day.

You guys will never get it through that Urdu (or Persian or Arabic) is not synonymous with Islam and Muslim. Allah is neither an Arab nor a UP-ite (or even a Hyderabadi). Sorry to be the bearer of bad news for you guys.

sadna #381

Yep Syed Shabuddin defnitely heads the list of such leaders .

SMA...SMA MESSAGE FROM MUSHY

from jung of today

Govt says all safety measures were in place

India prime suspect in Bahawalpur massacre

By Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: India has emerged as the prime suspect of Sunday`s terrorist attack on a Catholic church in Bahawalpur killing 18 persons, including a policeman, and 17 members of the country`s Christian community.

On the basis of circumstantial evidence and keeping in view the normal pattern of terrorist targets in the country, the government has asked the intelligence agencies to include India as the prime suspect. It is suspected that the Indian RAW has masterminded this carnage to malign Pakistan.

An Interior Ministry spokesman, meanwhile, said the government, both at the federal and provincial levels, had taken all possible measures for the safety and security of places of worships and allegations to the contrary, that no precautionary measures were taken despite intelligence warnings, are not correct.

The spokesman said as a matter of fact, the presence of

#303 Zafar

As for the increase in the number of dowry deaths, yes it`s one view that what has gone up is the reporting of such deaths rather than the number of incidents. I don`t think that is true. That`s why i cited personal knowledge instead of govt figures. The size of dowry has gone up dramatically in recent years. In some communities an H-1 visa was worth 1 million rupees or more in dowry. In lower economic classes too dowry has gone up (proportionately) and families find it harder to meet the demands. Therefore it seems entirely plausible to me that my vantage point is not something unique.

An interview with V.S. Naipaul in sunday`s NY Times magazine

Questions for V.S. Naipaul on His Contentious Relationship to Islam

By ADAM SHATZ

Although your prose has been universally praised, you remain an object of considerable controversy. You have been charged with insensitivity and pandering to Western prejudices in your writings about Islam.

Well, that is the trouble with writing about Muslim people. There are people of the universities who want to run you out of town, and they`re paid to, and so they pay no attention to what you actually say.

You have described the Taliban as vermin.

No, that`s my wife! She`s a Pakistani journalist who for many years wrote a column. She writes from that kind of perspective.

Are you surprised by Osama bin Laden`s support in Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia and Iran -- countries you wrote about in your travel books on Islam?

No, because these are the converted peoples of Islam. To put it brutally, these are the people who are not Arabs. Part of the neurosis of the convert is that he always has to prove himself. He has to be more royalist than the king, as the French say.

Is this what you mean when you write about Islam`s imperial drive to extend its reach and root out the unbeliever?

Yes. It is not the unbeliever as the other person so much as the remnant of the unbeliever in one`s customs and in one`s ways of thinking. It`s this wish to destroy the past, the ancient soul, the unregenerate soul. This is the great neurosis of the converted.

more at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/28/magazine/28QUESTIONS.html

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Ref Asif Naqshbandi #: 377

[I will contest your view that the leaders I chose were scourges to Hindus. They were all practising, pious, Sunni Muslims.]

I am not saying you chose them for that reason but if you have seen the response of most others to you, they have chosen to make fun of you for that.

[Some amongst them, like Aurangzeb Alamgir are considered wali e kaamil [perfect sufi saints, friends of God] by us.]

As a small boy, when I read in history books that Aurangzeb, the Emperor of India, lived on the proceeds of the sale of copies of the Quran hand-written by him and skullcaps made by him, I was deeply impressed by his simplicity. Again, one has to separate Aurangzeb as a person from Aurangzeb the Emperor; as an emperor he did things that one finds hard to accept (such as killing his own brothers to get the throne and imprisoning his father).

[WE can argue about different versions of history for ever....:-)]

That is so true!

[I am not calling for the destruction of the idolators.]

I know that.

[Neither does the Qur`an call for the destruction of unbelievers [except when they are the aggressors in a war]. I fully believe that orthodox Islam is a tolerant faith.]

Having lived with large Muslim populations from my childhood, I know that to be true too.

[I agree with you totally here. Except that Aligarh is not a good example; their interpretation of Islam is ``modernist`` and not classical. Universities which combine modern science with classical islamic teachings are what are needed most.]

I would leave the design of a modern curriculum to educated Muslims. They should know what is best for their people. A balance between modern scientific education and one`s cultural heritage (Hindu, Muslim or Christian as the case may be) in any educational institution would be an ideal blend that would produce a truly outstanding citizen of the world. He may not be a financial success like Bill Gates but is that what we need in every person?

[we should learn science but not scientism--the belief that science has the answer to all our questions alone.]

Agreed.

[Hope that makes sense to you...:-) ]

You do. Honestly. It is a great mystery to me why people start asking you for the definition of a true Muslim when you mentioned the 4 recognized schools of thought in Islam. You did not ever call for the extermination of anybody else yet all these people are making the assumption that that would be your next step.

It is always nice to have a discussion with a person who is learned in his own religion than to argue with people whose total concept of religion consists of the few verses they learnt by rote as children.

Regards.

Zafar Al-Talib #369

`` ?When this happens I put in my request for a few hard kicks to the whining Sanghis/Jamaatis? backsides.?


Voh tho aap yahan kar chuke, Mashallah.``

Alas, chaahtey huey bhi aap jaisa `saathvik` hona sab ke liye mumkin nahin :((if you will pardon the expression)

Hazrat Asif Naqshbandi of London Sharif:

If you happened to overlook, I asked a couple questions to you in my post #317.

Thanks.

reason #366
`` firstly , i am sorry i did not understand the link between my post and your reply . ``

reason #335
``and ofcourse there are so called muslim leaders who have done nothing in political career beside making muslims insecure about UCC . ``

:) I was curious whether Shahabuddin is one of them, is he?

I didnot know about his connection with AB Vajpayee.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Atal Vajpapyee,P.M. of Scular Democracy ``will of Nation``Babri panel

PRASANNA MOHANTY

New Delhi, October 11, 22:44









he All-India Babri Masjid Action Committee has said it does not believe that Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee will actually do anything to resolve the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute before March 12, 2002 - the Vishwa Hindu Parishad deadline for a solution.

The VHP has threatened that if the government failed to find a solution, it would start building the temple at the disputed site. Reacting to Vajpayee`s statement on Wednesday that the Ayodhya Cell would be revived, convener of the committee Zafaryab Jilani told TheNewspaperToday from Lucknow: ``How can we expect justice from Vajpayee? We have no faith in him. He is a party to this movement of building the temple at the site (in Ayodhya). We cannot trust him and therefore there is no question of any expectation. And we cannot be fooled by such gestures.``



``How can we expect justice from Vajpayee? We have no faith in him.``





The Prime Minister`s Office said a notification to this effect was expected in the next few days. While the exact nature of the Cell and its terms of references are not known yet, it is believed that a retired bureaucrat would be assigned to broker a settlement between the VHP and the Babri Committee.

Former Prime Minister Narasimha Rao had set up the Ayodhya Cell under the PMO in September 1992. Former Cabinet Secretary Naresh Chandra, who had retired by then, was given the task of facilitating negotiations.

But the process broke down when the VHP refused to withdraw its proposed kar seva from December 6, 1992 and the Babri Committee declined to participate in the negotiations.

On December 6, 1992, the kar sevaks demolished the masjid. Since then, there has been no attempt to bring the two parties together. Meanwhile, the VHP has announced that it will begin temple construction at the site from March 12, 2002. It was in response to VHP`s announcement that the PM said in Lucknow a few months back that he was talking to the Muslim leaders to find a solution to the problem. But he refused to divulge who was he talking to. The Babri Committee later denied that any talk was on.

Jilani said the Prime Minister’s decision to revive the Cell, as was announced by the VHP after a meeting with the Prime Minister here last Wednesday, was aimed at strengthening the movement to build the temple in view of the forthcoming UP elections. ``This is an exercise in futility. Nothing will come out of it. It is just to help the VHP and the Bajrang Dal and give a message to the Hindus, who have drifted away from them and also from the BJP, that something is being done to build the temple. It is to fool the Hindu masses - their electorate. But this will not fool us,`` Jilani noted.

However, the proposal to revive the Ayodhya cell has not enthused S.P. Gupta, chairman of Indian Archaeological Society who was in the panel of four experts from the VHP side which provided historical and archaeological evidence to prove that a temple existed at the disputed site before the masjid was built.

Gupta told TheNewspaperToday: ``It makes no sense. The purpose is to evade a commitment. What can the Cell do? I am taken aback by the announcement.``











The others in the panel were Prof B.R. Grover, former director of the Indian Council of Historical Research, Prof Devendra Swaroop of the Delhi University and Prof. Harsh Narayan of the Aligarh Muslim University.

The members of the Babri committee panel were historians Prof R.S. Sharma and D.N. Jha, Prof Athar Ali from the Aligarh Muslim University and Prof Suraj Bhan of the Kurukshetra University.

Gupta insists that the negotiations broke down because the Babri Committee did not accept the evidence, while Jilani put the blame on the VHP saying it did not withdraw its proposed ``kar seva.`` Now, both the parties argue that there is no point in repeating it. The matter is also pending before the Lucknow High Court.

Re: banjara

``The ``Will of the nation`` pertains to the building

of a Ram temple,``

Ah, ok. I see. I disagree with any overlap between religion and government affairs.

In this specific case, the Supreme Court will have something to say about that. In India the Supreme Court is really independent and doesn`t hesistate in chiding governments.

Dear Harimau, you wrote:

[In asking for a Muslim leader to lead the Muslims of India to their former glory, could you not have chosen to ask for someone who has not been a scourge to the Hindus?]

I will contest your view that the leaders I chose were scourges to Hindus. They were all practising, pious, Sunni Muslims. Some amongst them, like Aurangzeb Alamgir are considered wali e kaamil [perfect sufi saints, friends of God] by us. I did not choose them because they (supposedly) were bad to Hindus but because they ruled according to Shar`iat. I think Muhammad Tughluq was another such ruler.WE can argue about different versions of history for ever....:-)

[I know you are a pious Muslim. I know you take to heart the Holy Quran. Clearly, you have the sense to interpret those verses that call for destruction of the idolaters in the context of the times and to take to heart those passages that call for tolerance.]

I am not calling for the destruction of the idolators. Neither does the Qur`an call for the destruction of unbelievers [except when they are the aggressors in a war]. I fully believe that orthodox Islam is a tolerant faith.

[Don`t you think what anybody, not just Muslims, needs in this day and age is modern scientific education that will lead to their upliftment? Don`t you think what we need is 10,000 people who will create the next 10,000 Aligarh Muslim Universities? Isn`t it your scientific education that has enabled you to move freely to the West and participate in the general economic progress? Has that actually prevented you from being a good Muslim? Would a modern education actually prevent an ordinary Muslim from being a religious person in his personal life?]

I agree with you totally here. Except that Aligarh is not a good example; their interpretation of Islam is ``modernist`` and not classical. Universities which combine modern science with classical islamic teachings are what are needed most.

[I know you think deeply about the issues of Muslims in India. I am offering these suggestions to you for you to reflect on them. I know that you will agree with me that when all people put their religion in their personal sphere and socially interact as equals, we will all advance together.]

I thank you for your advice. I agree totally with you that Muslims desperately need scientific education but this does NOT have to mean abandoning traditional islamic thinking or doctrines. In other words we should learn science but not scientism--the belief that science has the answer to all our questions alone. As a practising scientist I reject that view totally.

Hope that makes sense to you...:-)

Zafar bhaiyya,

You are right. We did have that discussion on another board. I merely relayed the traditional Sunni belief about Allah`s Messenger alayhisalatosalam. If you do not wish to discuss it is up to you and your right :-) I will though say that as a Muslim it is our duty to find out as much as possible about the beautiful life about Our Beautiful Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam. When you know about their [i.e. Allah`s Habib (I use ``their`` as a plural of respect)life you will love them. And a person cannot be a perfect momin until he loves Allah`s Messenger more than anything else including his own self! (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam). That is why I recommend you (and everyone else) read the following two books on Allah`s Messenger`s blessed life (peace be upon him and his family):

1. Muhammad (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam): His Life based on the Earliest Sources --by Martin Lings.

2. Muhammad Messenger of Allah (Ash-Shifa of Qadi `Iyad) (sal Allahu alayhiwasallam) -translated by Aisha Bewley.

And if you can read Urdu:

1. Zikr-e-Jameel by Hazrat Muhammad Shafi Okarvi.

2. Zia un-Nabi sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam by Hazrat Pir Muhammad Karam Shah al Azhari (rahmatullah alayhi) (7 volume masterpiece of seerah writing).

If you -or anyone else-- wants to read about the Blessed Prophet (peace be upon him) in the Qur`an Sharif the best book, in Urdu, is ``Shaan Habibur Rahman Min Aayaatul Qur`an`` by Hazrat Mufti Ahmad Yaar Khan Na`eemi (rahmatullah alayhi).

If you just read ONE book then the one by Aisha Bewley above in English is the one you should read. Available from amazon.com.

:-)

wa salam

Eklavya #364:

``Long ago (that is when I still had all my teeth) when I had never travelled out of U.P., I could not understand how anyone could be an Indian and not know Hindi. Now I can not look back on the stupidity and bigotry of that boy without feeling a sense of shame. Luckily, in India that in-your-face, aggressive, south-baiting Hindi hegemonism is almost dead. If it was not, I would openly and strongly oppose it.``

Well said. Sadly, there are still a lot of people who equate knowledge of Hindi with patriotism and a lack of knowledge as otherwise. Even sadder is that a lot of people want a single culture for India, even for Hindus, ignoring the fact that there are several vibrant `cultures` (and religions) in India that have developed over centuries.

Having lived in both North and South India, I find there is an apalling ignorance of the `other`. I have come across many (otherwise) well educated N Indians who cannot name the Southern states, who (to give a trivial example) think Bollywood = Indian cinema (not realising that Tamil cinema alone produces more movies per year than Bollywood) etc. Similarly, I have seen many South Indians for whom the rest of India is one homogenous `Hindi speaking` entity.

If I had a choice, every school student would spend one year in the opposite end of India (and that includes the North East too) and learn the local language.

``Pakistan is a great country.``

Come again?

Rsaxena #358 ``the intellectual sewers of the modern world.``

Just like your posts are the intellectual sewers of chowk (along with your other smelly buddies and the nutcase Jay).

re shah 362

The post makes no sense whatsover. Bengalis and Tamils are anti-Urdu? I am non-Urdu speaking? What does all of this have anything to do with the questions posed to your earlier?

Urdu-Muslims? What on earth is that? I suggest you re-read the Holy Prophet`s last sermon about distinguishing between people in that manner.

RSaxena # 352

``What`s wrong with saying the ``will of the nation?`` How is that related to religion?``

The ``Will of the nation`` pertains to the building

of a Ram temple, on a disputed site, which is sub judice.Ram`s temple will be used for his pooja by his followers.I hope you are aware of the fact that pooja is a part of Hindu Dharama.Do you see the relation to the religion?

Regards.

Reply Hobbyty # 306

Hobbyty

[“Secularism is an example of modernization (a response to increasing complexity), in which differentiation of religion from economic and political institutions. THIS DIFFERNTIATION CAN ALSO APPLY TO THE SEPERATIONOF RELIGION FROM CULTURE AND CONSCIENCE. Therefore there can be two meaning of secularism or alternately we can view it as a dichotomy of Objective versus Subjective secularism. On a psychological and cultural level, what was once sacred both in the psychological and in the cultural sense is now open to the profane.” ]

True – in a secular society there is no way to ENFORCE sacredness. Either an individual feels something is sacred, or they do not, and there is no way to force them. This seems like a good thing to me.

[“Within The realm of Subjective secularism, you have profanation, resulting in the diminishment of religion as a cultural and moral force. Subjective secularism acts to decimate religion, not by demystifying it or rationalizing it, but by infiltrating the sacred psycho-social terrain in the individual conscience and within society as a whole.”]

You mean morality is perceived as no longer being defined, or limited, by any particular religious tradition or belief, but by social consensus (sp?). I think that this has always been true to some extent – although morality usually has hidden in religion. (For example, so many customs have hidden in Islam and are perceived as Islamic which are actually just social mores….)

I don’t see such a clear line between the subjective/objective secularism.

[“Consider your statement about the reawakening, revival: You question whether it was the right thing to do or happen. In other words, Subjective secularism gives to itself the right to decide the validity of individual conscience.”]

Nahin bhaiya, Subjective Secularism tho kahin golf khel raha thha. It wasn’t him. Mathlab, that was MY opinion.

[“ You begin with the presumption that religious awakening/revival has a purpose other than what the adherent has judged to be true or correct for that adherent’s conscience. Your analysis begins with “look at the results”, which you then explain – as opposed to “look at the reason for the revival”, that is to say the individual conscience.”]

An individual’s religious “purpose” or “need” are personal, and should affect nobody but him or her. It’s nobody else’s business. It’s the outcomes that the rest of society has to deal with – and in the case of Yugoslavia, the outcomes which had to be dealt with included ethnic cleansing and murder. I very much doubt (and again, this is MHO, not SS’s) that religious revival in Yugoslavia resulted in better human beings (Orthodox, Catholic or Muslim). If you think that it did, I’d be interested in knowing why.

[“Opium of the masses”? really? well, why then is religion so strong in the US?]

Look at US social welfare policies. Besides – where else but church/mosque/synagogue/temple do people make business deals or (traditionally) demonstrate that they are advancing economically (from the Southern Baptists to Methodists to Episcopalians)?

[“Moreover, what does such an attitude say about the role of the individual conscience? Do people not ask “Who am I? “What does my life mean?” “Am I part of some greater design?” – Now, this is for the individual conscience to decide, not for those who reject the very validity of that conscience. It is the opposite of tolerance; It appropriates a civic morality that denies to any other the right to an individual conscience. The key lies in whether or not one is willing to acknowledge that peoples practice their faith, because they need the spiritual uplift of their faith, after all, what happened to Tolerance being the foundation of civil society?”]

On the contrary. Secularism respects EVERYBODY’S right to conscience re: matters spiritual. What it also does, however, is state that your right to religious freedom stops when it starts impinging on the rights (religious and otherwise) of others. That’s why religious organisations loathe secularism – it stops them from bullying people in the name of God.

[“Now look at your last statement: “The revival of religiously based identities is a reaction to change – fear of change if you will.”…”OK, that’s one answer, but why would anyone want to assign a value judgement to such a response? To what next will the Subjective secularists take objection to and which other groups of persons will they make decisions for?”]

Hey – I can object to anything I like. But where am I making a decision for anybody else? Objective Secularism doesn’t mean I can’t call something wrong or evil if that is my opinion. I can condemn bubble gum all I want, so long as I don’t interfere with your right to chew it.

Zafar

Reply Sadna # 308

“When this happens I put in my request for a few hard kicks to the whining Sanghis/Jamaatis? backsides.”

Voh tho aap yahan kar chuke, Mashallah.

Reply Asif Naqshbandi # 313

Dear Asif

“I cannot recall having written any thing about the Blessed Prophet alayhisalatosalaam`s anatomy mubarak which you refer too; I would NEVER write about that for fear of disrespect. I think I did write about the imaan of the blessed parents of the Beloved Prophet alayhisalaam--in fact, if I recall all I did was paste an article which gave the orthodox Sunni view on this matter of aqeedah.”

I cannot recall which board this was on, but I do recall reading a post (or series of posts) discussing whether the Prophet was born circumcised, and also which mentioned the Prophet’s parents being raised from the dead in order to convert to Islam. If you did not posts these things, excuse me, I have mistaken you for somebody else.

If you did post them, please note: I have no negative or positive comments to make on these beliefs. My point to Satyavadi was that I do not have any wish or interest in discussing them beyond that past interaction. I fully respect the right of other people to do so whenever and wherever they wish, but I do feel that involving myself in these discussions un-necessarily would be wasting these people’s time.

Best wishes,

Zafar

Reply RSaxena # 309

“I know I`m not supposed to like this Bukhari fellow but I can`t help but give him an ear when goes on tirades against Pakistani terrorism in Kashmir. At least one part of his brain, no matter how small, must be working. No? Or do you think he and the BJP have struck a deal where they don`t bother him when he goes on tirades against the US (and for Taliban) as long as he goes on tirades against Pakistan?”

How can he sincerely oppose jihad in Kashmir and then turn around and call for jihad in Afghanistan? He is entirely self-serving and opportunistic, and in my considered opinion, an odious little toad.

Re:sadna #340

reason #335

Do you know anything about Syed Shahabuddin and his various stands? He is an ex-IFS topper(I heard) and is a talented man I think (with a talented family, too). I have not followed him closely, recently he was one of the leaders who protested the banning of SIMI.

firstly , i am sorry i did not understand the link between my post and your reply .

i know of Syed Shahabuddin and i do not know if you are aware that he was brought into politics by our own PM AB Vajpayee. No wonder he is one of the reasons for the rise of the BJP :-)

``18 Christians shot dead in Pak church``

Looks like Bajarang Dal has a branch in Pakistan too.

Shah,

Do you think ``urdu is Pakistan, Pakistan is urdu approach`` had something to do with the break up of Pakistan?

Long ago (that is when I still had all my teeth) when I had never travelled out of U.P., I could not understand how anyone could be an Indian and not know Hindi. Now I can not look back on the stupidity and bigotry of that boy without feeling a sense of shame. Luckily, in India that in-your-face, aggressive, south-baiting Hindi hegemonism is almost dead. If it was not, I would openly and strongly oppose it.

Pakistan is a great country. Please share it equally with those whose mother tongue is not Urdu. The same is the case with Islam. These are all different concepts. They have different defintions, different domains of meaning, and follow different evolutionary logics. Mixing them up demeans them.

Religion not important to Hindus? LOL...I wish it was less important, Shah. The only difference is that a great many Hindus (and Muslims) have decided to read their holy books with a new set of eyes.

Regards.

Ref Asif Naqshbandi #: 312

[It is funny how my prayer--which just asked Allah to remove the chains of slavery from the Muslims of India and restore them to their former glory and for each Muslim child to have pride in his Muslim ancestors and to renew in them the fervour of their past--so upset a few hindus on here.I said nothing bad against anyone in that humble little prayer.

It seems even praying for the revival of Muslims in India really rattles certain Hindus! Talk about hatred....!

Janab Naqshbandi Sahib,

In asking for a Muslim leader to lead the Muslims of India to their former glory, could you not have chosen to ask for someone who has not been a scourge to the Hindus?

I know you are a pious Muslim. I know you take to heart the Holy Quran. Clearly, you have the sense to interpret those verses that call for destruction of the idolaters in the context of the times and to take to heart those passages that call for tolerance.

Don`t you think what anybody, not just Muslims, needs in this day and age is modern scientific education that will lead to their upliftment? Don`t you think what we need is 10,000 people who will create the next 10,000 Aligarh Muslim Universities? Isn`t it your scientific education that has enabled you to move freely to the West and participate in the general economic progress? Has that actually prevented you from being a good Muslim? Would a modern education actually prevent an ordinary Muslim from being a religious person in his personal life?

I know you think deeply about the issues of Muslims in India. I am offering these suggestions to you for you to reflect on them. I know that you will agree with me that when all people put their religion in their personal sphere and socially interact as equals, we will all advance together.

Regards.

Re:Reply #: 348

Shah

``Pakistan was made not b/c muslims couldnt earn there living in undivided India ,it was total control on all aspect of muslims language ,dreass

,islamiyat,own destiny ,observent life ,...etc.``

Can you furnish any proof of your above statement? This kind of thing is no doubt being taught in madrasas in Pakistan. Did you by chance get your education in one of them? A simple way to disprove your assertion is to look at Indian muslims of today. These are the people who chose to stay back. They have not lost their islamiyat, language (Urdu press in India is second only to English in terms of number of dailies published), dress or their culture for that matter.

``Urdu is the pakistans national language how many of your thses gentle men know Urdu & schooled in Islamiyat.??``.

Again, if Urdu is Pakistan`s national language, why should muslims like Abdul Kalam or Azim Premji know this language. Abdul Kalam, for your information is fluent in Tamil and writes poetry in that language. He is also a sanskrit scholar. Since he did not get his education from a madrasaa, he does not equate language with religion. Do i become more muslim if i know Urdu? Am i a Pundit only if i know sanskrit? What kind of contorted logic is this?

Sorry for butting in but i hope i have set the records straight and you have learned something in the process. Do not forget, Munshi Premchand was fluent in Urdu as Ras Khan was in Hindi.

Sridhar

Re: Jilani`s article

While people in this forum are debating the status of minorities in their respective countries, here is an article from Amina Jilani in Jung.

``A State of Denial

Amina Jilani

It is high time that the members of that amorphous community known as the Ummah, which makes vain attempts to trumpet its unity whilst agreeing to remain fractured, and hostile to one another, indulged in a bit of introspection.

In the aftermath of the September happening the Muslim nations have been either moaning and groaning, or they have been up in arms burning effigies and hurling violent abuse at the Great White Satans of this startled world. The cause of their ire or their self-pity is Afghanistan and its people. However, no humantarian aid of any sort from any Muslim state is flowing into that unhappy country to help its refugees and its widows and orphans for whose plight so many breasts are being beaten. The support from the Muslim world boils down to mere rhetoric with nothing behind it, except in the case of Pakistan which is reluctantly being overrun and forced to provide shelter, no matter how crude or rude.

For over a decade Afghanistan has been in a state of turmoil and civil war inflicted by Muslim upon Muslim. The Muslim people of Afghanistan have been murdered and pillaged by the Muslim Mujahadeen and then bludgeoned into submission by the Muslim Taliban whilst being at the same time starved and killed by drought. Where then were the other Muslim states? Those now jumping up and down were either silent observers, quite content to stand by and watch the atrocities of the Mujahadeen and the Taliban or, as with the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, active participants in the interests of its own ‘strategic depth’.

Pakistan’s great Islamists (though divorced from the true faith) are now erupting in self-righteous violent fury over the doings of the Infidels. It seems that if Muslim hits, maims or kills Muslim, that’s fine, but let the infidel step in, having been a victim of terrorism with obvious Islamic connections, and things are quite different. When the alleged perpetrators claim their acts of terrorism are sanctioned by Islamic values few Islamic voices are raised in protest.

The good Muslim activists remain silent when the Taliban attack and sack the Western humanitarian relief agencies and seize food meant for the desperate civilian population. They remain silent when the Taliban steal equipment, supplies and vehicles from the relief agencies and thus hamper their ability to give relief? And last week brought rumors in the press that there are fears the Taliban may try to poison humanitarian food stuff being distributed to starving Afghan civilians and then blame the act on the Americans. This is not impossible, and should it happen how many ardent Muslims will protest?

There is a wealth of hypocrisy along the way. Muslims are up in arms against discriminatory practices in non-Islamic countries but are silent on discriminatory practices in Islamic states. For instance, Saddam Hussain is quite justified in killing Kurds; the Gulf states can base their laws and even salaries on ethnic origins and no Muslim will protest that this is a racist practise; Palestinian refugees can become citizens of the United States, but no Muslim state other than Jordan is prepared to grant them this facility though all the Muslim states pledge their undying support for the Palestine cause, and weep and wail over the plight of the Palestinians, and vow to fight to the death for their right to a homeland. The list is long.

At their recent meeting in Qatar the Organisation of the Islamic Conference refused to accept any responsibility for the September terrorist attack. Not one member wishes to take the lead in tackling the problem, or even talking about it, though terrorism is endemic to the Muslim world. Take Pakistan and its marauding groups of fanatics such as the Sipah-e-Sahaba and the Sipah-e-Muhammad, with which we here are all too familiar, who have been allowed to spread terror throughout the country. In Egypt, the Islamic Jihad and the Gama-e-Islami kill and destroy and make miserable the lives of their fellow Muslims. In the far off Philippines, the Abu Sayyaf band, supposedly fighting for liberation, are busy killing their fellow Muslims. There are few Muslim countries not terrorised by terrorism, and the worldwide victims of terrorism more often than not are Muslim victims of Muslim terrorists, particularly in such brutalised places as Palestine and Chechnya.

But, wallowing in a state of denial, the Muslim countries refuse to admit that terrorism is an internal problem. They shrug off all blame, and lay it at the doorsteps of the Western world, or the CIA, the Mossad, the Indians, the Jews. They are paranoiac, seeing conspiracies against them everywhere but in their own front yards.

What the Muslim world should now ask itself is how, in this day and age, it has spawned an Osama Bin Laden? And how, in the year 2001, is that man now transformed into a role model for millions of Muslim youth, both uneducated and educated, to emulate? Something is very wrong in the kingdom of Islam. Against all the tenets and teachings of Islam, it has allowed itself to be hijacked by a bunch of semi-literate demagogues, who practice a fanatic militancy geared to violence, combined with an illiberal repressive brand of fundamentalism. Enough is surely enough.

Here in Pakistan, we should not grudge the man who now heads this country any seat he may wish to sit in, any hat he may wish to wear, if he can somehow drag it into the 21st century and get it going on a path, no matter how rutted, towards progress. His volte face on the ‘national interest’ may well prove to be Pakistan’s saving grace.

But President General Pervez Musharraf, despite his act of support to the coalition, may not get it all his own way. He wants a government dominated by ‘moderate’ Talibans (this is like talking about ‘moderate’ Nazis in 1945). Last week, US Secretary of State General Colin Powell made it quite clear: “The next government of Afghanistan cannot be dictated into existence by Pakistan or any of the other neighbours. It has to be an internationally blessed process, and it has to involve the UN, and it has to involve all the Afghan people, not just who (Pakistan) might favour at a particular moment to put into power in Kabul.”

So much for Musharraf’s strategic depth. And another of his recommendations has been shot down. Colin Powell also has insisted that US forces will not limit their strikes on Afghanistan to the period before the start of the month of Ramadan. Action will continue until the objectives are reached, even though the US is ‘sensitive to Ramadan’.

An afterthought: Would it not be far more becoming to our President General and the image he presents to the world were he, since he feels the compulsion to dye his hair, to seek professional help so that he does appear before his international audiences as if wearing a chestnut skull cap atop a naturally graying head? Or better still, just go gray as nature dictates.``

What blew my mind away was the news that not one muslim country is sending any humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. What are the oil-Sheikhs upto? Busy with their wives in the harem, no doubt. No Palestinian can become a citizen of any muslim country except Jordan? Wow, that is some news. Why all this sympathy for Palenstinians then if no one is helping them in concrete terms.

Time for introspection by the so called muslim Ummah.

Sridhar

re romair 350

You`re giving only a partial picture of the countries under review. For starters, Turkey and ALgeria restrict Islamist politics because the Islamist version of democracy is `one man, one vote, one time`- an anthema to true democratic practise. Those bleeding heart Western HR activists did not believe this and kept on bedgering the late Shahenshah for being repressive and anti-democratic. Well, the `democracy` that replaced the His Majesty makes Imperial Iran look like a kindergarten for repressive regimes. Algeria acted swiftly to counter this kind of `revolution` prior to the second round of elections.

As for Turkey, she is model worth emulating. Mullahs have been predicting her demise as a political/economic force ever since the Ataturk demolished the last edifices of sixth century obscurantism. Yet, Turkey has survived, has an economy better than almost all other non-petro Muslim countries, and is steadily heading towards full integration with EU. Yes her democracy is not perfect and her HR record is spotty for which she comes in under scolding from the other Europeans. But as her Interior Minister told an EU meet not too long ago, `if Belgians or Danes had Iran, Iraq and Syria for neighbors, they wouldn`t be such do-gooder liberal bleeding hearts as they are today`. In our lifetimes, Turkey will become a full fledged democracy with all the ingredients of a modern civilized society. Then the mullahs can harp about something else.

The same `democracy` argument is used in Bangladesh by those who support Islamist outfits like Jamaat and IOJ. My answer is that everybody ought to be able to do politics and run in elections in a free country like Bangladesh. PROVIDED that all parties and contestants publicly affirm their allegiance to the Constitution of the Republic which reposes sovereignty in the people excersized through their Parliament. This stuff about ``God`s sovereignty`` and Nizaam-e-Mohammadi is incompatible with the Constitution.

correction #350: ``In my opinion, the only way they can get into political parties is through back doors, opened to them by people like NS, BB and Zia.``

should read

``In my opinion, the only way they can get into political power is through back doors, opened to them by people like NS, BB and Zia.``

Re: Eklayva

``Then, if you dig deeper and ask: if the term ``Islamic`` does not apply to the nature of governance, then does it describe some kind of a vision? What precisely are the practical dimensions of that vision? If you press beyond some vague prefacing, you will get as many different answers as the number of people you ask. I am sure you will find that on many dimensions of that ``vision`` India ranks higher than many so-called ``Islamic`` nations.``

There`s no need to complicate this further. You get my point, don`t you? Yes, many Indians are Muslim but India is not and never will be like the countries which are majority Muslim....those countries, with the exception of Turkey and to some extent Bangladesh, are the intellectual sewers of the modern world.

re shah 348

``Urdu is the pakistans national language how many of your thses gentle men know Urdu & schooled in Islamiyat.??``

A. WHy would Indians have to know Pakistan`s national language?

B. How many Pakistanis know ``Pakistan`s national language``? (my guess is slightly less than half can actually speak proper Urdu and less than a querter use is as their home verncular)

C. Why would those gentlemen want to be schooled in Islamyiat to prove their Muslim-ness?

RE: Reply #: 348 Shah

``Pakistan has successfull actyors more than 2 & industrialits too. May be not as rich as Prem ji that may b/c he has 7 times moe ppl. & 10 times larger economy .Incidently thses sucessful indian muslims are also ADDing to the sucess of India .So it is not one way Gift to muslim india as you indirectly argue.``

I mentioned those examples to refute Naqshbandi`s contention that Indian Muslims are in ``chains of slavery`` (a futile exercise, in retrospect). I never said that people like Premji were doing a favor to India. In fact they are the pillars of modern India. For every Premji who is in the limelight due to his phenomenal achievement there are countless ordinary Indian Muslims who, by sheer dint of their hard work, contribute to the Indian nation. More power to them. Rabble-rousers like Naqshbandi`s bring dishonor to these folk by their words.

Romair, Banjara, Shah

Some interesting comments. I will get back to you guys soon. Right now, I am expecting a bunch of hooligans to drop by :)

Sigalph343

Right on pal. The rest of the `ummah` can learn a lot from Turkey.

You cant have your cake & eat it too.

If you like what Turkey is or Pakistan,Egypt,Syria,you must not base your constitution on British or American model.Both thses constitution ,guarantees ,freedom of religion,pursuit of hapiness ,liberty & life .Non intereference or minimal interference by the govt.in day to day life of its subjects.Such democracies ,requires HIGH degree of tolerence.Rascism,discrimination is CRIME here .

There is nothing wrong in liking dictator specially benevolent dictators.You dont guarantee ,endless ,total & bizzare freedom seen in the west .But make up your mind .like i said in the beginning dont delude yourself into liking Western constituion & still wanting to censure certain ppl. you Dont like or dont agree with.

Re: banjaara

``Precisely what the muslims would also want and that way the Govt. in power would not be laying the ``ShilaNiyas`` or the Prime Minister declare to the nation about the ``Will of the nation`` or every Official Govt.Function start with Aarti,because that is what you expect in a democratic and secular country.``

What`s wrong with saying the ``will of the nation?`` How is that related to religion? As for your other points, I agree. Ban that $hit across the board. No aartis, iftar parties, or christmas lights at Vajpayee`s official residence. If he wants to do all this, he should get off of government premises and do it.

I get pi$$ed off when George Bush says ``God Bless America``...he should chant that nonsense in his bedroom and spare the nation. Even America is not perfect...if he said ``Jesus Bless America,`` there would be a lot of offended people...but no one cares about the sizable atheist population who gets offended when he says ``God Bless America``...

If one looks at things from a purely democratic point of view, then everyone and anyone has a right to come out on the streets. It doesn`t matter what they are coming out for. They could be religious lovers, or satin worshippers, klu klux klan members, or the BJP. What one does not have a right to do is to come out on the street and destroy property and carry out violence.

The worst action against any religious (or non-religious) group is to not allow them on the street. It is even worse to completely attempt to suppress them, as is being done in Egypt, Algeria, Turkey, and was done in Iran.

The results of such suppressions are obvious and open for everyone to see, i.e. massive counter reactions. Egypt has the most vicious and powerful militant religious groups in the world. Their is a storm brewing there (and in Saudi Arabia), against its pro-American govt. Primarily because whenever even the non-militant religous groups win elections in any of Egypt`s syndicates (legal, etc.), they are banned. It is not a coincidence the top two members of Al-Qaeda are Saudi and Egyptian, as were a majority of the hijackers.

In Algeria, the religious parties, out and out, won the National Election, but were not allowed to form the govt. Look what is happening there now. And in Iran, it was the Shah`s extremist anti-religion policies that lead to the counter Islamic wave. Even in India, the rise of the BJP may (or may not, I am not sure) have been a backlash to what many Hindus (rightly or wrongly) saw as suppression of their religion in anti-Hindu and pro-Muslim secularism. At least, this is the logic the BJP provides on its own website.

In Turkey, the govt. has gone out of its way, to ban everything that has anything to do with Islam. This in a country that has one of the highest percentage density Muslim of any country in the world. However, religious parties continue to pop-up there. If Turkey`s economy goes down to South Asian levels (it has had some major currency and financial shocks in its history), the religious parties will come out into the forefront. Turkey has an extremely poor human rights record in its handling of Kurds. It is in a state of war with more groups than is Pakistan. So it is not the model state people make it out to be. Countries do not become progressive by making it illegal to wear hijab in their equivalent of National Assembly. That is not different than forcing a female to wear a burqa. I start getting sick when Pakistanis point to Turkey (or Saudi Arabia) as their ultimate goal. It is a sign of an inferiority complex. Both are at the opposite extreme end of the spectrum.

The worst thing Pakistan can do is to kick out or ban religious parties from the political arena. If Pakistanis are so sure that their country-folk are, ``moderate`` Muslims, then they should have no fear of religious parties. I certainly don`t fear them. In my opinion, the only way they can get into political parties is through back doors, opened to them by people like NS, BB and Zia.

Let the religious parties come out on the streets. Let them present their points of views. Let them yell and scream and burn effigies of Musharraf (along with their other Army-hating colleagues). Only take action against them, if any of they commits violence etc., then take strict action.

On the whole, Musharraf seems to be doing the above, and is handling this situation extremely well. I have admired his ability to think, ``outside the military uniform.`` But his dealings with the religious parties, go beyond the political anlaytical abilities of even the most capable General. My feeling is he is being advised by various (non BB and non NS loving) politicians in the PPP and PML, etc. on how to handle the maulvis.

They only way to remove religious extremism from a society is to raise the living standard of the citizens. If Pakistan wants the followers of JUI et. al. to be reduced, it needs to provide jobs to the people who are participating in the protests. People who have jobs tend not to take part in processions, on a daily basis, on working days. If Pakistan attempts to take out any political religious party militarily or forcefully, it will turn into Egypt or Algeria. And if it attempts to force secularism down every Pakistanis throat, it will turn into an Iran without oil.

If Pakistan`s, ``silent majority`` members really wants to take on the religious parties, they need to come out on the Pakistani streets, in greater numbers than the religious supporters, in rallies against the JUI, JI etc. But sadly, the silent majority in Pakistan spends too much time instructing others to take-on the religious parties, and too little time taking any action itself.

Pradeep Kumar your Moms first crush on silver screen or your grand mothers whether you are in or out of college.

For some reason he got all the Raja ,roles like Shahjehan in Taj Mahal,Mere Huzoor,.Never liked the look .Oblong Face with crooked moustacheue .I dont know what ppl. those days considered handsome

Pradeep Kumar dead

PTI

Kolkata, October 27

Veteran film actor Pradeep Kumar, who appeared in lead roles in Hindi and Bengali films, died here on Saturday of a massive heart attack, according to Ramakrishna Mission Seva Pratisthan hospital sources.

He was 76.

Kumar is survived by his wife, son and daughter.

He was admitted to hospital on October 22 with cerebral vascular problem. Subsequently, he suffered multiple organ failure, the sources added.

RSaxena # 344

``As long as it is restricted to the believers` homes and minds and does not pollute government affairs or the public domain.``

Precisely what the muslims would also want and that way the Govt. in power would not be laying the ``ShilaNiyas`` or the Prime Minister declare to the nation about the ``Will of the nation`` or every Official Govt.Function start with Aarti,because that is what you expect in a democratic and secular country.

Regards.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Saxena,

There is a general confusion here. By ``general`` I mean, it is not confined to you and me.

People use the label ``Islamic`` loosely. For example, an ``Islamic`` country could be Saudi Arabia, it could be Pakistan, or it could be Turkey. Thus, the label has little to do with the nature or structure of national governance.

Then, if you dig deeper and ask: if the term ``Islamic`` does not apply to the nature of governance, then does it describe some kind of a vision? What precisely are the practical dimensions of that vision? If you press beyond some vague prefacing, you will get as many different answers as the number of people you ask. I am sure you will find that on many dimensions of that ``vision`` India ranks higher than many so-called ``Islamic`` nations.

Therefore, I think that the current use the term ``Islamic`` state is highly problematic. India has more Muslims than all other countries but a few. Since there is no clear understanding of what constitutes an Islamic state, I dont see any reason why India, with its very large Muslim population, is any less Islamic than most ``Islamic`` states.

A functioning democracy can be Hindu, Musli, Christian all at the same time. And most (not all) Muslims will agree that democracy is quite compatible with Islam.

Re: Eklayva

``Let`s say India will never be a ``religious`` or ``theocratic`` country. I think that is what you meant.``

No. I meant exactly what I said.

``Sometimes in the give-and-take of Chowk, we Indians fail to emphasize what, IMO, all of us very strongly believe: Islam is a broader and completely different concept than captured in the state of Pakistan.``

I don`t care what Islam, or any other religion for that matter, is or is not. As long as it is restricted to the believers` homes and minds and does not pollute government affairs or the public domain.

``With the number of Muslims we have living in a working democracy, India is already more ``Muslim`` a nation that many others.``

What? You`re making no sense now, Eklayva...I am not talking about the number of Muslims in India...I`m talking about the stuff that afflicts the Muslim world outside of India and perhaps Turkey...dictatorships, religious police, lack of personal liberties, blasphemy laws, lack of religious freedom, membership in religious organizations like the OIC, etc. Yes many of countrymen are Muslim, but our country is far from the $hit I listed above...and it will stay that way.

re eklavya 341

``People of all religions should be encouraged to move their religions to their places of worship, their homes, and their hearts. Ofcourse, all those lovely processions and colorful festivals are a boon to the public. But otherwise, religion, whether Hindu or Muslim, has no business being on the streets. ``

Right on pal. The rest of the `ummah` can learn a lot from Turkey.

RSaxena,

Let`s say India will never be a ``religious`` or ``theocratic`` country. I think that is what you meant.

Sometimes in the give-and-take of Chowk, we Indians fail to emphasize what, IMO, all of us very strongly believe: Islam is a broader and completely different concept than captured in the state of Pakistan. With the number of Muslims we have living in a working democracy, India is already more ``Muslim`` a nation that many others.

re: Shah # 326

Shah,

``Muslims in Indias are encouraged to move Islam underground religion in your mosque ,madrasah & house if you care.``

People of all religions should be encouraged to move their religions to their places of worship, their homes, and their hearts. Ofcourse, all those lovely processions and colorful festivals are a boon to the public. But otherwise, religion, whether Hindu or Muslim, has no business being on the streets. Definitely not when it is being used as a pretext for inciting hatred against others and indulging in violent acts threatening life and property.

reason #335
Do you know anything about Syed Shahabuddin and his various stands? He is an ex-IFS topper(I heard) and is a talented man I think (with a talented family, too). I have not followed him closely, recently he was one of the leaders who protested the banning of SIMI.

Harpreet #33 and #34: Your posts are like gold nuggets in a manure factory.

As for the article itself, it gives mediocrity a bad name. Mian sahib provides a bibliography to an article that provides as much new knowledge as one gets when reading the letters A, B and C. The message of the article (the west hates us) is as profound as the message of a village mullah on a Friday prayer.

...it always takes two to tango...the hate cuts both ways...

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/27/arts/27ANTI.html

Anti-Semitism Is Deepening Among Muslims

By SUSAN SACHS



Stay in a five-star hotel anywhere from Jordan to Iran, and you can buy the infamous forgery ``Protocols of the Elders of Zion.`` Pick up a newspaper in any part of the Arab world and you regularly see a swastika superimposed on the Israeli flag.

Such anti-Semitic imagery is now embedded in the mainstream discourse concerning Jews in much of the Islamic world, in the popular press and in academic journals.

The depictions are not limited to countries that are at war with Israel but can be found in general-interest publications in Egypt and Jordan, the two countries that have signed peace agreements with Israel, as well as in independent religious schools in Pakistan and Southeast Asia.

Sadna:

seimpreciousme #264

{ ?.sigh?..tit for tat and you resort to name-calling?.very disappointing, especially coming from you?``}

“Join the club. “

…..like I said it was tit for tat….without any name-calling…..

“You can use this to good purpose, I suggest that you`all hold a convention and collect money for childrens education back in your native countries or WTC victims or some such noble cause.. “

…..um….thanks for the germane response/advice…

RE: Reply #: 312 Asif Naqshbandi

``It is funny how my prayer--which just asked Allah to remove the chains of slavery from the Muslims of India and restore them to their former glory and for each Muslim child to have pride in his Muslim ancestors and to renew in them the fervour of their past--so upset a few hindus on here.I said nothing bad against anyone in that humble little prayer.``

Brotherly Muslim love has been responsible for more killings in Pakistan in the last year than all the killings in religious riots in India in the past decade. Brotherly Pakistani love has laid waste the entire country of Afghanistan (of course a few greenbacks caused Pakistan to shift it`s brotherly love towards the U.S.). And brotherly Pakistani love for Bangladeshi resulted in the deaths of 3 million Muslims.

Meanwhile poor Muslims in India are taking such horrible steps backward - like Azim Premji being a measly billionaire or Aamir Khan and Shah Rukh Khan making movies that are technically equivalent to the West or Jinnah`s grandson being a top industrialist or even Muslims being full and equal participants in the democratic experiment that is India. And of course we have Abdul Kalaam who can design a rocket that we can then fire up your a * *e.

Sheesh

Asif Naqshbandi # 313

``BTW, since you are from India have you heard of Ala Hazrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan of Bareilly Sharif, U.P.?``

Janab ! all the sharif`s of Bareilly have migrated

to Pakistan alongwith the followers of Raza Khan,

and the zaalim kafirs have renamed Bareilly as

Bareilly.Toba Toba:)))

RE UCC:

I do not think implementation of UCC will bring about a more just system in india . Laws are laws and people misuse them whether they are divine laws or man made laws . but i do agree that there should be one law for one country and it should have been codified at the time of independence . i do not know why the leaders of freedom struggle did not implement it at that time . as far as i know it was not for appeasing the muslims as our sanghis want us believe .

atleast for past few years the champions of UCC had been the jan sanghis and again these idiots have misused a very valid issue and created an impression that UCC is anti muslim . and ofcourse there are so called muslim leaders who have done nothing in political career beside making muslims insecure about UCC .

Ek

Yes.

Write @ alphaHussain@hotmail.com

Pakistani brothers and sisters

Assalamualaikum. We are doing well. Thanks for your concern. Makhfi has been reading too much Jamati literature. Our problems are not more difficult than Pakistan`s problems. We have a bigger country. Bigger problems. I am involved in local politics. I know how Indian mind works. I know we can solve our problems. Urstruly, Asif, both of you go to hell.

Reply Saminashah # 307

Is there any way to stop junkies like Naqsbandi out of these posts . he posts nothing but garbage .

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

ali1#300

``u r right. the baboons need a mahmood ghaznavi... judging the their reactions, the dhotis are beginning to get wet already with fear. cowardly bride burning thugs. maybe this time mahmood will plant enough seeds so the baboons can evolve to neanderthals...``

Ali: are you watching Jay Leno? According to him, thereb is a virgin shortage in your paradise. Relax, you may may get a `restored` virgin if and when get there.

Asif Naqshbandi: 312

``It is funny how my prayer--which just asked Allah to remove the chains of slavery from the Muslims of India and restore them to their former glory and for each Muslim child to have pride in his Muslim ancestors and to renew in them the fervour of their past--so upset a few hindus on here.I said nothing bad against anyone in that humble little prayer.``

I hope your prayer works. I hope Alla restores glory to all Indians and Pakistanis regardless of their faith.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Ref Zafar #304:

[But I will certainly keep my eye out for any Turkish/other Meditterranean ladies on your behalf - please do send details so that I can circulate here. (My flatmate is from Cyprus, but Greek. How about somebody from there? Also many Lebanese people here in Sydney.)]

I once met a Greek(mother)/Turkish(father) girl in Denver. Golden hair and flawless golden skin; she was breathtakingly beautiful.

Go for it, guys!

PS. Was it Emperor Chandragupta Maurya who was given a Greek girl in marriage? Lucky dude!

Asif naqshbandi:

So you want comments on Ala`s (whoever) suggestions ? I thought you were smarter than that- seriously. Ok here goes my comments:

``1. Barring the affairs wherein Government is involved, the Muslims should decide all their disputes mutually so that millions of rupees,which are being spent over litigations, may be saved.``

What if the 2 or more parties find no mutually agreeable solution ? They just don`t see eye to eye- period. Isn`t litigation better than war ?



``2. The affluent Muslims of Bombay, Calcutta, Rangoon, Madras and Hyderabad should open banks for other poor Muslims.``

Should it be made the law ? I don`t think so, what about free will- What if I`m a meanie or just don`t care-

``3. Muslims should not purchase anything from anybody except Muslims.``

While purchasing, people ususally demand good quality, and a good deal- these matter most to capitalist peegs like me - not the religion of the seller. Its a global society. Stop thinking like an exclusivist- Please tell that to your leader too.

``4. The sciences of Islam should be propagated and publicized``

Science is not specific to any religion. If that were so the computer you are using would be unislamic and your typing may be considered a haraam activity ( and maybe even is by some fundoo freaks)

I don`t know where to end, but I think we are on two very different planes.

Asif Naqshbandi

Dear Mr. Naqshbandi:

Some say our heroes are their villans. Others say that this an extreme view and then in the same breath confirm that our heroes are their villans. But what does this matter anyway, God knows the heart and the intention of his creature, and does not God Listen to all, who remember him and are thankful for His mercy, for even in wretchedness, God carries His creatures in the palm of his hand.

Wonderous, boundless, mercy and forgiveness are the promised reward to all, for showing mercy and forgiveness towards others. Can anyone doubt this?

Re: Asif

``It seems even praying for the revival of Muslims in India really rattles certain Hindus! Talk about hatred....!!``

Nah, it ain`t hatred. But India will always be a secular country...never again a Muslim country. People can keep their religions private and in their house...no room for it in the public domain or in government affairs. Anyone who doesn`t like that, lives to proselytize, or wants to be ruled by clergy is free to get the fcuk out.

Re: Asif

``I think you know deep down inside that Islam is right and that terrifies you....

May Allah guide you to Islam...:-)``

May Allah guide you to sanity.

harimau #310
Its all in your mind. I must admit its fun to see you carefully making the distinction between Pakistani and Indian, you never bothered before.

Asif Naqshbandi# 314

``I dont let my absolute conviction of the truth of Islam make me narrow minded``

When logic fails, one resorts to faith: Bertrand Russell

Kohinoor-e-Pakistan WalaTala Hazrat Maulana Asif Naqshbandi Sahab (Sawalahi waslam):

``It is funny how my prayer--which just asked Allah to remove the chains of slavery from the Muslims of India and restore them to their former glory and for each Muslim child to have pride in his Muslim ancestors and to renew in them the fervour of their past--so upset a few hindus on here.I said nothing bad against anyone in that humble little prayer.``

Relax, no one is bothered by you praying for Indian Muslims, atleast not me. Its just the way you pray in your highly Persianized Urdu as you put it, and the things your wrote - Aurangzeb ki shaan, then about Timur (wasnt he one of those many Muslim invaders that ravaged Delhi?) etc that was so hilariously funny, we couldnt resist it.

Seriously,tell me do you think

1) Ghouri/Ghaznavi were heroes, considering the fact that the worst sufferers of their tyranny in India were ancestors of present day Pakistanis, many of them Muslims even then?

2) Does Taimur Lame qualify as a hero for Indian/Pakistani Muslims, merely because he was Muslim, in total disregard of the grief that he brought to many Indians (many of them Muslims)?

Thanks in advance.

Satyavadi

Zafar #304:

``But I will certainly keep my eye out for any Turkish/other Meditterranean ladies on your behalf - please do send details so that I can circulate here. (My flatmate is from Cyprus, but Greek. How about somebody from there? Also many Lebanese people here in Sydney.)``

Lebanese, Greek, Cypriot Greek, Cypriot Turk koi bhi chalegi, as long as ... you know what :)

``Good luck with finding a rishta. Really - details bhejiye and I will do my best to help``

Thanks man. Bohat jaldi bhejta hoon :)

``After reading Asifbhai`s explanation of the Prophet`s genitals and parents rising from the dead a couple of boards back I have unfortunately not been able to find the time to go through his posts since, nor to address posts to him (I don`t wish to waste his time).``

Mitthi chhuri ho to aap jaisi :)

Later.

Satyavadi

No community has ever enjoyed so much attention and spent so much time in the sunshine, for all the wrong reasons. And all roads lead to pakistan.

today`s day of glory:

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20011026-25413235.htm

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20011025-97583115.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0%2C1361%2C581201%2C00.html

http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=101459

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/26/opinion/26FRIE.html

Here`s something interesting. I hear donkeys bred in Lahore(Pakistan) and Afghanistan are in great demand in Rajasthan fairs. We always knew that there are great donkeys in the land of pure. It is so evident on Chowk.

http://headlines.sify.com/164news5.html

Pullu

RSaxena (and others like him):

I really feel sorry for you: a simple prayer, which, given the highly Persianised Urdu it was written in, I doubt you even understood properly, caused you to curse me and call me a ``pschotic mofo``...

So much hatred is sad...and the funny thing is you do not even know me!

I think you know deep down inside that Islam is right and that terrifies you....

If you can, try to read Martin Lings` excellent biography of the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him) or, Roger du Pasquier`s ``Unveiling Islam`` or Gai Eaton`s, ``Islam and the Destiny of Man``...

But, somehow, I doubt that you will..since it is easier to remain ignorant and not challenge yourself mentally...that way you can justify your hatred to yourself :-)

(Before you ask, I have read the Mahabharat and parts of the Gita and Mirabai`s poetry...) I dont let my absolute conviction of the truth of Islam make me narrow minded ;-)

Or just go to the dargah sharif of Hazrat Sultan al Hind Khawaja Muinuddin Hassan Chishti (may his secret be sanctified) in Ajmer with an open mind...there you will see haqq....this great Sunni saint alone converted 90 lakhs of Hindus to Islam...

May Allah guide you to Islam...:-)

Zafar,

I cannot recall having written any thing about the Blessed Prophet alayhisalatosalaam`s anatomy mubarak which you refer too; I would NEVER write about that for fear of disrespect. I think I did write about the imaan of the blessed parents of the Beloved Prophet alayhisalaam--in fact, if I recall all I did was paste an article which gave the orthodox Sunni view on this matter of aqeedah.

That`s all.

BTW, since you are from India have you heard of Ala Hazrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan of Bareilly Sharif, U.P.?

BTW, I always welcome any feedback from you insha Allah. I am always happy to meet new people especially from Hindustan. You can email me if you like on naqshbandijamaati@yahoo.com (so can anyone else on here)

:-)

wa salaam

It is funny how my prayer--which just asked Allah to remove the chains of slavery from the Muslims of India and restore them to their former glory and for each Muslim child to have pride in his Muslim ancestors and to renew in them the fervour of their past--so upset a few hindus on here.I said nothing bad against anyone in that humble little prayer.

It seems even praying for the revival of Muslims in India really rattles certain Hindus! Talk about hatred....!!

BTW, no one has commented on the method given by Ala Hazrat on how the Muslims of India can revive their fortunes peacefully which I presented in post * *231 * * I think as the 4 Point Plan...

Ref ali1 #: 300

[u r right. the baboons need a mahmood ghaznavi... judging the their reactions, the dhotis are beginning to get wet already with fear. cowardly bride burning thugs. maybe this time mahmood will plant enough seeds so the baboons can evolve to neanderthals...]

Can`t get the rape fantasy out of your mind, can you, Ali?

Ref sadna #: 298

[Do you see the contradiction here?]

I am asking the Pakistanis to shut up about Babri Masjid, not Indians of any religion. Hence there is no contradiction.

By the way, way back in 1991, my reaction when I heard about the mob assembling to break down Babri Masjid was that the Army should have been ordered to send in a couple of helicopter gunships and take out the first couple of rows of the assembled crowd (including any RSS/VHP/Bajrang Dal leaders) and that would have put the crowd to flight. So, I am not the foaming-in-the-mouth Hindutvavadi you think I am.

However, I must admit that I am beginning to enjoy your new posts. You seem to have lost some of your namby-pamby handwringing ultra-liberal approach.

Re: Zafar

``For every Bukhari there is a Shabana Azmi.``

I know I`m not supposed to like this Bukhari fellow but I can`t help but give him an ear when goes on tirades against Pakistani terrorism in Kashmir. At least one part of his brain, no matter how small, must be working. No? Or do you think he and the BJP have struck a deal where they don`t bother him when he goes on tirades against the US (and for Taliban) as long as he goes on tirades against Pakistan?

Zafar #303
`` I agree that impetus for change has to come from the group most affected – Muslim women in India. I agree that there’s no organisation made up of them which has taken a stand on this.``
`` don’t agree – I think in this case the law has to change, and then disadvanteged groups (like women) empowered to demand their legal rights. Social engineering fueled at least partly by legislation? Perhaps…where’s a philosopher king when you need one? ``

Actually, the way I see it, I donot think we should wait for Muslim women only to speak. Its like if we had waited for Hindu brides to speak up about dowry deaths.. Its a perhaps collective responsibility to address problems specific to any group, even if we donot belong to it.

So firstly, if UCC is the only solution, there is an additional minority religious identity aka subcontinental history issue here, its less likely to become a ``us vs them`` minefield if there were correspondingly strong voices among Muslims in favor. This holds true for other religion-specific personal laws too.

UCC maynot be the only solution. I think some Muslim womens organisations are making the case for laws less liable to misuse within the ambit of the Personal Law itself. That may be another way. The pitfall is then the Muslim Personal Law Board becomes sole arbiter, with nominated members? it is less accountable than it should be and kingdom may come by the time they move in the `right` or desired direction.

How about a Muslim Prime Minister next.. A Muslim at the forefront of change in Muslim Law would be ideal. When this happens I put in my request for a few hard kicks to the whining Sanghis/Jamaatis? backsides.

Lajwanti,

One would think you were a monstrous parody, if we hadn`t already read your past illuminations...I even started to ask why you assume that I ``eat pork, drink alcohol and take drugs``, but then I thought, wait a minute, why am I falling into this illogical and shameless trap, or this automatic frame of reference? I guess this is how the game works...

Zafar

“I do not understand the difference between subjective and objective secularism as you use these terms in your post. Please explain”

Below is a more complete quote and is the crux of the argument:

“Secularism is an example of modernization (a response to increasing complexity), in which differentiation of religion from economic and political institutions. THIS DIFFERNTIATION CAN ALSO APPLY TO THE SEPERATIONOF RELIGION FROM CULTURE AND CONSCIENCE. Therefore there can be two meaning of secularism or alternately we can view it as a dichotomy of Objective versus Subjective secularism. On a psychological and cultural level, what was once sacred both in the psychological and in the cultural sense is now open to the profane.”

Zafar, Objective secularism is the differentiation of institutions (Church from State) – here the institutions are separated, it does not speak to, or apply a value to, or have an opinion about religion other than it is an institution separated from the institutions of governance, or rather, government.

Within The realm of Subjective secularism, you have profanation, resulting in the diminishment of religion as a cultural and moral force. Subjective secularism acts to decimate religion, not by demystifying it or rationalizing it, but by infiltrating the sacred psycho-social terrain in the individual conscience and within society as a whole.

Consider your statement about the reawakening, revival: You question whether it was the right thing to do or happen. In other words, Subjective secularism gives to itself the right to decide the validity of individual conscience. You begin with the presumption that religious awakening/revival has a purpose other than what the adherent has judged to be true or correct for that adherent’s conscience. Your analysis begins with “look at the results”, which you then explain – as opposed to “look at the reason for the revival”, that is to say the individual conscience. “Opium of the masses”? really? well, why then is religion so strong in the US? Moreover, what does such an attitude say about the role of the individual conscience? Do people not ask “Who am I? “What does my life mean?” “Am I part of some greater design?” – Now, this is for the individual conscience to decide, not for those who reject the very validity of that conscience. It is the opposite of tolerance; It appropriates a civic morality that denies to any other the right to an individual conscience. The key lies in whether or not one is willing to acknowledge that peoples practice their faith, because they need the spiritual uplift of their faith, after all, what happened to Tolerance being the foundation of civil society?

Now look at your last statement: “The revival of religiously based identities is a reaction to change – fear of change if you will.”

OK, so Orthodox Christians and Muslims, who Churches and Masajid were called “Museums of dead religions”, now free from persecution for practicing their faith, fear this change and seek a return to persecution by practicing their faith? Again, notice in this statement, the complete dismissal of individuals free choice to practice their faith. In troubled times, the observation is that people tend to their faith, or rediscover their faith, in degrees. The question to ask is what does this mean? In uncertainty, they seek the comfort of their faith? OK, that’s one answer, but why would anyone want to assign a value judgement to such a response? To what next will the Subjective secularists take objection to and which other groups of persons will they make decisions for?

Dost Mittar also approaches this from this line of non-reasoning and suggests that if only the idea of secularism takes hold, society will benefit. Again, I have to use the word, shallow. I don’t mean any personal insult, but suggest that it has not been taken in to account that to arrive at secularism, we must lay it’s foundation with the principles of tolerance, which we have justified as deriving from the values of pluralism. Secularism without tolerance is the Stateism we witnessed in Soviet days. Secularism without tolerance is an immorality, a profanation of morality.

I seriously hope you will consider these arguments very seriously and put special emphasis on the meaning of a Democracy, civil and human rights and what does tolerance mean, how do we arrive at it, why is it the necessary ingredient. Please consider the authors I had mentioned and just to kind of round out the argument, you may consider, “Opium of the Intellectuals”

re: sigalph235 # 296

sigalph235,

Advancement opportunties for Hindus in Pakistan are not as completely blocked as you fear. Why, just recently another Hindu married lady was forcibly promoted to the coveted rank of a she- wadera (granted, one of many she-waderas in the household - so her reign couldn`t be absolute). In this case, mercifully, the poor husband was dead (and gone to hell - asif naqshbandi has ruled out paradise for us poor Hindus :))

http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/today/editor/opi2.htm

Reply Dost-Mittar, Sadna, Soysauce # 269

Re: UCC

I agree that impetus for change has to come from the group most affected – Muslim women in India. I agree that there’s no organisation made up of them which has taken a stand on this.

In some ways the law makes it easy for Muslims to opt for the standard civil code without fuss – all people have to do is register with the authorities and standard family law applies to them (at least so far as inheritance goes – don’t know how this affects divorce or custody of children however). This is good, in that people can access it easily, but also reduces the pressure for change. Individuals CAN improve their own circumstances in this manner without challenging the fact of Muslim personal law being applied selectively in India.

Soysauce: “Muslim inheritance laws tend(ed?) to be better than hindu laws when it comes to women, for example.”

Perhaps traditionally, but not when you compare Muslim personal law with Reformed Hindu Law. (proper name?)

“To some extent you can pass laws (assuming they are not too controversial) and hope that society`s attitudes change over time to lend weight to those laws. In many cases tho there has to be a willingness in the society to change and reform before there can be laws that solidify those changes.”

I don’t agree – I think in this case the law has to change, and then disadvanteged groups (like women) empowered to demand their legal rights. Social engineering fueled at least partly by legislation? Perhaps…where’s a philosopher king when you need one?

“I believe, having heard of a few among relatives and acquaintances, that dowry deaths have indeed increased. Laws haven`t helped to any noticeable extent and they won`t until society really, really sees dowry deaths as a scourge that must go.”

I’m not sure that this doesn’t indicate that they are being reported more. Currently if a woman dies within seven years of marriage her death is investigated as possible murder. Now this law isn’t worth the paper it’s written on unless these investigations take place properly (and I don’t want to comment on how well these investigations are carried out across the country)…but the fact remains that there is now a ward in Tihar Jail where Mothers In Law convicted of involvement in Dowry Deaths are locked up. Without the law, these people would not have been punished for their crime, and other potential criminals of this ilk would not get the message that this is against the law and you can go to jail for it.

“…good laws could only lull us into thinking that we have done something.”

True. We need good laws AND activism.

Zafar

Reply Harimau # 284

Harimau

Thank you for your response. I now do have a better idea of where you are coming from, and truly – you don’t have to convince me of the good things about living in a secular democracy. I agree that conditions for individuals to better their circumstances without disadvantaging others are best in these circumstances. Let me put down what issues remain for me (without khunnas, unlike last time).

When anybody uses terms like “the Muslims” the implication is that all Muslims have ONE point of view and a one, separate, set of interests. This is exactly the attitude which saw India divided and the creation of Pakistan. (I am not rearguing the case against TNT – no point, Pakistan now exists – but the continuation of that idea in India is against the essence of the country. Muslims and Hindus in India largely do NOT have different interests – what is good for one is generally good for the other, essentially empty issues like masjids and temples aside.)

[“you know enough that none of my diatribes are aimed at anyone but the obscurantists among ``the Muslims``.]

Fair enough. But by ceding the label to them you are giving them credit for more influence than they are due, and reducing the ability of more Moderate people to speak and be heard as Muslims (which would be a good thing). There are many Indian Muslims who participate fully in the life of the nation. For every Bukhari there is a Shabana Azmi. Not taking this into account, even when polemicising (?) is similar to Chowkistadors from Pakistan assuming that every Hindu Chowkistador is a hard core believer in caste and the saffronisation of India (whatever that means) at the minorities’ expense, and perhaps even panders to that misconception.

[“I can also see that a lower-middleclass or poor Indian Muslim probably has more grievances than a rich or upper-middleclass Muslim but then so does a Hindu or Christian in similar socio-economic circumstances, a fact that seems to escape the attention of our Pakistani cousins.”]

Agreed, economic status is THE most important determinant of options in India. But gender and descent are also factors, albeit hopefully declining in importance. We can’t discount them, and pretending that they are not relevant at all doesn’t convince people one debates with, but only undermines one’s own argument. Sahi?

Regards

Zafar

Reply Veeresh # 292

“Ghazni & Salahuddin will have to look elsewhere. Maybe Heera Mandi?”

Abh Heera Mandi ko aise libel karne se kya faida? Unhon ne aap ka kya bigada?

urstruly,

u r right. the baboons need a mahmood ghaznavi... judging the their reactions, the dhotis are beginning to get wet already with fear. cowardly bride burning thugs. maybe this time mahmood will plant enough seeds so the baboons can evolve to neanderthals...

dost-mittar #269
``I do not see any similar strong leadership in the Indian Muslim community at the present time.``

The issue of UCC has dealt with almost like an `ultimatum` in the past few years. IMO, such a confrontationist approach, esp when the Ayodhya issue is being kept alive, (in addition to BJP being in power and the consequent visibility of VHP/RSS/BD/etc) is not providing any space for `moderates` in either community in these issues.

IMO, additionally, Indian Muslims are having to live down Partition(unfortunately), and cannot speak/organize with all the vigor required without being viewed suspiciously by Hindus. There is even resistance to an all India Muslim party. I have not understood why, I think thats something which is really needed. The author is right, IMO in this regard.

harimau #270
Do you see the contradiction here?
``Our constitution permits everyone who was born in India after 1947, and those who were born before but have not renounced Indian citizenship, the right to live as a free citizen. I am not doing anybody any favor by letting them live in India. It is their constitutional right and I will defend that right.``

``Well, in that case, is it too much to ask you and your cohorts not to talk about the Babri Masjid? Or, since the criminals are still alive, it is an issue that you can raise whenever you want?``

The Constitution grants not only right to live as a free citizen(which as you rightly say, we have to defend), but also grants the right to due process of law. Demolishing a disputed mosque by a mob is not due process of law. Either we accept the whole hog with the Constitutional principles after 1947 or we don`t. We cannot pick and choose.

re: alphaHussain # 280

Alpha,

Not very far at all. Are you on Balda road?

re: Banjara # 277

You know what, this is really interesting.

English is

German ist

Persian hast (ast)

Sanskrit asti

creepy, don`t you think?

re urstruly

``For a Muslim in India there is no judge, no jury, no conscience, no mercy, no law but the law of the gun.

Judge A M Ahmadi, former Chief Justice of ``Hindu`` India, must have been a vegetable-eating and cow-worshipping Brahmin who cared for the rule of the gun for Muslims. But he can always migrate to Pakistan where his conscience will be salved. After all, isn`t Pakistan the place where Hindus are treated no different than their Muslim brtheren and their properties and honor protected to the fullest extent of the feudal law? Why, wasn`t there a Hindu who became the President of Pakistan too long ago? Prime Minister? Chief Justice? Federal Minister? Speaker of Parliament? AMbassador? No?

Dude, this is all a media conspiracy to paint Pakistan as a theocratic state which discriminates against Hindus!

InYourMouth,

Why are you so desperate? That dirty tush is getting itchy?

Dumbo, I would much rather have Muslims friends than Hindu morons like you.

Zafar Al Talib #287:

Great post. You, Hamidm and Veeresh are the best on this site. OK even Ustruly many times and Maulana Asif Naqshbandi - Did you read his prayer to Allah on this thread. Allah tumhaare mehboobo ko bachao, Aurungzeb ki shaan waapas Lao, Timur ki tarah humey raaj karney do --- the poor soul did all on behalf of Indian Muslims like you and you dont even have a word to say on that?

BTW, Ghauri, Ghaznavi (plunderers, looters and rapists of Urstruly`s Punjab and also his heroes) have always been Pakistani heroes. Now even this langda Taimur ?

Also, you mentioned somewhere that you look like Turks..Now I am a big fan of Turks(actually all Mediterranean people)... So before you get it wrong, would you happen to have a daughter between 20 and 25 who shares your looks and ofcourse your wit?

Later,

Satyavadi

PS: Let me know if you need more details about myself and contacts for ``poochh-taachh``.

Re: Asif Naq

``Ya Allah apne Mahboob kay waastay Hindustaan kay mazloom aur majboor MusulmaanoN ko, jo kal tak taaj pehne huwe thay, aaj ki tawq-e-ghulaami se nijaat day. Aur dobaarah aulaad e Mahmood o Iltamush o jaan-nisaaraan e Babur o Aurangzeb o Timur ko takht-nasheen hone ki tawfeeq ataa farmaa de.

Ya Allah unke bachche bachche mein woh jazbaa paida karday ke woh phir apne azeem ush-shaan abaa o ajdaad ki yaadein taazah kardein.``

Dude, you`re one psychotic mofo

urstruly # 266 . . . I dont know about anybody else, Muslim or Hindu, but you are one mianji dude who would get a job as a scriptwriter in Bollywood immdtly . . . kyaa pathos, kyaa imagination . . . sorry I have tears in my eyes as I got to go take a morning walk to listen to the midday qawwalis at Nizamudin about kilometres from my home and check out the (Muslim) predicaments there . . . oh yes, seats and berths on the Kalka Mail are all sold out and that is SO anti-Muslim ofcourse . . . poor guys, they have to travel in crowded buses, more discrimination.

Urstruly, please please remember: Pakistan does NOT have a copyright on Muslims. Pakistan is NOT the Muslim saviour state.

India is what it is, and it will improve, and the Muslims and Hindus and Siksh and Christians amd Jews and Jains and etcetc will improve with it.

Ghazni & Salahuddin will have to look elsewhere. Maybe Heera Mandi?

Abbe Stukia

Bapu is m.ale and other male4 can threaten him like two steag fighting over female doe in’; jungle. But man cannpot argue with Lajwanti bevcaujse ladies so man`s izzat becomes badnaami if raise hand;s against the/M;. SAMJHA? THEY CAN SAUY PLAIN TRUJTHS WHAT BAPUY CANNOT SAY!!!!

Wheat is youR IZZAT IF ARGUE4 WITH THEM, hain?????!!!!!! Do you wear CHOOORIES AND M.AHNDI LIKE MADONNA?????

Don’t talk,to Bapu if you want Lajwanti to be quj,iet. Bapu is weak, hE IS NOT IHN CONTROL!!!! AND OTHER ALS,O CORRUPTE3D.!!!!!!!n Ask nme nicely lik.e gentleman if you want, but I advice; you stay out of, women’s disagreement or;; you are like ;Americans in Afghahnjstan stuck; in quagmere.

Amnd Samina

Don’t evemn say words like hijabn withy DIRTY MOUTH TH,AT EATS PORK DRINK ALCOHOL AND TAKING DURGS!!!!!!! all a big haram and no ,no in Islam – Firsty study mazhab properly thEN COME AND TAL;K OK Donb’t preternd to; know anything, we can all see your kafir hart

And don’t try to hide behind Frangi or Stuk;qa tHIS TIME!!!!!! AREH YOU AFRAID OFE PEOPLE HEARING BLA;CK, TRUTH ABOUT YHOURSELF????!!!!!!!

Abbe Stukia

Bapu is m.ale and other male4 can threaten him like two steag fighting over female doe in’; jungle. But man cannpot argue with Lajwanti bevcaujse ladies so man`s izzat becomes badnaami if raise hand;s against the/M;. SAMJHA? THEY CAN SAUY PLAIN TRUJTHS WHAT BAPUY CANNOT SAY!!!!

Wheat is youR IZZAT IF ARGUE4 WITH THEM, hain?????!!!!!! Do you wear CHOOORIES AND M.AHNDI LIKE MADONNA?????

Don’t talk,to Bapu if you want Lajwanti to be quj,iet. Bapu is weak, hE IS NOT IHN CONTROL!!!! AND OTHER ALS,O CORRUPTE3D.!!!!!!!n Ask nme nicely lik.e gentleman if you want, but I advice; you stay out of, women’s disagreement or;; you are like ;Americans in Afghahnjstan stuck; in quagmere.

Amnd Samina

Don’t evemn say words like hijabn withy DIRTY MOUTH TH,AT EATS PORK DRINK ALCOHOL AND TAKING DURGS!!!!!!! all a big haram and no ,no in Islam – Firsty study mazhab properly thEN COME AND TAL;K OK Donb’t preternd to; know anything, we can all see your kafir hart

And don’t try to hide behind Frangi or Stuk;qa tHIS TIME!!!!!! AREH YOU AFRAID OFE PEOPLE HEARING BLA;CK, TRUTH ABOUT YHOURSELF????!!!!!!!

Advertise Here









Aslam Beg predicts

According to Khabrain ex-COAS General (Retd) Mirza Aslam Beg said that America will carpet-bomb Afghanistan after which the Taliban will become helpless. The Americans will destroy the Taliban and bring to power a broad-based coalition government in Kabul. After that the country will be split in small states which the Americans then will manipulate into fighting among themselves.

`Parpota` Sheikh Chilli

According to Ausaf, ex-president of Azad Kashmir and leader of Muslim Conference, Sardar Qayyum, said that America had always stood by Pakistan and that the Taliban should hand Osama bin Laden over to them. Those who accused America of being a fickle friend were nothing more than parpota of sheikh chilli (great grand children of a famous day-dreamer).

Imam Mehdi and Afghanistan

According to Khabrain, in the light of a hadith, the black-turbaned armies from Afghanistan will join the forces of Imam Mehdi. The armies of Rome will confront the armies of Madina and ask for men wanted by Rome, but Madina will refuse to give them up.

Don`t befriend Christians and Jews!

Famous cleric Dr Israr Ahmad wrote in daily Pakistan that Sura Maida in the Quran asked the Muslims not to befriend Christians and Jews because they were joined against Islam and that whoever befriended them would be one of them. Earlier the cleric had written that civil war in Pakistan would be useful in bringing Islam to the country.

Pakistan`s `halala` with America

Leader of JUI Balochistan Hafiz Hussain Ahmad told Khabrain that Pakistan was a divorcee of America but the Taliban had made it possible for America to do halala with it and take it back in wedlock. He said if Ahmad Shah Massoud had been alive he would have fought against America. He also said that Allama Tahirul Qadiri was a sarkari maulvi and calling him wise was contempt of court (because of stricture passed against him).

Filmstar turns out to be 34!

According to Khabrain famous filmstar Mira, who is 21 officially, had turned out to be 34 on the basis of the birth certificate made in Malir Karachi in 1967. She shifted as a two-year-old to Sheikhupura and her ID card was given the false year of birth as 1977. This discovery was supposed to affect her market value.

America`s real target!

Editor Ausaf Hamid Mir wrote in his column that after Zahir Shah had been brought to Kabul American troops will invade Afghanistan. Iran had become aware of this and was now issuing statements because once the American troops are stationed in Afghanistan they will not go away but use that platform to take their revenge on Iran. After that the Americans will realise that their real friend was not Pakistan but India because of its bigger market and they will ask Pakistan to end the jehad in Kashmir calling it terrorism.

America will use chemical weapons!

Quoted in Insaf, Pakistan`s nuclear scientist Sultan Bashiruddin stated that the United States will use chemical weapons during its invasion of Afghanistan, which will have sinister effect on Pakistani territory too. He said that America had already planned the bombing and is prepared to use lethal chemicals.

Don`t pay income tax!

According to Insaf 55 percent of the businesses in Pakistan were running without paying income tax. Most traders when contacted pretended not to know what income tax was and put forward their ignorance of taxation as an excuse not to pay taxes.

Mulla Umar married Osama`s daughter

According to Khabrain, the ruler of Afghanistan Mulla Umar married the daughter of Osama bin Laden in 1998 and there were rumours that Osama bin Laden also married the daughter of Mulla Umar. Mulla Umar is 40 years old and sits on his charpai while holding his cabinet meetings. He wrote important orders on bits of papers and called himself a servant of Islam.

Taliban don`t have good generals

Quoted in Insaf, ex-COAS General (Retd) Jehangir Karamat said that America will not land its own troops in Afghanistan but will use the Northern Alliance as its spearhead. He said Rashid Dostam could organise the Alliance and that there was no good generals like him with the Taliban. He said Taliban were in the interest of Islamabad and any other government in Kabul could increase Pakistan`s problems, and that the Frontier was safe because of the Taliban.

Juma Namangani bigger threat

According to Nawa-e-Waqt, Juma Namangani of Ferghana Valley in Tajikistan was a bigger threat to the world than Osama bin Laden because he had two thousand warriors with him and was operating in a region in the Pamirs that was not easily accessible. He threatened the life of the Uzbek president Karimov. He made money from drug smuggling and took handouts from Osama bin Laden and wanted to bring about a Taliban-style order in the Central Asian republics. (He went secretly to Tajikistan from Pakistan after shaving off his beard).

America will stay back

Famous poet columnist Zafar Iqbal wrote in daily Pakistan that even America was not able to conquer Afghanistan and the bases he got in Pakistan, Tajikistan and India, will make it possible for it to act against its old rival China. The Americans will stay back in the region, including Kashmir, which dispute they will resolve in their own favour. The great poet wrote that America will get bogged down in Afghanistan and will become so khwar (humbled) that its global thanedari will be exposed as impotence.

Jehad against America`s friends

Pakistan`s most powerful cleric Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai of Banuri mosque was quoted in Khabrain as saying in Islamabad`s Jamia Farooq Azam that his men will do jehad not only against America but also against its allies. He said Pakistan`s rulers who were allied with America will not be tolerated. OIC should do something but, if not, it should keep its resolutions with itself. He said `nobody`s father` would be able to change the syllabi of the madrasas in Pakistan.

Afghan ambassador`s funny name

Daily Pakistan reported that famous editor Altaf Hassan Qureshi asked Afghan ambassador Mulla Abdus Salam Zaeef why his name was zaeef which meant `weak`. On which the ambassador replied that the human being was a weak entity and it was proper to acknowledge this weakness. Famous editor Altaf hassan Qureshi then opined that perhaps the name was originally zaif which meant `guest`.

Just like us

Columnist Beg Raj wrote in daily Din that the Americans thought that since all those named in terrorist acts were Muslims America should get rid of its Muslims. He said this was just like Pakistani behaviour in 1993 when Babri mosque was destroyed in India. Pakistanis burnt all the mandirs. On little suspicion, Pakistanis were known to have burned entire Christian settlements in Pakistan, and when the rumour spread that the Jews had occupied the Kaaba mosque, Pakistanis had burnt the American embassy in Islamabad while the government stood aside as a spectator and President was riding a bike in Rawalpindi as a publicity stunt. He wrote that on the one side America was sending food for the starving Afghan people, and on the other the Taliban were kicking the UN charity organisations out of Afghanistan.

Myths about Afghan history

Columnist Mustansir Javed wrote in Jang that contrary to the assertion that the Afghans were never defeated by anyone, history actually showed that they were never free of the dominance of great powers. In 1840, the British blundered into Kabul after putting forward the claim of Shah Shuja to the throne of Ahmad Shah Durrani, arrested the pretender Dost Muhammad Khan and sent him to India. The sons of Dost especially Akbar Khan put the British army to the sword. After that the British ruled through remote control and money, but Sher Khan wanted more and turned to Russia. The British marched into Kabul in 1878 and after defeating Sher Ali put his son on the throne. Soon after that, the British took control of the Afghan foreign policy through a treaty. The Afghans kept killing each other while their princes visited India and were regaled lavishly by the British. Habibullah came to power in 1907 but was killed. His son Amanullah who went to war with the British but was defeated. After Bacha Saqao`s fundamentalist takeover, the British sent Nadir Khan to take care of him. He defeated the Bacha and hanged him.

JUI prepares 1.4 lakh new warriors

According to daily Pakistan, JUI had prepared 1.4 lakh new Taliban in its seminaries. The Afghan soil had produced Mehmood Ghaznavi and Ghori and destroyed the Russians. The main seminaries supplying the Taliban were run by Maulana Samiul Haq, Fazlur Rehman, Mufti Shamzai, Abdul Ghani, Nur Muhammad, and Muhammad Yusuf. In 1992 when Mulla Raketi started his mischief in Afghanistan the Afghan youth turned to Pakistani seminaries. When Mulla Raketi abducted DC Quetta, the Taliban from the seminaries took action against him. These were supplied by Fazlur Rehman and Muhammad Yusuf.

GO TOP

Layman 263,

If pakillstan army were professional at any time, as the romairs and YLH insist, it is aubelievable that it could decline so fast. The reality is that it was a typical latin army from the beginning, as demostrated by bangladesh and kargill invasion.

Now they are so much used to to the good life that they dont want to even do what they are supposed to do, to fight. The jihadists have taken over this role.

In a way it is understandable, if the madrassas are delivering a certain number of jihadists per year looking for shehdad, at least pak army is helping them by letting them onto kashmir and to the northern alliance.

The imbeciles of india talking of peace talks with pakistan fails to realise the importance of jihadists. In karachi they are killing one another. Any of the alleged peace talks have to have a componenet for jihadic venting, a concept which will be very difficult for the parties to accept.

Even in the anonymity of chowk no pakistani dares to criticise jihad. In every muslim majority country, jihadists are there and at present they are being channalised to kashmir. Last year jihadists from six countries were killed in kashmir.

A more intense jihadic war in afghanistan is the only short term hope for india. In the long term, it is only iraquisation and ``dial a shehdad``. There has never been a quite islamic frontier in history and the indian imbeciles talking of lahore and agra are just that, imbeciles.

Reply Urstruly # 266

“My Indian Muslim brothers and sisters, as a Paksitani, I am standing in front of you, today, ashamed, broken, and beat. I have lost my own country to neo-colonialists recently. I am sorry, I can not be your savior, your Mahmood Ghaznavi, your Salahuddin. But I assure you that the phoenix will rise from its ashes; I assure you our mothers and sisters are not sterile to stop giving birth to another Mahmood, another Ghauri, another Salahuddin. The flame is burning. Only one candle, no matter how small it may be, is always enough for all the darkness of the universe.”

Mrs Peron,

I’m sorry to point out that you’ve forgotten your lines again. They start:

“Don’t cry for me Argentina….”

Learn them properly and the show “Evita in Hijab, or how you CAN have nihari for breakfast every day and still fit into the burqa you were married in” will certainly enjoy the success it deserves on its current tour.

Your fan,

Zafar

Reply Hobbyty # 257

Hobbs

Interesting post.

“…recall that the experience of secularization is not a new one. It was thought that religion would not survive secularization in the West. In Euro-Asia, a tragic experiment of secularization without religion was effected for some 70 years, if my numbers are correct. As soon as the experiment was over, religions not only emerged intact, but also look at the growth of the Orthodox Church and Islamic revival.”

But has the re-emergence of religiously based identities in Eastern Europe been an entirely good thing. In many places – former Yugoslavia, Chechnia – it has resulted in unmitigated disastor. It has been murderous for minorities and deeply corrupting for majorities. Muslims, for example, were far safer in Godless Yugoslavia than they have been in any of its successor states since, including the Bosnjak portion of Bosnia. I cannot believe that what has happened has been good for the Serbs either, or how they deal with difference withing their “own” society.

“Try and kill religion all you like, has not worked before or ever. Even your question “just universal moral principle” is call to fill that spiritual void; consider, where was such language and concepts first developed if not in religion?”

Secularism doesn’t kill religion, it merely does not allow any particular religious establishment to play a dominant role in public life. And yes, morality was first articulated by way of religion, but does that mean that it must remain confined within a religious paradigm? I would say not.

I do not understand the difference between subjective and objective secularism as you use these terms in your post. Please explaim.

“Secularism is an example of modernization (a response to increasing complexity), in which differentiation of religion from economic and political institutions.”

The revival of religiously based identities is a reaction to change – fear of change if you will.

Zafar

Paksitani terrorists killed in Afghanistan. Time to celebrate.

Indians watch this video about why Pakistanis financed by Musharraf may be behind NY attack.

http://www.geocities.com/massoudafghan.geo/pakistani_taliban_leader_.html

Did you read salon article about Pakistani women going Taliban way?

Pakistan banega Afganistan. I cant wait.

Ref Zafar Al-Talib #: 222

[you manage to lob in a post which:

1 Implies that you think that Muslims are fundamentally different from other Indians]

Can you tell me where I said so?

[2 Clearly states that in your opinion Indian Muslims are present in India only on the sufferance of Indian Hindus and not as of right in their own country]

My rhetorical questions usually do get the dander up of Muslims. But why don`t you read it carefully and see if I actually suggest such a thing.

[3 Makes no recognition of the fact that Indian culture is composite whole which includes the religious and social traditions of everyone who lives there, including Indian Muslims]

No, I only point out for the benefit of YLH that there used to be a pre-existing culture in Northern India before the arrival of the Islamic thugs known as the Sultans of Delhi and that it doesn`t have much of an external manifestation today because of his personal heroes such as Babar, Akbar and Aurangzeb.

[and usually

4 Throws in some gratuitous abuse of Islam and the Koran.]

He deserves it. Also, at least the fact is that Hindus managed, with the help of Lord Bentinck and other Britishers to abolish sati, and through reformers such as Ram Mohan Roy encouraged widow re-marriage and through Arya Samaj tried to eliminate over-dependence on rituals. On the other hand, it is those `satanic verses` in the Koran that demand the killing of the kaffirs and taking of their wives as war booty that are still not condemned, except sotto voce, by moderate and liberal Muslims. That, my dear Zafar, is a fact that hangs like a millstone around the neck of all Muslims. You also have to accept the fact that the women in your household enjoy freedoms in India that would not be granted to them in Peshawar or most Muslim countries, such as to dress as they please and mingle with persons of the opposite sex in public places without being beaten up by a so-called religious police.

[There’s a term of ridicule for subcontinental Muslims who base their current self image on a spurious idea of a golden age when Muslims ran everything and built the Taj Mahal.]

You mean, Mughal-wannabe`s?

[You seem to be equally committed to living in the past rather than the present, only instead of going on about imagined glories you dwell on historical wrongs done to one set of dead people by another set of dead people. What is the word for such a person? And what’s the point?]

Historian. The point is to pull up people of YLH`s ilk when they start ranting and raving.

By the way, it is those historical wrongs and fears about retribution that created Pakistan in 1947. So don`t tell me that 54 years later, I should forget that this history was used to divide our country, to cause millions of deaths, to uproot several millions more, and to sell into sexual slavery thousands of hapless Hindu women who had the misfortune to live in today`s Pakistan.

No, I don`t blame Indian Muslims. I blame Jinnah, Liaquat Ali Khan and a host of other thugs who have ruled Pakistan.

[1 Do you think I am fundamentally different from you because of my religion?]

No.

[2 Do you think I am less Indian than you because of my religion?]

No. My history lessons are directed at Pakistanis and people like Studebaker who consider India to be the belly of the beast.

[3 Do you think your culture is different from my culture? How so? If we’re both Indian don’t we share the same Indian culture?]

Only when it comes to religious matters, which to me is purely personal, though there might be some typical public celebration such as Diwali, Dussehra or Eid.

[If you answer, please don`t try and assign blame for your views to things some vague entity called ``the Muslims`` allegedly do. You`re writing these posts, not ``the Muslims``. You are responsible for what you write, not ``them``.]

I merely point out that ``the Muslims`` as a whole hang together, be it in supporting the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas or in explaining the root causes of people flying planes into buildings. I know you are NOT one of them and you know enough that none of my diatribes are aimed at anyone but the obscurantists among ``the Muslims``.

[The term “co-religionists” also usually comes up in your posts – generally coupled with an invitation to subcontinental Muslims to take responsibility for the actions of people from places like Afghanistan or Sudan – in fact to take responsibility for the actions of just about anybody but themselves from just about any country but our own. (Pakistan for Pakistanis, India for Indian Muslims.) Instead of staying in a midieval mindset that sees the world as “co-religionists” of this or that or falana, don’t you think you owe your fellow nationals a little bit more decency? (Dislike Aurangzeb all you like – I’m not challenging your view of history – just be conscious that he’s DEAD and Indian Muslims who are around today are not him.)

To be frank, I have come to expect this kind of attitude (and uncultured aggressiveness) from a very few of the less enlightened Pakistani posters on Chowk. It’s embarrassing to hear the same kind of stupidity from a fellow Indian.]

As a polemicist, one cannot be writing caveats all the time to exclude a Zafar or person of similar mindset. My writings point out that India tries its best to create conditions for the advancement of all its citizens, however imperfect those might be today. I can also see that a lower-middleclass or poor Indian Muslim probably has more grievances than a rich or upper-middleclass Muslim but then so does a Hindu or Christian in similar socio-economic circumstances, a fact that seems to escape the attention of our Pakistani cousins. I also point out that Indian Muslims must help themselves and not expect handouts from anybody including the government.

My dear Zafar, let us remember one thing: Muslims have the choice to advance to the modern age or go back to the 7th century. At least in India, they have role models in other communities such as Hindus, Parsis, Christians and Jains that show them that education and hard work and a willingness to adapt to the modern world are the keys to success. What role models do they have in any of the -stans?

Regards.

Dua Dar BaargaaH Rahmaani Baraaye Haalaat e Mazloomi -yi Musulmaanaan-e-Hindustani

786

Ya Allah apne Mahboob kay waastay Hindustaan kay mazloom aur majboor MusulmaanoN ko, jo kal tak taaj pehne huwe thay, aaj ki tawq-e-ghulaami se nijaat day. Aur dobaarah aulaad e Mahmood o Iltamush o jaan-nisaaraan e Babur o Aurangzeb o Timur ko takht-nasheen hone ki tawfeeq ataa farmaa de.

Ya Allah unke bachche bachche mein woh jazbaa paida karday ke woh phir apne azeem ush-shaan abaa o ajdaad ki yaadein taazah kardein.

Ay Sultan e Arz o Samaa beh MusulmaanaaN e kishwar-i Hind imdad kun!

Iltijaa mikonam zi sadaqa Sultan e Hind, imdad kun!

Az azmat-e-Ghaus-e-Saqalayn arz mikonam een dua raa

Beshanu duay-am ba tufail e-Sayyid al Saqalayn Khudaa raa!

Dua Dar BaargaaH Rahmaani Baraaye Haalaat e Mazloomi -yi Musulmaanaan-e-Hindustani

786

Ya Allah apne Mahboob kay waastay Hindustaan kay mazloom aur majboor MusulmaanoN ko, jo kal tak taaj pehne huwe thay, aaj ki tawq-e-ghulaami se nijaat day. Aur dobaarah aulaad e Mahmood o Iltamush o jaan-nisaaraan e Babur o Aurangzeb o Timur ko takht-nasheen hone ki tawfeeq ataa farmaa de.

Ya Allah unke bachche bachche mein woh jazbaa paida karday ke woh phir apne azeem ush-shaan abaa o ajdaad ki yaadein taazah kardein.

Ay Sultan e Arz o Samaa beh MusulmaanaaN e kishwar-i Hind imdad kun!

Iltijaa mikonam zi sadaqa Sultan e Hind, imdad kun!

Az azmat-e-Ghaus-e-Saqalayn arz mikonam een dua raa

Beshanu duay-am-ba tufail e-Sayyid al Saqalayn Khudaa raa!

Urstruly, don`t you ever get tired of your buffoonry.

Ek

How far from Balda Road?

Urstruly:

You call it the ``faults of the forefathers``. Another of your paki tricks, from the divide

and rule baggage. Come on, stop trying, you were never good at it. Try divide and get ruled...as has happened in Afghanistan.You are happy that your forefathers gave you Pakistan, but you lie ``ashamed,broken and beat``. You have lost your country as u say. Indian Muslim in nowhere near your stage of desperation and penury. So much to your forefathers insightful decision making.

Ghaznavi and Ghauri were born in pakistan? Whoah....were they Punjabis?

Man when r u coming to kashmir? May be one of those Indian army bullets will take

you to the land of virgins...{you call it heaven}.

Pheonix will rise from the ashes;flame is burning...Haallo aap kehna kya chahtey hain?

One candle is enough for the darkness of the Universe...? Yeh gaye saarrey galaxies, nebula, stars(red,white and dwarf)...

Hail the new Guru. I am sure Makhfi will believe you. Aren`t YOU?



In the mean time something more for you to shed tears.Let`s see if u can.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/251001/dLAME79.asp

I couldn`t help laughing at Mushy`s statements,

``We are not wearing bangles...``

{Kshama kar dijiyega, hamein kahan maloom tha.}

So much Urstruly,Ylhish and sarwarish.

eeks...but sarwari tho bangles pahenti hongi.

enzoy

Pullu

sigalph235 # 221

Since you mentioned your grandparents migrated to

Chittagong,I assumed that you also lived there.But

you have clarified the matter.That is the reason

you were unaware of SPS.

Regards.

Eklavya #228

Bhai ! kyun sharminda karte ho.Me and Guruji..yeh

taab,yeh majaal yeh taaqat kahan mujhe :)

In persian,Hast (also pronounced as Ast) is used

for both ``is`` and ``are``.

Regards.

You cry baby! When was Marx a historian? The South Asian muslims better come to grips with the fact that they are converts from Hinduism. Stop forging articfial links with the invaders.

When you cite Marx and imperial historians to denigrate India`s ancient history and its pluralistic religious tradition namely the Vedic Sanatan Dharma/Hinduism, you yourself are creating communal tension.

Accept A Common Civic Code, repeal Article 370, and modernise. South Asian muslims are in great trouble because of their unwillingness to identify with their real tradition.

#252 Zafar Al-Qaeda (just kidding!)

It`s easy to say we want uniform laws. The question is whose laws for which. This is where the problem lies. Muslim inheritance laws tend(ed?) to be better than hindu laws when it comes to women, for example. We really need to come up with some sort of consensus as to what laws we want. After all women are greater than 50% of voters and they can decide just as anyone else what they want. To some extent you can pass laws (assuming they are not too controversial) and hope that society`s attitudes change over time to lend weight to those laws. In many cases tho there has to be a willingness in the society to change and reform before there can be laws that solidify those changes.

I believe, having heard of a few among relatives and acquaintances, that dowry deaths have indeed increased. Laws haven`t helped to any noticeable extent and they won`t until society really, really sees dowry deaths as a scourge that must go.

Passing laws in fact may help hide the ugliness. I can sit here and lecture the pakis that we have enlightened laws but so long as we don`t have enlightened people, these feel-good laws could only lull us into thinking that we have done something.

Eklavya:

So you are one! No wonder you are always trying to be Mr. Friendly to all the mullahs and pathans. Just watch out, they are proven backstabbers, but who knows you may enjoy that.

Soysause:

I am guessing, but that sentence sounds very fruity. May be you should ask Eklavya.

soysauce,

Could you clarify the point you made about members of different faiths being able to live together peacefully as members of those faiths? What, in your view, are the main difficulties?

Ref salwari #: 233

[In your post to YLH you seem to be mistaken about certain things.]

Not at all. I am trying to fill in the lapses in education that YLH has.

[History is filled with brutal rule of the strong over the weak.]

Good. Let us all accept that the heeng-laden hindoos are stronger than the saffron-eating Kashmiri Muslims and so the Kashmiris will have to stay under the heels of Indians. So stop shedding crocodile tears for the Kashmiris. I also notice that those tears are reserved only for the Muslims but not for the pundits who have been cleansed out of the Kashmir valley.

[And to an extent Indian History is out to demonize anything ancient and non-hindu.]

I am quoting factual evidence that you can see with your own eyes today. If that demonizes Islamic rule, tough sh!t.

[I feel that a foreign intrusion in those times were very important in building a stable and modern society today. Afghanistan was largely kept rural since the beginning, and faced no internal or external pressure to change, do better, and exploit dormant human or material resources.]

Exactly what kind of stable and modern society has been built in Pakistan for you to make this statement?

[There is a lot of cultural diversity in India today because of that.]

That cultural diversity exists by chance, not by design. The history of Islamic culture is not one of accommodation in India but the destruction of everything that existed in India. The latest manifestation of that is the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas. So, don`t try to whitewash historical crimes. These crimes were also the sole reason for the founding of Pakistan: the theory that there will be retribution at the hands of the hindoos for centuries of Islamic thuggery. So, don`t try to have it both ways.

[One more thing, Brutality is just that. It is not justifiable under any circumstances. If it has been done to your forefathers, quit getting a perverse pleasure out of being a victim because it is too far fetched.]

The only pleasure I derive is watching you contort yourself into strange shapes trying to defend the indefensible.

[Some really ignorant people think that Pakistan should hold and house every non-Pakistani who happens to be a Muslim in order to justify its existence.]

No, I just taunt the basic foundation of Pakistan`s existence. And there is and can be no reasonable response to my taunts.

[Your statements are a representation of a vast majority of Indians who have nothing but suspicion for the Indian Muslims.]

The vast majority of Indians don`t care two hoots about their fellow Indians. They are too busy trying to survive. So, imagine what you want about Indians.

[If a Pakistani would have said the same thing about Hindus in Pakistan, you would have made this an international issue of human rights violations.]

There ARE Hindus in Pakistan? Ha, ha, ha. That is a good one.

I understand that the few who remain call themselves Husain or Ali in public so that they don`t have to disclose their identity. Compare that to Zafar from India, who doesn`t call himself Kishanchand to survive.

Ref xxabbu #: 250

[We will not let the crimes of the DEAD revisit the LIVING. Get off playing the victim, for chrissakes. Its been a long time since.]

Well, in that case, is it too much to ask you and your cohorts not to talk about the Babri Masjid? Or, since the criminals are still alive, it is an issue that you can raise whenever you want?

YLH was ranting about the mistreatment of Muslims in India and I just gave him a comparison to show him that Indian Muslims are enjoying better rights that Hindus did under Muslim rule. With your own country in the state it is in, you should all shut up about the citizens of other countries and see what you can do about ahmadiyyas, shias and honor killings -- favorite topics for Jay.

[You arent doing anyone a favour by letting them live in India.]

We live under a system of laws in India. Our constitution permits everyone who was born in India after 1947, and those who were born before but have not renounced Indian citizenship, the right to live as a free citizen. I am not doing anybody any favor by letting them live in India. It is their constitutional right and I will defend that right.

My right to free speech also means that I can say what I want -- particularly, when it is factually correct -- and if you don`t like history lessons, go bury your head in sand. Sand from Arabia, I am told, is superior for this purpose compared to sand from the Thar desert.

[Now shoo, go back into the hole you came from.]

How about going back to your madrassah and training some more folks to fly into buildings?

Aisha:

``If a Pakistani would have said the same thing about Hindus in Pakistan, you would have made this an international issue of human rights violations.``

Not really. We would in fact take is as the norm. We don`t have any higher expectations from Pakistan vis-a vis the Hindus. In any case, why the hell should India care about Hindus rotting in Pakistan. They had a chance to come in 1947, and didn`t. Feel free to treat them as you will.

Re: Eklayva

``What specific changes would you suggest in Indian and Pakistani constitutions?``

Pakistan doesn`t believe in the concept of a constitution. How many times have they thrown theirs out or put it on hold? Before someone can make changes to it, it would help if it was actually upheld. No?

Mr. Makhfi

Welcome to Chowk.

I am extremely sorry about your (Muslim) predicament in India. Sometimes the faults of the forefathers come haunt the coming generations for centuries. Only time has told how right the concept of Two Nations Theory was and how right was the decision of our forefathers who chose to make Paksitan, rather than living with Hindus. I see that Muslims who chose to live with Hindus have been turned into living deads, who can not even complain about the tyrrany of Hindu. Those who choose to raise their voice against this tyrrany are summarily sentenced to death as in Kashmir. For a Muslim in India there is no judge, no jury, no conscience, no mercy, no law but the law of the gun.

My Indian Muslim brothers and sisters, as a Paksitani, I am standing in front of you, today, ashamed, broken, and beat. I have lost my own country to neo-colonialists recently. I am sorry, I can not be your savior, your Mahmood Ghaznavi, your Salahuddin. But I assure you that the phoenix will rise from its ashes; I assure you our mothers and sisters are not sterile to stop giving birth to another Mahmood, another Ghauri, another Salahuddin. The flame is burning. Only one candle, no matter how small it may be, is always enough for all the darkness of the universe.

seimpreciousme #264
`` ?.sigh?..tit for tat and you resort to name-calling?.very disappointing, especially coming from you?``

Join the club. You can use this to good purpose, I suggest that you`all hold a convention and collect money for childrens education back in your native countries or WTC victims or some such noble cause..

sadna

semipreciousme #185

{``and sadna, yes the biased, prejudiced and bigoted pakistani media is incomparable to the just, impartial and equitable indian media…the greatest thing since velcro….sliced bread even, right?``}

``Considering that I posted a number of posts dumping on the Indian media and Hindu-Muslim issues on the Ali Minai board, I donot plan to explain myself further to idiots.``

….sigh…..tit for tat and you resort to name-calling….very disappointing, especially coming from you…

jay #249:

``Pakistan disowns Harkat dead``

I think it is shameful. Crapistan did the same thing during Kargil, when it refused to accept the dead bodies of even its soldiers, not to mention the `mujahideen`. They have no pride, no shame. It was left to the Indian army to give the dead Pak soldiers an (Islamic) burial in the snow.

The Crappie govt thinks that if it denies, everyone will believe them. But then, this behaviour can be traced back to when Crapistan`s birth when `tribal lashkars` attacked and occupied what is now POK.

Reply Babu # 244

“Indian Muslims had one chance at secession. That was in 1947. A lot of other Hindu groups could claim that they never had a chance at self-determination.”

Now why isn’t living in a functioning democracy a realised chance at self-determination?

“Right now there are no Indian Muslims attempting secession.”

Let’s keep it that way. A good place to start would be to stop treating Indian Muslims differently from the way other Indians are treated. I also think that a functioning democracy is a good vehicle to resolve any problems a society experiences without violence.

Zafar

Reply Eklavya #: 246

“Zafar, in India we have a LOT of people (more Hindus than Muslims since the former constitute the majority) who share the cant-trust-the-other attitude. These people are the source of our greatest weakness. This weakness is internal, native, our very own. It is real. It is better, for me, for you, and for all Indians, to be cognizant of it than to underestimate it in any way, shape, or form.”

I agree Eklavya, but I think that asking people to examine WHY they hold certain beliefs is a good place to start.

Zafar

re asif n 231

I understand that Amir-ul-Momineen Mullah Omar, Conqueror of Statues and Master of a Hundred Wives is looking for an Economics Minister. Make sure you apply. Since they don`t have much of an economics, you`d have plenty of time to write your own Mein Kampf too. Good luck

Reply Soysauce # 251

Re: UCC

The acceptance of a UCC is often seen as an indicator of how Indian (or un-Indian) Indian Muslims are and wish to be – a largely symbolic issue. It may well be a symbolic issue for non-Muslim Indians or for Indian Muslim men, but for Indian Muslim women the lack of a UCC is something which causes concrete hardship. At its core it is a civil rights issue. This nebulously understood, and midievally defined, “separate Indian Muslim identity” is being payed for by the usual suspects and is being exploited for their own advantage by the usual suspects.

Zafar

Honestly, I thought I didn`t send the post, because the grandmother thing was not very deep. That was mean: Rsaxena is known to have O.J instincts. But, anyway, thanks for appreciating my post, though I don`t know which one you are talking about.

``Dial an insult? Be brave, say it here in open forum. Rule 0 of discussion forums : Donot ask those whom you are cursing to mail you for more.``

I thought you are the one who complained about me telling you off on a public forum? :)

Later,

Aisha

DostMittar, Zafar

I did not mean it to apply to predominantly Christian, Jewish Hindu Buddhist, etc. countries, but to Pakistan specifically and Islamic countries generally.

“Wouldn`t it be enough if secularism is based on just universal moral principles without reference to any religion?” An example of the Subjective secularism, a profanation. (And a dead give away of our opposite approach) (And a call for a new religion?)

Dost, recall that the experience of secularization is not a new one. It was thought that religion would not survive secularization in the West. In Euro-Asia, a tragic experiment of secularization without religion was effected for some 70 years, if my numbers are correct. As soon as the experiment was over, religions not only emerged intact, but also look at the growth of the Orthodox Church and Islamic revival. Or look at the strength fo religion in the US. Something about religion creates an attachment, something about a spiritual void. Does it have to be an organized religion or spirituality? well, a rose of any other name, is the attitude I take with reference to that notion. After all, why has Hinduism, after multitude of changes, bending, flexing, branching, rationalized, intellectualized, demystified, still an powerful appeal to it’s adherents? It must be fulfilling some void that regardless of whatever challenges it faces, it reinvents, recasts itself and is again relevant to significant numbers of lives. This appeal is the spiritual voids it fills. Try and kill religion all you like, has not worked before or ever. Even your question “just universal moral principle” is call to fill that spiritual void; consider, where was such language and concepts first developed if not in religion?

Of course You have not asked me how minorities would fare, if we deviate from objective secularism and concentrate on Subjective secularism, that is profanation - I know you were saving this for later. I wish to make two interrelated points:

1. My contention that the emphasis on subjective secularism is used against Islam, in India. This is because it is susceptible to it, given its structure as an Abrahamic faith and the genus of secularism from within an Abrahamic faith. Hinduism is not susceptible similarly, as it does share the structure of the Abrahamic faiths. Indeed, to the degree that it can be said to be organized, a rather convincing argument can be made that it does not have a structure or that it has a very fluid structure. The same cannot be said of any Abrahamic faith. In the US, it is objective secularism that finds emphasis, with ACLU type organizations, performing both a watchdog and promoter of Subjective secularism role, curiously to ensure the differentiation in Objective secularism. In The Indian context, in my opinion, calls for cultural nationalism are precisely an attempt to marginalize Islam and the Indian Muslim experience. Profanation is inherent in the secularizing experience, yet it is the degree of such infiltration that is culturally important, as is reflected by the author.

I don’t want to be misunderstood on this point, Therefore, I want to emphasize that I am simply expressing an opinion and not a prescription for Indian society, culture, group or whatever. No offense intended to anyone.



2. This is a most interesting question and if you agree, lets set aside an approach from a view of religious pluralism, salvic pluralism leading to religious tolerance as a religious and societal value. Lets look at this again in the context of Objective and Subjective secularism.

Secularism is an example of modernization (a response to increasing complexity), in which differentiation of religion from economic and political institutions. This differentiation can also apply to the separation of religion from culture and conscience. Therefore there can be two meaning of secularism or alternately we can view it as a dichotomy of Objective versus Subjective secularism. On a psychological and cultural level, what was once sacred both in the psychological and in the cultural sense is now open to the profane.

What space then does religion or the sacral in this context occupy? Religious revivalism is effort to anticipate, adjust and respond to changes linked with the dichotomy and a response to profanation. Given the increasing complexity and the compartmentalization of experience, religion will not again be the same force or play the same role it did in society and in person’s lives. Therefore, you witness, an evolving religiosity, deeply private and yet ecumenical (Ummah). Revivalism is an apt description, because the renewed emphasis on purpose, order, justice, and salvation. Nevertheless, Why? With increasing complexity of life, religion offers it adherents a melieu to seek answers to the question of meaning in their lives. Perhaps, Perhaps, secular differentiation of institutions may be a function of religion (Kernel without the husk?)

Dost, I realize some of this is rambling but perhaps you will ideas to refine the thinking.

Zafar - please view my statement about the indian version of secularism win the context of the Objective and Subjective and tell me if it makes sense to you, Do you find any validity in as an analytical tool?

``Bhaijaan, if you chat with guests the way you sometimes post on Chowk I am convinced that Bhabhiji has her work cut out for her.``

I`m affraid it`s true. Need to change focus or go to school or something -

soysauce #251
`` The issue of hindus & muslims being able to live together is a complicated one from the pov`s of both hindus & muslims. The real question, i think, is can hindus & muslims live together as hindus & muslims?``

According to me at the basic level, its not. The parameters for `living` together are already broadly laid out in the Constitution : Hindus and Muslims are supposed to be perfectly equal in sight of law, we have the same fundamental rights, the same right to safety of life and limb, we are indistinguishable in everything except the personal law and control of educational/religious institutions(if I am right). Anyone who does not believe these fundamentals in the Indian Constitution is a Paki, as far as I am concerned.

Now the question arises about things not so `fundamental`.. Suppose, as Imam Bukhari has once suggested, there is a demand for reserved seats in legislatures for Muslims. Well, this has to be looked into as a possible `solution` this may solve some problems, though I am very much inclined against retooling the relations of Hindu-Muslims at this level. And how about affirmative action. I come from a state which has had affirmative action for Muslims for many years, as all affirmative action, its a remedy for a time and place and I think it should be seriously considered in states which donot have them. I think the BJP was considering a poll alliance with a `backward Muslim` party in UP with promise of reservations.

`` A lot of the serious obstacles are swept under and it`s the muslim indian who is accused of being in the way of enacting UCC. I suspect that to the muslim community talk of UCC is the first step in stripping them off their muslimness. You`d allow, i hope, that even many self-professed (there`s that term again, well, i do profess to be a secularist)secularists, want a UCC``

The UCC (working towards which is a directive principle of the Constitution) can happen only with a national consensus. I spent a lot of time on Sulekha convincing myself that the BJP, who brought up the UCC issue is not serious/sincere about it. I say this because it has not reached out to the Muslim community or public at large to build up the support base required for a Constitutional amendment. I have not heard of BJP contacting any Muslim organisations to exchange point of views or get their support, even progressive Muslim organisations which may be in favor of UCC. I donot see BJP reaching out to public at large to disseminate information on the issue. I have not heard of any concerted Muslim membership drives in the BJP, or efforts to make Muslims feel more welcome in the BJP. I believe a responsible political party with belief in its manifesto and determination to make things happen should do all this if it claims to be interested in the welfare of the Muslim community. All I have heard(as a member of ordinary public) is accusations against the minorities related to UCC. Never heard of a law passed by recrimination, is this how you work toward 2/3 majority in Parliament and consent in state legislatures?

Hence I have reached the conclusion that the Hindutva parties are as indifferent about UCC as any such-minded imam say, except in their hypocrisy about it. For the Hindutva parties who claim to be thinking about equal rights for `poor Muslim women`, the UCC issue is a false issue, a tool of accusation only, to put minorities on the defensive and put a gloss on themselves, as in ``if you donot agree with us you are less Indian than us``.

As far as I am concerned, I am not playing their game. A need for UCC must come from inside the communities affected, and as Indians concerned about other Indians, as citizens we have to work for it, but through throwing light on and understanding the issues and reaching out, not through accusations.

anNy #252
``pukistan indeed.. god bless and help you``

`Interacting` with many chowk Pakistanis on this board has led me to this honest conclusion. And I certainly hope I am one-sided, its better than being a hypocrite.

Reply Bapu #:229

Deepika/Lajwanti/Fatimah/whatever

“You are the one who has written about 10 posts on Sulekha deriding that Islam does not have INTROSPECTION,I dont believe that.”

You are obviously working under the assumption that if you throw enough muck it will stick. Apna aim sahi karthe tho shayad…

But now that you mention it, I thought the writing style of “American Psychiatrist” sounded very familiar. Was that you? Are you now posting under the name of “American Psychiatrist”?

More power to you if you are! I take it as a salute to the idea of academic achievement.

Zafar

PS Joke tho nahin thha? If so LOLROTFL (!!!) great sense of humour, you really had me going there.

Reply Hobbyty # 224

“After which my beautiful bride cleverly managed to change the subject to events and trends in Pakistan.”

Bhaijaan, if you chat with guests the way you sometimes post on Chowk I am convinced that Bhabhiji has her work cut out for her.

:-)

“So many Indians on these boards swear by their version of secularism. A version in which promises to create an Indian Identity but which from my perspective, is dedicated to creating culturally Hindu Indian identity.”

Hinduism IS part of India’s identity. But so is Islam, and Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Sikhism….of course kebabs are more important, but still.

“A cheap shot, Unworthy of you, because you could have dealt with the substance of my response not the validity of my right to a point of view.”

Nahin, dekhiye, ghussa math hona….uff, Hobbyty, ek hi panga mara poore post men…

“.. I honor the civil course you seek, yet I question if such a course will be efficacious against fascist thugs.”

If we allow fascist thugs to define our world views, they have in a very profound way won the contest to shape the world.

“ISI Check? - It`s in the mail.”

Thank you, thank you, sirji, thwadda paani seva karunga…

“…I may be no friend...”

Be ashamed Hobbyty. That was nasty.

Zafar

sadna,

``its hard for me to ignore that you`re the one of those who turns up to defend ali1 after his beautiful and classy posts. However, this will not prevent me from replying to him whenever he deserves it.``

have i asked you not to answer ali`s posts? no i have not.. all i asked was for you to stop referring to my country as pukistan..like i also pointed out, its below you..if ever there was any doubt about your one sidedness, its this..pukistan indeed..

god bless and help you

#236 Sadhana

``But according to me, Indians speaking to each other or on the communal issue in India, have to accept the basic premise that Hindus and Muslims can live together. I consider whose who donot accept this basic premise are Pakistan-sympapthizers or Pakistanis at heart, irrespective of their religion. I have called Hindus who seem to reject this premise (of Hindus and Muslims being able to live together) Pakistanis or Pakistani/TNT sympathizers, and I donot see why I should not call Muslims that too, if they donot accept this basic premise at the core of the Indian nation(though I would do that with much more circumspection I assure you).``

I have seen you make this point elsewhere also. The issue of hindus & muslims being able to live together is a complicated one from the pov`s of both hindus & muslims. The real question, i think, is can hindus & muslims live together as hindus & muslims? To many hindus (an alarmingly increasing number) it is possible provided muslims aren`t quite, ahem, muslim. Many of these (by & large well-intentioned, not RSS, VHP types) believe that a uniform civil code is a necessity. This i think is the result of increasing polarization/politicization at the subconscious level. The problems are who frames that code, how much of the muslim code (personal law, common law, etc.) would be included in such, etc. A lot of the serious obstacles are swept under and it`s the muslim indian who is accused of being in the way of enacting UCC. I suspect that to the muslim community talk of UCC is the first step in stripping them off their muslimness. You`d allow, i hope, that even many self-professed (there`s that term again, well, i do profess to be a secularist)secularists, want a UCC. In many ways india faces difficulties that no other nation has faced in trying reconcile divergent cultures under a single flag. I don`t know what the answer is. I think tho that ``anyone who doesn`t believe that hindus & muslims can live together is a paki`` is a bit too facile. There are always conditions laid down for such a coexistence at the conscious or subconscious level and they are not the usual social contract thing either.

Harimau #189

``Your heroes, the Muslim sultans of Delhi, not only destroyed every single temple in Northern India, they terrorized the priests to such an extent that even in the tiny little temples that Hindus built to practice their faith surreptitiously, there were no pujas according to the scriptures for close to 30 generations.``

``So long as that is not being done in India, your co-religionists have far more rights than the Hindus had for 1000 years under the heel of Islamic thugs.``

We will not let the crimes of the DEAD revisit the LIVING. Get off playing the victim, for chrissakes. Its been a long time since. You arent doing anyone a favour by letting them live in India. Now shoo, go back into the hole you came from.

xxabbu

LIVE TRUTH AND DEAD JIHADIST

It has become quite common fpr the pak army, to disown their own. Return of the kargill invasion.

Pak disowns Harkat dead

Mubashir Zaidi and Agencies

(Islamabad/New Delhi, Oct 24)





Despite an official ban by Islamabad against letting in the bodies of 35 Pakistani militants killed by US airstrikes in Afghanistan, eight of the corpses were on their way to Rawalpindi and Karachi for burial on Wednesday night.

All the dead were members of the terrorist group Harkat-ul-Mujahideen

re: dost-mittar # 238

Dost-mittar,

If Hobbyty has some concrete ideas to suggest, we ought to gladly listen to him. Your query, therefore, is a valid one.

re: Faiza # 225

Faiza,

It is not easy to take many people along. It is very very difficult, particularly for those of us who have animalistic passions raging within us. The instinctive response is to hit back harder than the other can take, to demean, to destroy, to asperse, to generalize, to descend into questioning the legitimacy of the other`s birth, or doubting the morals of the other`s spouse, worse, mother.

I don`t know how others manage to maintain their cool, but for me, it is a constant, unending struggle. I don`t always succeed. Those who do have all my respect.

re: Zafar & Harimau

Harimau, I do not know you well enough to judge where you are coming from. So the following may not (probably does not) apply to you.

Zafar, in India we have a LOT of people (more Hindus than Muslims since the former constitute the majority) who share the cant-trust-the-other attitude. These people are the source of our greatest weakness. This weakness is internal, native, our very own. It is real. It is better, for me, for you, and for all Indians, to be cognizant of it than to underestimate it in any way, shape, or form.

re: hobbyty # 224

Hobbyty,

I agree with you that Indians, in general, have not thought more deeply about the issue of religion. How, in your view, can India and Pakistan better organize their polities to reflect and promote the kind of secularism you advocate? What specific changes would you suggest in Indian and Pakistani constitutions?

Re: sarwari

``If I was your grandmother I would make sure you get married to someone as unpleasent as Rsaxena so that only one house gets messed up insted of two.``

I`ve already contacted your local animal care center to offer you and your hubby-to-be a free neutering...public service measure.

gowardhan 211

Zafar Al-Talib 219:

My statement was ``Any attempt by Muslim minorities in India at secession and to practice Islam beyond the personal realm should be met with maximum force.``

My statement was in context of the bad examples set up by a wide range of contemporary Muslim states ranging from secular Indonesia/Turkey to Islamic Sudan/Saudi Arabia.

My point was two fold - secession and religion in public life.

Indian Muslims had one chance at secession. That was in 1947. A lot of other Hindu groups could claim that they never had a chance at self-determination.

Hinduism and Hindus have done a relatively good job of adapting to modern public life all around the world in spite of casteism and other social practices. (United Kingdom, USA, Malayasia, Singapore) Even when injustices are done like in Sri Lanka, the LTTE does not invoke religion to wage war. Religion and politics are kept separate. Muslims in the Islamic heartland (Morocco to Indonesia) seem to have major problems. There are a few exceptions like the PLO, Kurds, Berbers etc.

Right now there are no Indian Muslims attempting secession. In the future if there are grievances they must make sure

1) never call be the first to call for secession

2) keep religion out of any legitimate struggle

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re: InYourFace # 234

How can I know that until I have met you and examined your backside?

#234 InYourFace

Completely out of curiosity - is that established gay talk?

Shahid:

You are seeing things more than there is. But it`s futile to blame you. Because if you are going to magnify the problems and live under it, you are bound to see only dark clouds and doom.

Both Hindus and Muslims carry the burden of history and it shows in the way both the communities react when confronted with difficult questions. The riot situation is not as one-sided as you would have us believe. Do you think absence of police would lead to less violence (riots)? Don`t you think police WILL resort to firing if the protesters turn violent( I don`t deny recent accusations though)? Why is it that some of the most riot prone areas have significant Muslim population?Ahmedabad, Kanpur, Hyderabad or Kashmir for that matter. If hindus and our police are really out to exterminate Muslims, we should be having killings in almost every town and every state in India. I agree we are not even close to being a tolerant society. And secularism that we keep chanting is a farce. But that there is a huge population out there eager to embrace secularism is also true. We must recognise that there exist problems between the two communities. And Bajrang Dal,VHP,SIMI are all there to play on such differences. Sooner we accept the problems, easier it will be to address the difficulties . Agreed our society is changing and there will be an eventual confrontation with fundamentalists (of whom there will be muslims and hindus); it is upto us to strengthen the better elements. Instead of complaining and becoming distraught, we must make an unprejudiced and frank attempt to confront.

Sadna: You must already be geared to face many asking to ``exercise restraint``. But I know you are still in ``Bootstrap mode`` of the faith.

You are good in this mode too. :)

I went to the site that u mentioned(truthindia). One can`t help lauding the attempts of the person.

Pullu

hobbyt #224
`` The Islamist work That I have presented and will present is actually leading up to an understanding for the efficacy of such a objective secularism, one which has as it`s foundation, religious pluralism and freedom of conscience based on universal moral principles of Islam.``

``that even if Indian Muslims had a choice to become Pakistanis, psychologically, it would be very difficult for them to make the leap from appeasemen to a position of strong defense of Islamic identity in India. What choices and course of action(s) this leaves Indian Muslims is for them decide. Freedom is never free. ``

hobbyt, just a question. Isn`t Pakistan supposed to be THE worked out example of ``one which has as it`s foundation, religious pluralism and freedom of conscience based on universal moral principles of Islam.`` on the subcontinent ? Is the noble purpose accomplished in Pakistan, do you think ?

sarwari #235
`` Why are you giving lectures on ``ignoring`` People and continuing to write, when you always sneak in a ``Sarwari`` here a there in almost every attempt to say something? ``

Which lecture? I ``sneaked in`` one ``sarwari, ylh, scout`` on this board. But you and others have done it so often with `sadna` when I was not even on the board, I seem to remember? And your views on Indians and their treatment of minorities have been very openly expressed by you often in colorful language. So why this double standard and outrage both?

btw, your post on `double minority` was a good one.


``How you`ve been raised``
Do I do that in response to something you say to me or just out of the blue?


`` If I was your grandmother I would make sure you get married to someone as unpleasent as Rsaxena so that only one house gets messed up insted of two. And I don`t need your comments on that Thank you. And if you are married apologize to your husband for me. And don`t you give me lectures about getting personal because you always make stupid comments about the way I`ve been raised. Gosh I was just saying you won`t be as frustrated if you have Tariq Road`s ``Goul Guppey````

Why is it always sexual innuendos and insults with you and ali1? I am just noticing, I donot really want to know, I assure you.

``Email me I am not done yet...``
Dial an insult? Be brave, say it here in open forum. Rule 0 of discussion forums : Donot ask those whom you are cursing to mail you for more.

soysauce #230
`` OK, so you are NOT a secularist.``

I didnot say that. I said I am not a ``self-professed`` one as you accused me of being. We are what we are by our actions and words, I donot believe in labels. (OK, Paki is a label, I will come to that.)

``If merely telling someone not to shoot the messenger is shooting that someone, well then, you have just shot me. It`s your turn now.. Sure you laid out your problems with the article in #27 & # 28. Why then #50+? Wasn`t that a tad, hmmm, mean-spirited? Just like the posts on Sulekha that call YOU a paki?``

soysauce, I posted a lot of material on why I suspected the author to have an agenda, and why I suspected he was not an Indian Muslim because he ``seems`` ignorant of facts vital to an Indian Muslim`s view of India`s secularism (such as it is). You on the other hand, are shooting at me because of one line in one post.

Turns out I was not far wrong about the `slant` of the article. The article was apparently written for a non-Indian website on which I have seen other anti-India articles. You can read his other articles there. Everyone has to make a living, as does this author.

But according to me, Indians speaking to each other or on the communal issue in India, have to accept the basic premise that Hindus and Muslims can live together. I consider whose who donot accept this basic premise are Pakistan-sympapthizers or Pakistanis at heart, irrespective of their religion. I have called Hindus who seem to reject this premise (of Hindus and Muslims being able to live together) Pakistanis or Pakistani/TNT sympathizers, and I donot see why I should not call Muslims that too, if they donot accept this basic premise at the core of the Indian nation(though I would do that with much more circumspection I assure you).

btw, this article raises many issues(and contains many inaccuracies). Your valiant defence of Indian secularism would be better achieved by concentrating on those, looking for defects in a single person like myself cannot achieve very much in this regard, I am already trying to do the best I can, though you have no value for it.

Sadna,

Why are you giving lectures on ``ignoring`` People and continuing to write, when you always sneak in a ``Sarwari`` here a there in almost every attempt to say something?

If I was your grandmother I would make sure you get married to someone as unpleasent as Rsaxena so that only one house gets messed up insted of two. And I don`t need your comments on that Thank you.

And if you are married apologize to your husband for me. And don`t you give me lectures about getting personal because you always make stupid comments about the way I`ve been raised. Gosh I was just saying you won`t be as frustrated if you have Tariq Road`s ``Goul Guppey``

Aisha Fayyazi Sarwari

Email me I am not done yet...

aisha_Sarwari@yahoo.com

Eklavya #212 :

``Girl, that`s some class.``

Man! How gay can you get?

Harimau.

In your post to YLH you seem to be mistaken about certain things.

``So long as that is not being done in India, your co-religionists have far more rights than the Hindus had for 1000 years under the heel

of Islamic thugs.``

History is filled with brutal rule of the strong over the weak. And to an extent Indian History is out to demonize anything ancient and non-hindu. Whatever is sustainable and usefull doesn`t go away. One great example is that Yoga still survives. And I think it does because it is not so closely bound to religion.

I feel that a foreign intrusion in those times were very important in building a stable and modern society today. Afghanistan was largely kept rural since the beginning, and faced no internal or external pressure to change, do better, and exploit dormant human or material resources. There is a lot of cultural diversity in India today because of that. Don`t you consider that a national asset or are you one of the people who spat at the Taj in protest? One more thing, Brutality is just that. It is not justifiable under any circumstances. If it has been done to your forefathers, quit getting a perverse pleasure out of being a victim because it is too far fetched.

``So shut up about the treatment of minorities in India. They have your country to go to if they don`t like it in India but I don`t see a

line in front of the Pakistan High Commission for visas.``

Some really ignorant people think that Pakistan should hold and house every non-Pakistani who happens to be a Muslim in order to justify its existence. Your statements are a representation of a vast majority of Indians who have nothing but suspicion for the Indian Muslims. If a Pakistani would have said the same thing about Hindus in Pakistan, you would have made this an international issue of human rights violations.

Later,

Aisha

http://paknews.com/articles.php?id=1&date1=2001-10-23

Well, well. Our own YLH screaming away on other web-sites.

Apparently, chowk is not enough.

I posted the ``4 Point Plan`` of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi rahmatullah alayhi in post 106 but I misquoted it due to errors in memory. Here is the ACTUAL 4 point plan of Ala Hazrat.

[

``..A‘lahazrat through his book published in 1912, presented four peerless points for the economic development of Muslim brethren. These are:

* * * *

1. Barring the affairs wherein Government is involved, the Muslims should decide all their disputes mutually so that millions of rupees, which are being spent over litigations, may be saved.

2. The affluent Muslims of Bombay, Calcutta, Rangoon, Madras and Hyderabad should open banks for other poor Muslims.

3. Muslims should not purchase anything from anybody except Muslims.

4. The sciences of Islam should be propagated and publicized,

* * * * * *

At the instance Prof. Rafiullah Siddiqui Chairman Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Hyderabad (Sindh), has written an article ``Fazil-i-Bareillvi Kay Char Ma‘ashi Nikaàt``, published from Maktaba-i-Chashm-i-Rahmat, Balrampur (UP), India. Prof. Siddiqui has beautifully explained all the four points at length; I have had all the appreciation for Prof. Siddiqui and his article.

Through his first point, A‘lahazrat has propounded the theory of savings. He has realized the significance of savings and has made people to realize it. In most of the under-developed countries, the rate of saving varies from 5 to 8%. Now the economic experts have declared that for economic development of the country, saving to the tune of 15% of the national income is a must. The importance of savings over-shadowed the world in 1936 when Lord J.M. Keynes of England presented his ``Theory of Savings & Investment``, which proved successful in overcoming the international depression. In short, according to Keynes, saving is all. It is equal to investment according to his Equation. Thus, more saving, more investment; more investment, more development. For this theory of Saving & Investment, Prof. J. M. Keynes was honored by England and the most prestigious title of ``Lord`` was conferred on him. Prof. Rafiullah Siddiqui has so nicely and so rightly quipped that Prof. J. M. Keynes was honored in 1936 for what was already pointed out by A‘lahazrat in 1912. Who deserved and who bagged the honor, is thus to be seen. Yet, it may be taken for granted that A‘lahazrat would not accept such an honor from British even if he were presented one.

Secondly, A‘lahazrat presented the theory of opening banks. Needless to mention that banks in the eyes of A‘lahazrat were meant to be interest-free banks. History of banking is known to all of us. A‘lahazrat suggested and talked of opening banks at a time when banks played no significant role in the country. In 1912, there were only a few banks in India, in big cities, and nobody could foresee then that after a lapse of three or four decades, the importance of banks would assume so much proportion. No doubt, it was A‘lahazrat who was able to peep into future and suggest boosting up the banking industry before hand.

A bank is an institution through which the savings of the masses are deployed over productive investment. It is bank that collects pennies but provides pounds. Banks help the people create tendency of saving. Being a great economist. A‘lahazrat well realized the hazards of hoarding and advocated for the development of the banking industry.

The third point of A‘lahazrat is that Muslims should purchase each and every thing from Muslims only. Apparently, this point appears to be based on somewhat narrow-mindedness. But it is not so, if we go deep. What A‘lahazrat says is that Muslims should purchase from Muslims only. It is not restricted to a particular place, locality or province. It means that Muslims countries should purchase from Muslim countries only. It means that A‘lahazrat has opposed the free-trade theory as espoused by Adam Smith and suggested Trade Protection so as to withstand the competition in the international market. Fredrick List, a noted German economist has emphatically supported the Trade Protection Policy. Prof. Rafiullah Siddiqui has very much appreciated this point of A‘lahazrat. According to him, A‘lahazrat wanted to provide economic protection to Muslims but the Muslims neglected the economic acumen highlighted by their own savant, A‘lahazrat.

To the misfortune of Muslims, what was pinpointed by A‘lahazrat for the benefit of Muslims, was utilized by non-Muslims. Second World War had badly ruined Germany, France, Italy etc. The economy of these European countries was crippled. European Common Market (E.C.M) consisting of six European countries came into existence. It achieved marvelous success and the entire World witnessed that it changed the entire story. The staggering economy of these countries mustered a sudden boom and the German mark became the powerful currency of the world. After all, what was this E.C,M.? It was a practical shape of the guidelines given by A‘lahazrat just on the lines that Muslims should make purchases from Muslims only. Even today, if the Muslim countries unite and follow such a policy, luck will smile upon them.

Now come to the fourth point. It is regarding the publicity of Islamic sciences. When theories of economics are going on, how far it is desirable to talk of Islamic sciences or religion. A Mawlawi always remains a Mawlawi-some people may think. Prof. Siddiqui has duly appreciated the importance of knowledge of Islamic sciences but meanwhile he has gone to say that this fourth point is not in regard to economics. With due respect to Prof. Siddiqui, I would like to say that he has hastened to observe like so, perhaps because of its appearance. Prof. Siddiqui has succeeded in realizing the importance of this point but has failed to link it with economic theories.

To my mind, this point is all the more important. Everybody knows that there is lot of difference between theory and practice. Implementation is an upheaval task. The first three points of A‘lahazrat provide a theoretical approach. The fourth one provides a pragmatic approach. It must be borne in mind that A‘lahazrat has introduced what we may call Muslim Economics. He has talked of benefit and betterment of only Muslims. From this angle, all the four points are inter-connected. The first point of A‘lahazrat is regarding mutual settlement of their disputes. The idea is so nice but its implementation is fairly difficult. As says Adam Smith, ``man is the born servant of self interest``. Everybody wants to gain. Nobody wants to lose. In quest of gain, man runs after the courts headlong. He runs and runs towards the courts till he gets a gain what he calls justice. Such a race towards the gain makes the litigation time-consuming as well as money-consuming. Now A‘lahazrat speaks of preaching and teaching Islamic sciences to the people. He means to say that spirit of Islam must prevail upon the Muslims. A‘lahazrat goes to say that such an abrupt race of litigation can be controlled only with the spirit of Islam. Under true spirit of Islam, Muslims shall prefer to get their disputes decided only by their Muftis whom they would consider as heirs of Holy Prophet and regarding Holy Prophet (Allah’s Grace and Peace be upon him), the Holy Qur’an declares as under:-

``By Allah, they shall not be Muslims unless they make you Hàkim in matter of their disputes and unless they accept your decision by heart and feel no hindrance whatsoever there from in their hearts.``

Thus, a true Muslim shall be duly satisfied with the decision of a Mufti regardless of the fact whether he remains a gainer or loser. He would accept the decision by heart. Nor would he take it as point of prestige, as a true Muslim wants nothing but what Allah and His Holy Prophet (Allah’s Grace and Peace be upon him) want for him. He would not knock at the doors of the court at all. A short meeting with a Mufti can solve a long dispute. Thus, it would be seen that the fourth point advanced by A‘lahazrat is very much linked with the theory of mutual settlements Muslims by avoiding litigation with a view to ensuring large savings.

The second point is of opening Muslim banks. Muslims would like to help Muslims only when they are taught to help them in terms of Islamic sciences, that is, in light of Holy Qur’an and Hadith. Interest is a prize of exploitation. Muslims would refrain from accepting interest if they are told that usury is haram (strictly forbidden) according to Holy Qur’an and whosoever accepts interest, should be ready to fight with Allah on the Day of Judgment. Only through the injunction of Islamic spirit, which flows from the knowledge of Islamic sciences attained through the study of Islamic books or through the company of Islamic savants, Muslims can agree to opening of interest-free banks and usury can be put an end to. If the rich people open banks out of their riches, the poor people will get rid of their poverty to a great extent. First, the poor will be able to get employment in various projects financed by banks. Secondly, the poor section will be able to secure interest-free loans from the banks, which they would get otherwise at a heavy rate of interest. Thus, the second and fourth points of A‘lahazrat are well linked together.

Muslims should make purchases from Muslims only — is the third point. It does not purport to say that Muslims should sell to Muslims only. A‘lahazrat is restricting outgoings only of Muslims. Unless the Muslims are taught of their religion, nothing can be achieved in this field. A person, who has no knowledge of Islamic studies, is western-minded, would hardly purchase anything from Muslims. He would be addicted to using foreign goods and would not hesitate to purchase them from any corner. Nowadays, it is seen that those who have craze for using foreign goods, may it be, cigarette, wine or anything like that, help the foreign companies earn a lot of foreign exchange. A Muslim would make purchases from Muslims only when it is impressed upon him that Holy Qur’an declares:

(Space for Arabic script) ``Innam al-Mo’minoona Ikhwatun``

That is, ``Muslim and a Muslim are brethren.`` Unless he treats the other Muslim as his brother, he would not extend him a brotherly-treatment. Moreover the teachings of Islam shall bear wide repercussions on the standard of trade. No trader would like to give short weight as it is forbidden in Islam. No trader would make any adulteration of any kind, as it is forbidden in Islam. No trader would try to conceal defect, if any, in his commodity as it is forbidden in Islam. No trader would resort to unnecessary hoarding of stock as it is forbidden in Islam. No trader would allow unnecessary bargaining in price as it is forbidden in Islam. In this manner, under the yoke of Islam, trade will wear a bloomy look. If Muslims undertake to make purchases from Muslims only and if Islamic spirit prevails, then a Muslim will not be able to get wine, because no Muslim would like to sell it as it is forbidden in Islam. In this way, not only the trade will flourish but it will also bring about a flawless society.

So, it is evident that all the four points of A‘lahazrat are coherent and co-related insofar as Muslim Economics is concerned...``

endquote from www.sunnirazvi.org (an excellent site).

I still maintain this is the way to Muslim revival in India and elsewhere insha Allah..

please disregard my earlier post 106. (If possible the moderator should delete post 106 of mine).

#187 Sadhana

OK, so you are NOT a secularist.

If merely telling someone not to shoot the messenger is shooting that someone, well then, you have just shot me. It`s your turn now..

Sure you laid out your problems with the article in #27 & # 28. Why then #50+? Wasn`t that a tad, hmmm, mean-spirited? Just like the posts on Sulekha that call YOU a paki?

Who am i to tell you all this? You don`t mean that really, do you? After all, i am THE soysauce..

Banjara Guru ji,

I have some questions for you. Does the word ``ast`` mean ``is`` in Persian? If it does, how do you say ``are`` in Persian?

Dhanya vad.

There is an excellent op-ed piece in today`s Wall Street Journal print edition [Oct 24] by Amir Taheri, an Iranian journalist who is based in Paris. I am not going to name it here because the usual apologists will spout their usual apoloties/denials. Then let us discuss it. Unfortunately it is not on their free site.

Re Eklavya

If anybody can be as far removed from a techno type, it is moi. In fact, my understanding of hindi is slightly better than my understanding of technology, especially physics, and to begin with, my hindi is good enough only to hail a cab in a North Indian city, at the most.

Eklavya, Zafar

I told my guests that Pakistanis had scarified so much to build armed forces to not be blackmailed by India and that they were just plain wrong in the continuous appeasement. They said the usual, not all Hindus are ... so I asked them why then do they find themselves in the situation they do. After which my beautiful bride cleverly managed to change the subject to events and trends in Pakistan.

Of course, I am conscious that so many people want to be able to simply live their lives peacefully, in an amicable atmosphere with others. However, I am also aware that this is not possible for us, presently. For all of us have failed to examine in detail what must be the foundations of our desire to ensure a structure which we (our culture and identity) is not just preserved, but thrives, evolves or whatever, so long as it is free.

So many Indians on these boards swear by their version of secularism. A version in which promises to create an Indian Identity but which from my perspective, is dedicated to creating culturally Hindu Indian identity.

I have no problem with a secularism, the original sense of secularism, the so called “objective secularism``, (the one derived from and based on religious moral principles)in the sense of modern differentiation of institutions, not the ``subjective secularism`` in the sense of cultural and psychological decimation of religion, and in particular, Islam in India, while not so secretly promoting Hindu religion and culture.

The Islamist work That I have presented and will present is actually leading up to an understanding for the efficacy of such a objective secularism, one which has as it`s foundation, religious pluralism and freedom of conscience based on universal moral principles of Islam.

The difference between the Objective and subjective secularism is that in the former the institutions are differentiated, religion being an institution and religious knowledge, it`s subset; religion grows strong, relevant and a moral force, whereas in the latter, it is actually under attack. It is in this rational that calls for greater ``Indianization”, which calls for “cultural nationalism” in India, should be viewed. Wait then to hear that Hinduism is not a religion as such it is more a philosophy of life. Hmmm? Which reflects itself in the culture of society? Hmmm? No longer societies?



The Indian version of secularism will succeed for the Hindus and will marginalize the Muslim; such is its design. That remains the problem of the Indian Muslim; which is why I said to Zafar, that even if Indian Muslims had a choice to become Pakistanis, psychologically, it would be very difficult for them to make the leap from appeasement to a position of strong defense of Islamic identity in India. What choices and course of action(s) this leaves Indian Muslims is for them decide. Freedom is never free.

The saddest part of the read, is the ``triple`` jeopardy this places the Indian Muslim in, as is evident from the predicament, reflected in some responses. Educated Indian Muslims want to see themselves as being safe in secularism, but fail to differentiate between the promise and the reality, that is they do not question the quality(ies) that can lead to the desired effect, but have abandoned themselves to an unexamined version of secularism. Yet I am reconciled to hold hope; hope surviving, clutching to the adage ``that which does not break your back, will only make you stronger``

Zafar

``Vaisai, TNT was a conspiracy against Indian Muslims by their “leaders” – big fish in small pond syndrome.``

And the ``butter will not melt in their mouth`` Hindu leaders had nothing to do with it? We can have deeply help positions, but please let us not dispense with honesty, entirely.

“No such thing as a great Muslim nation in India?? No such thing as Muslim culture in India??”

There is an Indian nation which includes people of different religions. Why is that hard to accept?``

Zafar, India has always been many nations, it has never except in modern times been a single nation, with a single culture and a single language, with a single anything. The ambition that India be a single country, which includes people from different religions, different races, etc is a most noble, and praseworthy ambition. All I am suggesting is that the modalities employed for the pursuit of this ambition be examined. Read my bit about objective and subjective secularism; please read Daniel Bell, Robert Bellah and Peter Berger for a more detailed discussion. Or just read what VHP, BJP think of secularist on their website.

“imagine Maulana Fazul Rahman winning an election on a platform that call for the destruction of some temple, is actually elected and appointed to the second most powerful post in government. Well, sure, it could happen.”

This presupposes elections.

Elections in Pakistan? It`s relevance. Like questioning the nationality of the author of the paper? Touché? Then you will you choose to disregard the recent local body elections, creating both a democratic structure and bringing the process to peoples who have never actually experienced it their lives.

A cheap shot, Unworthy of you, because you could have dealt with the substance of my response not the validity of my right to a point of view.

Did Maulana f Rahman`s, JUI win big in the recent local election? You know the answer

``Who says religious nationalism of any kind is a good thing for India? The only nationalism there should be in India is Indian nationalism.``

Again, examine the content of ``Indian nationalism`` as we understand it today, rather as those ruling elite postulate intellectual trends about this notion. I know this cannot be what you mean.

``SIMI promotes the violent dissolution of the country, which is against the law.`` And the destruction of Masajid? is....? not violent? will not lead to dissolution? Courts are a remedy you say, but not for SIMI? Fro RSS, Bajrand Dal, Shiv Sena? Again don`t misunderstand me, I honor the civil course you seek, yet I question if such a course will be efficacious against fascist thugs.

Remember the Prime Minister of India calls the destruction of the Babri ``an expression of national will`` - Clearly these statements do not alarm you, but will you not be mindful of those to whom not just alarm but action is called for?

ISI Check? - It`s in the mail.

``There is no one trend in any country – certainly as true of Pakistan as of India.``

Yes, correct, but some trends are clearly more distinguished than others. Listen, you can disagree with this author or myself or anybody, but it`s just smart to not dismiss the general sense that comes through.

``What makes you think we have to abandon any portion of our history and culture? And how does our history and culture differ from other Indians` history and culture? Aren’t they the same? How are they different?``

The point of the article is just that that Muslims history and culture is under attack in India. I know you will not not buy that. Again, India has many histories and many cultures. It is only in the last 54 years that it has had the task to create what can be called a version of history that can help in it crafting a vision of a single peoples. Let`s take history in America as an example, where is the indigenous American and why? Could it have been different? why not?

``Kya kahthe ho bhai?``

This is a kindness you do me and I am grateful. I may be no friend, but I not a foe either.

Zafar Al-Talib

http://www.dailypioneer.com/secon2.asp?cat= story7&d=FRONT_PAGE

“ The unwarranted remark by Imam Bukhari came in response to a pertinent question from Shabana. She had asked him if he has issued a fatwa to all Muslims to prepare for jehad, ``why don`t you go to Kandahar and start the process. This would take away our troubles too,`` she told him during a video conferencing sequence on the subject Why the voice of liberal Muslims goes unheard``.

His response was: ``Main naachne gaane wali tawaifon ke sawalon ka jawab nahin dena chahta hoon.``

……. on national tv?!!?……what a piece of….and i thought our mullahs were bad….this guy takes the cake…shabana’s right….airdrop him into kandahar…..ASAP…..

Reply Harimau # 189

Harimau

Every time I seem to have convinced my friend Hobbyty that Indian Muslims see themselves, and are seen by other Indians, as fully Indian and NOT citizens on sufferance (ie potential fifth columnists for Pakistan) you manage to lob in a post which:

1 Implies that you think that Muslims are fundamentally different from other Indians, and/or

2 Clearly states that in your opinion Indian Muslims are present in India only on the sufferance of Indian Hindus and not as of right in their own country, and/or

3 Makes no recognition of the fact that Indian culture is composite whole which includes the religious and social traditions of everyone who lives there, including Indian Muslims, and usually

4 Throws in some gratuitous abuse of Islam and the Koran.

There’s a term of ridicule for subcontinental Muslims who base their current self image on a spurious idea of a golden age when Muslims ran everything and built the Taj Mahal. You seem to be equally committed to living in the past rather than the present, only instead of going on about imagined glories you dwell on historical wrongs done to one set of dead people by another set of dead people. What is the word for such a person? And what’s the point?

A few more questions:

1 Do you think I am fundamentally different from you because of my religion? Why?

2 Do you think I am less Indian than you because of my religion? Why?

3 Do you think your culture is different from my culture? How so? If we’re both Indian don’t we share the same Indian culture?

If you answer, please don`t try and assign blame for your views to things some vague entity called ``the Muslims`` allegedly do. You`re writing these posts, not ``the Muslims``. You are responsible for what you write, not ``them``.

The term “co-religionists” also usually comes up in your posts – generally coupled with an invitation to subcontinental Muslims to take responsibility for the actions of people from places like Afghanistan or Sudan – in fact to take responsibility for the actions of just about anybody but themselves from just about any country but our own. (Pakistan for Pakistanis, India for Indian Muslims.) Instead of staying in a midieval mindset that sees the world as “co-religionists” of this or that or falana, don’t you think you owe your fellow nationals a little bit more decency? (Dislike Aurangzeb all you like – I’m not challenging your view of history – just be conscious that he’s DEAD and Indian Muslims who are around today are not him.)

To be frank, I have come to expect this kind of attitude (and uncultured aggressiveness) from a very few of the less enlightened Pakistani posters on Chowk. It’s embarrassing to hear the same kind of stupidity from a fellow Indian.

Zafar

re banjara

``Did you go to SPS ? When did you live there??``

Pardon my ignorance, but I am not sure I know what SPS is. I have never `lived` in Chittagong myself.

Reply Scout # 200

“Do you really think the Indian film industry is representative of the real India?

The film industry does not depict India as it is, it depicts India’s dreams and aspirations. (Granted these can be escapist, trashy, vulgar, etc. etc. – nobody has everyu accused us of universal good taste.)

We may not all be fighting off villains and marrying Aishwarya Rai after cavorting (love that word) through France, Switzerland, Australia, the Bahamas etc. etc. But many of us would LIKE to. That’s what the films tell you – not what people have or are, but what they want or would like to be.

As such the industry does say something important about the country.

“Can Indian men still jump from 10 story buildings on their feet and their big poof hair styles intact?”

Actually this is quite factual. Aap kabhi aiye dekhne.

Zafar

Reply Babu # 207

Babu

“Any attempt by Muslim minorities in India at secession and to practice Islam beyond the personal realm should be met with maximum force.”

I don’t think there are any such attempts – unless you accept that the situation in Kashmir is a communal conflict.

“Of course that also applies at a lower level to the Hindu majority in India.”

Why at a lower level?

Zafar

Zafar #201
``Or the intellectual saathhi of our belowwwed Imam Bukhari.``
Imam Bukhari has his moments too, donot forget. Our hotheaded clerics are better than their hotheaded clerics :).

www.truthindia.com

Its a very long article, so pl. read

UPDATE ON THE SITUATION IN AZAMGARH: AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

Posted March 22, 2000
(submitted by Shamsul Islam)

under ``Events and other News`` in the left margin.

I think its another example of a typical situation where a local numerical majority of Hindus, and the bias of the police works against a minority group.

The question to ask is whether things have changed for the better or worse in the past few years:

www.truthindia.com

Khaki Prejudice

Ram R. Punyani
Posted June 16, 2000


The episode of (9th April, 2000) police force barging in to the Hostel of Jamia Milia Isalmia on the pretext of looking for two offenders, and then going on rampage is not only highly disturbing, but is one more reminder of the communalsiation of state apparatus in general and of the police force in particular. Earlier there was a fracas in which two of the students were involved and were to be apprehended. The police contingent of close to a thousand broke open the gate of the hostel, beat up the warden and then mercilessly beat all around while hurling highly communal abuses, calling the students Pakistani agents, ISI agents and also made other derogatory remarks. It is worth recalling that Jamia Milia Islamia is one of the products of the struggle for independence and has been the flag bearer of Indian Nationalism, Secularism and Democracy.

The list of biased behavior of police can be infinitesimally long. Not very long ago in Post demolition Mumbai riots most of the victims of police `action` were Muslims. In the first phase of riots when police was using the bullets with gay abandon, the victims who during this phase happened to be mostly Muslims suffered bullet wounds. While in the second phase the victims suffered stab wounds mainly due to the action instigated by the Shiv Sena.

One of the police officials, Vibhuti Narayan Rai, conducted a study in to the behavior of police in the communal riots (Record of Police Neutrality in Communal Riots, Indian Journal of Secularism, Dec 97). The finding of this study is very disturbing. The study is based on the interviews with the community leaders, feedback from serving and the retired police personnel, record of the police academy, and study of the reports of different communal riots. While we know that 65% the victims of communal riots have been Muslims the arrest and casualty figures are very revealing. In Bhiwandi riots 1970 of those arrested in cognisable offences, 21 were Hindus while 901 were Muslims, casualties wise, 17 were Hindus and 59 were Muslims. In Meerut riots of 1982 the pattern is no different 124 Hindus were arrested, as against 231 Muslims while 2 Hindus and 8 Muslims were the victims of casualty. As in Mumbai, here also police bullets selective hit the body of Muslims and soul of secular values. In Bhiwandi (1970), Firozabad (1972), Aligarh (1978), Meerut (1982) there was not a single Hindu victim of police bullets while the number of Muslims dying of police bullets respectively was-9, 6,7,and 6.

Let us have a look at come of the glaring examples of the police partiality. In Meerut riot in 1987 P.A.C. was deployed to control the riots. As the violence continued unabated for some time, PAC according to its theory that Muslims are responsible for the riots and should be taught a lesson, picked up more than two dozen Muslims from a locality known as Hashimpura and killed them at two places in Gaziabad after transporting them in their truck. One of the worst complicity of the police in communal violence was seen in Bhagalpur riots (1989). Here the police was a mute witness to the murder of 116 Muslims who were buried in a field and cauliflower was grown on it to cover up the episode. Bhagalpur police administration kept denying this till another police party led by a DIG dug out some of these dead bodies.

Police ``Understanding`` of the situation

Because of the heavy communalsation of the police force it believes that communal riots are due to Muslims and this is what guides their conduct. Their communalised consciousness is supplemented by brutal savagery, which gets further compounded by their non-professional approach in dealing with these situations. Many Muslim predominant areas are termed as `mini-Pakistan` and police force while entering these areas enter with the preparation and the spirit as if they are entering the enemy territory. This also makes them do the riot investigation in apathetic manner and years after years they keep sitting on the available evidence, which goes against their deep-set biases. Two of the comments from inquiry commission reports will give us a good glimpse of the attitude of some of the officers of the police. In the Bhiwandi-Jalgaon riot the Madon commission commented ``The real reason for the inadequacy of the measures taken by the authorities was the communal bent of mind of some of the officers and incompetence of others?Unfortunately, the SP, Mr. S.T.Raman appears to have possessed a communal bent of mind and perhaps a pro Jana Sangh (Previous avatar of BJP)?he fully realised the seriousness of situation but chose to turn a blind eye?``

In more recent Mumbai riots those who were implicated in the riots dubbed Justice Shri Krishna as anti Hindu. The police also got its `due share` in the report, `` police officers, particularly at the junior level, appeared to have an in built bias against the Muslims which was evident in their treatment of the Muslims and Muslim victims of the riots. The treatment given was harsh and brutal and, on occasions, bordering on inhuman, hardly doing any credit to the police. The bias of policemen was seen in active connivance of police constables with the rioting Hindu mobs on occasions, with their adopting the role of passive onlookers on other occasions, and finally, in their lack of enthusiasm in registering offences against Hindus even when the accused were clearly identified ?(vol., p.25-26) And ``Despite clues, miscreants were not pursued, arrested and interrogated, particularly when the suspected accused happened to be Hindus with connections to Shiv Sena or Shiv Sainiks. This general apathy appears to be the outcome of built-in prejudices in the minds of average policeman that every Muslim is prone to crime``(Vol. I, p.26)

Commission after commission of inquiry are full of these and similar type of examples of maltreatment and biased behavior against Muslims. Police not only behave in a partial manner during riots, in most of the `regular` situations also these biases govern their attitudes. Mostly the police act more as a `Hindu force` rather than as an arm of secular state. The discrimination in their behavior is obvious at all the levels. By now minorities have starting looking at them as the hostile force. Lately it is the experience of the second largest minority, the Christians as well.

What is the remedy to this impasse? On one hand the communalisation of society is cornering the minorities and on the other the supposedly protective force has no qualms in conniving and even acting on behalf of the offending communal elements. This is of course due to multiple factors. The recruits to the police force are from the same group, which is on the communal offensive.

The training programmes of police academies etc. are not at all geared for secularisation of its trainees. On the contrary many a top officials themselves are having heavy communal bias. The representation of the minorities in the police force is abysmal and the recruitment policy of the state has remained lop sided resulting in a very low percentage of Muslims in the police force. All these need to be reversed as early as possible. Not only that there should be a conscious effort to improve the percentage of Muslims in the police force but also the training programme needs to be recast with an emphasis not only on the Human rights of minorities but also the general communalisation has to be fought against at all the levels.

anNy#193
Its hard for me to ignore that you`re the one of those who turns up to defend ali1 after his beautiful and classy posts. However, this will not prevent me from replying to him whenever he deserves it.

Banjaara,Eklavya, whoever

I would suggest you either take a hike or spend your valuable time posting on the subject at hand. Just like I donot pay attention to insults(mostly), I donot pay attention to commendations and criticism either. I am NOT interested in explaining myself to any person here who demands it or to take instruction from you, I am here to express my own views on the subject for my own sake. As I asked soysauce, who ARE you?


scout
Its hard to take people like you seriously. I would like you to take a deep breath and see where exactly I was trying to prove India`s secularism through B`bay movies before posting multiple posts lecturing me on it. If you can find it, THEN I may consider taking you seriously.

babu 207

You made a mistake without wanting to make it perhaps. Separtism by *anyone * (hindu muslim donkey) should be met with maximum force because those ideas cause too many problems creating hatred. Nip the evil in the bud.

re: Rdesikan # 188

Really?! See, that`s why I never enter into an argument with you techno types :(

Seriously, though, doesn`t night-vision technology merely amplify ambient light (or, possibly, it could employ non-optical parts of the EM spectrum)?

Woh tau phir light hi huee naa? :)

Tr. Isn`t that just another form of light?:)

Regards.

Sadna,

Banjara # 195 makes a valid point. Please don`t lose patience (now, who am I to talk?).

anNy # 193

Girl, that`s some class.

Zafar, nasah, faruk, other Indian Muslims,

For some people it is easier to dismiss me calling me Islam hater than do the hard thinking I ask them to do.

That is why I call them brainwashed. Two people I admire, zafar and eklivya. Both are too patient at least in my view.

Some things I cant stand for which Pakistanis call me Islam hater.

One fool (he may be Indian) argues that using green tiles means insult to Islam.

Another Pakistani crook says hateful things and adds Allah knows best. Every body accepts that hateful argument because Allah is supposed to know best.

Third idiot uses twenty foot sh&t before someone`s name to scare people into believing him even if that guys ideas are absurd. In India we used to have many such idiots thirty years ago. Most are dead. I never respected them. I am not going to respect new idiots just because they are Pakistani.

Another Paksitani idiot keeps using real problems in India to sell his snake oil telling Indian Muslims that they are world`s most suffering, exploited, terrorized, oppressed population hoping to incite hatred. Now he is openly suggesting another partition! Why does he do that? Individual hindus may be good. But overall Hindus are bad. He couldnt live with them. How can you?

Blood of five million people hindus, muslims, children, men, women, old, young, who were killed in the last partition is not enough for this blood thirsty man whose mind is drenched in blood. He likes to pretend to be spreading religion using big words! I hate him for his dirty thoughts. I dont hate Islam. He will tell you he is Islam. Pakistan is Islam. By hating him, I hate Islam. Sh$t on him, I say.

All these ``Islam loving`` Pakistanis want to grab Kashmir using Islam card. If they loved Islam so much they would go save shias being killed in their country. No one speaks of them on Chowk. If they loved Islam so much they would take back those more than million Biharis stuck in Bangladesh. If they loved Islam so much they would speak out against China for it is doing to Muslims. If they loved Islam so much they would not have destroyed raped a Muslim country Afghanistan to build ``strategic depth`` against India. Such a crime!

These Islam using Pakistanis are hypocrites using religion for war. Islam is very far from their minds.

jay #163 ``I am one of the few on chowk directly affected by the WTC attack, I am fired by morgan stanley, nearly half of our fleet are on the ground, and who needs an engine specialist when the engines are not running, and th silly bas/tards know that I have no where to go.``

I dont belive a word of what you write - remember the last time you told me you lived in Kerala, and then a few posts later assured me that there was no way I could tell whether you were lying or not and you could be living anywhere? So, excuse me if I fail to take your word no more seriously than you do.

In his latest column Ayaz Amir says:

“”After the historic referendum the political scene has shifted and is no longer putty or French plaster in General Musharraf`s hands. His cohorts could not manage a one-sided referendum. How will they manage a contentious and contested general election? One, moreover, likely to be dominated by the hated spectres of the PPP and the Nawaz League.

In a world not driven by paranoia or megalomania, a fiasco such as the referendum would call for a re-examination of priorities.

But nothing of the sort is occurring in Islamabad.

Far from sounding chastened, the general has spoken of a permanent political role for the armed forces while his trumpeters, Memon in the lead, continue to insist upon the transparency and fairness of the referendum.

__________________________________________________

They are even saying the coming elections would be as transparent as the referendum (oh, boy) - which is meant as an affirmation of good faith but sounds more like a threat.

__________________________________________________

In any case, the choices on offer are stark. The original theory was built on Gen Musharraf`s popularity:

``People tell me that I am very popular. I thought if I am really popular, I must go to the people.``

These are verbatim Musharraf quotes from an ARY interview.

On the coattails of his popularity the right sort of parliament would be elected in October. But the referendum has cast these happy forecasts into doubt. In its aftermath how can ``positive results`` be ensured?

Tongas on their own can`t do it. Nor can the patched-up quilt of a Quisling League deliver the kind of vote the general is banking upon.

Thus barring wholesale disqualifications or massive rigging, the military government is left holding the strings of an uncertain future.

Of course it can do the right thing by holding proper elections without regard to the outcome.

But this is hoping for the moon.

If such good sense could prevail in Pakistan we wouldn`t be in the mess we find ourselves in.(Dawn)

tvarad 183

Very good article you posted. Aslam Qadar Khan is right mostly. One important point. This pan islamic thing is not only media creation. Both evil fundamentalists muslims and hindus promote that idea.

Muslim fundamentalists like hobbyty on chowk think nothing but pan islam (surprisingly sensing the mood on chowk he has not come out against Pakistan in favor of Bin Laden yet but he will do so soon. Still, for him Islam is Pakistan and Pakistan is Islam). Hindu fundamentalists look at people like Hobbyty and take him as confirmation of their already existing hatreds.

No difference between Hobbyty types and RSS types. Both promote violence in which average peaceful Indian Muslims suffer. We should shut the mouths of these hateful people.

Mr Shahid Akhter Makhfi,

Your article is devoid of any coherence as the moon is of life. Shame on you Chowk for publishing garbage.

NotAMullah

Some general comments on discrimination around the world.

Indonesia which happens to be overwhelmingly Muslim Javanese prohibits Chinese (Christian/Buddhist) from using Chinese names, adopting Chinese customs and learning Chinese language. It is not an Islamic republic. Turkey prohibited Kurds from using Kurdish names, practising their culture and using their language. You could not use the word ``Kurd`` till recently. Kurds were called ``Mountain Turks``. Turkey is a secular state. Imagine Indian security forces enforcing similar rules on Indian Muslims.

Sudan declared Islamic law in mid 1980`s and converted country into war zone. 2 million plus non-Muslims have been killed, starved to death etc. Worse the oil drilled in the non-Muslim territorry are used to finance the war. I am sure Pakistanis won`t see any mention of this in their newspapers.

Lebanon had a 50% Maronite Christian majority. They are down to 30%. Look for the percentage to drop below 10% in 20 years. Egypt had 20% Coptic minority in the 1955. They are down to 7%. Bangladesh had 25% Hindu minority in 1971. Thanks to religious persecution they are down to 10%. Call it low intensity persecution.

Having said the above I would not advocate any reverse discrmination against Muslim minorities.

Any attempt by Muslim minorities in India at secession and to practice Islam beyond the personal realm should be met with maximum force.

Of course that also applies at a lower level to the Hindu majority in India.

Reply Hobbyty # 171

Hobbyty

Yaar, kabhi kabhi chakkar aane lagthe hain yeh sabh parh ke.

“Rsridhar says that Muslims can earn the gratitude of Hindus if they let them have the Babri?”

I don’t agree with him on this one. I think that the case must be settled in the courts, and then the courts findings must be implemented, regardless of what they are.

“In other words, without evidence, admit they are in error - and the the implications for the next demand? The Hindu God is more valid than a Masjid? After all muslims are not really indian or they did actually steal the land, or that only they did, rape and pillage? Cuz you do realize the demands will not end just with this Babri business, do you not? Earn their gratitude? while they write a history in which Muslims are foreigners? Invaders?”

To be fair, Hobbyty, I’m sure that Sridhar did not imply any of this in his posts. One needs to read them fully before jumping to conclusions.

“Are your Father, mother and their parents, Turks??? Do you look like a Turk??”

Er…actually….I kinda do…but that is not the point, is it?

“TNT was a conspiracy against the great Hindu nation and Pakistan is an abomination???”

Vaisai, TNT was a conspiracy against Indian Muslims by their “leaders” – big fish in small pond syndrome. But how does this follow from your earlier point?

“No such thing as a great Muslim nation in India?? No such thing as Muslim culture in India??”

There is an Indian nation which includes people of different religions. Why is that hard to accept?

“Islam in India is expected to be responsible for the extreme or unpopular ideas or acts, is Hinduism responsible for Shiv Sena, RSS, Bajrang Dal, etc??”

People are responsible for these things, Hobbyty. Just like people are responsible for driving a plane into the WTC. Not religions. People.

“Do newspapers reveal this? Islam, the face of terror! but the demolition of the Babri, an abberation? an act by a handful of extremist?”

Hobbyty, how many mainstream Indian papers or major Indian politicians have said that Islam is the face of terror. On the contrary they continue to irritate Bajrang Dal types by repeating the mantra (eeek! Did I say mantra?) “Islam is a religion of peace, Islam is a religion of peace…”

“imagine Maulana Fazul Rahman winning an election on a platform that call for the destruction of some temple, is actually elected and appointed to the second most powerful post in government. Well, sure, it could happen.”

This presupposes elections.

“Has any Indian Muslim had the cojones to say that Hindus could earn the gratitude of Muslims if they pulled out of Kashmir, and then did X and Y and Z?”

Who are you to say that? No Indian would earn my gratitude by pulling out of Kashmir – aren’t I a Muslim? Btw, they wouldn’t earn Imam Bukhari’s gratitude either – even if you doubt my authenticity surely he is a mohallahvaala above reproach.

“… you remain unwilling to call a spade a spade - and it only this, this confrontation, however one chooses to define the confrontation, either electoral, or awareness raising, something that will allow the nation to take a breath and realize the danger of Hindu nationalism - after all, If Hindu nationalism is a valid commodity, why aren`t the nationalism of non-Hindus valid?”

Who says religious nationalism of any kind is a good thing for India? The only nationalism there should be in India is Indian nationalism.

“This not about individual Hindus or individual Muslims, but rather about a ideological movement which is determined to stamp a Hindu identity upon India, now you are right that this the business of Indians, but please, please do not throw the rubbish about pluralistic , unique definition of secular democracy at us - it`s an insult to persons intelligence - by all means if that paradigm finds resonance or that ideal holds attraction, who are we in Pakistan to say, that is not valid, for you, just don`t tell us that is true for us as well.”

Yes, yes, that’s also a strong ideology in India, if it’s not true for you what is going to happen to your minorities?

“After all why is Ok to ban SIMI but not any Hindu organization involved in inciting communalism?”

Ban them all, I say.

“How secular is a government that wages a civil war aginst persons who choose to define their movement in religious terms? - Again, don`t get me wrong, why would a movement calling itself Islamic invoke such wrath in a supposedly ``secular`` polity? while movements that promote hindu values and identity provoke no such reflex?”

SIMI promotes the violent dissolution of the country, which is against the law. Muslim parties continue to function in India openly (and an Independence Party btw continues to function without let or hindrance in Indian Kashmir, unlike PoK) – but don’t seem to get much of a following from Indian Muslims. Now is it my fault that their ideology does not attract a following?

“Sadna has accused Asif and myself of attempting to bind Indian muslims in Ideological prostitution, you may even agree with this objectionable notion.”

Nobody’s offered to pay me yet. ISI saalaa check nahin bhejthe…

“Yet to say that unrest or an alienation among Muslims in India does not play into the hands of some in Pakistan would be less than truthful, however; this point of view completely disregards any sense of religious affinity and concern, it assumes all pakistani muslims who posit an opinion have nothing but Machiavellian motives. On the other hand, you are quite correct in saying that Pakistan as a whole cannot claim the right to speak for Muslims of India, however; it deny affinities is to deny reality.”

By the same token we have a natural concern about what happens in Pakistan – hence the comments on secularism, democracy, respect for minorities, etc. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

“Perhaps you are right but I cannot judge or come to conclusions with regard to the authors absence thus far. Tell me, what do results of the elections say? Faith in the inate goodness, fairness of the Indian electorate? perhaps this may sound like a cheeky question coming from a Pakistani, under military rule, yet, perhaps this will not disqualify it from consideration?”

People get the governments they deserve.

“Do not misunderstand me, I realize that india is big and complex, country but am I wrong in thinking that the magnitude of the problem (communal) has substantially increased? Actually, I am convinced it will continue to grow as india becomes a more complex economy, it`s built in to the structure of society and reflects in the constructs that animate it`s external relations.”

Yes and no. Some of the reactions to change and growth promote communalism. Other reactions to, and factors of, change and growth promote a secular approach to life. There is no one trend in any country – certainly as true of Pakistan as of India.

“Now if I may I should like to explain my impatience. Recently a couple of visitors were over, they had family in India and the conversation took that turn. They felt that I was not sufficiently aware of the wrath that their family and ordinary Muslims, most who they said lived as minorities in villages suffer when ever realtions with Pakistan are more tense than usual.”

This is true. But it’s not your responsibility. You should not have to mind what you say because we have failed to implement a fully secular policy in India.

“I informed them that a Bangladeshi friend of mine was in Bombay at the time of the riots and had told me of the kinds things Muslims suffered there.”

My grandmother and many relatives live in Bombay. You don’t have to tell me.

“My guests suggested that we in Pakistan need to be ever mindful of the vulnerablity that we expose our coreligionists and kin in India to, if we do not follow Indian leadership. I remain very upset that muslims in India are basically hostage and I find in attitude you are taking an acceptance of that hostage status.”

How so?

“Pakistan cannot do anything about it, but only Muslims in India can help themselves.”

Jee haan.

“It is clear to me that psychologically and culturally, they will find it very difficult to be Pakistanis, even if they had such a choice; one twelveth the size of India, Pakistani Muslims says don`t push us we will teach you a lesson to remember, while indian muslims, citizens of india, by all rights and privilage of heritage, Indian, are required to abandon their history and culture to ingratiate themselves and earn a place in line with other ``minorities``.”

What makes you think we have to abandon any portion of our history and culture? And how does our history and culture differ from other Indians` history and culture? Aren’t they the same? How are they different?

“Actually, I must apologise to you, I have been inconsiderate and the way you choose to see the world and yourself in it, is your business and none of mine.”

Kya kahthe ho bhai? At least you listen and dialogue rather than just scream insults. As the young people used to say about sixty zillion years ago: keep on truckin’.

Zafar

Reply Stuka, Bapu # 173, 178

“You had asked if Bapu Shah Bhardwaj Lazwanti had ever written introspective before? Well, I will reproduce his text. It may not be fully introspective, but it is the truth. Get past the hyperbole, and you will see the bitterness. I don`t know what the hell this guy is, of he`s Indian, Bihari stuck in Bangladesh whatever. I do know that this post is relevant, if not for him, than for the disfranchised Muslims of India.”

You’re right Stuka.

Bapu please accept my apology – sometimes you do write things which are insightful and it was wrong of me not to acknowledge that. (I still stand by what I said about introspection and the Islamic Renaissance, however.)

“AND PLZ SHOW ME ONE ASPECT OF HINDUISM WHICH IS INTROSPECTION OR SUPERIOR TO ISLAM.”

Bapu what does introspection by Muslims have to do with Hinduism?

Zafar

Reply Stuka # 167

Re: Hindutva

I agree that the right wing elite in India had no intention of actually giving political power to lumpens, but the fact is that having created a political vehicle fueled by these people the elite is less in control of them than it would like. That’s my point. Vaisai I agree that class is a greater functional determiner of power and affinity in India than religion or caste, at least for the elite.

Re:

Re: Mangley

It is a puzzle, and one we should think about, that communalism is alive and well in some of India’s most advanced states (Maharashtra, let’s not forget the Shiv Sena and the Bombay riots, after all, in India’s most “developed” city, and Gujarat) and is somewhat blunted in its poorest (Bihar). That’s why I think that communalism is not just an expression of poverty, but also of a disfunctional ideology.

What troubles me is that I do think that the BJP has some really sound things to offer India, but I think they’re a package deal (economic reform plus riots). If they’re going to change, they have to change from within and with the ideological blessings of the RSS.

Zafar

re: Hobbyty # 171

Hobbyty,

A very interesting post.

So what did you tell your Indian Muslim guests when they suggested that Pakistan needs to be mindful of the vulnerablity of Indian Muslims?

Reply Gowardhan # 135

Gowardhan – the article from Makhfi you posted is most interesting. A few things which perhaps people can clarify for me:

“Once said, it is believed and the belief is such that people may not cremate the dead for two months in the belief that the dead man is still alive but meditating, while the body in fact is decomposing.”

Hain? I’ve never heard of this. Has anybody else? Laash ko kahan rakhthe hain? Would there be anybody left to cremate the first dead person or would every one else have died from cholera?

“The Britishers are revered as the builders of Modern India, while the chief architects to lay the groundwork were the Turks.”

We were conquered by the Turks? Were we in the Ottoman Empire? Why didn’t anybody tell me??!!!

The Mughals would be the invaders least distant from Turks, being Turkmen speakers from Farghana, could this be what he was talking about? Very sloppy…

“The VHP through manipulation of historical research, in pursuance of its claim, has done a commendable job. Now members of the Bajrang Dal claim that they know the precise birth spot of Krishna that lies beneath the Idgah at Varanasi !”

Now my sneak previews of Amar Chitra Katha at friends’ houses (I wasn’t allowed comics, sigh) gave me to believe that Krishna was born in Mathura. True? Not true? Why hasn’t the Bajrang Dal been informed of this? (Given your handle I expect a FULL explanation of this point from you.)

“On the question of Ram temple, it seems that Ram has been monopolised by the Hindi speaking belt of North India.”

What? Ayodhya vaisai new invention hai kya? Ramlila men Ayodhya ka naam nahin likkha kya?

“A study of the Hindu history reveals that the temple worship was an alien of practice. None of the scriptures refer to them or lay on Hindus the duty of going to temple for worship of an image.”

My head is spinning now. What’s his point here?

“Mahabharata makes no mention of temple nor the word “Ayodhya” comes anywhere.``

Er...does the Mahabharata cover Ram`s story? I thought it didn`t...might that be why it doesn`t mention Ayodhya?

``It was more of a borrowed phenomenon from the practice of kins that people started going to temples to look at the image of diving potentate and to watch the ceremonials of his daily life, which were modelled on those of a king.”

Diving potentates? Nagarajas or scuba karne vaale?

Gowardhan Saheb, this man just seems peevish now. (Or the intellectual saathhi of our belowwwed Imam Bukhari.) But if I am wrong, please let me know. Otherwise I am EMBARRASSED that he is a Muslim. (God knows there’s plenty of room for criticism re: where Indian Muslims are today, but what provokes Chowk to publish stuff of this calibre when a simple look at an Encyclopedia would discredit the author’s ability to write knowledgeably on the subject?)

I must go and lie down now.

Zafar

Zafar,

Do you really think the Indian film industry is representative of the real India?

Do women really prance around half naked on the streets of India? Can Indian men still jump from 10 story buildings on their feet and their big poof hair styles intact?

That`s all the absurdities that I can remember as of now.

:)

Do you wish to retract your statement?

sadna, various posts,

Take a deep breath and relax. Anger won`t get you anywhere but to the path of physical self destruction (wrinkles on your pretty little face :).



Not once in any of my posts did I enhance Pakistan or patronize Indian Muslims. All I asked for was some appreciation of self criticism in response to this article.

As far as YLH and Sarwari are concerned, if they are unreasonably patriotic of Pakistan, they are vehemently critical of it as well.

Do you even bother reading anything written by Pakistanis other than what you WANT to read?

Soysauce, why are you finding fault with Sadna?

Her posts are valid. Have you seen her posts on complicity of Bombay police in the riots?

BTW, are you Indian or Pakistani?

And how come you are not finding fault with Zafar since he agrees completely with Sadna.

sadna various posts.

During the last three years that I have been

around this lunatic ward aka chowk,I have never seen you losing your cool inspite of personal insults heaped on you from all sides.I respect

your point of view and have observed your mostly

balanced views,but this time on this board you

have behaved unlike yourself.Relax and take it

easy.Things can`t be all that bad...unless your

monthly payments have been stopped by some Section

Officer in the MoD :))))

Regards

Sadna, you are a cool gal.

I am behind you 100%.

Ignore the nutcases I say.

Includes some Indians like Kiran. What drugs is he/she on?

sadna:

``thats what we Hindus plan for Pukistan.``

you stop referring to my beautiful country in this demeaning manner..i dont like it...

and its below you too

sigalph235 # 87

``When my grandparents moved from Murshidabad to Chittagong, trust me it was not as weekend tourists.``

Did you go to SPS ? When did you live there??

If you wish not to reply,I will understand.

Regards.

Semipreciousme #160,

Check again. Indian movies are banned.

Just because you can see Indian movies using smuggled video cassettes doesn`t mean they are not banned.

Semi, Sadna just called you an idiot

YLH:

In one of your interacts, you said that Indian Muslims are being terrorized and victimized in their daily lives.

Let me give you a little bit of an example. Hindu scriptures were never written down and were handed down orally from teacher to student, from generation to generation.

Your heroes, the Muslim sultans of Delhi, not only destroyed every single temple in Northern India, they terrorized the priests to such an extent that even in the tiny little temples that Hindus built to practice their faith surreptitiously, there were no pujas according to the scriptures for close to 30 generations.

The result is that worship in North Indian temples consist of showing the aarti (lighted lamp) to the idol followed by singing `Jaya Jagdeesh Hare`.

Go to South Indian temples and compare the elaborate rituals that are performed there to the pitiful state of affairs in North India.

Compared to this treatment of Hindus in their own land, you fcukers have been allowed to keep your Satanic Verses aka The Unholy Quran and your co-religionists have been running madrassahs all over India to propagate your religion.

Terrorizing the Mulim population would call for burning every copy of the Quran, demolishing every mosque, killing every maulana, and cutting off the tongue of anyone who dared to open his mouth to say `Bismillah`.

So long as that is not being done in India, your co-religionists have far more rights than the Hindus had for 1000 years under the heel of Islamic thugs.

So shut up about the treatment of minorities in India. They have your country to go to if they don`t like it in India but I don`t see a line in front of the Pakistan High Commission for visas.

Re Eklavya 177

``We can fight darkness only with light, not with darkness.``

But on a technical note, it is possible to fight darkness with darkness, thanks to state-of-the-art night vision technology. :)

soysauce #170
``Seriously, you could have simply pointed out that the charges that the author makes are genuine and that he could have bolstered his case citing an indian source rather than the NYT.``

I did, in two posts at least :#27 and #28.

semipreciousme #185
``and sadna, yes the biased, prejudiced and bigoted pakistani media is incomparable to the just, impartial and equitable indian media…the greatest thing since velcro….sliced bread even, right?``

Considering that I posted a number of posts dumping on the Indian media and Hindu-Muslim issues on the Ali Minai board, I donot plan to explain myself further to idiots.

soysauce #170
``self-professed secularist``
Where have I ``self-professed`` and who are you to judge? I have not understood whats your problem? I`m a messenger, too, of my own views. Why are you trying to shoot me?

Genghis Khan: ``All ye muslims. Allah has sent you Genghis Khan to fight. Are you ready?``

Isnt Genghis the chap who build a tower of muslim heads in Baghdad? The bloke whose soldier one stopped a muslim traders caravan and told them not to dare to move while he went and fetched his sword with which to decap them? So what`s the deal now?

re shailendar #143:

Excellent post I must say. Plz. contribute more.

later

-sac

P.S: Don`t worry about the usual suspects polluting the interacts. Its the price one has to pay in order to have an open forum.

Shahid Akhter Makhfi,

I read your article and you make some valid points but have some facts wrong that have been pointed out by other on this board. I don’t think that Green tiles in the bathrooms are offensive. My bathroom has green tiles too, it just the décor we chose. Muslims don’t have a copyright on the color green. That said, I don’t disagree there are some Hindu fundamentalists who would like to drive us out of our country like the Pakistani’s drove the Hindus out of their country, but the majority would like to preserve India’s secular fabric. Your article would have made more interesting reading if you had also mentioned what some Hindus are doing to help some Muslims, say like seva a overwhelmingly Hindu women’s organization that helps Muslim women weavers by marketing their products and giving them a much better price.

The article also has a ghetto Muslim tone to it. My family is doing well in India and has not faced any discrimination. You have to get out and compete, most if not all employers are interested in your performance not your faith.

Regards,

Faruk

Hindustan Times Editorial Platform (Oct 23 01)

Manufacturing a divide

Aslam Qadar Khan



Vir Sanghvi’s point in his column (Waiting for a Hindu backlash, October 14) that there are not enough moderate Muslim voices is well taken.

Yes, there are not enough such voices. More and more moderate and liberal Muslims must make themselves heard.

Having said that, however, there are two points one would like to make. First, the appeal for more moderate Muslim voices must not be restricted only to times of crisis. The Indian media must make a conscious effort to seek out moderate Muslim voices at all times.

Second, the sooner we accept the fact that there is no global Muslim identity, the sooner we will stop pushing Muslims to the wall every time there is some issue engulfing some Muslim country and providing ammunition to both Muslim and Hindu extremists. If these two things are not done, we will be manufacturing, rather than ‘waiting’ for a Hindu backlash.

It is increasingly difficult for moderate Muslims to find space for their voices. As Rajdeep Sardesai (Indian Express, October 16) writes, the media love a fundamentalist. In fact, this love affair is so much that the media seem to discourage liberal Muslim voices while actively seeking out — if not encouraging — extremist Muslim opinion. This is clearly evident by the disproportionate amount of time, attention and space given to extremist Muslims in the media all over the world.

When a handful of people listen to Imam Bukhari or wave a flag with Bin Laden’s face on it, Islam is seen as the problem. “Is Islam the face of terrorism?”, thunders a Star TV news programme.

But when thousands of kar sevaks pull down the Babri masjid, it is not the Hindu religion but extremism that is clearly seen as the face of such outrage.

It is a common complaint of moderate Muslims that their voices are never provided with adequate space during ‘normal’ times. Articles are not printed, meetings are not covered. But during times of crisis, when Mullah Bukhari starts ranting, the media are there to hold forth and listen.

Moderate Muslims are then asked to explain him, rationalise him and prove our distance from him. We are more than willing to do this, but how many times and how many of us need to do so? It is highly annoying and frustrating to have to defend ourselves from the ravings of extremist elements in the Muslim community.

And every time there is a ‘Muslim’ crisis — Shah Bano or the present one — extreme voices become not only more appealing but also more exciting for news consumption. It is far more difficult for moderate Muslims already on the defensive to be heard.

The issue of a pan-Islamic identity is clearly nonsense. It is mostly a media construction. It is raked up during times of crisis and conveniently forgotten at other times. A UP Muslim has more in common with a UP Hindu than he has in common with a Muslim from another state, let alone another country.

Muslims do not share some sort of an identity which overrides their national identities. There is no pan-Christian identity either. Muslim countries fight against one other. There are secessionist movements in Muslim countries too. Or are we forgetting Bangladesh? Did Iraq not invade Kuwait?

There are countless examples which reduce the idea of a pan-Islamic identity to what it is: a convenient propaganda tool in the hands of extremists. It is used by non-Muslim extremists to lay the blame on the Muslim minority in their country. It is used by Muslim extremists like Bin Laden to muster whatever support they can for their dubious causes. The success or failure of both such attempts is no proof for the existence of any pan-Islamic identity.

We cannot dismiss the notion of a pan-Islamic identity. But far too much is read into it. It has become the bane for Indian Muslims, used to question our nationalism and loyalty. “Are you an Indian first or a Muslim first?” is an absurd question to ask. We all live with multiple identities. It is as absurd as asking whether one is a man first or a father first or a husband first. Religion and nationality are two separate things and they cannot — particularly in a secular country — be in conflict.

There is very little Muslim support for Bin Laden from Muslims who have nothing to do with him. But there may be support to him from Muslim mullahs who have much to do with him. So one must understand that while there are Muslims responding to Bin Laden, they are also Muslims denouncing him.

Also, let us only worry about Indian Muslim support to Bin Laden — which is quite meagre to begin with. Finally, let us distinguish between supporting Bin Laden and expressing our deep grievances with the American policy in various parts of the world.

Let us all — liberal Hindus, liberal Muslims and the media — actively join forces to counter-extremism. Otherwise we may all have to bear some responsibility for manufacturing support to the Hindu right.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re: Zafar # 156

Goes to show that in many parts we continue to live in the dark ages.

We can fight darkness only with light, not with darkness.

YLH:

Yesterday some Indian told me that `Arundati Roy` was nothing but a whore... how sad is that?

That is very sad. Hope you told the guy off. A statement like that needs to be condemned without reservation. However, while rising to her defence as an individual, keep in mind that Arundhati Roy is definitely Anti American, so I wouldn`t rise to a staunch defence off her views either.

This is an interesting point ;)

Any comments by the Pakistanis????

Fact: Their are only 2 possibilities. The whole subcontinent becomes completely secular or India becomes a Hindu state. History will decide.