Riots

#: 71

sadna

Pankaj #60

Ek unse UP-size ki cheez(Pakistan) nahin sambhalti

.......................

Agar bharat varsh U.P. ko sambhal rahe hai tou bhagvan ke bari krippa hai ke Pakistan Bharat maine nahi hai !!!!!!!!!!!

Allahabad jahan lecherous lover of Edwina thha

Lucknow jahan Bag Pipe ho ke bhi Nahi hai

Ayodhya jahan Manavta ka avinaash ho raha hai

Asif Naqashbandi,

I admire your honesty. Unlike the fakes like YLH, sarwari and hobbyty ... you are the true face of Pakistan .I wish more of you, proud, practising Pakistani muslims post here, so that we can understand the true nature of Pakistan and Islam.

Your admirer,

ali

Ali2 #83

Hobbyty and Asif Naqashbandi are two different people? The two say identical things in two diferent forms.

Asif Naqshbandi #73: ``YET in terms of aqeedah with a Muslim I have an added spiritual bond-that of shared IMAN-which i do not have with any non-Muslim, and that bond is stronger than any national boundaries or even than blood. that is all.``

There is nothing in Islam which justifies what you are stating. Islam alone, in and of itself, cannot be used as the criteria for forming any kind of a bond. The criteria for forming a bond is, first and foremost, the character of the person. If one only uses Islam as the criteria than your bond with Saddam Hussein should be stronger than your bond with a Christian who dies to protect Pakistan.

``Yes I would like pakistan to be a real Islamic country and its laws to be based on the Shar`iah

[Hanafi fiqh as Hanafis are the majority in Pakistan]``

There are as many interpretations of Islam as their are Muslims in the world. Why should the Hanafi fiqah be considered the correct Shariah. If it is the correct version, then it should be implemented in all Islamic countries of the world. It shouldn`t matter whether the majority population of that country supports it, or not.

Your argument is based on two contradicting concepts. On the one hand you are suggesting that Shariah should be imposed, since it is the correct word of God (I agree that Shariah, at least according to Muslims, is the correct word of God. However, there is no agreement on its correct interpretation, hence it should be avoided). On the other hand you are suggesting that the Hanafi version should be implemented since that is the majority group in Pakistan. The former argument relies on a direct religious concept (Shariah), the later relies on a democratic concept (majority). If Shariah should be implemented, then the fact that Pakistan has a majority of Hanafis should be immaterial. If the Hanafi version is the word of God, then it correct, and it doesn`t matter how many Hanafis there are in Pakistan. This same concept can thus be used by anyone who believes their version is the correct word of God, i.e. word of God doesn`t need a majority vote. In such a case, why not implement a non-Hanafi version. Which version should be implemented?

``in a real islamic state of pakistan, in return for paying a small tax called the jizya you would have complete freedom of worship etc and the muslims would OBLIGED to protect you and your rights.``

This is a non-factual statement, since you are attempting to predict the future. There is no way you can know what would happen in Pakistan if an implementation of your version of Shariah were to occur. You don`t know which direction it would end up in. I am assuiming you cannot predict the future. Currently, the only practical example is Afghanistan. Of course, you could argue that the Taliban`s version of Shariah is not the correct one. But they seem as convinced as you are that their version is correct. How do we decide whether you are correct or the Taliban are correct? If it is to be decided by a majority vote, then that does away with the whole concept of Shariah to begin with, since people will be deciding which version is the word of God or not.

``this does NOT repeat NOT (as pankaj suggests) mean that i support idiots and misguided zealots like Masood Azhar etc``

Being a misguided zealot is a relative term. There are people who may consider you a misguided zealot, or me one. And there are people who consider Masood Azhar a non-zealot. So who decides who is a misguided zealot and who is not? Why shouldn`t we implement Masood Azhar`s version of Shariah? Why should it be a version you suggest?

``i believe that until muslims are united politically all over the world we will continue to be massacred as we are being now.``

This is correct. However this will not occur by implementing someone`s version of Shariah in each country. That will only divide us more. How exactly does implementing Shariah in a country, bring Muslims together? Are the countries that have implemented Shariah close to each other? Can you give a few examples?

``is it wrong for me to believe as a Muslim that we must be ruled and live our lives according to Islam and not any mam-made ideology?``

It is not wrong for you to think that. What is wrong is to assume that you are right and others are wrong. Why should I allow you to implement Hanafi Shariah in Pakistan, if I don`t agree with it? Are you more knowledgeable, more able, more patriotic than I am.

``For most Muslims the muslim conquerors of the subcontinent ARE and always WILL be heros.``

This is debatable. It depends on your defintion of conqueror. Considering that 70% of the Muslim world is illiterate, I doubt too many know much about the Muslim conquerors of the Sub-Continent. And there aren`t too many books written on Muslim conquerors of Sub-Continent in languages spoken in non-Pakistani Muslim countries. Can you point me to a couple of books on Ghaznavi written in Arabic, or Malay, or Turkish or Swahili. Once again, being a Muslim, in and of itself, is not the criteria laid down by Islam, for respecting a conqueror. There are many Muslim conquerors who were ruthless. Should they be respected, just because they were Muslim. Many killed other Muslims. The criteria of a respected conqueror is someone who liberated individuals.

``do you think if there was a strong and powerful muslim state stretching from pakistan to morroco that the hindus would DARE burn down the Babri Mosque or kill muslims and rape and kill 70 000 pure muslims of kashmir?``

This is incorrect. Unfortunately, the only Muslim state that cares about the Kashmiris is Pakistan (believe me, I have been involved in this cause, far longer and more intensely than you ever will be). Even now, the Muslim states from Pakistan (actually Indonesia) to Morroco are strong enough to get India to accept the UN resolutions on Kashmir. However, these Muslim states don`t want to do that. So being strong or being Muslim, doesn`t really have anything to do with it. What does have something to do with it, is one`s respect for human rights, and one`s respect for the country of Pakistan. I am still waiting for Yasir Arafat to go to India and make a strong statement for the Kashmiris. You will find that non-Pakistani Muslims care far less about Kashmir than Pakistani non-Muslims. Can you name a few non-Pakistani Muslims who have died for Pakistan`s Kashmir cause in the past 50 years. I can name quite a few Pakistani non-Muslims.

Based on this, I fail to understand your love for non-Pakistani Muslims being at a higher level than that for Pakistanis non-Muslims. Please note the examples I provided, of Pakistani non-Muslims who have died for Pakistan, and won gallantry awards. How many non-Pakistani Muslims give a hoot about Pakistan. Indian forces are standing ten meters from the Pakistani border, ready to attack. My Pakistani non-Muslim colleagues in the military are armed and ready to protect Pakistan. Many of them, I know personally, regularly fly missions over Kahuta to protect it. I have yet to see any non-Pakistani Muslim out of an ummah of 1.2 billion seem to be too concerned about an Indian attack on Pakistan. If you don`t believe me, please apply for a visa to any of the non-Pakistani Muslim states (including states where strict, ``Islamic`` law is implemented), and see how you are treated.

If Prophet Muhammad could personally explain Shariah to everyone, then I would be the first person to support that version. However, until that time, all Muslim nations have to beware of individuals who portray themselves as more holy than others, and want to implement their own understanding of Islam on others. This is a destructive and devisive action. Such individuals need to be kept far away from using our religion for their own personal benefit, even if they themselves feel their intentions to be noble. They are attempting to become self-appointed interpreters of Prophet Muhammad in everyone`s lives. They are dangerous to our religion and to Pakistan. Mullah Omar, Zia-ul-Haq, Qazi Hussein, Maulana Fazl-ul-Rahman, as well as the arguments you have presented are some examples (we also need to beware of the secular fanatics who are attempting to do the same from the other side).

Pakistan should be what the people of Pakistan want it to be. The rights of all minorities should be protected and gauranteed. After that, if Pakistanis want Shariah, then so be it. If they want pure secularism so be it, as well. Provided it is done through a vote, and not forced on us by you or anyone else.

What we need to definitely be cautious of is to keep the reigns of Pakistan away from the religious fanatics and secular fanatics who want to dictate their own solutions on everyone else.

ana

“Maybe I don`t have any sharam left. But the fact that I don`t consider Ghaznavi to be a hero, does not mean that I am insulting people who do. Jinnah is a hero to me. Kishwar Naheed is a hero to me. Faiz Ahmed Faiz, and most of all my maternal grandparents are heroes to me. We don`t have to share the same heroes..”

….right on….and you can add to that christians like j salick, who inspite of the way his community’s been discriminated against, never ceases to amaze with his passion for pakistan….

“Hopefully at least one Pakistani understood what I was trying to get at..but if not, then I apologize, and remain the besharam person I`ve always been.”

….you can make that two….and welcome to the besharam club….:)

ps…you’ll have to learn to take the rantings of ali, asifn with more than a pinch of salt…

Hey RAM !

http://headlines.sify.com/654news1.html

Bad taste in the mouth: Son kills mother in GujaratVadodara (Gujarat), March 9 A woman was burnt alive by her son for not cooking to his taste, while the world celebrated the Women`s Day on Friday.The 26-year-old man doused his widow mother with petrol and burnt her at their Baranpura home Friday.Kamlaben, who suffered 85 percent burns, was admitted to the SSG Hospital by her elder son Sanjay, where she succumbed to her injuries in the wee hours Saturday.Wadi police said Ajay Jaiswal, a computer engineer, found his mother Kamlaben`s cooking `lousy`, and frequently quarelled with her over the issue.He had an altercation over her cooking Friday and in a fit of rage, tied the 65-year-old woman with a piece of cloth and set her afire.A case has been registered and search was on for Ajay, police added.

Zafar & Hobbyty,

I sent an email to nasah on what I thought was his address, but haven`t received a response. Hope we hear from him soon.

WHEN GUARDIANS OF GUJARAT GAVE 24-HOUR LICENCE FOR PUNITIVE ACTION

FROM SUJAN DUTTA



Ahmedabad, March 9:

Pogrom noun; organised massacre (originally of Jews in Russia) (The Little Oxford Dictionary)

The riots in Gujarat in the wake of the Godhra train carnage on February 27 were not only tacitly backed by the state administration, but chief minister Narendra Modi?s government also gave the VHP/Bajrang Dal stormtroopers 24 hours to do the job.

While it cannot be reported that the government set a deadline, investigations by The Telegraph over the past week reveal that the top men in the government moved in a fashion that made it clear to the VHP/Bajrang Dal that ?turant jawabi karvai? (quick punitive action in the words of the Bajrang Dal) must be taken by the evening of February 28.

In the event, much of the vengeance ? if that is what the systematic pillage, looting and killing can be called ? spent itself out within that time, but the violence spilled over to the districts, villages and smaller towns. It continues in small pockets more than a week after the Godhra burnings.

That the VHP and the Bajrang Dal have organic linkages with the current rulers of Gujarat is public knowledge. Even so, the pointman between the administration and the VHP leadership was the person entrusted with the peaceful running of the state: state home minister Gordhanbhai Zhadapia, himself a secretary of the VHP for six years before moving on to electoral politics and the BJP.

The Modi government?s decision to support the ?jawabi karvai? was conveyed to the VHP/Bajrang Dal on the evening of February 27 in Godhra itself. That day, chief minister Modi, home minister Zhadapia, health minister Ashok Bhatt, VHP state joint general secretary Jaidipbhai Patel and VHP state organising secretary Arvindbhai Patel were in the town.

They met and talked several times: in Signal Falia where the S-6 coach of the Sabarmati Express was torched, in the collectorate, in the hospital, in the run of things. It was not a formal, structured meeting in which the decision was made clear to the VHP. It was conveyed to them on-the-fly, as it were, but with the warning that a spiralling of violence could mean deployment of the army by midnight Thursday-Friday (February 28-March 1).

Till late in the evening of February 27, the VHP leadership was anxious to get support from the BJP for the statewide bandh on February 28, the day following the Godhra killings. The decision to call for a bandh was taken by the afternoon of February 27, and across Gujarat, the VHP/Bajrang Dal cadre interpreted it as a call to action.

The decision was taken mostly in mobile-phone consultations between the VHP office-bearers in Godhra and Ahmedabad, state VHP general secretary Dilipbhai Trivedi, who was going to Delhi from Ayodhya on the Saryu-Yamuna Express, VHP international division chief Praveen Togadia and Gujarat BJP president and MP Rajendra Sing Rana, who was in New Delhi for the Parliament session.

The formal decision of the BJP to support the bandh call was announced through a press note issued around 8 pm. The VHP/Bajrang Dal took that as an endorsement of its stand. The BJP did agonise over the decision to support the bandh call chiefly because the state police intelligence chief, additional director-general of police G.C. Raigar, had warned of its consequences.

Even by the afternoon and the early evening of February 27 ? the Sabarmati Express was torched in the morning ? violence was breaking out. The BJP was also hopeful of a more strident condemnation of the attack on the Sabarmati Express from secular forces.

The Telegraph quotes from a conversation with Kaushik Mehta, one of the two joint general secretaries of the VHP in Gujarat. The conversation took place in the VHP office in Ahmedabad on March 7 and was an hour long.

Mehta wanted the conversation to be kept off the record. But The Telegraph did not make a commitment.

Mehta: ?Let me tell you something off the record. The violence would not have taken place if the secular parties had strongly condemned the attack on the Ram sevaks. In particular, till the late-evening of the 27th, we were expecting a condemnation of the attack from the Shahi Imam of Delhi?s Jama Masjid. But that did not come.

?Then it was decided there should be a model for reprisals. It was important to teach a lesson that could be emulated?. We had also sensed that once again the Centre was moving towards blaming the ISI for perpetrating the Godhra attack. All the 2,000 men, women and children could not have been ISI agents.?

What followed was a pogrom. People were targeted irrespective of standing and political colour. Asked if violence would not beget violence, Dilip Trivedi, state VHP general secretary said: ?We hope not. We hope that after what has happened, a lesson will have been learnt.?









SCRAMBLE TO SAVE AYODHYA TALKS



FROM RADHIKA RAMASESHAN



New Delhi, March 9:

Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee today initiated measures to dispel the minority community?s misgivings that threatened to snarl the Ayodhya talks, saying the government would abide by a court verdict on whether the temple trust could hold a puja on the ?undisputed? land.

His defence minister, too, tried to calm nerves by raising the possibility of army deployment in Ayodhya. But the announcement drew a clarification from the Uttar Pradesh Governor that he wanted the force to be put only on alert.

The ?confidence-building? measures came less than 24 hours after the VHP signalled a possible go-ahead for a ?symbolic? bhoomi pujan in Ayodhya on March 15. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a petition on the issue on March 13.

Official sources said the government was keen to create a ?conducive? ambience for tomorrow?s meeting of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board. The Centre wanted to ensure that the Kanchi Sankaracharya?s proposals were not rejected out of hand as this would mean going back to square one, they added.

When a delegation of the All India Organisation of Imams called on the Prime Minister this evening, he said: ?The government would do as per the directive of the Supreme Court which is hearing the matter on March 13?. Whether we like it or not, we have to abide by the court?s verdict.?

If the court negated the puja proposal, a ?new chapter? would begin. But if the court ruled that it was only a question of a one-day puja, ?efforts to resolve the old issue will have to be continued?, Vajpayee added.

The apex court will hear two petitions, one seeking contempt proceedings against VHP leaders on charges of violating status quo ante in Ayodhya and the other calling for army deployment.

Official sources said the Prime Minister?s statement was a response to apprehensions voiced by minority leaders that sanctioning a puja may allow the VHP?s kar sevaks a chance to access the disputed spot and provoke a law-and-order problem.

Board members like Syed Shahabuddin had reacted adversely to an out-of-turn announcement by the Kanchi seer yesterday that the government had given the green signal to the puja. The board almost considered calling off its Sunday meeting until the Sankaracharya stepped in and despatched a set of written assurances.

NDA allies like the Trinamul Congress and the Telugu Desam Party have protested against the puja proposal. Desam, which was slated to hold a meeting of its politburo today to finalise its candidate for the Speaker, has deferred it by a day to await the board?s response. Coalition convener and defence minister George Fernandes is scheduled to leave for Hyderabad to pacify Desam.

However, in its attempt to send a reassuring signal by bringing the army into the picture, the Centre seems to have tied itself in knots. Fernandes revealed at a seminar this morning that he had received a written request from the Uttar Pradesh government for army deployment.

Official sources said the statement was meant to assure the minority community that the army?s presence would deter the VHP from assembling a big mob on March 15. But in the evening, Governor Vishnukant Shastri issued the clarification at a news conference.

BJP as well as official sources said the confusion arose as the state administration did not want to take any chances with the VHP. But some senior colleagues of Vajpayee were against army deployment for fear that it might further antagonise the hardliners.

The Prime Minister, however, sounded optimistic before the Imams, saying the Ayodhya issue was ?now on the road to resolution?. He added that a congenial atmosphere had been created because of the VHP?s commitment to honour a court verdict and the Sankaracharya?s mediation. ?Swamiji came from far away Kanchipuram as a messenger of peace. I am happy that representatives of the Muslim community had candid talks with him,? Vajpayee said.

But VHP spokesman Vireshwar Dwivedi asserted that the puja would take place as planned.

re: Dukhi # 88

Ram Ram, indeed!

Iss duniya mei sub kucch mumkin hai, especially in that place Gadhora.

Difficult to believe, though, this may be, I have probably found a place less civilized than my very own U.P.

ana & semi,

You two have been a joy to read. May we all lose sharam.

scout #43
huh? I was being strictly factual for your own good.

``When will there be another Muhammad Bin Qasim to relieve us of the Hindu oppression. When will another Ghaznavi come to destroy these satan worshippers?`` ``One day the kaafir hindus will get their comeuppance insha Allah.``

This sort of `arrogance without substance` is more to your taste, evidently?

The harsh reality is those fervently awaiting the Mehdi to come and smite the satanworshippers while they freewheel on Arab money, meanwhile cannot even agree to offer prayers together. They are busy campaigning to declare large numbers of perfectly good believers out of the fold. Those most sacrificing of believers, the mujahiddeen from Pakistan were ruthlessly abandoned to the Bigger Satan by their more believing but retreating brothers the Taliban/Al Qaeda. Ek unse Afghanistan-size ki cheez nahin sambhali.

re: studebaker # 92

These Kashmiri policemen appear to have done again what they do best: faking deadly ``encounters`` with some possibly innocent people to establish how efficient the are.

This is disgusting. These policemen should be caught and severely punished.

Even more serious is the allegation made in the Telegraph. I hope the Telegraph pursues this story and uncovers some evidence. The charges are too grave for anything else.

sadna #93, ``This sort of `arrogance without substance` is more to your taste, evidently?``

no i`ve learned not to respond to such religious negativity, and i was only bothering you because you chose to respond to it with more negativity by putting down Pakistan and the religion of Pakistan.

people like asifk and asif naqshbandi

shouldn`t be responded to and shouldn`t be viewed as spokespersons for Muslims in Pakistan by Indians.

i`ve seen you do this repeatedly. how would you feel if i chose the words of harimau or the other nut, audio-video-radio as the words of every Indian Hindu?

you`re an intelligent woman, think about it.

Rumair #72 You are on the mark in pointing to the gallantry with which Pakistani christians have fought for their country in 1965 and 1971, and the national heroes they have produced. Christians have also made significant contributions to Pakistan in public service in the civil as well. Chief Justice A. R. Cornelius, another christian, is among the most highly respected Pakistani jurists. And christian missionary run schools have contributed greatly towards the spread of education in Pakistan and produced some of the most dynamic and successful Pakistanis at home and abroad. The role of the individual christians in the building of Pakistan vastly outstrips the general perception of them as a community. It is noteworthy that christians are under suspicion - and at times under physical attack - both by the muslim fundamentalists in Pakistan and the hindu fundamentalists in India. This proves of itself that the christian communities in the sub-continent are doing something right and it is for the ``silent majority`` in these countries to stand shoulder to shoulder with their christian countrymen against the religious fanatics. Christianity has no doubt produced fanatics, but in the subcontinent and not in our day and age.

semipreciousme #87 and ana: People like you represent the finest traditions of Pakistani society, and it`s best hope for the future.

Asif #73 you write ``Yes I would like pakistan to be a real Islamic country and its laws to be based on the Shar`iah `` You dont get it, do you? You equated Islam with Shariah and conveniently ignore the Quran. Like the proverbial camel that first stuck asked the Arab to be allowed to stick it`s head in the tent, then it`s neck, and then conveniently pushed the Arab out of the tent, the Quran has been quietly pushed out of view by you to be replaced by Shariah - which in effect makes the word of ordinary men (and indeed, of men destined for hell) override what the true muslim believes to be the word of God.

You refuse to answer when challenged on this point, and like the camel go from one board to another spreading your foul antiQuranic message.