India’s Potential Lose-Lose-Lose Scenario

krashid #135

I got it. Murad`s father WAS a Muslim from Albania. But he was born and brought up in US and his mother is a white Christian. Read his CV in the Nobel Prize homepage. Nowhere is there any mention of ANY religion. Seems that Murad, Zewail and Salaam are the 3 Muslim/Muslim ancestry scientists to win NL. Except Salam, the other two are absolutely silent about religion. So are the 3 Hindus (Raman, Chandra and Khorana), the Chinese, the Japanese, and the dozens of Jews and Christians.

Modern science is, in spirit, agnostic. It`s amusing that Salam is the only Nobelist who mixes his religious belief with his scientific accomplishments! ;-)

krashid #135

Plz don`t drag down the nobel prize into this silly game of oneupmanship. The nobel prize is only a vague indicator of excellence. How many Soviets got Nobel prize compared to the US, although Soviet science was always at par with the West! How many mainland Chinese or Japanese have won it?

Secondly, the Muslims you refer to: Murad (medicine) and Zewail (chemistry), none of them owe anything of their success to their native countries. They have stayed in US, enjoyed the intellectual freedom of the West, and realized their creativity. They wouldn`t have achieved .00001% of their success had they remained in their Muslim homelands. I am not sure if Murad is a Mulim at all (I think he is a Christian from Iran or Lebanono; I`ll check). As for Zewail, my friend works in his group at Caltech. Zewail is only a nominal Muslim, as much as my friend is a nominal Hindu. Unlike Abdus Salam, who always trumpeted his Islamic faith (though his own community got their butt kicked by fellow Paki Muslims........sigh!), Zewail has no interest in organized religions at all. So plz don`t portray Murad and Zewail as Islamic ghazis winning the Nobel!

Thirdly, tell me one thing. The Muslim Arab world has so much oil, it is so-o-o-o very

(filthy) rich. Still why don`t they have a SINGLE decent university/ scientific research institute? Even we, the poor rotten Kaffirs of India, who are supposed to worship the cow (!), we have our IITs, TIFRs and IISc, which are respected by the West (Now don`t whine over it. This is true. Check the author index of ANY scientific journal). Yet I have never seen any Muslim acientist going to Arabia or Iran to do higher research. For that purpose, they always have their eyes set on the Great Satan (USA), it`s Fellow Satan (Europe), or the Asiatic Infidels (Japan, KOrea etc.).

THERE MUST BE A LIMIT TO HYPOCRISY!!!!!!!!

re romair 174

air marshal sahib, your indignation about Kashmir`s self-determination rights will have more punch if you did not ignore the fact that India is only one of THREE countries occupying Kashmir. I do not recall your saying anything about Pakistan or China controlling parts of Kashmir. Farook Abdullah`s elections may be a farce but compared to Ziaul Haque`s and Jiang Zemin`s democracy, they probably fare not too bad.

Same with your allegations, largely true, about India`s brutalities: how come you don`t say a word about the wanton killings carried out by the foreign mercenaries, against Muslims I may add, in the Valley day in and out? Please none of that desperate nonsensical comparison with Bangladesh in 1971- it is apples and oranges.

I must apprise you of a sad fact: while India diligently claims that J&K is an integral part of India, an openly separatist outfit like APHC can and does operate in the state and has offices in Delhi. In Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (`Azad` Kashmir), every individual or organization which wants to operate legally has to agree to forego supporting an `independent` Kashmir, let alone a Kashmir united with India.

The cause of true Kashmiri freedom is the cause of human freedom. It is just that it sounds utterly hollow and patently insincere coming from across the LOC.

re urstruly 166

``The Hindus might find it shocking, but it is true that, none of the 66 Muslim countries, “converted” and “pure” has anywhere a genocide going on``

You`re right my friend. The genocides have been thoroughly completed to be going on right now:

1. Turkey in Armenia 1926

2. Pakistan in Bangladesh 1971

3. Syria in Hama 1983

4. Iraq in Halajaba 1984

5. Taliban in Afghanistan 1993-1998

6. Indonesia in E Timor 1998

Need I say more?

Hum Dekhein Gay



shankar #175: ``but the author of this article has no stomach for debate``

The reason I don`t debate this, is because it I have found it pointless to debate Kashmir (this article wasn`t about Kashmir, by the way) with Indians. They don`t listen to Gandhi, on this issue, why would they listen to me? But since you have presented far too many mistruths in your reply, I feel obligated to respond.

``Pakistanis are very sure about the antipathy Kashmiris have towards the rest of India. They maybe right.``

I am quite surprised that you think this is a, ``maybe.`` It is very difficult to debate this issue with people who still think this is a, ``maybe.`` If someone came and occupied your house and killed your children, would your antipathy towards that person be a, ``maybe?`` Or would you hate his guts?

The first thing that needs to be done in Kashmir is to understand what is actually going on there. To do so it has to be opened up completely to the rest of the world. The second is to ask the people of Kashmir outright to find out whether it is a, ``maybe`` that they want to separate from India, or if it is a, ``definite,`` or whether it is a, ``no.`` The fact that India is scared to take this step is a good indication that it is not a, ``maybe.``

``If the AHPC is the true voice of Kashmiris; atleast they should have the guts to stand for election.``

It is the APHC`s right to decide which election they will participate in and which they will not. India has already jailed three of their seven leaders. Their whole stance is that they don`t recognize the Indian occupation of Kashmir. India has given absolutely no statement regarding the acceptance of their desire for self-determination for Kashmir, if they participate in the elections. Why should someone participate in an election that is being held by a government that has occupied them, and has butchered over 60,000 of their people. And is now asking them to participate in elections, which have traditionally be farces, even according to Indian newspapers.

``If they win overwhelmingly, like the Awami League of East Pakistan, then their credibility for autonomy or independance will be greatly enhanced.``

The Awami League participated in the election of 70, because East Pakistan was a part of Pakistan, at that time. It was not occupied territory. If Pakistan were to go and occupy Bangladesh today, my feeling is that the Awami League wouldn`t recognize a Pakistani election. They would fight the occupation.

The whole reason the current militancy started in Kashmir, was due to the farce elections in the late 80s (Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in Crisis). And just like the Awami League started a freedom movement after farce elections in 1970, the Kashmiris have done the same. Do you really think the Awami League would have agreed to or trusted another election, after the farce election of 70, under the Pakistani govt.? Did India give the Awami League advise to agree to another election under the Pakistani govt. after the election of 70, or did it support the militant freedom movement that occured right after the 70 elections?

The Kashmiris sat around for forty years peacefully, waiting for India to give them their right for self-determination. Even though self-determination is a universal human right, not something that one needs to be, ``given`` by occupiers. Why should they go through these futile excercises again and again, if they don`t want to? If India was sincere, it would have given the Kashmiris this right, in the past fifty years.

``But no; their excuse is that the elections will be a fraud anyways!``

Kashmiris don`t need an excuse against occupiers. They are human beings, not cattle. And this is not an excuse, this is a fact. Read any newspaper. If an election has a history of being a fraud, why should people participate in it? Why the hell should Kashmiris listen to anything the Indian govt. says. No one should ever have to listen to occupiers.

``I think its a big reason why NOT A SINGLE govt of the world has outrightly backed them.``

Every country in the world, except India, has recognized self-determination for Kashmiris. Kashmir is marked as disputed territory on the UN maps. That is why India is sh *t scared of taking it to the UN. Can you give me any other reason? But even if not a single country in the world supported Kashmir, it still would make no difference. Basic human rights are not subject to international recognitions. Every country in the world recognized the British occupation of India. Did that make it right?

``Seems to me, he`s just a spokesman for Musharraf.``

This may or may not be true. But at least I am not the spokesperson for gang rapist and killers who are committing some of the world`s worst human rights violations in Kashmir. I would much rather be a spokesperson for a dictator, than be the spokesperson for a killer.



The more I read Indian comments, even of otherwise reasonable Indians, the more I am begining to realize why Jinnah wanted a separate Pakistan, or autonomous areas for Muslims within an Indian confederacy. How can anyone, in the long run, live with a group of people, who not only feel they have a right to occupy others(against their will), but feel that they have a moral right to force them into farce elections as well (again and again). And then have the self-righteousness to the blame the predicament of the occupied people, as the occupieds` own fault. Would I have been able to make the above comments, without being harmed, if I was under Indian occupation in Srinigar? Or would I have been jailed like three of the seven leaders of the APHC? This is why Kashmiris want freedom.

Unfortunately theere is a common trait amongst human rights violaters. They blame the vicim, not themselves. They take some actions of a few of the people who have some association with the victims, and use it to justify thier barbaric practices against a whole group of victims. After all, Germans killed Jews because they felt the Jews controlled the European financial machinery, and were helping the British. There may have been a few Jews like that, but does that justify a holocaust? Indians killed the Muslims in Gujrat, because they felt Muslims had killed Hindus in Godhra. There may have been a few Muslims who did that (though even that is controversial), but does that justify Ahmadabad. Pakistanis killed Bengalis because they felt the Bengalis were conspiring with Indians. There were probably some, but does that justify Pakistan`s actions. Indian`s are killing Kashmiris, because they say they are terrorists. There maybe some (India doesn`t even allow terrorist actions against Hindus in Kashmir to be looked at by any human rights organization, hence the use of the word, ``maybe``), but would they have existed had India not done 99% of the killings in Kashmir. How many people have been killed in the separatists` terrorist actions, alleged or otherwise, in Kashmir that are reported by the Indian govt.? The combined number over the past years probably doesn`t cross a few hundred. These terrorist elements should be caught and punished. But does that justify the genocide in Kashmir by India? And if this number is just a few hundred, then who killed the remaining 60,000 people. Obviously the Indian govt. forces (by far, the biggest terrorist group in Kashmir). Why are their actions supported by the everyday Indian?

It is very easy to blame the victim, and only highlight his faults, while hiding one`s own, because the victim has no voice until the occupier is defeated. At the very least, you as a psychiatrist, should understand this. Since India has not been kicked out of Kashmir yet, it is able to hide its crimes. But someday, they will be exposed.

You will rarely find any Pakistani, on this site, who supports Pakistan`s actions in East Pakistan. I certainly do not (even though I personally had a West Pakistani colleague and friend whose whole family was killed by the Mukti Bahni, in a gruesome act of terrorism, in front of his eyes in East Pakistan. I also have quite a few family friends and relatives who died in the 71 war). Yet nearly every single Indian goes out of his way to justify India`s enslavement and killings of people who do not want to live with them. Why is there such a different in thought processes? If some group doesn`t want to be occupied by India, should they be killed? Even animals have more rights. The only published statements I have heard supporting outright self-determination for Kashmiris are by Gandhi (and Khushwant Singh) - a univeral religionist (at least in his last days) and a Sikh. When will Hindus start making such statements? Even Arundhati Roy (human rights activist with Christian mother) and Deepak Chopra (spiritualist) are unwilling to come out and outrightly say that Kashmiris deserve unconditional self-determination, and that India should leave them alone. Even they mix it with a, ``but`` and a, ``maybe.``

Indians blame the problems in Kashmir to the Kashmiris` association with Pakistan, or on terrorism, or on the Kashmiri`s religion etc. So much so, that some, ``poltically correct`` Pakistanis also try to portray the issue as an equal set of wrongs by both Kashmiris and Indians, - perhaps because they want to avoid conflicts with Indians. Others like me, have stopped arguing the case with Indians, and only speak up when they see outright incorrect statemetns by Indians.

But everyone knows deep down that the real problem in Kashmir is that India has subjuagated someone against their will, and is too cowardly to hold a promised plebescite, while simutaneously and hypocritically using the word, ``maybe,`` to great effect. It has slaughtered (slaughter is the correct word to use here) so many of Kashmiris, that it is even scared to let international HR organizations into Kashmir to count the bodies.

Yet the occupied are still resilient. The occupied are now fighting back militantly and by denouncing all elections. The occupiers seem to not like this, and are trying unsuccessfully, every trick in the book, to discredit the occupied. It is this mindset that allows parties like the BJP to come into power through elections. The occupiers can go to hell, as far as I am concerned, if they don`t like the denouncement of the elections. This is exactly what the APHC has told them.

Here is an idea: Why don`t you worry about what is going on in your hometown of Bombay, and just leave the Kashmiris alone. They don`t need your attention. Why do you want to enslave the Kashmiris, and then defend this enslavement? No one invited you to make Kashmir an, ``atut-ang.`` Just get the f * *k out of there, because no one wants you there. And if you don`t get out of there peacefully, and start killing the inhabitants, then quit complaining if the Kashmiris start fighting back and killing you as well, and do not want to participate in your fu * *ing elections, decade after decade. That is their decision, not yours. ``Live Free or Die,`` isn`t the motto only of the State of New Hampshire. It is a Universal emotion.

Whether the Kashmiris themselves declare Martial Law in Kashmir, side with Pakistan or with Satan, or become independent, or start walking backwards, is none of your business. No one asked you to be concerned. No one invited you to subjugate them. They can side with anyone they want. The moment India leaves, the Kashmiris will say good-riddance to India and everything will be ok. I doubt their will be a teary eye in Kashmir, when their occupiers are kicked out. And if India will fall apart because of Kashmiri independence, then India has far bigger issues than Kashmir. It has not right to use the subgation of Kashmiris as an excuse.

But what goes around, comes around. Sooner or later, if their is an Allah or Bhagwan, I hope He will ensure that every Indian who supports India`s actions in Kashmir will pay in some divine manner for supporting, and not opposing, the killing fields created by their govt. in Kashmir. I hope their are at least some decent people left in India who realize that the one and only problem in Kashmir is India`s occupation of the people. Everything else is an after-effect. If India leaves Kashmir alone, all the after-effects will go away. I am slowly begining to lose hope, however, that such a breed of Indian is around, anymore. Perhaps the slow transition from Gandhi, to Nehru, to Vajpayee, and now to Advani is complete. Fortunately, in Pakistan, such a breed is now starting to get the upper hand.....

For every Kashmiri, with all of whom I share my ethnicity, my heritage, my frustrations, my family`s ancestoral home, my prayers, and most of all my sorrow, who has lost a family member to India`s occupation (the total number of dead, even according to BJP`s admission is over 60,000), and who has been raped and tortured (very common tactic of the Indian forces, as reported by international journalists who have been able to sneak into Kashmir. Even Isrealies don`t use rape against the Palestinians), I have the following words of the winner of the Lenin Peace Prize, Faiz Ahamd Faiz:



Hum deikhein gay

Laazim hay kay hum bhi deikhen gay.....Woh din kay jis ka waada hai......Joh loh-e-azal mein likha hai

Hum deikhen gay

Jub zulm-o-sitam kay koh-e-garan.......Rooee ki tarah urr jayein gay.......Hum mahkoomon kay paoon talay.....ye dharti dhar dhar dharkay gi.......Aur ahl-hukam kay sar upar, jub bijli kar kar karkay gi

Hum deikhen gay

Jub arz-e-Khuda kay kaabay say......sub butth uthwai jaiyen gay.........Hum ahl-e-safa murdood-e-haram......masnad pay bithai jayein gay.....Sab taj uchallay jaeein gay.....sub takht giraeey jayeen gay

Hum deikhen gay

Bus naam rahey ga Allah ka.....jo Ghaeeb bhi hay hazir bhi..........Jo manzar bhi hay naazir bhi.....Utthay ga Ana-ul-Haq ka naara.....jo mein bhi hoon aur tum bhi ho..........Aur raj karay gi khulq-e-Khuda......jo mein bhi hoon aur tum bhi ho

Hum dekhein gay.....Laazim hay kay hum bhi deikhen gay

Hum deikhen gay



Every Indian, who tries to justify the outright inhumanity being dished out to the Kashmiris by their govt., even by the using the word, ``maybe,`` iinstead of outrightly condemning it, has blood on his hands....And he/she should remember that one human being can only kill another, for so long. Every dog has his day........Hum deikhein gay....



``Kashmir`s ``real rulers`` were its people, not its maharajah. ``If the people of Kashmir are in favor of opting for Pakistan, no power on earth can stop them from doing so. They should feel free to decide for themselves.`` (Mahatma Gandhi, ``Gandhi`s Passion``...Wolpert)

``Kashmir Bharat ka atut-ang hai`` (BJP and nearly all the present day Indians` stance)

I am sure Gandhi must be crying in his grave, looking at what India is doing in Kashmir. But if Indians aren`t going to listen to their own, ``Bapu (father),`` then it is pointless for me to try to convince them. That is why debating this issue with Indians is a waste of time, I have concluded.

Amit #160

Pakistan should think beyond Kashmir.

Otherwise Hindu right will kill Muslims in India.

So you think that all the riots from cow slaughter to other BS are dependent on Pakistan.

Why Assamese are being killed.

Is it because of China or Communism.

World is not a closed system anymore.

And India has come out of isolation.

Anything happening in India will have ripples from China to America to Europe to Arab World.

Sialgaph 235 #

It is not so.

The two years I followed on Nobel prize.

One went to an Iranian origin and another to an Egyptian origin.

One in Medicine by the name of Murad (along with others for Nitrous Oxide as vasodialtor). And another was also in some scientific subject from Egypt.

I think if I dig there will be more names.

Nobel Prize for Peace in my opinion is politically motivated. And depends upon the biases and outlook of the commitee nominating.

Same may go with Literature.

In scientific subjects there is a chance of misjudgement, but is not much dependent on outlook and biases of committee members in terms of race color or creed.

For example Einstein was given Nobel Prize for something which was according to Einstein a minor work. And his major work went unacclaimed because of prevailing biases in scientific thinking.

Fawad #179

Your answer can be yes and no.

On individual level there are many success stories.

But it is true that Pakistani Institutions fail to produce any impact.

I need to give credit to Musharraf administration, that it is trying hard to change the situation for better. (Does not mean, I agree with political philosophy of dictators. Give to cesar what is his due)

RSridhar #164

So what was the danger to Hindu right that they started burning christian missionaries and churches. (Coersion to stop their missionary work)

Facts speak for themselves.

Shankar:

More to the point on ISI`s shenanigans in Afghanistan:

http://www.dawn.com/2002/08/18/op.htm#3

Amit:

here is some evidence to back up my previous post:

``...Vajpayee`s Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition would win 245 to 255 parliamentary seats in a snap election, less than half the 545 seats in the lower house, according to the poll...``

http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/reuters08-17-050936.asp?reg=ASIA

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

Re: shankar

``...Romair can spin facts in any way he wants, it doesnt change the truth...``

Ever heard the saying, `truth is the first casualty of war`? Since Romair, the arm-chair warrior, dreams of grand strategies of waging war against India (recall his lengthy prognostications in defence of the policy of infiltration of armed men into India and his advocacy of theories of deterence?), truth gets short shrift when the bullets (even imaginary ones) start flying. Curiously, his defense of the policy of infiltration has ceased after 9/11. Could it have something to do with the fact that it might draw the attention of law enforcement agencies?

Re: Amit

``...The reality is somewhere between the two, but the dial is shifting towards the fanatics...``

True, but not if you go by electoral performance. The Hindutva brigade has lost them all in recent years. Gujarat, IMHO, was a crass and desperate attempt by the Hindutva hooligans to `bolster` their case by polarizing the electorate prior to elections -- based on a `simple` proposition: your life or mine, and reducing all other issues (i.e. quality of governance, education) to the barely audible noise level. They might very well succeed in their devious plans, and if they do, then it would indeed be a very dark day in India`s history. Criminal Modi held his very own little Wanasee Conference (named after the special Nazi meeting held to formulate the ``Final Solution`` for the extermination of all Jews) in Gandhinagar the night before Gujarat Bandh (Feb. 28), and there is a distinct possibility that some of the attendees may spill the beans (Outlook India, last week`s issue). Amongst the subjects discussed in the meeting were to let the police `lie low and to let Hindu anger be expressed`. I don`t know how Modi is able to sleep at night, after this.

The election commission has snubbed the BJP by trashing plans for early elections and that offers a glimmer of hope that the forces of evil may yet be vanquished.

``...I think it is time that the Pakistani leadership understands the ground realities in India and thinks beyond just Kashmir...``

Don`t count on it -- the Pakistan Army`s obsession with Kashmir is so intense that it willingly alienated East Pakistan in `65 by risking a wider war with India, only to lose it barely 6 years later. Musharraf has promised more of the same -- screw foreign direct investment in Pakistan if it means giving up `the cause`. If the Indian experiment fails, then a large (indeed a major) part of the blame will and should fall on Indians themselves. When a civilization reaches a cross-roads, and when its flaws can no longer be hidden or denied, then usually scapegoats are found by formulating questions like `Who did this to us?`. The answer, usually is, `foreigners or minorities`. Should India fall victim to its own victimhood, then India (and all within it) will indeed get what it deserves. If, on the other hand, the Indian experiment succeeds, then the credit should go in large measure to the `puny, rice eating Indian who shook the lion`s mane` in the words of Mahatama Gandhi when describing non-cooperation with the British government.

Re: Shankar

``...If they win overwhelmingly, like the Awami League of East Pakistan...``

Umm...let`s see. The Awami League felt comfortable of standing in and winning elections even though they were organized by a military dictator (Yahya Khan) who had a receptive ear for the Awami League`s nemesis (Bhutto). On the other hand, the APHC barely registered a protest when one of their own was assassinated (Lone), and when the surest way for the Indian government to lose international sympathy would be to rig elections in Kashmir.

``...After a decade of helping Afghans, one would logically feel that there would have been a tremendous amount of Afghani goodwill towards Pakistan...``

Here is an experiment I suggest: Go find a middle class Afghan expat, and ask him how he feels about the ISI and its operatives. Be prepared for an answer that may shock your sensibilities. I say this because I was stunned to hear the Afghan proprietor of a local eating house volunteer something to the effect, `we will take our revenge` soon after Kabul was liberated.

V. S. NAIPAUL & TUNNEL VISION

Harimau # 149 (and Krashid)

Allow me to elaborate on what I meant by “tunnel vision”. In his book, Beyond Belief, Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naiapaul aka V.S. Naipaul introduces his book in the prologue with these words:

Quote:

“This is a book about people. It is not a book of opinions……”
End Quote.

Ironically, in the very next paragraph he gives an insight into his philosophy in these words:

Quote:

“Islam is in its origin an Arabic religion. Everyone not an Arab, who is Muslim is a convert. ISLAM IS NOT SIMPLY A MATTER OF CONSCIENCE OR PRIVATE BELIEF (Urstruly’s emphasis). It makes imperial demands. A convert’s worldview alters. He rejects his own; he becomes, WHETHER HE LIKES IT OR NOT (Urstruly’s emphasis), a part of Arab story. The convert has to turn away from everything that is his. The disturbance for society is immense, and even after a thousand years can remain un-resolved; the turning away has to be done again and again. People develop fantasies about who and what they are; and in the Islam of converted countries there is an element of neurosis and nihilism. These countries can easily be set on boil.”

End quote.

This is not selective quoting. That is the philosophy around which his book revolves. He projects the life of “people” whom he says this book is about, as an affirmation of his philosophy. In almost every chapter he lashes out on Allama Iqbal by saying “with the fervor of a convert”.

I know you must be thinking that, “well why shouldn’t you whine, you are a ‘convert’ too”. You might be right in your thinking but lets, for sake of argument, we take the philosophy of V.S. more objectively.

When we look at his view objectively, we find out that basically, VS is trying to say that conversion is bad, so in a society of converts what is bad in it is because of the conversion and that causes neurosis and nihilism. Since every coin has two sides, and we can not know of bad unless we know good, so in order to understand what VS is saying we must compare the society of converts with a society of non-converts. Naturally, we come across the closest example of Hinduism. Hinduism originated in India, it stayed in India, there is no known predecessor to this religion, and, therefore, according to VS’s thesis this must be the religion the way a religion should be according to his opinion. So all those Hindus who can trace back their Hindu ancestry to no other religion are the “true people (free of nihilism and neurosis)”.

Another way to look at this is to say that in fact Hinduism has nothing to offer for the rest of the world except to the product of in breeding. I know that this argument is answered with “we don’t convert people”; fine; but what if someone voluntarily converts to Hinduism. Then according to Naipaul he must create a sense of neurosis and nihilism in the religion. Which means that Hinduism is a race based religion particular only to the people belonging to the region and which also means that it is segregationist religion. Besides who in his right mind would convert to Hinduism and become the fifth caste is beyond me.

Those of you who are grinding their teeth at the above commentary must understand that this was not a commentary on Hinduism, rather it was a commentary on Naipaul’s philosophy and logic. This my friends is what I call Tunnel Vision. Those people who cast Naipaul as the harbinger of “Western liberal democratic traditions” conveniently forget that the whole West is actually a convert too. And convert to what; ironically another Arab religion. But Naipaul and Hindus don’t see nihilism and neurosis there.
The Hindus might find it shocking, but it is true that, none of the 66 Muslim countries, “converted” and “pure” has anywhere a genocide going on. Unfortunately, in India on the other hand there are two places, Gujrat and Kashmir where genocide is going on at this very moment as we speak. Unfortunately, it is the neurosis, nihilism, and ingrained segregation of the Hindu society that has made it turn on to itself. Unfortunately, what Naipaul writes, is the predominant discourse among the Hindu intelligentsia now a days, whether secular Hindus or Hindu Hindus. Such, bigotry, segregation based ideology and anti-Muslim stereotypes are being fed to the illiterate masses in heavy doses by media through their intellectuals. After an objective study of Naipaul, one can easily see that he has been rewarded for his anti_muslim bias, which has become a fad after 9/11 throughout the world.

The term “Western liberal democratic traditions” sounds very sexy when someone uses it in his writing. It kinda makes one feel like from being another planet or something, but unfortunately people do not understand that West did not achieve those traditions just by writing about them; people have sacrificed their lives to achieve those high ideals for their children by fighting with the forces of neurosis, nihilism, segregation, apartheid and xenophobia caused by “in-breeding”.

shammi,

{{This board is about India lose-lose-lose scenario, not about esoterics in number theory.}}

It started out that way...but the author of this article has no stomach for debate, perhaps because we arent intellectual enough or our etiquette doesnt suit his highness.

I`m dissappointed in Romair`s attitude. If he lives in a glass house, he should`nt throw stones at others.

Seems to me, he`s just a spokesman for Musharraf. Mushy, the guy who made a FARCE of the electrol process in Pakistan has the BALLS to condemn the elections in Kashmir!

If the AHPC is the true voice of Kashmiris; atleast they should have the guts to stand for election. If they win overwhelmingly, like the Awami League of East Pakistan, then their credibility for autonomy or independance will be greatly enhanced. But no; their excuse is that the elections will be a fraud anyways!

Pakistanis are very sure about the antipathy Kashmiris have towards the rest of India. They maybe right. However, how do they gauge what Kashmiris really feel about Pakistan? After a decade of helping Afghans, one would logically feel that there would have been a tremendous amount of Afghani goodwill towards Pakistan. The reality is completely different. GoP could do itself a favor by learning the moral of that story.

After taliban fell, the first thing the common Afghanis did was to take their anger out on Arabs & their Pakistani followers. The present Afghan govt is not allied with Pakistan, against India. Pakistan`s ``strategic depth`` in Afghanistan is an abject failure.

The worst thing that Kashmiris did was ask Pakistan`s help in their fight with India. It absolutely destroyed whatever moral ascendancy they claimed in their fight. I think its a big reason why NOT A SINGLE govt of the world has outrightly backed them. Compared to the backing that the PLO has recieved from many nations, the AHPC is TOTALLY isolated.

Romair can spin facts in any way he wants, it doesnt change the truth.