The changing face of America

Pardesi, some good posts. Quickly couple of points. 1 billion Indians still have no idea after 20 years have passed that what historical scars June 84 and Nov 84 have left on the Sikhism(not only Sikhs). I must also add there has been very little effort either to understand it or correct it. Result. Sikhs have turned introvert to a large extent...rather than having that ``we are protectors of India`` danda up there rear, that it used to be, they are turning more pragmatic, more business oriented and buying influence rather than asking for it to be their fair share in India. With exponential increase in the number of landless sikhs(amongst jatts), the Sikh community is changing very fast in its world view as well as what it thinks it is itself.

Fine tahmed132, you have a nice day/evening too, and continue ignoring the real question:-

````Now tahmed32 would you take your earnest endeavours a bit further and try to address the issues of Muslims in Bangladesh vis-a-vis the heroic West Pakistani Army, enough graveyards there? Or maybe you could address the issue of Palestinian Muslims and how they are decimated in the ultimate free teritories of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia? Hey, how about Ahmedi Muslims in Jhang, and if the DM flogged them for distributing sweets and making merry, thus disturbing the equanimity of other Muslims? As a matter of interest, since we don`t have one in India, could you puclish the grading list of the various kinds of Muslims on a 1-10 scale for us, please? ````

````Matter of fact, tahmed32, would you like to explain here what your concept of being a Muslim is? ````

````Since I asked you first, would you please answer me first, if you don`t mind? ````


+++

You`re not taking a bow. You`re taking evasive action.

+++

As for the cut and paste, tahmed, I assure you, answer me first, and you`ll get it.

veeresh #133 You keep asking questions that I have already responded to (e.g. on the question of pakistan`s record with minorities, and this definition of muslim that i told you was irrelevant to the point being discussed and to which i provided you with a definition anyway. You ignore all this, so what`s the point of my wasting more time with you?

Also, I see you have not been able to back any of the accusations you made towards me by cutting and pasting anything I had ever written. Nor do you apologize for making false accusations (that would be way too much to expect I suppose). You just ignore that.

Finally, I see that when you see that the point I had raised with you (namely your contention that India is the ``best`` in the world when it comes to treatment of muslims) has also been questioned by Pardesi, you conveniently change the issue to something more defensible (this quote is from your post below to pardesi): ``It is my contention that on yardsticks of generalisations as well as numbers, Muslims have it worse in other countries including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Pakistan, than they do in India.`` This, of course, is NOT what your contention has been.

For the above reasons, I shall take a bow on further discussion with you. Have a nice day.

PS: Enjoy telling people about the nice samosa`s in delhi. All that feel good stuff rings hollow given the way you have behaved in this interaction as described above.

tahmed # 120, let me try to bring this out chronologically please, relevant to this debate??

1) I said: - #90 by veeresh on October 12, 2003 2:38am PT

````This article and the subsequent interacts brings out a few things which need to be stated in Black & White here:-

a) Muslims and others seem to be treated better in the US than in Saudi Arabia, but they are treated the best in India.

d) Queen Latifa and Chaka Khan are not Muslim enough for more than a few other Muslims, worldwide. Nor is Mohamed Ali the boxer. ````

2) You said:- #94 by tahmed32 on October 12, 2003 8:09am PT

````veeresh #90 just one minor point about muslims being better treated the best in India: I read your post out to the people who died in Gujrat, and they all rose from their graves and voted a unanimous ``Yes``. I went to this joint where the Babri masjid stood, and was pleased to see volunteer workers from all over India rebuilding the mosque. ````

3) I said:- #96 by veeresh on October 12, 2003 8:42am PT

````tahmed32, thank you for earnest endeavours in bringing up Gujarat and Babri Masjid. Please be aware, also, that there is a system of redressal in India, and slow or otherwise, it tries to work.

Now tahmed32 would you take your earnest endeavours a bit further and try to address the issues of Muslims in Bangladesh vis-a-vis the heroic West Pakistani Army, enough graveyards there? Or maybe you could address the issue of Palestinian Muslims and how they are decimated in the ultimate free teritories of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia? Hey, how about Ahmedi Muslims in Jhang, and if the DM flogged them for distributing sweets and making merry, thus disturbing the equanimity of other Muslims? As a matter of interest, since we don`t have one in India, could you puclish the grading list of the various kinds of Muslims on a 1-10 scale for us, please?

I normally don`t get into these f/a/r/t/i/n/g competitions, so excuse me . . . but if you look at my post 90 again, I did not mention Pakistan. So why are you, tahmed32, jumping up and down trying to be as popular as a cat at a dog-show?

Yes, Gujarat was a blot. So was Babri Masjid. That, and other blots, are the price we pay in India for something called freedom. You wouldn`t understand that tahmed32, and let me assure you, that has nothing to do with your being a Muslim. The accident of fate that you are a Muslim and I am not has nothing to do with the Gujarat blot. The reality that I am willing to accept it as a blot, but you cannot see th same blots, is probably to do with the flies in your eyes, not mine.

Matter of fact, tahmed32, would you like to explain here what your concept of being a Muslim is?

That was my question to this Board, if you look at #90 again. ````

+++

Since I asked you first, would you please answer me first, if you don`t mind?

Romair: Between you and me, I neither have the time nor the desire to invest on this board any more. It`s a beautiful day outside. And, I want to enjoy my Columbus Day since this is the 1st time I have a Day Off in October! :) I suggest you enjoy your thanksgiving. I have responded to you in my i-log and felt the need to do so. Bye Bye and Happy Thanksgiving!

eNjOy!
[I do miss the fRoG gOdDeSs/pRiNcEsS]

From the article:
``This time the Brit seated next to me wished to have a snack too. Funnily enough they couldn’t very well serve him while avoiding me so they were avoiding him too. He asked twice for a sandwich and they told him they would be back with it. Eventually he and I did get served, although after a persistent demand by the two of us.
``...In a never-before seen-but-now-operational Baggage Check, both my suitcases were inspected, as were of ALL OTHER FOREIGNERS.`` (emphasi added)

And yet this:
``This time the story was different. I experienced the growing wave of racial profiling and discrimination and was amazed at how much things changed in this one-year time span.``

What gives!? Where is the ``racial profiling``? And could the treatment by the aircrew just have been a case of bad service? I actually took the same flight last year. Yes, one of the stewrd/esses was quite short and unhelpful, the others, though were the opposite. And I`m a male. Higher ``risk`` group.

Dost-Mittar # 127

I guess the reason is that powerful people are all related to each other at business level. High-level businesses depend upon the suppliers, buyers, labor unions and bureaucrats to get things done. The powerful criminals do own/influence quite a few levers even though they may not be in power today. It’s like Kennedys’ influence in USA even during Republican rule.

Our moral fiber as desis is quite weak. In spite of all our “agla janm” “pichhla janam” “84 lakh lives” bullcrap, we are not the people who will feel very guilty about our own contribution to mass murders or day-to-day misery of our fellow citizens. As long as our own class is reaping the benefits, we use fancy language like “trickle down effect will take care of masses” to absolve ourselves of any social responsibilities (e.g. clean drinking water or at least enough food for every one). We Indians are the ultimate Republicans.

With that weak desi character, any BJP politician, or even Sikh businessman, will subconsciously do quick cost benefit analysis in forcing any unpleasant issue today: What are the quantifiable benefits in dollars and cents to me? Nothing, except couple of “wah wahs” from 2% Sikhs. What are negatives? You might loose Congress’s critical votes in some other give and take bills and unnecessary headaches with other Congresswallas who might be stakeholders in your businesses. You see my point? Congress and BJP are no different than Republicans and Democrats here. They will keep criticizing each other to get votes and later on they need each other due to mutual interdependence in matters of business and governance.

The lessons learnt by Sikhs:

1. Protect yourself by not opening your big mouth for greater good of the country (e.g., the way they use to do in 1970s asking for more economic powers for states. Like any change, the beneficiary will not give you any credit and the looser will go after you. Indira Gandhi and powerful businesses, which thrived on central control, made these guys the targets. And look at the results when finally central grip was loosened. The top billionaire list is not dominated by old money any more).
2. Just buy influence with both parties and keep yourself busy minting money the way other regular people do. Don’t try to be a hero, let the country take the course it will take. Understand your limitations and learn to deal with it.

PS: Once I was discussing our Indian attitudes (on not giving a damn about poor) with another gora guy, and he said that the western elite only started worrying about poor whites around 1820 after their industries became dependent upon the health of its labor. So, there is hope for our poor in future as manufacturing expands and becomes dependent upon healthy but poor masses. As economist, you might want to tell us more on this some time :).

Veeresh:

Be it Delhi or Gujarat, the term ``Riots`` are misleading. They were pogroms with no semblance of anything approaching equal aggression by both communities.

You say the state apparatus broke down. Not only did it break down, it abbeted the pogroms by inaction and political pressure. Corrective Action was taken in Delhi in 2-3 days but that was not the case in UP. As Pardesi says, to say that the law cannot take its course because a few Sikhs support the individuals is mind boggling. Wonder how Dara Singh ended up getting the death penalty then?

Anyways, you are entitled to your opinions but I fail to see how they would carry any validity since you are not a Muslim and cannot therefore speak for even a single one.

ZahraJ,

A ``mehram``, I`m assuming, is a male escort. Why is it ``haram`` to perform Umra alone?
Does anybody have an answer?

I mean, if the answer is ``because the Quran says so``, or because guys like Nasbandhi quote some enlightened (male, ofcourse) muslim scholar Al-ul-bull

---

then I think Islam discourages ``questioning`` of authority.

BTW, my observation on Chowk leads me to believe Pakistani ladies, when given an education, tend to be outspoken of womens` injustices ...esp when tolerated under the ``excuse`` of Islam . So I was surprised when Romair mentioned that women campaigned for a separate entrance in a mosque.

More power to you

---

Pardesi:
I agree with your post. One thing that I have never been able to figure out is why the BJP govt. (which has Akalis as its partners) not been able to do justice? These people were among the most vocal critics of the Congress govt. for its shielding of the gang of leaders accused of leading the murders. Indeed, they used the anti-84 rhetoric to win sikh votes against Manmohhan Singh in the election to the last Parliament.
I should also add another puzzle in my mind. While the anti-sikh rioters were almost all non-panjabis, these leaders (Bhagat, Tytler) happen to be panjabis themselves. This is where there may be some validity to Veeresh`s suggestion of some sikhhs involved in shielding these criminals. Being Panjabis themselves -and given the close hindu-sikh relations- I wouldn`t be surprised if these leaders do indeed have sikh friends and relatives who are willing to shield them.

tahmed:
[a muslim is simply someone who believes in one God and considers the prophet muhammed to be A (emphasis added) messenger of God.]
So, the Ahmedias are Muslims, after all, according to you!
But be careful, when you call Hazrat Mohammd to be just A messenger and not THE Last Messenger, you are veering towards apostacy yourself!
Anyway, I like your Deen-e-Ilahi!

Veeresh:
[Frank question to those present here - do you see communal riots in areas where middle class progress overtakes misery? ]
Ahmedabad?

Veeresh #120

“2) 1984, Sikh murders, state apparatus broke down, elements within went to inhuman extents and then within 48-72 hours there were correctives. I know, I was there in Delhi on those dates. And there is complete truth in stating that elements within Sikhs were and are responsible for the lack of legal correctives in connection with 1984 riots, again, I am in Delhi. And being in Delhi does not mean that I am only measuring the distance between white stripes on the road.”

Veeresh, the massacres were organized by Congress ministers/goons with Rajiv’s full knowledge. It was not innocent sounding “state apparatus broke down”. What was the corrective action? Was Rajiv not returned to parliament with biggest majority by our peace loving secular masses? If our law and order system did work beautifully to hang Indira’s murderers, how come it did not work so efficiently in case of sikh massacres? The murders took place in Delhi and other major cities you know, not some remote Assam jungles away from international media. Were any of the senior ministers - Home minister/Delhi mayor/Police commissioner - punished for failure of duties? How come all these massacres (or call them “riots” if you like) typically give 48-72 hour window to butchers to do what they want and later on it’s all swept under the rug? So, sir what corrective actions we are talking here?

Finally, even though we have better record than Pakistan on minorities, we still need to learn a lot about law and order and about protection of every innocent live, specifically under “riot” situations. We can proclaim democracy and “equality under law” all we want but our standards are still third world standards in this respect. There should be no shame in admitting that if we really are serious on this issue.

Now please continue your discussion with Tahmad on Muslims. Sorry for interruption.

veeresh #116

On 1: (a) Please cut and paste anything I have written in my posts to you on this board (or any other board) on chowk over the past several months for that matter where I (a) ``assume that all Hindus are the same``. (b) hold all hindus responsible for what happened in Gujrat. (c) claim that muslim countries (any muslim country, including pakistan) has a better record than india.

All i am saying, as i keep repeating, is: india is not the world`s ``best`` country in treatment of muslims, as you were claiming. And I gave Gujrat as an example of something that has not happened in the US, Europe, or even many third world countries. And why you think that I am blaming ALL hindus for murders done (or condoned by the likes of Modi) by a few is a mystery to me.

On 2) Again, to repeat what i already said, GIVEN THE POINT BEING DISCUSSED, which is as I have re-stated in 1) above, you are bringing up an irrelevant point. Clearly, in Gujrat the hindu mobs did not have any trouble defining muslim families.
On 3) I am well aware of the history of the US and of India. The history of all nations is soaked in blood, I may add. But the point i am making (as i have to keep repeating since you keep ignoring it) is very simple: you said India is the ``best`` country in its treatment of muslims, and i am saying it is not.

You can keep ignoring what i write, and keep putting words in my mouth, and i will keep correcting you. We can have a lot of fun on chowk this way. Or you can believe me when i tell you that i have no desire to either berate india or hindus. and if you dont believe me, check what i have been writing for a couple of years now on chowk. but that does not mean that you should expect me to accept an obvious misrepresentation of the truth, on pain of receiving angry posts from you accusing me of things that are the OPPOSITE of what i have consistently said all along on chowk.

(and btw your definition of a muslim as ``a good human being`` is incorrect from a theological perspective anyway: being a muslim has nothing to do with being good or bad. this is because per the Quran, the judgement on who was a good human being and who was not will be made by God himself on the Judgement Day, and this judgement will be applied to ALL individuals ever born, not just muslims. So, you can be a hindu and go to heaven, or a muslim and go to hell. The Quran simply does not emphasize the distinction between muslim and nonmuslim, and speaks to all humanity.
And since you are so interested in my giving you a definition of a muslim, here it is: a muslim is simply someone who believes in one God and considers the prophet muhammed to be A (emphasis added) messenger of God.
So, as is clear from the Quran: You, a hindu, may end up with the ladies in heaven and I, a muslim, may end up frying in hell. Just saying ``allahu`` at any opportunity does nothing to improve my chances. )

ZahraJ #110 Those are kind words from you indeed, and much more generous than deserved. But thanks anyway for your appreciation.

Zahra #110 I had sent one post, and it came out as posts #118 and #119 under veeresh`s nick. So, this time let me put my nick to what I wrote :-)

Those are kind words from you indeed, and much more generous than deserved. But thanks anyway for your appreciation.


CHOWK STAFF: the optional feature with the prompt ``interact number if replying to a previous interact`` DOES NOT WORK. I assume you will fix it or remove it.

Dear Veeresh (#120):

``.....I discovered that the main reason was a war between locals, across religious lines, for control of a kabaadi business in the nizamuddin area. Today Nizamuddin is about as de-segregated as it can get. The mosque sits amidst a thriving business area, including new car dealerships, crematoriums, graveyards, restaurants, exporters . . . and the dharamshala in the area gets into the act renting space around the time of the Urs to all comers. ...``

I grew up in Nizamuddin East in 60`s, before I left India in 1970. This is certainly quite a refreshing change. Nizamuddin Basti was completely segregated. I walked through the doors of Arab-ki-Sarai almost every day to catch my bus to my school and college. Last time I was in Nizamuddin Eas was in early 90`s, I did hear rumblings of people complaining that muslims with bags of money earned in Middle East were buying over the property....

BTW, peace and quiet of Nizamuddin East was no longer the same as when I grew up in A block. Those morning walks to Humayun`s tomb were no longer possible. In my days there were just two porters and a sub-station master at Hazrat Nizamuddin station, and in early 90`s it was a riot. They almost everyone in the colony. The roads were not crowded with Marutis, and most banglows were single storey. In early 90`s, there were multi-storey buildings all over. Those were the days, segregated no doubt. Where is this Kabaadi Wala located...?

ANIL KAPURIA