South Asia’s Clarence Darrow

Dear Hindvi-

I am not surprised that you- a self professed Gandhi-admirer and a logical champion of United India- have been called a communalist and Pak ISI agent...

These are small vindications you see... whether you admit it or not.

ballukhan i think u had a much harder time growing up than me, u have internalised the lessons of that discrimination so well that u have become a reflection of your own oppressors.

anybody who gives u a dose of reality becomes a pakistani/ anti national for u. you will have a hard time convincing my pakistani colleagues who burnt a hole in my pocket on just the other day on 15th august.

But if nationalism means hating pakistanis sorry i cant and wont do that they are liguistically, genetically and culturally the same as me and no matter how much I love India I cannot hate them.

Re: # 183

This is a typical communalist`s ruse...........by pointing out fingers at other criminals you think you can get away with your murders? Ofcourse all those , irrespective of their religion, who connived with Dawood and his PAki intelligence network are anti-nationalist...............it is an interesting restatement of the Pakistani nationalism in a perverse way by calling Dawood an Indian nationalist!.................

Pal

`` carry out his heinous acts against the Indian citizens and the state through organized smuggling, narcotics, prostitution, money launderying, extortion, contract killings, fake currency and what not.....................that ``

Most of the people in his org were hindus before the bombay riots, and there are many more hindus in those rackets than muslims will ever be does Arun Gawli, Chota Rajan ring a bell? do u think any of this could be done without connivance of the political class, bureaucracy and the police and remember they are all overwhelmingly hindus.

Re: # 181

AAh....... so now Dawood is a big nationalist??? He is a (Pakistani) nationalist because he bribes Indian cricketers and government officials as well as politicians in order to carry out his heinous acts against the Indian citizens and the state through organized smuggling, narcotics, prostitution, money launderying, extortion, contract killings, fake currency and what not.....................that is why you guys in the Pakistani intelligence agencies try your best to hide him................... we Indians do not need any lesson on nationalism from trolls like you?

dawood Ibrahim was as big an indian nationalist as any any indian cricket fan, every time the indian team went to the UAE he would give them gifts and organise receptions, especiallly when they did well until the late 80s/early90s.

A close relative of mine, a govt servant asked the UAE govt in the early 90s why they didnt hand him over to the Indian govt. he was taken aback by the reply they said India hadnt once asked for him officially until that point!!

Its obvious why they hadnt, cause once he starts singing in court he will name a lot of important names. they would much like him eliminated out of court.

as regards the situation on the western front u will have to be merely literate to read the relevant info its available on the web itself, both the countries had emptied their ammo, and the international community was not ready to supply fresh stores. heck India had emptied all its artillery shells just in Kargill firing a couple of hundred Howitzers.

Who is this man speaking for???

``What compromise in 71?``

Now he is repeating the PAki military historiography of the 71 war:-

`` india went for max there was nothing more India could do, in the west India had been grinded to a halt and all the arsenal was spent, in the east India completed the conquest. ``

This is another assertion of his agreement with the PAkistani ``moral`` stand on Kashmir:-

``Prisoners of war or no priisoners pakistan wasnt going to sign away kashmir. ``

The moral view point reasserted again:-

``if India`s official position has been the same no matter what the military situation Pakistan`s hasnt budged an inch under far greater duress, ``

Now the final words of praise to the current dictator:-

``until now when Musharraf is showing flexibility.``

Do we need to do some more analyses to see what this man is all about. This man praises Dawood ibrahim as the PROTECTOR of IMs in Mumbai.................what other nonsense can we expect from this troll.........

if it is TNT why do the Kashmiri`s want independence and not union with Pakistan? relax bring forth some points dont regurgitate the defensive position u take evry time u r in hindu company.

Re: # 177

The Paki navy intelligence troll called hindvi is back......apologizing for his Paki masters....with lies and propoganda about Kashmir which is at best a vestige of the discredited TNT.....................

What compromise in 71? india went for max there was nothing more India could do, in the west India had been grinded to a halt and all the arsenal was spent, in the east India completed the conquest. Prisoners of war or no priisoners pakistan wasnt going to sign away kashmir.

if India`s official position has been the same no matter what the military situation Pakistan`s hasnt budged an inch under far greater duress, until now when Musharraf is showing flexibility.

Re: # 175
//...But the problem is with the subcontinent mindset when they think they are winning they never look for compromise...//

Not true. Actually, such compromise has led to the situation India finds itself today. The famous compromises after 1971 war ultimately led pakis to dare start a jihad in Kashmir later.

Anycase - india`s position on kashmir has always been the same - no matter what the relative military situation may be at any point of time.

Bong Dongs
The sadest day in india`s history was when the congress working committee passed the partition resolution and Jinnah nodded his head on Mountbatten`s command, it was much sader than the day ghouri defeated prithviraj, because the muslim experience at least led to the flowering of indian culture, but no good came of that second partition.

A confederal arrangement in Kashmir though it may look unacceptable as a compromise to most Indians and to a few pakistanis is the best solution, both keeping in mind the egos and keeping in mind the basis for a future partnership between the two countries.

But the problem is with the subcontinent mindset when they think they are winning they never look for compromise. In the early 90s narsimha rao was ready to offer the Kashmiris anything short of independence byt the pakistanis and kashmiris didnt take that offer.

Now when india is winning or perceives itself because of the international situation to be so it refuses to compromise despite repeated willingness on the part of Musharaf to compromise and think out of the box.

my fear is that if this atitude continues Mr Ajay78 (if that is the year he was born in) might see in his lifetime the solution that he fears, because by force alone a restive peace maybe achieved as in checheniya by the russians for a hundred years but no permanent political solution can emerge.


Salim

the confederal solution for kashmir is the best for achieveing rapprochment between india and pakistan. and the best hope for this is a muslim prime minister for India, the problem of partition was created because in the subcontinents muslims voted for muslims and hindus for hindus (that is i suspect the reason Jinnah abandoned secularism) only when they vote for each other will there be a solution. a muslim PM would also solve most of india`s problems with its neighbours as well as its internal rifts.

Salim Chauhan

I like the way you carry the twin swords of your rajput and muslim identity in the same scabard, and the Chahamanas were indeed a noble caste. You in your various guises have impressed me and foxed the chowk staff. I think you are far too intellegent a man to waste your time fighting battles on unplugged. focus here, contribute and also bring back the humour with which u arrived on Chowk, I loved your bear traps.

dont waste your energies.

Dost Mittar

Dont stuff words into my mouth I never supported Independence for Kashmir, I personally favour a confederal arrangement for the whole of kashmir (india`s + pakistan`s) but that is not because I am scared of what will happen to Indian muslims, (though that gun is held to their head by the likes of u), it is because India should never have been partitioned in the first place. nor do I think the repercussions wil be deep to tear India asunder.

But it cannot be denied that the agreement of partition made India as much a hindu majority country as it made pakistan (including bangla) a muslim one. The congress should never have signed on that dotted line, but they did and the truth is Godse`s action was wrong but his logic was not entirely awry, gandhi has to share the burden of that responsibility along with nehru, patel and the rest of the congress.

Kashmir`s coming to India was also the result of mainly Nehru (and sheikh Abdullah to a lesser extent) it was not through a democratic process. Mainly because of Nehru`s personal attachment to his roots. Otherwise by the understanding that muslim majority areas go to pak and hindu majority areas go to India it made no sense pulling Kashmir, and all pretense was lost once India commited police action in Hyderabad and Junagadh.

This is one of the reasons right wing hindus hate nehru, because they believe he tied an albatross around their necks. they say: had Kashmir gone to pakistan at the time of partition it would be no problem but now its a question of pride (Ana) and I agree with them, but unlike the right wing it is also a question of emotional attachment for indian muslims like me after all Kashmir has been a part of the nation they love and call home for over 50 years in addition it is also the last muslim majority province india has. And at the end of the day atleast on Paper India upholds a value called secularism which is superior to what either the Pakistanis or the Kashmiris are likely to do so.

All of the above makes Kashmir the most complicated issue on earth far more complex than palestine and chechiniya or tamil ealam, no wonder it has evaded solution for so long.

But that doesnt mean giving a wrong impresion as you habitually do on chowk about what happened to hindus without explaining the much larger number of muslims slaughtered, raped and evicted in the Jammu and Poonch area by the dogras, sikhs and refugees.

Also Dost Mittar get out of the habit of assuming hindu nationalism is equal to Indian nationalism, while you can weep repeatedly and justifiably for what happens to hindus from afghanistan to bangladesh the moment an Indian muslim says a few words in sympathy or defense of the Kashmiri muslims who are being brutally tortured and killed in custody and extra judicially by security forces the muslim will be labeled an antinational, a separatist a pro kashmir sepratist, marching to a different drummer, pakistan se rishta kya?.

This equating of hindu nationalism with indian nationalism played a large part in the partition of the country especially in punjab (where Lapat Rai etc held this view, because of which the Unionists never could identify themselves with the larger India) in Bengal (where BC Pal and aurobindo ghosh held it) and in UP (where Madan Mohan Malviya, Pant etc held this view). Infact nehru himself said many a communalist hides himself under the cloak of a congressman. It was the failure to isolate such communalists which strenghtened the league propoganda that congress was a Hindu party which championed hindu interests.


By the way nobody but u would consider me a muslim, or do u believe is as they say ``naam hi kaafi ha``i?

My parting advice to you stop seeing the world as Dar Ul Harb and darul Islam (by the way the Quran does not sanction this, it is a later innovation) and stop presenting one sided info. bad things happened to your family in partition but much much worse happened to many I know personally like a family friend who lost 19 members of his family (including probably abducted women) a stone`s throw from Delhi in Faridabad, yet i dont think he harbours the kind of prejudice u do.

#120, {``#120 by kaalchakra on August 15, 2005 6:14pm PT
Also, salim, supporting the reunification makes it appear that one has lost complete confidence in the nation-building abilities of Pakistani liberals. Or that Indians know & understand the right path for Pakistani nation better than Pakistanis themselves do...:( ``}

Kaalchakra Sahib,
You are right in the first sentence of your response. Many Pakis, especially from the other three provinces, have lost confidence in the ability to transition to a fair, just, safe, honest, and meaningful environment in Pakistan. Let me give you an example - the Paki cricket team (or for that matter, the Indian cricket team.) Under Australian leadership and coaching, the Indian cricket team whipped the Pakis in Pakistan - no doubt about it. Of course, Pakistan was playing under Paki leadership (before the great Miandad had proposed to Dawood, but that is another story. :) ). Once Pakistan got its own Gora leader and coach, things turned out quite differently when India and Pakistan played in India recently. There is nothing wrong with Pakis or their ability to excel - they have just had terrible leaders, even some they tried to adore.

Now, let`s talk about nation-building. India has experience in developing a mature, relatively fair, and proven democratic society. This has not come easily or cheaply. There are almost 60 years of blunders, sacrifices, feats, and miracles involved in that success story. If Pakis can demonstrate an equal commitment to real democracy, starting today, then in August, 2063 (give or take a couple of years), Pakistan can attain India`s political status. In fact, because of strong, prevailing vested interests in today`s Pakistan, it will take Pakistan longer to get there politically. There were far fewer such interests in 1947.

I am a pragmatist. I say ``if you can`t beat `em then join `em.`` If the best that we Pakis can do is to take another 58 years to approximate Indian democracy, then why not just become a part of it, but seriously. We will, of course, have to abandon the Islamic rule, Muslim Ummah, Shariah Code, Hudood stuff, and other such nonsense. Religion will have to be a deeply personal and individual matter, much as it is in the West today.

Admitting to failure is the first sign of success. :)

#168

so which politician will fall on his sword here? anybody who does, will not only loose the election but his life.