The Commonality of ’Fundamentalisms’
Mr Spock`s reply, while quoting (in Italics) some of Ombudsman`s words/points.
Words of Ombudsman:
``Do we get bogged down in redressing each cause or look at what our priorities are?
Mr Spock`s reply/words.:.
Very pertinent question.
However, it is also the most disconcerting one.
The topmost priority of any person is security of life, limb and property, in that order.
While - in any intellectual analysis - the Bajrangi rabble-rousers might simply be looking to reap a political harvest by harping on the lurking fears, it is undeniable that the fears do lurk for a valid reason that I had pointed out.
In an atmosphere of suspicion, and known problem of future insecurity for a Hindu minority in an ``Islamic`` state, where do you expect people to seek their priorities ?
Lest you forget the intuitive model of prioritisation,- the priority of an individual is FIRST to overcome an imminent threat to the very existence (security priority)of the individual, and THEN to seek food and shelter ( economic priority) to further that existence.
Ombudsman`s words:
`` Would it help the country to forcibly shove hindutva down the throats of a significant minority? To repeat your question, what if they do not accept it?
Mr Spock`s reply to the above:
Firstly, I differ with your take on the subject.
You confuse the aim of the core Bajrangis, and those of the sympathisers among a wide cross-section of Hindus, without whose active support Hindutva would be relegated to the dustbin of fringe cults.
The real aim of sympathisers, in my analysis, is to bring about a qualitative change in the THINKING of the aggressive, evangelical minority about their trans-national agenda, and their long-terms relations with and plans about Hindus in India.
Thus far, Hindutva draws its emotional and logical succour from a significant section of the Bajrangi-sympathisers because of the oppression, suppression, extermination and destruction that Hindu minorities in Pakistan, Bangladesh and even segments within India with an Evangelical majority.
Unless the evangelical minority with transnational agendas - Muslims with their Dar-ul-Islam dreams ( and increasingly Christians in the North-East with their separatist and genocidal tendencies against Hindus ) are made to think about the dangers of aggression against the very FABRIC of secularism and tolerance of Hindus, which makes their activities POSSIBLE in India, there will only be a slide down the path of ``wars of thousand cuts`` from many parts of India where the SECTARIAN ``minority`` become powerful enough to undermine the SECULARISM of the majority.
You - like many self-professed secular intellectuals - often raise the bogey of ``useless politicians who want to divide the people in the name of historic facts and religion``
There is a Bajrangi question related to this charge which I haven`t got an answer or opinion.
I asked you before, and I ask you again now, for THAT answer/opinion.
Forget ``history``,- it is only a corroborative evidence of what is happening right now all over again, all over the world.
Let`s deal with the other bogey of a charge.
Who is it that really divides people in the name of religion,- between Momin/believers and Kaffir/heathen/unbelievers ?
Who is it that sees the world in black and white - MOMIN and KAFFIR - and makes the world a bitter clash of civilisation ?
Is it the Bajrangis and the Hindutva brigade ?
Or is it the custodians of ``exclusive-truth`` evangelical faiths of Abrahamic genre ?
Let`s say the Bajrangis disband, and life goes back to the happy days of Nehruvian secularism.
Does it change the evangelist thinking ?
Does it change the current root cause of insecurity among Hindus of India - the fear of being a minority like those in Bangladesh and Pakistan ?
What guarantees that the India that your priority is - a land of milk and honey and secular ethos - will REMAIN so , once the demographic BALANCE shifts and secular Hindus become a minority in India ?
Don`t tell me education and prosperity will change the outlook of evangelical Muslims and Christians.
Don`t we see examples of economically successful Muslims in Western Europe trying to politically/religiously/socially undermine the very SAME nations that allowed them SECULAR refuge and granted them prosperity ?
How do you set your priorities to achieve an India that will overcome this nonsense of transnational evangelical activism and agenda , and bring security to the minds of parched Hindus seeking the comfort of peaceful coexistence on the lines of the great Upanishadic hymn ``Sahnabhavatu Sahanau Bhunaktu Sahaviryam Karyavahaih`` ?
Until this question is answered satisfactorily, Bajrangi phenomenon is there to stay.
(Ombudsman`s reply to the above..as follows...while quoting some of the words of Mr Spock)
The passion in your response is almost overwhelming. :))
Let me pick out some choice words and sentences sprinkled throughout the post.
(Mr Spock`s words in italics, to which Ombudsman is replying)
``Atmosphere of suspicion”, “known problem of future insecurity for a Hindu minority in an ``Islamic`` state”, “to overcome an imminent threat to the very existence”, etc, etc.``
(Ombudsman`s reply to the above..as follows..)
Are you sure Dr. Spock? Future insecurity of a hindu minority in an Islamic state and imminent threat?
You say the priority of an individual is FIRST to overcome an imminent threat.
Imminent threat? Are you sure Dr. Spock?
Let me a recite an old story here.
Long time ago, one Hindu king had achieved great success. He had everything he could think of. All the riches in the world were at his disposal. But he was visibly not happy. His big worry was that he had enough for his next ten generations, but what will happen to the eleventh? He was advised to see a holy man living in the jungles. The king was advised that the holy man does not accept any gifts except the gift of food. King had the choicest foods prepared in quantities enough to feed a wedding party. The holy man thanked the king and said he could not accept the gift of food because he already had his meal of the day. King suggested that he keeps it anyway as it will last him a long time. The holy man replied that he worries about the present day only and leave the future worries to future. The king had received his answer.
I had said that problems are many for a nation, but we need to identify our priorities.
There are 800 million hindus, 150 million muslims. Do you really believe it is a priority for an individual hindu to worry about a higher growth rate of a minority community? This may be a potential problem in a couple of hundred years if things continue the same way, but priority now?
I do not think so.
Dr. Spock, you seem to worry too much. Have some confidence in the newer generations of hindus that will come to resolve the problems facing their time. Let us worry about our real priorities, poverty, hunger, discrimination, and illiteracy of a large segment of society.
Even if their aim is genuine, the way bajrangis want to achieve it is totally wrong. To remove their own future insecurity, they want to create insecurity in a large segment of the population. Instead of integrating the society, their way is dividing it. No country has or can progress by making its minorities feel insecure.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 11, 2004 09:19 am
Post 3, from an exchange, earlier mentioned..Mr Spock`s reply, while quoting (in Italics) some of Ombudsman`s words/points.
Words of Ombudsman:
``Do we get bogged down in redressing each cause or look at what our priorities are?
Mr Spock`s reply/words.:.
Very pertinent question.
However, it is also the most disconcerting one.
The topmost priority of any person is security of life, limb and property, in that order.
While - in any intellectual analysis - the Bajrangi rabble-rousers might simply be looking to reap a political harvest by harping on the lurking fears, it is undeniable that the fears do lurk for a valid reason that I had pointed out.
In an atmosphere of suspicion, and known problem of future insecurity for a Hindu minority in an ``Islamic`` state, where do you expect people to seek their priorities ?
Lest you forget the intuitive model of prioritisation,- the priority of an individual is FIRST to overcome an imminent threat to the very existence (security priority)of the individual, and THEN to seek food and shelter ( economic priority) to further that existence.
Ombudsman`s words:
`` Would it help the country to forcibly shove hindutva down the throats of a significant minority? To repeat your question, what if they do not accept it?
Mr Spock`s reply to the above:
Firstly, I differ with your take on the subject.
You confuse the aim of the core Bajrangis, and those of the sympathisers among a wide cross-section of Hindus, without whose active support Hindutva would be relegated to the dustbin of fringe cults.
The real aim of sympathisers, in my analysis, is to bring about a qualitative change in the THINKING of the aggressive, evangelical minority about their trans-national agenda, and their long-terms relations with and plans about Hindus in India.
Thus far, Hindutva draws its emotional and logical succour from a significant section of the Bajrangi-sympathisers because of the oppression, suppression, extermination and destruction that Hindu minorities in Pakistan, Bangladesh and even segments within India with an Evangelical majority.
Unless the evangelical minority with transnational agendas - Muslims with their Dar-ul-Islam dreams ( and increasingly Christians in the North-East with their separatist and genocidal tendencies against Hindus ) are made to think about the dangers of aggression against the very FABRIC of secularism and tolerance of Hindus, which makes their activities POSSIBLE in India, there will only be a slide down the path of ``wars of thousand cuts`` from many parts of India where the SECTARIAN ``minority`` become powerful enough to undermine the SECULARISM of the majority.
You - like many self-professed secular intellectuals - often raise the bogey of ``useless politicians who want to divide the people in the name of historic facts and religion``
There is a Bajrangi question related to this charge which I haven`t got an answer or opinion.
I asked you before, and I ask you again now, for THAT answer/opinion.
Forget ``history``,- it is only a corroborative evidence of what is happening right now all over again, all over the world.
Let`s deal with the other bogey of a charge.
Who is it that really divides people in the name of religion,- between Momin/believers and Kaffir/heathen/unbelievers ?
Who is it that sees the world in black and white - MOMIN and KAFFIR - and makes the world a bitter clash of civilisation ?
Is it the Bajrangis and the Hindutva brigade ?
Or is it the custodians of ``exclusive-truth`` evangelical faiths of Abrahamic genre ?
Let`s say the Bajrangis disband, and life goes back to the happy days of Nehruvian secularism.
Does it change the evangelist thinking ?
Does it change the current root cause of insecurity among Hindus of India - the fear of being a minority like those in Bangladesh and Pakistan ?
What guarantees that the India that your priority is - a land of milk and honey and secular ethos - will REMAIN so , once the demographic BALANCE shifts and secular Hindus become a minority in India ?
Don`t tell me education and prosperity will change the outlook of evangelical Muslims and Christians.
Don`t we see examples of economically successful Muslims in Western Europe trying to politically/religiously/socially undermine the very SAME nations that allowed them SECULAR refuge and granted them prosperity ?
How do you set your priorities to achieve an India that will overcome this nonsense of transnational evangelical activism and agenda , and bring security to the minds of parched Hindus seeking the comfort of peaceful coexistence on the lines of the great Upanishadic hymn ``Sahnabhavatu Sahanau Bhunaktu Sahaviryam Karyavahaih`` ?
Until this question is answered satisfactorily, Bajrangi phenomenon is there to stay.
(Ombudsman`s reply to the above..as follows...while quoting some of the words of Mr Spock)
The passion in your response is almost overwhelming. :))
Let me pick out some choice words and sentences sprinkled throughout the post.
(Mr Spock`s words in italics, to which Ombudsman is replying)
``Atmosphere of suspicion”, “known problem of future insecurity for a Hindu minority in an ``Islamic`` state”, “to overcome an imminent threat to the very existence”, etc, etc.``
(Ombudsman`s reply to the above..as follows..)
Are you sure Dr. Spock? Future insecurity of a hindu minority in an Islamic state and imminent threat?
You say the priority of an individual is FIRST to overcome an imminent threat.
Imminent threat? Are you sure Dr. Spock?
Let me a recite an old story here.
Long time ago, one Hindu king had achieved great success. He had everything he could think of. All the riches in the world were at his disposal. But he was visibly not happy. His big worry was that he had enough for his next ten generations, but what will happen to the eleventh? He was advised to see a holy man living in the jungles. The king was advised that the holy man does not accept any gifts except the gift of food. King had the choicest foods prepared in quantities enough to feed a wedding party. The holy man thanked the king and said he could not accept the gift of food because he already had his meal of the day. King suggested that he keeps it anyway as it will last him a long time. The holy man replied that he worries about the present day only and leave the future worries to future. The king had received his answer.
I had said that problems are many for a nation, but we need to identify our priorities.
There are 800 million hindus, 150 million muslims. Do you really believe it is a priority for an individual hindu to worry about a higher growth rate of a minority community? This may be a potential problem in a couple of hundred years if things continue the same way, but priority now?
I do not think so.
Dr. Spock, you seem to worry too much. Have some confidence in the newer generations of hindus that will come to resolve the problems facing their time. Let us worry about our real priorities, poverty, hunger, discrimination, and illiteracy of a large segment of society.
Even if their aim is genuine, the way bajrangis want to achieve it is totally wrong. To remove their own future insecurity, they want to create insecurity in a large segment of the population. Instead of integrating the society, their way is dividing it. No country has or can progress by making its minorities feel insecure.
The Commonality of ’Fundamentalisms’
Mr Spock reply while quoting some the words/points of Ombudsman...
Ombudsman`s words..as follows:
``The passion in your response is almost overwhelming. :))
Mr Spock`s reply to the above, as follows..
It is intentional sir. :)
Emotive discussions merit emotive delineations.
Ombudsman`s words quoted as follows...
Are you sure Dr. Spock? Future insecurity of a hindu minority in an Islamic state and imminent threat?
You say the priority of an individual is FIRST to overcome an imminent threat.
Imminent threat? Are you sure Dr. Spock?
Mr Spock`s reply to the above, as follows..
Sure I am sure.
Coupled with the meteoric rise of the Taliban and Jamaat in Pakistan, the GIA in Algeria etc, and the current trends of inhuman brutalities/mayhem against hapless Hinus in Bangladesh, Doda in Jammu, the Srinagar Valley and other pockets of India ( Mumbai, Coimbatore, Godhra, Akshardham, Parliament ) - as also the hills of Nagaland, Meghalaya and Tripura - give me a reasonable degree of certainty about the IMMINENCE of an active Islamist threat to the life, limb and peroperty of the Hindus in India, and - if left unchecked - the known certainty of oppression/suppression/extermination/eviction of a possible Hindu minority in India in the future.
Words of Ombudsman, being quoted as follows..
``Do you really believe it is a priority for an individual hindu to worry about a higher growth rate of a minority community?``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above...
You are passionately clinging to a strawman, sir.
To quote an eminent SECULAR Muslim intellectual from Bangladesh - Shahriar Kabir - the worry of EVERY secular person ( Hindu AND Muslim ) should be about an Islamist threat to the VERY FABRIC of peaceful secular coexistence in India and the rest of the Indian subcontinent.
That threat is merely compounded by the fact that there is a rising popularity of Saudi-funded Wahabi organisations in India and its neighbourhood ( SIMI, Deenadar Anjuman, Markaz Da`wa-ul-Irshad , Hizb-ut-Tahrir ) among a wide cross-section of Muslims,- uneducated AND educated, poor AND rich.
If you add a statistically significant concept like growth rate, you only aggravate an already worsening situation, and elevate the threat level/imminence.
Words of Ombudsman being quoted as follows..
`` This may be a potential problem in a couple of hundred years if things continue the same way, but priority now?``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above...
If you ask me if it is really a priority for an individual Hindu to worry about it, I may have to give you the age-old English dictum in times of crises :
``If not you, who ? If not now, when ?``
What do we say to the Bajrangis who ask this question, sir ? :)
Ombudsman`s words being quoted as follows...
`` Dr. Spock, you seem to worry too much. Have some confidence in the newer generations of hindus that will come to resolve the problems facing their time. Let us worry about our real priorities, poverty, hunger, discrimination, and illiteracy of a large segment of society.
Mr Spock`s reply to the above, as follows ..
Aren`t you passing the buck ?
I could do the same, turn your argument upside down, and say :
Mr Ombudsman, you seem to worry too much. Have some confidence in the newer generation of Indians that will come to resolve the problems facing their time ,- poverty, hunger, discrimination, and illiteracy of a large segment of their society. Let us worry about our real priority - the safety and security of our life, limb and property, and the peaceful future of our progeny.
Would that help ? :)
Ombudsman`s words being quoted...as follows ...
`` Even if their aim is genuine, the way bajrangis want to achieve it is totally wrong.``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above, as follows ..
Again this argument is a case of a blind misleading the blind, sir.
The hardcore Bajrangis are a fringe minority among Hindus.
The real power to act is in the hands of those that sympathise with the cause.
They believe - and rightly so - that protagonists of TRANSNATIONAL evangelical religions have done INCACULABLE harm to SECULAR ideals in a nation,- promoting hedonism over holism, conflict instead of cooperation and competition over convergence.
The EDUCATED and AFFLUENT among these evangelical FAITHFULS - egged on by the glory-days of history - are more virulent in their transnational dreams, words and deeds.
Only a JOLT now can snap them out of their world-necrosis reverie. And the Bajrangis ( like the Israelis, the Chinese, the Russians and the US in the rest of the world ) have become the available instruments through which these necrotic tendencies can be capped, reduced and rolled back in the Indian subcontinent.
If left unchecked now, there is but certainty about civil wars and clash of civilisations, which would inflict more damage on a global scale than the local skirmishes we see today.
Ombudsman`s words being quoted...as follows ....
`` To remove their own future insecurity, they want to create insecurity in a large segment of the population.``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above...as follows ...
What insecurity are we talking of, sir ?
Even the worst Bajrangi demand is merely an Indianisation of the Islam and Christianity ( much like what China has done ) - an attempt to stem the transnational interests of the rising Wahabi/Baptist sentiments among the minorities.
To quote a favourite Bajrang quip,- ``worse comes to worst, Muslims can seek refuge in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Where can the Hindus of Indian subcontinent go to seek refuge in`` ?
Whose insecurity is greater, sir ?
Ombudsman`s words being quoted.....as follows...
`` Instead of integrating the society, their way is dividing it. No country has or can progress by making its minorities feel insecure.``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above...as follows ...
I suggest you take that argument to the Vatican and Mecca/Cairo/Riyadh, sir.
It is their way to divide the world into good and evil, believers and heathens, Momin and Kufr, the victor and the vanquished, the chosen and the condemned.
Perhaps they ought to change their positions once and for all, and make their transnational followers subscribe to this change in body, mind and soul.
I can assure you that - soon thereafter - the great Upanishadic dictum ``Udara Charitanam tu Vasudha eva Kutumbakum`` ( to the High Intellect, the world is a family ) will become the accepted order of the day.
And, then, sir, we can start dealing with the ``real`` problems of poverty, illiteracy etc.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 11, 2004 09:19 am
Post 4, from an exchange on the said subject...Mr Spock reply while quoting some the words/points of Ombudsman...
Ombudsman`s words..as follows:
``The passion in your response is almost overwhelming. :))
Mr Spock`s reply to the above, as follows..
It is intentional sir. :)
Emotive discussions merit emotive delineations.
Ombudsman`s words quoted as follows...
Are you sure Dr. Spock? Future insecurity of a hindu minority in an Islamic state and imminent threat?
You say the priority of an individual is FIRST to overcome an imminent threat.
Imminent threat? Are you sure Dr. Spock?
Mr Spock`s reply to the above, as follows..
Sure I am sure.
Coupled with the meteoric rise of the Taliban and Jamaat in Pakistan, the GIA in Algeria etc, and the current trends of inhuman brutalities/mayhem against hapless Hinus in Bangladesh, Doda in Jammu, the Srinagar Valley and other pockets of India ( Mumbai, Coimbatore, Godhra, Akshardham, Parliament ) - as also the hills of Nagaland, Meghalaya and Tripura - give me a reasonable degree of certainty about the IMMINENCE of an active Islamist threat to the life, limb and peroperty of the Hindus in India, and - if left unchecked - the known certainty of oppression/suppression/extermination/eviction of a possible Hindu minority in India in the future.
Words of Ombudsman, being quoted as follows..
``Do you really believe it is a priority for an individual hindu to worry about a higher growth rate of a minority community?``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above...
You are passionately clinging to a strawman, sir.
To quote an eminent SECULAR Muslim intellectual from Bangladesh - Shahriar Kabir - the worry of EVERY secular person ( Hindu AND Muslim ) should be about an Islamist threat to the VERY FABRIC of peaceful secular coexistence in India and the rest of the Indian subcontinent.
That threat is merely compounded by the fact that there is a rising popularity of Saudi-funded Wahabi organisations in India and its neighbourhood ( SIMI, Deenadar Anjuman, Markaz Da`wa-ul-Irshad , Hizb-ut-Tahrir ) among a wide cross-section of Muslims,- uneducated AND educated, poor AND rich.
If you add a statistically significant concept like growth rate, you only aggravate an already worsening situation, and elevate the threat level/imminence.
Words of Ombudsman being quoted as follows..
`` This may be a potential problem in a couple of hundred years if things continue the same way, but priority now?``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above...
If you ask me if it is really a priority for an individual Hindu to worry about it, I may have to give you the age-old English dictum in times of crises :
``If not you, who ? If not now, when ?``
What do we say to the Bajrangis who ask this question, sir ? :)
Ombudsman`s words being quoted as follows...
`` Dr. Spock, you seem to worry too much. Have some confidence in the newer generations of hindus that will come to resolve the problems facing their time. Let us worry about our real priorities, poverty, hunger, discrimination, and illiteracy of a large segment of society.
Mr Spock`s reply to the above, as follows ..
Aren`t you passing the buck ?
I could do the same, turn your argument upside down, and say :
Mr Ombudsman, you seem to worry too much. Have some confidence in the newer generation of Indians that will come to resolve the problems facing their time ,- poverty, hunger, discrimination, and illiteracy of a large segment of their society. Let us worry about our real priority - the safety and security of our life, limb and property, and the peaceful future of our progeny.
Would that help ? :)
Ombudsman`s words being quoted...as follows ...
`` Even if their aim is genuine, the way bajrangis want to achieve it is totally wrong.``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above, as follows ..
Again this argument is a case of a blind misleading the blind, sir.
The hardcore Bajrangis are a fringe minority among Hindus.
The real power to act is in the hands of those that sympathise with the cause.
They believe - and rightly so - that protagonists of TRANSNATIONAL evangelical religions have done INCACULABLE harm to SECULAR ideals in a nation,- promoting hedonism over holism, conflict instead of cooperation and competition over convergence.
The EDUCATED and AFFLUENT among these evangelical FAITHFULS - egged on by the glory-days of history - are more virulent in their transnational dreams, words and deeds.
Only a JOLT now can snap them out of their world-necrosis reverie. And the Bajrangis ( like the Israelis, the Chinese, the Russians and the US in the rest of the world ) have become the available instruments through which these necrotic tendencies can be capped, reduced and rolled back in the Indian subcontinent.
If left unchecked now, there is but certainty about civil wars and clash of civilisations, which would inflict more damage on a global scale than the local skirmishes we see today.
Ombudsman`s words being quoted...as follows ....
`` To remove their own future insecurity, they want to create insecurity in a large segment of the population.``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above...as follows ...
What insecurity are we talking of, sir ?
Even the worst Bajrangi demand is merely an Indianisation of the Islam and Christianity ( much like what China has done ) - an attempt to stem the transnational interests of the rising Wahabi/Baptist sentiments among the minorities.
To quote a favourite Bajrang quip,- ``worse comes to worst, Muslims can seek refuge in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Where can the Hindus of Indian subcontinent go to seek refuge in`` ?
Whose insecurity is greater, sir ?
Ombudsman`s words being quoted.....as follows...
`` Instead of integrating the society, their way is dividing it. No country has or can progress by making its minorities feel insecure.``
Mr Spock`s reply to the above...as follows ...
I suggest you take that argument to the Vatican and Mecca/Cairo/Riyadh, sir.
It is their way to divide the world into good and evil, believers and heathens, Momin and Kufr, the victor and the vanquished, the chosen and the condemned.
Perhaps they ought to change their positions once and for all, and make their transnational followers subscribe to this change in body, mind and soul.
I can assure you that - soon thereafter - the great Upanishadic dictum ``Udara Charitanam tu Vasudha eva Kutumbakum`` ( to the High Intellect, the world is a family ) will become the accepted order of the day.
And, then, sir, we can start dealing with the ``real`` problems of poverty, illiteracy etc.
The Commonality of ’Fundamentalisms’
Before that, would like to make clear that in this exchange, Ombudsman is not going over the board at all. On the contrary, he is presenting his side in a very calm and sensible manner. Does not mean that Mr Spock is a Bajrangi...he is presenting the other side.. Aother thing..words in bold or underlined are by the writers by themselves and not by me...Only italics are by me that for the clarity purpose...
Mr Spock`s reply to Ombudsman previous post..
Ombudsman`s words:
Even if their cause was justified, their action was not. The world needs to firmly separate the two.
Mr Spock`s reply/words:
No doubt.
However, those that act this way don`t necessarily subscribe to this ``separation``.
And why shouldthey ?
Ombudsman`s words:
``An act against innocent civilians is against the law, irrespective of how the forefathers of one community had treated the other in the past.``
Mr Spock`s reply:
Firstly, Law is simply a contractbetween individuals in a society.
If individuals do not agree with the contract, or definition of ``innocent``, this argument is moot.
Secondly, the premise you have put forward for your ``secular`` argument is essentially wrong.
While the plight of their forefathers may indeed be a corroborative evidence to the facts of the case, the real cause of Bajrangi phenomenon - as opposed to commonplace jihadi phenomenon - is the absence of a security guarantee of property, honour, limb and life of Hindu minorities in the immediate neighbourhood without India, and in pockets of Muslim majority or Christian majorty within India.
The fact that Hindus are targets of oppression, conversion and outright murder where they are in a minority is a direct cause of the rise of Bajrangi ideals among liberal Hindus of India.
Christians and Sikhs of India never feel threatened under a Hindu majority, and hence they have no Christian Bajrangis or Sikh Bajrangis ( forget political separatism of Longowal and Bhindranwale ).
This is not the case for the rise of jihadi Islamic fundamentalism. There, the direct cause is the sense of humiliation of the Ummah being subjugated by a more powerful Kufr, in direct contravention to the ASSURANCE in the ``infallible`` Quran about the Victory of Islam and Muslims over infidels by the benevolence of Allah, while the peripheral cause is the dissatisfaction with despotic rulers.
To stop the Bajrangi phenomenon, this perceived threat of subjugation, oppression and extermination of Hindus ( once they become a minority in their ONLY refuge ) has to be permanently removed, and the security guarantee must be restored.
Otherwise, it will be akin to plugging a million leaks in a pipe, and not turning off the faucet.
Ombudsman`s words:
``We have to be aware of historic facts and make laws to deal with the present situation. No sena, or dal, or lashkar should be allowed to dictate to others in the name of historic facts or religious faith. Let the law of the land take care of it, and if the law is not good enough, work to change it.``
Mr Spock`s words/reply to the above:
Very fantastic, very sensible.
But utterly misconstrued.
Laws are as good as the WILL of the majority to enforce it in letter and spirit.
What Law in the world can prevent a hypothetical Muslim majority in India overturning the best set of secular laws, and engaging in a systematic persecution and extermination of the same Hindu minority ( when they were in a majority ) that had enacted and enforced that ``best`` set of secular laws to sustain and safeguard the growing Muslim population in their midst ?
Why should then the Hindus be secular to their OWN detriment,- a Bajrangi would ask.
In a world preoccupied with a myriad of local, national and global ``interests`` that span social, economic and religious dimensions, do you have an answer, sir ?
Ombudsman`s words/reply to the above (first he is quoting some of the words of Mr Spock):
Mr Spock`s words (in italics):
In a world preoccupied with a myriad of local, national and global ``interests`` that span social, economic and religious dimensions, do you have an answer, sir ?
Ombudsman`s reply to the above:
I have an opinion.
First my compliments on an eloquent explanation and defense of bajrangi phenomenon. :)
There will always be causes, and interests, and conflicts in the society on the collective or individual level. Do we get bogged down in redressing each cause or look at what our priorities are? What are the priorities for India? Are these poverty of the masses without much hope or help, division in the society based on age old exploitation of certain segments, illitracy of a large number of population, or pandering to some useless politicians who want to divide the people in the name of historic facts and religion?
Would it help the country to forcibly shove hindutva down the throats of a significant minority? To repeat your question, what if they do not accept it?
In my opinion, bajrang dal is a platform for some shrewd politicians to gain power, hoodwinking the gullible public in the name of religion and past history. One hears most from bajrang dal, and oh yes the temple, near or close to an election. In between they mostly hibernate somewhere. Some state elections are coming soon, you should get ready to hear about the temple issue again. :)
Bajrangan Uma Bharati takes the cake. A court summons her to answer to some charges, and she goes there wrapping herself in a tiranga. It is said that patriotism is the last resort of the scoundrels. In case of bajrangis, it may be the first.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 11, 2004 07:44 am
Post 2, from an exchange which was mentioned in my earlier post...Before that, would like to make clear that in this exchange, Ombudsman is not going over the board at all. On the contrary, he is presenting his side in a very calm and sensible manner. Does not mean that Mr Spock is a Bajrangi...he is presenting the other side.. Aother thing..words in bold or underlined are by the writers by themselves and not by me...Only italics are by me that for the clarity purpose...
Mr Spock`s reply to Ombudsman previous post..
Ombudsman`s words:
Even if their cause was justified, their action was not. The world needs to firmly separate the two.
Mr Spock`s reply/words:
No doubt.
However, those that act this way don`t necessarily subscribe to this ``separation``.
And why shouldthey ?
Ombudsman`s words:
``An act against innocent civilians is against the law, irrespective of how the forefathers of one community had treated the other in the past.``
Mr Spock`s reply:
Firstly, Law is simply a contractbetween individuals in a society.
If individuals do not agree with the contract, or definition of ``innocent``, this argument is moot.
Secondly, the premise you have put forward for your ``secular`` argument is essentially wrong.
While the plight of their forefathers may indeed be a corroborative evidence to the facts of the case, the real cause of Bajrangi phenomenon - as opposed to commonplace jihadi phenomenon - is the absence of a security guarantee of property, honour, limb and life of Hindu minorities in the immediate neighbourhood without India, and in pockets of Muslim majority or Christian majorty within India.
The fact that Hindus are targets of oppression, conversion and outright murder where they are in a minority is a direct cause of the rise of Bajrangi ideals among liberal Hindus of India.
Christians and Sikhs of India never feel threatened under a Hindu majority, and hence they have no Christian Bajrangis or Sikh Bajrangis ( forget political separatism of Longowal and Bhindranwale ).
This is not the case for the rise of jihadi Islamic fundamentalism. There, the direct cause is the sense of humiliation of the Ummah being subjugated by a more powerful Kufr, in direct contravention to the ASSURANCE in the ``infallible`` Quran about the Victory of Islam and Muslims over infidels by the benevolence of Allah, while the peripheral cause is the dissatisfaction with despotic rulers.
To stop the Bajrangi phenomenon, this perceived threat of subjugation, oppression and extermination of Hindus ( once they become a minority in their ONLY refuge ) has to be permanently removed, and the security guarantee must be restored.
Otherwise, it will be akin to plugging a million leaks in a pipe, and not turning off the faucet.
Ombudsman`s words:
``We have to be aware of historic facts and make laws to deal with the present situation. No sena, or dal, or lashkar should be allowed to dictate to others in the name of historic facts or religious faith. Let the law of the land take care of it, and if the law is not good enough, work to change it.``
Mr Spock`s words/reply to the above:
Very fantastic, very sensible.
But utterly misconstrued.
Laws are as good as the WILL of the majority to enforce it in letter and spirit.
What Law in the world can prevent a hypothetical Muslim majority in India overturning the best set of secular laws, and engaging in a systematic persecution and extermination of the same Hindu minority ( when they were in a majority ) that had enacted and enforced that ``best`` set of secular laws to sustain and safeguard the growing Muslim population in their midst ?
Why should then the Hindus be secular to their OWN detriment,- a Bajrangi would ask.
In a world preoccupied with a myriad of local, national and global ``interests`` that span social, economic and religious dimensions, do you have an answer, sir ?
Ombudsman`s words/reply to the above (first he is quoting some of the words of Mr Spock):
Mr Spock`s words (in italics):
In a world preoccupied with a myriad of local, national and global ``interests`` that span social, economic and religious dimensions, do you have an answer, sir ?
Ombudsman`s reply to the above:
I have an opinion.
First my compliments on an eloquent explanation and defense of bajrangi phenomenon. :)
There will always be causes, and interests, and conflicts in the society on the collective or individual level. Do we get bogged down in redressing each cause or look at what our priorities are? What are the priorities for India? Are these poverty of the masses without much hope or help, division in the society based on age old exploitation of certain segments, illitracy of a large number of population, or pandering to some useless politicians who want to divide the people in the name of historic facts and religion?
Would it help the country to forcibly shove hindutva down the throats of a significant minority? To repeat your question, what if they do not accept it?
In my opinion, bajrang dal is a platform for some shrewd politicians to gain power, hoodwinking the gullible public in the name of religion and past history. One hears most from bajrang dal, and oh yes the temple, near or close to an election. In between they mostly hibernate somewhere. Some state elections are coming soon, you should get ready to hear about the temple issue again. :)
Bajrangan Uma Bharati takes the cake. A court summons her to answer to some charges, and she goes there wrapping herself in a tiranga. It is said that patriotism is the last resort of the scoundrels. In case of bajrangis, it may be the first.
The Commonality of ’Fundamentalisms’
Exchange is between Mr Spock (that is his nick at another forum) and Ombudsman. Mr Spock is expressing the arguements from Bajrangi side and Ombudsman is opposing it. Words which are in italics, to that other participant is responding to. It started after new census in India came out...
Words of Spock from an ongoing exchange:
I have heard many a secular protagonist claim that illiterate and poor Muslims are the gullible victims that take to Islamist terrorist ideals. Education and empowerment of disenfranchised Muslims would take the fangs out of Islamism.
There was this documentary on educated and economically comfortable second and third generation Muslims in France, which simply smashes this theory to smithereens.
Words of Ombudsman:
Bajrangi mind set if not stopped will do much more harm to the Hindus
Words of Mr Spock
To stop something, you must first know what causes that thing.
Otherwise you`ll simply be busy plugging leaks in the pipe instead of shutting off the faucet.
We have to figure out as to WHY and HOW a culture that has come up with such magnificent dictums like ``Ayam Nija Paroveti Gananam Laghuchetasam | Udara Charitanam Tu Vasudha Eva Kutumbakum ||`` can spawn such radicalism as the Bajrangi phenomenon.
What went wrong between 800 CE and 1948 CE ?
Ombudsman`s reply to the above post/words of Mr Spock
`` I understand what you are saying. A medical doctor needs to find the cause before he can treat it. But after being in the business for sometime, he does not need to investigate or look for a cause every time he sees a similar ailment. At times a diseased mind can start doing things that are harmful to himself and others around him. The only solution is to stop him immediately and not let him harm others.
Frankly, all jihadis, terrorists and fundamentalists everywhere try to justify their acts by hiding behind this `what is the cause` thing. It is time the civilized world stopped listening to such excuses. What happened in Beslan last week where even little children were not spared, some writers are still talking in terms of the ‘cause’ of this action. Even if their cause was justified, their action was not. The world needs to firmly separate the two. An act against innocent civilians is against the law, irrespective of how the forefathers of one community had treated the other in the past. We have to be aware of historic facts and make laws to deal with the present situation. No sena, or dal, or lashkar should be allowed to dictate to others in the name of historic facts or religious faith. Let the law of the land take care of it, and if the law is not good enough, work to change it. ``
Exchange continues...
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 11, 2004 07:01 am
It would seem, Indians or well wishers of India, specially Hindus, in their enthusiasm to criticise India - in the name of so called truth - at times just go overboard and they do not realise that they do no service to their own cause or to the cause they claim to profess. A few can be found on Chowk too who in their attempt to make/show things equal equal just keep on going in their enthuasism and in the process, may alienate some of those who may have been fence sitters. I have seen quite a many interactors (hindus) who come on various boards and hold moderate views but over the period of time, start having leanings towards bajrangis or hindus. Or at least, start asking questions on allegations raised/made against them. Guess about time to quote an exchange between two non muslims Indians, on the subject. Though it is bit lengthy but those who really want to understand the undercurrents or things going in Bajrangi minds, and their arguements, may find someting informative and perhaps, interesting too.Exchange is between Mr Spock (that is his nick at another forum) and Ombudsman. Mr Spock is expressing the arguements from Bajrangi side and Ombudsman is opposing it. Words which are in italics, to that other participant is responding to. It started after new census in India came out...
Words of Spock from an ongoing exchange:
I have heard many a secular protagonist claim that illiterate and poor Muslims are the gullible victims that take to Islamist terrorist ideals. Education and empowerment of disenfranchised Muslims would take the fangs out of Islamism.
There was this documentary on educated and economically comfortable second and third generation Muslims in France, which simply smashes this theory to smithereens.
Words of Ombudsman:
Bajrangi mind set if not stopped will do much more harm to the Hindus
Words of Mr Spock
To stop something, you must first know what causes that thing.
Otherwise you`ll simply be busy plugging leaks in the pipe instead of shutting off the faucet.
We have to figure out as to WHY and HOW a culture that has come up with such magnificent dictums like ``Ayam Nija Paroveti Gananam Laghuchetasam | Udara Charitanam Tu Vasudha Eva Kutumbakum ||`` can spawn such radicalism as the Bajrangi phenomenon.
What went wrong between 800 CE and 1948 CE ?
Ombudsman`s reply to the above post/words of Mr Spock
`` I understand what you are saying. A medical doctor needs to find the cause before he can treat it. But after being in the business for sometime, he does not need to investigate or look for a cause every time he sees a similar ailment. At times a diseased mind can start doing things that are harmful to himself and others around him. The only solution is to stop him immediately and not let him harm others.
Frankly, all jihadis, terrorists and fundamentalists everywhere try to justify their acts by hiding behind this `what is the cause` thing. It is time the civilized world stopped listening to such excuses. What happened in Beslan last week where even little children were not spared, some writers are still talking in terms of the ‘cause’ of this action. Even if their cause was justified, their action was not. The world needs to firmly separate the two. An act against innocent civilians is against the law, irrespective of how the forefathers of one community had treated the other in the past. We have to be aware of historic facts and make laws to deal with the present situation. No sena, or dal, or lashkar should be allowed to dictate to others in the name of historic facts or religious faith. Let the law of the land take care of it, and if the law is not good enough, work to change it. ``
Exchange continues...
“Final” solution?
Please ignore my post#141 addressed to you. Apparently, my mind was elsewhere, when I wrote that. :)
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 9, 2004 07:36 am
Farzana VerseyPlease ignore my post#141 addressed to you. Apparently, my mind was elsewhere, when I wrote that. :)
“Final” solution?
That “the nature of the regime determines the nature of the outcome” is a well-known adage in public administration and public policy studies. The nature of a regime is not only influenced by its constitution, guiding philosophy, and the consequent system of government, but also by the structure of the system. We know from experience, both in the corporate world and in public administration, that monolithic and centralized structures fail when the size and scope of the organization grows. Thus to compete with Honda and Toyota , General Motors and Ford have had to restructure into smaller and independent operating units. In public administration this is called de-centralization. De-centralization not only implies the downward flow of decision-making but also greater closeness of the reviewing authority to the decision-making level.
Thus, if more decision-making flows to the districts and sub-districts, the state government, which is the reviewing authority, must also have fewer units to supervise. I have always held that the real concentration of power is not with the Central Government but with the State Governments. Thus when a person like Chandrababu Naidu clamors for greater functional autonomy, he is actually calling for a greater concentration of power to himself. From the perspective of good governance, this is clearly unacceptable. Good government also means lesser government, responsive government, closer government and quicker government. Large centralized governments are inimical to good government. State Governments are the worst kind of centralized governments masking their regional jingoism as a demand for autonomy.
In 1973 Rasheeduddin Khan wrote: “ the process of the infra-structuring of the Indian federation is not yet over. Therefore, political demands of viable sub-regions for new administrative arrangements are not necessarily antithetical to the territorial integrity of the country. For, every urge for autonomy is not a divisive, but most probably a complementary force; it would not lead to balkanization but to the restructuring of national identity; it is not a fissiparous but a normal centrifugal tendency in a federation; it should not be taken as a call for disintegration of the national sovereignty, but its re-integration.” The “Report of the States Reorganization Commission, 1955” states: “Unlike the United States of America , the Indian Union is not an indestructible union composed of indestructible states. But on the contrary the Union alone is indestructible but the individual states are not.” It would be unfortunate if demands for the restructuring of India by creating more states are seen only as mere political contests, where the just causes of individual socio-cultural and agro-climatic regions is just a weapon of in the hands of out of work politicians deprived of a share of the benefits of office.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 9, 2004 07:36 am
Some excerpts ..That “the nature of the regime determines the nature of the outcome” is a well-known adage in public administration and public policy studies. The nature of a regime is not only influenced by its constitution, guiding philosophy, and the consequent system of government, but also by the structure of the system. We know from experience, both in the corporate world and in public administration, that monolithic and centralized structures fail when the size and scope of the organization grows. Thus to compete with Honda and Toyota , General Motors and Ford have had to restructure into smaller and independent operating units. In public administration this is called de-centralization. De-centralization not only implies the downward flow of decision-making but also greater closeness of the reviewing authority to the decision-making level.
Thus, if more decision-making flows to the districts and sub-districts, the state government, which is the reviewing authority, must also have fewer units to supervise. I have always held that the real concentration of power is not with the Central Government but with the State Governments. Thus when a person like Chandrababu Naidu clamors for greater functional autonomy, he is actually calling for a greater concentration of power to himself. From the perspective of good governance, this is clearly unacceptable. Good government also means lesser government, responsive government, closer government and quicker government. Large centralized governments are inimical to good government. State Governments are the worst kind of centralized governments masking their regional jingoism as a demand for autonomy.
In 1973 Rasheeduddin Khan wrote: “ the process of the infra-structuring of the Indian federation is not yet over. Therefore, political demands of viable sub-regions for new administrative arrangements are not necessarily antithetical to the territorial integrity of the country. For, every urge for autonomy is not a divisive, but most probably a complementary force; it would not lead to balkanization but to the restructuring of national identity; it is not a fissiparous but a normal centrifugal tendency in a federation; it should not be taken as a call for disintegration of the national sovereignty, but its re-integration.” The “Report of the States Reorganization Commission, 1955” states: “Unlike the United States of America , the Indian Union is not an indestructible union composed of indestructible states. But on the contrary the Union alone is indestructible but the individual states are not.” It would be unfortunate if demands for the restructuring of India by creating more states are seen only as mere political contests, where the just causes of individual socio-cultural and agro-climatic regions is just a weapon of in the hands of out of work politicians deprived of a share of the benefits of office.
“Final” solution?
Post#135
I have not really understood that post. Not sure how it answers the question/s I raised earlier in my post.
Anyway, thing that I am glad about is that you have responded. Really. For, I was having some different thoughts and have been toying with the idea as to shall I write (questioning, as well) now (post/s on not getting reply from you on this, and perhaps some more:) ), or let it be ....
Chances are/were that for a while, I would have waited more...after that, I do not know if I would have even remembered about raising the topic....:)
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 8, 2004 02:52 pm
Farzana VerseyPost#135
I have not really understood that post. Not sure how it answers the question/s I raised earlier in my post.
Anyway, thing that I am glad about is that you have responded. Really. For, I was having some different thoughts and have been toying with the idea as to shall I write (questioning, as well) now (post/s on not getting reply from you on this, and perhaps some more:) ), or let it be ....
Chances are/were that for a while, I would have waited more...after that, I do not know if I would have even remembered about raising the topic....:)
“Final” solution?
Quote:
`` In case you have not yet read the news, `Final Solution` has been passed by the Indian Censor Board finally without any cuts. ``
Sorry, I have absolutely no idea as to what is meant by the above.
I came to this board on reading HP`s recommendation/his post which was on your article/board. That is all. Other than that, have no idea. Just responded to few posts, here.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 8, 2004 02:52 pm
Farzana VerseyQuote:
`` In case you have not yet read the news, `Final Solution` has been passed by the Indian Censor Board finally without any cuts. ``
Sorry, I have absolutely no idea as to what is meant by the above.
I came to this board on reading HP`s recommendation/his post which was on your article/board. That is all. Other than that, have no idea. Just responded to few posts, here.
“Final” solution?
Post#123
Quote:
`` I got stuka`s point re. desai right but made an error in deduction re. sitara-e-imtiaz``
Morarji Desai could not have even thought that far even if he wanted to. When it is said, he thought or proposed Bangladesh should not have been created and J&K problem could have been solved or J&K in lieu of creating Bangladesh.
He did say Bangladesh should not have been created but that was because of two different reasons. One, his hatred for Mrs Gandhi . Whatever she had done, he had to oppose. Second, being a misguided soul in this respect, he truly believed that Bangladesh should not have been created. At least, India should not have played any role in that. He was looking at this from a humane angle and that was one of the reasons why he gave orders to R&AW not to indulge in certain activities against Pakistan. It had nothing to do with his having any foresight at all.
One of his statements when he became PM was, Women make mess of/in politics..words to this effect. Probably it was Mrs Bhandarnaike in Sri Lanka who was the PM or President, and Mrs Thatcher who objected to his this statement. He took back his statement and kind of apologised but, he never apologised to ladies in India who also had objected. And perhaps, they objected before objections got raised from overseas.
One wouldn`t expect any foresight in matters of nation building, geo politics from the likes of him.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 8, 2004 09:56 am
Dost MittarPost#123
Quote:
`` I got stuka`s point re. desai right but made an error in deduction re. sitara-e-imtiaz``
Morarji Desai could not have even thought that far even if he wanted to. When it is said, he thought or proposed Bangladesh should not have been created and J&K problem could have been solved or J&K in lieu of creating Bangladesh.
He did say Bangladesh should not have been created but that was because of two different reasons. One, his hatred for Mrs Gandhi . Whatever she had done, he had to oppose. Second, being a misguided soul in this respect, he truly believed that Bangladesh should not have been created. At least, India should not have played any role in that. He was looking at this from a humane angle and that was one of the reasons why he gave orders to R&AW not to indulge in certain activities against Pakistan. It had nothing to do with his having any foresight at all.
One of his statements when he became PM was, Women make mess of/in politics..words to this effect. Probably it was Mrs Bhandarnaike in Sri Lanka who was the PM or President, and Mrs Thatcher who objected to his this statement. He took back his statement and kind of apologised but, he never apologised to ladies in India who also had objected. And perhaps, they objected before objections got raised from overseas.
One wouldn`t expect any foresight in matters of nation building, geo politics from the likes of him.
“Final” solution?
Following is from Hindu paper/magazine..
.......
On a representation made by the non-government organisations working among the riot victims, the delegation said the officials had informed them that the State Government had agreed to remove the anomaly in compensation to the victims of the Godhra tragedy and the post-Godhra riots. They also informed the delegation that compensation to the victims of the train tragedy would be reduced from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh per deceased, on par with the amount of compensation declared for the victims of the post-Godhra riots.
Following is from Times of India..
Earlier, announcing a relief package for the riot victims, Vajpayee announced that the next of kin of the nearly 820 persons killed in the Gujarat riots would be paid Rs 1.5 lakh compensation each, of which Rs 1 lakh would be borne by the PM`s Relief Fund.
.............
Following is from Tribune..
Excerpts from the interview:
Q: The state government is giving compensation of Rs 2 lakh to next of kin of the victims of the Godhra carnage and Rs 1 lakh for those killed in the communal flare-up afterwards?
A: The Godhra incident was not communal violence but terrorism. It was a Congress MLA who in 1992 moved a resolution in the state assembly for giving Rs 1 lakh compensation to the victims of communal violence. The compensation is being given according to the law.
Apparently, later on (after the announcement) they agreed to compensate on equal basis.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 8, 2004 09:56 am
Dost MittarFollowing is from Hindu paper/magazine..
.......
On a representation made by the non-government organisations working among the riot victims, the delegation said the officials had informed them that the State Government had agreed to remove the anomaly in compensation to the victims of the Godhra tragedy and the post-Godhra riots. They also informed the delegation that compensation to the victims of the train tragedy would be reduced from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh per deceased, on par with the amount of compensation declared for the victims of the post-Godhra riots.
Following is from Times of India..
Earlier, announcing a relief package for the riot victims, Vajpayee announced that the next of kin of the nearly 820 persons killed in the Gujarat riots would be paid Rs 1.5 lakh compensation each, of which Rs 1 lakh would be borne by the PM`s Relief Fund.
.............
Following is from Tribune..
Excerpts from the interview:
Q: The state government is giving compensation of Rs 2 lakh to next of kin of the victims of the Godhra carnage and Rs 1 lakh for those killed in the communal flare-up afterwards?
A: The Godhra incident was not communal violence but terrorism. It was a Congress MLA who in 1992 moved a resolution in the state assembly for giving Rs 1 lakh compensation to the victims of communal violence. The compensation is being given according to the law.
Apparently, later on (after the announcement) they agreed to compensate on equal basis.
“Final” solution?
Post#111
Quote:
``Desai was against the creation of Bangladesh, his point was that we should use the issue to settle our own dispputes with Pakistan and not break the country in two. ``
He was against anything and everything which did not help him in PM of India..:)
When he became PM, and when the whole world was pleading Zia not to execute Bhutto, this coward gave the statement that it is Pakistan`s internal matter.
He gave instructions to R&AW not only not to indulge in certain activities in Pakistan but he went much beyond that.
Award that he got from Pakistan was for rendering services like these...And this is the same person who was called mole of CIA in India, by Seymour Hersh. Yes, case was settled outside the court but Seymour Hersh has not changed his statment, IIRC.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 7, 2004 02:21 pm
StukaPost#111
Quote:
``Desai was against the creation of Bangladesh, his point was that we should use the issue to settle our own dispputes with Pakistan and not break the country in two. ``
He was against anything and everything which did not help him in PM of India..:)
When he became PM, and when the whole world was pleading Zia not to execute Bhutto, this coward gave the statement that it is Pakistan`s internal matter.
He gave instructions to R&AW not only not to indulge in certain activities in Pakistan but he went much beyond that.
Award that he got from Pakistan was for rendering services like these...And this is the same person who was called mole of CIA in India, by Seymour Hersh. Yes, case was settled outside the court but Seymour Hersh has not changed his statment, IIRC.
Letter to Prime Minister of India
Post#20
Quote:
``I was like Americans who accepted the adminstration`s advocacy for war, because nearly the entire US media abdicated its responsibility to provide us with a more balanced perspective.) ``
You gotta be kidding! If you are serious about this then for your own information, read and learn, and understand lot more. For starters only, US was very much part of the crap known as Khalistan. How come a country like Ecuador dared to offer land for Khalistan (different matter that so called khalistanis did not accept that offer)? How is it that countries like Singapore let their territory be used (to some degree)for this purpose? And this without going into the role of Pakistan at all...
By the way, Hitler too had his reasons and he did not grow three horns or ears or arms...He was seemed like a normal person..many after meeting him felt in awe with him. That does not change the fact as to what he was and what he did.
Even Modi would sound very reasonable when one talks to him face to face...Does it really matter?
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 7, 2004 02:21 pm
MBhatiaPost#20
Quote:
``I was like Americans who accepted the adminstration`s advocacy for war, because nearly the entire US media abdicated its responsibility to provide us with a more balanced perspective.) ``
You gotta be kidding! If you are serious about this then for your own information, read and learn, and understand lot more. For starters only, US was very much part of the crap known as Khalistan. How come a country like Ecuador dared to offer land for Khalistan (different matter that so called khalistanis did not accept that offer)? How is it that countries like Singapore let their territory be used (to some degree)for this purpose? And this without going into the role of Pakistan at all...
By the way, Hitler too had his reasons and he did not grow three horns or ears or arms...He was seemed like a normal person..many after meeting him felt in awe with him. That does not change the fact as to what he was and what he did.
Even Modi would sound very reasonable when one talks to him face to face...Does it really matter?
Letter to Prime Minister of India
Quote:
`` Many of them are reasonable, and genuinely liberal and progressive in their outlook. While I don`t necessarily agree with all their positions, I think some of what they say deserves a hearing. I certainly don`t think we need to be inimical and terminate the dialogue with them, just because they disturb our comort zone and the pristine image of India. ``
I know of many Americans from the southern part of USA who are very resonable, genuinely liberal and progressive in their outlook. But, they feel, they have been wronged and want to see an independent Texas, and some other southern states too, which were collectively known as Confedrates. Now, I do not see/hear anyone saying/recommending/suggesting having a word/dialouge with them. Why not?
One does not even have to meet those Americans personally. One can have dialogue with them even on the internet.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 7, 2004 02:20 pm
MBhatiaQuote:
`` Many of them are reasonable, and genuinely liberal and progressive in their outlook. While I don`t necessarily agree with all their positions, I think some of what they say deserves a hearing. I certainly don`t think we need to be inimical and terminate the dialogue with them, just because they disturb our comort zone and the pristine image of India. ``
I know of many Americans from the southern part of USA who are very resonable, genuinely liberal and progressive in their outlook. But, they feel, they have been wronged and want to see an independent Texas, and some other southern states too, which were collectively known as Confedrates. Now, I do not see/hear anyone saying/recommending/suggesting having a word/dialouge with them. Why not?
One does not even have to meet those Americans personally. One can have dialogue with them even on the internet.
“Final” solution?
Post#115
Quote:
`` Wasn`t this person making a huge noise when I talked about the colonisation and co-opting of the Muslim in India under the garb of mainstreaming?``
So, in a country when majority tries to bring a minority into mainstream that is equalvalent (spl?) to majority colonising the minority?
Is that how colonisation is understood to be?
I would love to know how muslims in India, are being colonised...or attempts are being made to colonise them..
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 7, 2004 02:20 pm
FArzana VerseyPost#115
Quote:
`` Wasn`t this person making a huge noise when I talked about the colonisation and co-opting of the Muslim in India under the garb of mainstreaming?``
So, in a country when majority tries to bring a minority into mainstream that is equalvalent (spl?) to majority colonising the minority?
Is that how colonisation is understood to be?
I would love to know how muslims in India, are being colonised...or attempts are being made to colonise them..
“Final” solution?
Post#95
Quote:
`` VHP`s call for bandh, which even then was viewed as a signal of `direct action```
Assuming that is the case then are you willing to say that Mr Jinnah was responsible for all the mayhem/massacre riots that occurred after his `direct action` call? Should Mr Jinnah be looked at as contemptibly as VHP is being looked at?
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 7, 2004 09:49 am
Dost mittarPost#95
Quote:
`` VHP`s call for bandh, which even then was viewed as a signal of `direct action```
Assuming that is the case then are you willing to say that Mr Jinnah was responsible for all the mayhem/massacre riots that occurred after his `direct action` call? Should Mr Jinnah be looked at as contemptibly as VHP is being looked at?
“Final” solution?
Post#97
Quote:
`` you forgot gordhan Zadaphia sitting in the police control room, thus preventing or misdirecting the police.``
Any credible sources to back this up?
Quote:
`` Also the police itself misdirecting women and children into traps as at naroda. and leading the charges of the sanghis with firings against muslim men and women who were barricading themselves.``
Same as above.
No, not some planted or coloured story in the media. For media`s role has been questionable in the whole affair and it has been admitted by the investigative commitee (I do not recall the name but I think, one of the members was H K Dua, former editor of Hindustan Times) itself.
Posted by
rajsinghi1
Oct 7, 2004 09:49 am
HindviPost#97
Quote:
`` you forgot gordhan Zadaphia sitting in the police control room, thus preventing or misdirecting the police.``
Any credible sources to back this up?
Quote:
`` Also the police itself misdirecting women and children into traps as at naroda. and leading the charges of the sanghis with firings against muslim men and women who were barricading themselves.``
Same as above.
No, not some planted or coloured story in the media. For media`s role has been questionable in the whole affair and it has been admitted by the investigative commitee (I do not recall the name but I think, one of the members was H K Dua, former editor of Hindustan Times) itself.
- rajsinghi1
- Interacts: 317
- iLogs: 1
- Gallery: 0
- Page views: 1559
- Last visitor: guest
- Member since: Jan 29 2004
- Last signin: Mar 24 2008
- Send a message
- Add as friend
- Add to ignore list
- Add to block list
