Musharraf’s Coup - Seven Years Later

#251 by swarrier

[You should never let your inadequacies dictate your fantasies. You should rise above them.

You can dislike my opinions, but I beg of you please don`t waste time on sham psychoanalysis. ]


Okay. You got me. My arguments are completely nonsensical and puerile.

Now that that is out of the way, why don`t you answer my question. I`ll repeat it for you here.

Are you romantically involved with a Muslim woman?

I`ll be looking forward to your answer.

krishna_abcd#249

You said in #230
``The Shiv Sena or the Bajrang Dal want constitutional democracy. ``

Actions speak louder than mere assertions. If they did want constitutional democracy, they would have taken the lead in prosecuting rioters in Mumbai and Gujarat. They did not. For many Muslims affected by the violence, there is not much practical difference between jihadis and violent members shielded by these organisations.

``And I listed those differences in my post #230.

WHY is that a personal attack?``

Where did I say your #230 was a personal attack? The personal attacks were in your subsequent posts.

``How would I know whether the government is involved? Which state? Where? How is this relevant to this discussion? ``

Well, if you had been honest enough to answer like you demand from others, you would also have to say whether you think your answer applies to a BJP-ruled Gujarat also. As I said, for Muslims who lost 10-20 members of their families while they watched, there isn`t much difference between jihadis and communal rioters claiming allegiance to Hindutva organisations. To hold on to the moral upper ground they keep claiming over others, the Hindutva organisations who keep parroting Vasudeva kutumbakam should have shown more interest in helping Muslim victims. They showed none. For their victims there is no difference between their heartlessness and that of those who train and fund jihadis.

Re: # 247 and various others from abcd
Dear abcd

You should never let your inadequacies dictate your fantasies. You should rise above them.

You can dislike my opinions, but I beg of you please don`t waste time on sham psychoanalysis.

Leave DM out of your silly arguments.

Now again run away and play with your toys, or give us your rebuttal/agreement with the learned professor`s article on the prevaricating general in his labyrinth.

Dictators will do anyyhing needed to cling on to power so long as they can.They know that
they can remain in power;otherwise there is no future for them.Dr.Hoodbhoy is quite right
in what he has recounted about the seven years that the General has been in power.
In countries like Pakistan such coup-makers attain power & remain in it wih the help,assistance and active help from the most powerful country(s) in this world.
ONE WHO RIDES A LION CANNOT DARE TO GET OFF ITS BACK.
THE ONLY PLACE HE CAN EXPECT TO FALL INTO IS THE LION`S BELLY.

#248 by sadna


[1. In your world is anyone allowed to criticise Hindutva and Hindutva vadis ever ? ]

Of course, anyone is allowed to criticize anyone in a free society.


[2. Can you explain why are you attacking someone personally for criticising Hindutva organisations? In a free country, unless they are fascists, how can any party like BJP or `cultural organisation` like VHP/Bajrang Dal demand not to be criticised by the public for their actions which affect the public? ]


This is how it started. In post#225, he said the following:

``Frankly I don`t see any difference between the Islamist idiots in Pakistan or and the Vanar Sena and the Bajrang Dal cretins.

I don`t see why we should choose to like either of these cretins. Our punks are no better than their punks. ``

I simply made the point that there are LOTS of differences.

And I listed those differences in my post #230.

WHY is that a personal attack?


[If they don`t want to be criticised, the only way is these Hindutva parties quit public life - they should stop asking for our votes, and seeking to represent us in elected office and become private organisations. Please advise them to do so instead of attacking people for using their fundamental right of political opinion about Hindutva parties. ]

I don`t know if they do or do not want to be criticized. So this part is irrelevent to this discussion.



[3. When riots take place for two months after a communal incident in a state ruled by a nonBJP party for the last 5-10 years, is the nonBJP government of that state to be held accountable or the nonBJP government is totally innocent?]

How would I know whether the governement is involved? Which state? Where? How is this relevant to this discussion?

krishna_abcd
Just a few questions if you can answer.
1. In your world is anyone allowed to criticise Hindutva and Hindutva vadis ever ?

2. Can you explain why are you attacking someone personally for criticising Hindutva organisations? In a free country, unless they are fascists, how can any party like BJP or `cultural organisation` like VHP/Bajrang Dal demand not to be criticised by the public for their actions which affect the public?

If they don`t want to be criticised, the only way is these Hindutva parties quit public life - they should stop asking for our votes, and seeking to represent us in elected office and become private organisations. Please advise them to do so instead of attacking people for using their fundamental right of political opinion about Hindutva parties.


3. When riots take place for two months after a communal incident in a state ruled by a nonBJP party for the last 5-10 years, is the nonBJP government of that state to be held accountable or the nonBJP government is totally innocent?

#245 by swarrier

[I am a Hindu Kshatriya/Brahmin mix.]

So you were lying when you said ``The caste I belong to, its traditional occupaton was fighting``. You belong just AS MUCH to the Brahmin caste as you do to the Kshatriya caste. In fact, your father is probably Brahmin, because I think that Warrier is a Brahmin last name. That should make you officially of the brahmin caste.

Okay...

[Yes I have Muslim friends. I am proud of that. Perhaps that is something that a particularly thick individual like you will not understand. ]

Now we are getting somewhere. See, that was not too difficut, was it? All right, if we have to do this in increments, so be it. Next question: are you ROMANTICALLY involved with a Muslim woman?

Go ahead, you can do it....Out with it....

[You need to harp on what religion caste background you belong to rather than being an individual in your own right. ]

Yes, yes, of course. I am un-enlighened. :)

[Your statements and arguments are puerile and not even worth considering. ]

Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

[I state my opinion as I choose. ]

That`s ADMIRABLE! :) Very good.

[Now run away and play with your toy soldiers and tin tigers. ]

See, whenever someone uses his half-Kshatriya background to PROVE that that MEANS that Hinduism is a violent religion, you KNOW that there has to be the penis involved. The NEED to show Hinduism as being JUST as violent as Islam has to stem from some urgent compulsion. With non-Muslim guys, it`s almost always the penis. Women are usually less willing to compromise their integrity.

Look at Dost-Mitter. Trying to analyze the highly intellectual and deep inner meanings of the word ``Masjid`` AFTER following his penis and ``converting``, instead of doing the complicated research beforehand.

Ref HD #242

[Now that mushy, and everyone else,has accepted the reality of pakistan`s kargill intrusion, what happens to the downing case of the `atlantique` plane it registered at the international court, asking india for compensation???]

Pakistan is up the proverbial creek without a paddle in that instance.

India refused to accept the ICJ`s jurisdiction and the ICJ declined to hear Pakistan`s complaint.

Back in 1965 the Pakistan Air Force shot down a Cessna carrying the then Chief Minister of Gujarat well inside Indian territory.

``The Atlantique`` was just payback for that.

Re: # 244
abcd
I am a Hindu Kshatriya/Brahmin mix. Yes I have Muslim friends. I am proud of that. Perhaps that is something that a particularly thick individual like you will not understand.
You need to harp on what religion caste background you belong to rather than being an individual in your own right.
Your statements and arguments are puerile and not even worth considering.
I state my opinion as I choose.
Now run away and play with your toy soldiers and tin tigers.

Re: #240 by swarrier

And another thing I forgot to mention. Whenever there is this kind of passion - as your passion against the Hindutva-vadis, it has to be personal. Now if you personally have not been affected by them (if you have been, you should have mentioned where and how), then I strongly suspect that the penis is involved.

Once people start thinking with the penis, all rational thought goes out the window (behold the Islamists).

Are you close to a Muslim?

dear Pervez (wot`s in a name?)
a very clear analytical correct article. though is it; where are pakistani scientist`s inventions (if any) to go? and who will drive off with them, in their truck, when they are in power?......that makes you write and focus so intently on political matters!! scientist or politician? well I never!!!!!

Now that mushy, and everyone else,has accepted the reality of pakistan`s kargill intrusion, what happens to the downing case of the `atlantique` plane it registered at the international court, asking india for compensation???

#240 by swarrier

[My name is Sadanand Warrier. Simple. ]

It would be simpler if you stopped trying to avoid the question.

I did not ask for your name. I asked for your background. Religion, caste etc. (whether it is immaterial or not).


[You have interesting arguments.]

Interesting or not, you obviously have no answers for them.


[You read many things into my posts that I cannot myself.]

You said :

``Hinduism is not a peaceful religion. The caste I belong to, its traditional occupaton was fighting.``

This is a supremely asinine statement. The PROOF that Hinduism is not peaceful is that YOUR caste used to be warriers by occupation!

What an idiotic argument!


[I am sorry I sound obfuscatory.]

Sorry doesn`t cut it. You avoided giving a direct answer to what allegedly the Hindutva-vadis are coercing the general population to do.

What you are, is a hypocrite. You don`t even have the self-respec to admit that you have no logical argument.



[Perhaps you need somebody of your intelligence to talk with.]

I said that already. That this is our last argument. But you tried to beat around the bush and then leave when cornered.


[I unfortunately cannot understand anything other than you hate Muslims.]


I can understand just fine that you hate Hindus.


[Sadanand Warrier (just in case you missed it the first time as you seem to have in our earlier discussion)]


I think YOU are the one that is PRETENDING to have missed the fact that I am NOT interested in your full name, but in your religion, caste etc.

Re: # 239

My name is Sadanand Warrier. Simple.

You have interesting arguments. You read many things into my posts that I cannot myself. I am sorry I sound obfuscatory. Perhaps you need somebody of your intelligence to talk with. I unfortunately cannot understand anything other than you hate Muslims. So be it.

Ta

Sadanand Warrier (just in case you missed it the first time as you seem to have in our earlier discussion)

#238 by swarrier

[Okay long and last post. ]

I am not surprised. Obfuscate and leave.

[Let us use the word coercion, not acceptance or adoption.]

Heh heh heh. Nice try. Coerce other Hindus to do WHAT?

1) Accept them for what they are? or

2) Coerce them to adopt their brand of Hinduism?

Obfuscation won`t do, I`m afraid.


[In my opinion they want to dictate beliefs. In that they are no different from Wahabi fundamentalists. Where they differ is that they do not wish to kill other Hindus for their beliefs. Frankly I don`t think even the Graham Staines imbroglio was supported by the larger portion of the Bajrang Dal. However any coercion is not a correct step. ]

Neither is obfuscation. Tell me what exactly you mean above.


[You`ve been asking me this question from the reservation boards. I do not think it is important to the discussion. I am not Christian or SC/ST or Dalit. ]

Okay, what is your problem telling me then? Are you muslim? Are you close to someone who is Muslim?

Whether you are Muslim or not, I`d still like to know your background. Why would you be reluctant in telling me? I don`t know your name.

I suspect there is a good reason you don`t want to tell me.


[You can apply the same reasoning to uneducated Muslims and I am not a Congress supporter.]

However you have the penchant to single out the Hindutva-vadis as miscreants.


[Why, we are talking about things that could happen. Hinduism is not a peaceful religion. The caste I belong to, its traditional occupaton was fighting. That is what we did for centuries before the British made it illegal for us to carry our weapons. ]

You are a Muslim who is a ex-kshatriya, maybe? Or a Rajput?

Yes, they used to fight as a profession. But so does any army in any country today. And one BIG difference with Muslims - they NEVER killed civilians.

And also, this has nothing to do with Hinduism. What kind of moronic logic is this - that this proves Hinduism is not peaceful? After this argument, I`m never going to argue with you again. What an idiotic statement!


[Yes partially. The state of Emergency can still be declared within the bounds of the constitution I suppose. ]

Well, then don`t just single out the Shiv Sena. Killing Sikhs is far worse than detroying Valentine-card carrying stores. Whenever people exhibit this kind of partial vison, they have an underlying agenda.


[You are wrong here. The Congress (under VP Naik) encouraged the creation of the Shiv Sena to neutralise the trade unions, lead by Datta Samant our very own George Fernandes etc. The anti South Indian agitation came later. But in any case your argument that it was created as a response to Islamist thugs is wrong.]

It was not CREATED for that purpose. But is SURVIVES because of this. That does not change my argument in any way. My point was to show that the existence of these anti-Islamic parties (supported by their followers) depends on the public reaction against the Islamist thugs.

In other words, it`s anti-Islamic agenda is REACTIONARY, not PROACTIVE like your Wahabi extremists.


[The Shiv Sena is nothing but a party of opportunists. When the Shiv Sena first started his own folks the CKP`s did not want to have anything to do with him. ]

Who cares? This has nothing to do with this discussion.


[They would have reinvented themselves as something else. An anti congress stance would have been good enough. Thackeray is a very intelligent man. ]

This is irrelevent to the discussion.


[I thought you were the one who was the critic. I was merely talking to the University of Oklahama 1999. ]

No. That is not true. You WERE criticizing the Hindutva-vadis.



[So whose fault is it? That we could not keep a lid on Kashmir? That we rigged elections? That we let them have things when the rest of India was under rationing for sugar, kerosene etc? That we gave them more privileges? That we let the Pandits be chased away? That we are letting the army do the work of a civilian police force? That we let a neighbouring country stoke the fires,which they will anyway?
You think our politicians are brave. Why did we let people like Masood Azhar, Mushtaq Zargar live to be exchanged for IC-814? Why did we not kill them instead of innocent Muslims in Gujarat? I don`t believe in any trials for non-Indians caught in Indian territory illegally. Execute them if you have proof of their involvement in anti national activities. ]

It is the fault of the lefty JNU jholawala types, of Islamic apologists like yourself, and the cowlike nature of the Hindus.

But this is taking us AWAY from our debate. YOU SAID that we just need to ``like`` the ``other`` more. And I SAID that that is nonsense. Because a lot of people died not beacuse we don`t ``like`` the ``other``.


[Sure, it is inaction that has resulted in deaths. The problem is not with all Muslims. The problem is with some of them who want their views imposed on all people. They are the one`s to be stopped. ]

No, it is INCUMBENT UPON all Muslims, including yourself, to actively fight this thing. Because silence means consent. And silent support - by providing logistical support and social support, is unconscionable.

Somehow you guys get worked up whenever any Muslim dies anywhere in the world, but Muslim terrorists killing by the thousands - nah, not a peep. You guys are part of the problem.

Re: # 237
Okay long and last post.

[Accepted, or adopted? Which one do you mean? There`s a BIG difference between the two.]

Let us use the word coercion, not acceptance or adoption. In my opinion they want to dictate beliefs. In that they are no different from Wahabi fundamentalists. Where they differ is that they do not wish to kill other Hindus for their beliefs. Frankly I don`t think even the Graham Staines imbroglio was supported by the larger portion of the Bajrang Dal. However any coercion is not a correct step.



[This does not make them any different factually from a Wahabi fundamentalist.]

Really? Ok, we can talk about this AFTER you answer the question above.]

See my statement above.


[[That Hinduism is too plural to accept that rubbish is the only reason why they may not succeed. But it is a dangerous path to tread. People can be coerced or seduced by less.]]

[What`s your background, I wonder. While I know that the caste you were born into is immaterial as far as evaluating you as a human being is concerned, I was wondering whether you belong to the SC/ST or Dalit sections of society. Or are you a Christian?

I would appreciate it very much if you would tell me.]

You`ve been asking me this question from the reservation boards. I do not think it is important to the discussion. I am not Christian or SC/ST or Dalit.


[Vandalising shops on Valentine`s day isn`t exactly a good thing.

No. But killing Sikhs when Indira died isn`t a good thing either. Our country is poor, with a lot of uneducated people. Things are not perfect in ANY political party.]

You can apply the same reasoning to uneducated Muslims and I am not a Congress supporter.


[Luckily Jihad (as defined by fundamentalists) will not find a calling amongst all Hindus. We do not all follow the same ideals, thank goodness. ]

Would you be so kind as to provide some references regarding this ``jihad`` amongst the Hindu fundamentalists?]

Why, we are talking about things that could happen. Hinduism is not a peaceful religion. The caste I belong to, its traditional occupaton was fighting. That is what we did for centuries before the British made it illegal for us to carry our weapons.


[As for constitutional democracy, then the Bajrang Dal must still respect the law, lip service will not do.

You mean, like no killing sikhs, or no declaring of Emergency - things like that?]

Yes partially. The state of Emergency can still be declared within the bounds of the constitution I suppose.



[Bal Thackeray created the Shiv Sena to give voice to the anti-immigrant feeling amongst Marathis. But this was becoming less popular, so he utilized the anti-Pakistan, anti-National and anti-Mulsim sentiments.]

You are wrong here. The Congress (under VP Naik) encouraged the creation of the Shiv Sena to neutralise the trade unions, lead by Datta Samant our very own George Fernandes etc. The anti South Indian agitation came later. But in any case your argument that it was created as a response to Islamist thugs is wrong. The Shiv Sena is nothing but a party of opportunists. When the Shiv Sena first started his own folks the CKP`s did not want to have anything to do with him.


[No political party exists in a vacuum. Without anger against Islamic thugs, the Shiv Sena would have died out long ago.]

They would have reinvented themselves as something else. An anti congress stance would have been good enough. Thackeray is a very intelligent man.




[I am not for appeasement. But if you`ve got to do things you must do it right. I don`t have any solution to offer.

Well until you have one, don`t criticize others.]

I thought you were the one who was the critic. I was merely talking to the University of Oklahama 1999.



[But if we stop disliking each other that may be a step in the right direction.

I don`t think 45,000 hindus have died in Kashmir, and many thousands of Pandits have been forced to flee their homeland because they were ``disliking`` the ``other``.]

So whose fault is it? That we could not keep a lid on Kashmir? That we rigged elections? That we let them have things when the rest of India was under rationing for sugar, kerosene etc? That we gave them more privileges? That we let the Pandits be chased away? That we are letting the army do the work of a civilian police force? That we let a neighbouring country stoke the fires,which they will anyway?
You think our politicians are brave. Why did we let people like Masood Azhar, Mushtaq Zargar live to be exchanged for IC-814? Why did we not kill them instead of innocent Muslims in Gujarat? I don`t believe in any trials for non-Indians caught in Indian territory illegally. Execute them if you have proof of their involvement in anti national activities.


[Otherwise ``our hoods are fine and their hoods are bad`` will be the spiel on both sides.

It is easy to sermonize. But this kind of inaction has resulted in thousands of deaths. The problem is not 50-50. Muslims are fighting every other community in every country in the world. Muslims are the common denominator. THEY are the problem.

And JNU jholawalas.]

Sure, it is inaction that has resulted in deaths. The problem is not with all Muslims. The problem is with some of them who want their views imposed on all people. They are the one`s to be stopped.