What about Bombay 1992?

Re: # 134
Ch. Ch. Ch...
The moslems had started the riot in 1992 in Mumbai, with the idea that Mumbai people ( like typical city folks in India, unorganised) will succumb to the Islamic barbarism. The who's who of the muslim front was Dawood Ebrahim ( now in the list of International terrirists and is hiding in Pakistan), Anis Ibrahim, Chhota Shakeel etc... All were underworld dons, living lavishly with the help of extortion money and illegal activities (smuggling from Dubai). Police, under the patronage of Congress never brought these thugs under book.
When Mumbaikars, after the initial shock, organised under Shiv Sena and paid back the moslems with the same coin, these moslem heroes shown clean pair of heels. Their initial destination was Dubai.
Congress was in power and they have allowed these islamists/thugs shelter and protection from not being persecuted. When, people of Mumbai organised under Siv sena, Congress had failed to protect them.
Ask any Mumbai commenr, they will narrate the actual story. Siv sena swept to power after the riots.

Re: # 159
Hindutva hyenas, and Jewish geniuses can bash Islam, Muslims, and the Holy Prophet to their own orgasmic satisfaction.

ANs: People does not believe in mere words. The problem Islam is creating for thousands of years in different parts of world are now available to everybody. So, these incidents are not thought as exception or isolation. Information about London Bombing, Madrid Bombing, French Riot etc. now available to all of US. So, the stench of Islam is now properly felt by all ( from USA to Thailand). Thanks to media revolution. When, we used to see large scale non moslem migration from Bangladesh or Kashmiri pundits, we used to take this from political angle ( at least our so called secular leaders used to provide that angle only. Media used to be controlled). What pride you get from being part of barbaric identity and furthermore defend the barbarism? Does people of UK, Spain, USA, Thailand are jews and they are all conspiring with Indians against Islam?

The raving lunatic Okhla is lying about everything (except chowk censoring my articles) in the below reproduced BS diatribe, in fact it is quite pathetic that idiots like him have to invent bs to discredit my quite well established, well argued posts....like Madani sahib said these bastar** are just jealous because they cannot approach my posts except by inventing lies. Btw nobody deported me from the US or fired me from any US university, I came back to Pakistan of my own volition, away from the land of cheerful morons like okhla, slaves yet happy in their enslavement....Now go eff off okhla....

Masadi you creep !!!! (Utterly & Completely Respected)

So you are still trying to spread your bullshyte notions that have been rejected by the rest of the civilized world!!!!

Will you never learn ???

Don't you remember the hiding you got on faithfreedom.org( at the hands of Ali) ???

Don't you remember the disciplinary meetings in the US University just before they deported you in spite of your pleadings???

Don't you remember your abject surrender and begging/whining tone in which you implored for a second chance to be allowed to stay in the US????

Don't you remember the unceremonious manner in which you were comprehensively rejected and kicked out of the US??

Don't you remember the impish grin on the face of the US immigration (INS) official as you were dragged kicking and screaming to the airplane????

Don't you remember the "evil" students in your Pakistani college who made open mockery of the ideas you tried to teach them???

Don't you remember the management committee meeting which unanimously declared you "unfit" to train young Pakistani students???

Don't you remember how you were thrown out of that college and the security staff alerted to never let you enter again ???

Don't you remember how all your pleadings for "outstanding claims" were met with derisive laughter???

Don't you remember how the Chowk staff has consistently refused to publish your bullshyte articles???

Don't you remember how even lulu.com would not accept your "works" any more???

And now, you have found a one-man audience in the intelligent MADani.

Perhaps now you have reached the peak of your career.

Rejoice in your success.....

#162 Posted by IB on August 17, 2007 2:42:03 pm


they dealt with a man in uniform in Pakistan who had been remarkably flexible in dealing with the issue of Kashmir – President Mushraff


It's not a concession when you agree to give up something you don't have..India agreeing to withdraw from Siachen, a place it actually controls, is a concession...

Stuka yes, its a federation, different states have more or less religious overtones. But its not an atheist coutry by any standards, just ask the homosexuals. They cant get married in most states just because they may not be monotheist, monotheist rules are held as mandatory for ALL inculding atheists and nonbelievers

The Pledge of Allegiance

Original adopted October 12, 1892, 'Columbus Day'.
"I pledge allegiance to my flag and to the republic for which it stands: one nation UNDER GOD indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Amended in 1954, during the Cold War McCarthyism, at the request of Christian and anti-Communist groups to include "under God" The use of a capitalized 'G' in 'God" is commonly considered the specific Judeo-Christian god.
The use of 'God' may disclude all non Judeo-Christian believers, as well as polytheists .

Arkansas
"No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any court."
Article 19, sect. 1 of the 1874 constitution

North Carolina
"The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God...." Constitution Article 6 Section 8

South Carolina
"No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor who denies the existence of the Supreme Being..."
Article 4 Section 2

Tennessee
"No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state." Bill of Rights: Article 9 Section 4

"In God We Trust", congress declared national motto

Salim:

"There is a symbiotic relationship between lunatic Muslims and even more stupid news media hungry to portray ALL Muslims in the worst possible light."

Absolutely, any suggestions how media can be made to give more "dog bites man" kind of news?

You are absolutely right – when you say about the vacuum which needs to be filled and there is not just lack of trust between the two but a sense of misgivings as well.

I do understand where India is coming from about the lack of trust – Kargil has been the ‘stabber’, there is no doubt about it but since then lot of water has passed and today we live in a different world .
The possibility of war between India and Pakistan has diminished post-Pokran / Chaggi and Kargil and the military establishment on both sides (especially Pakistani) has learned that war of any sort (conventional, limited and proxy) is not acceptable and as far as I understand the statements coming from Indian Army high-ups are the same.
The Confidence Building Measures had been a success and the cross border infiltration from Pakistani side is at halt – agree or not it’s an achievement.
Trade between us has increased 400% over the last 3-5 years and recently Indian Prime Minister has allowed imports of Pakistani cement into India – while Pakistani govt. has allowed Indian Cotton Bails imports into Pakistan apart from sugar.
Pakistani(s) are only concerned about Indian Government’s involvement in Afghanistan which some hawks in Pakistani establishment use as an excuse to sometimes change policies at the right time.
I seriously believe that Indian(s) has lost a chance – they dealt with a man in uniform in Pakistan who had been remarkably flexible in dealing with the issue of Kashmir – President Mushraff ( I agree he was the chief planner of Kargil War – he’s like one of those hunters who turn into conservationist when they realize there mistakes ) .
Indians should have shown a bigger heart. It’s heartening to see even the ruling and so-called hawkish J&K leaders Farukh Abdullah opening criticizing Indian govt. stance and calling for at one time – a separate state of J&K. Kashmir should be addressed. There has been realization among the Pakistani masses that India will never gave Kashmir to Pakistan – so they are now prepared to settle for a separate state and so are the Indians (they talk about joint control).
As far as Bombay Bombing is concerned – normal people get effected with all this and at times we tend to argue on chowk for the sake of arguments – which is unethical and like playing over the dead bodies of not just those who died in Bombay but people who died of terrorist activities anywhere be it Bombay, Karachi or anywhere.
I hope for the best - !

addu
1. christianity is the state religion in ameirca too ...which means in the same way as pakistan there is a supremacy of one God, idolatory is not considered equal to monotheism.


No, its not.

IB, we can and should negotiate, of course! That water arrangement thing has worked pretty well. But what I do suspect is that India and Pakistan will never agree on who is being just and who is being unjust. And what to do with people who are very very unjust.

Not a big deal. Just a possibility to keep in mind. As GT suggested, so long as both sides keep themselves constantly ready for any and all eventualities, they must certainly do everything they can to reduce tensions (as much as necessary, without sacrificing their short-term and long-term interests).

As a man of war, this lay person's caution is the least you would expect. :)
-------------

Cool, GT! :)

DM #154 {".., an Imam in Kolkata on Friday declared "unlimited reward" on the head of Taslima Nasreen, ...
Speaking at a rally after the Friday prayers, Syed Mohammed Noorur Rahman Barkati, imam of the Tipu Sultan Shahi Masjid, also demanded that the writer be deported from the country in a month.
...
"If our demand is not met, there will be an unlimited cash reward for whosoever kills her."}

DM Sahib,
These lunatic mullahs know exactly how to grab the limelight and expose themselves to the largest world audience. Does anybody have a record of how many such "unlimited cash rewards" have actually ever been paid?

There is a symbiotic relationship between lunatic Muslims and even more stupid news media hungry to portray ALL Muslims in the worst possible light.

If the news is boring for the day, just wait for Zawahairy or Been Laid to provide an audio, or better a video, so that right-wing foaming-at-the-mouth talk show hosts, electronic Aya Toolas, Hindutva hyenas, and Jewish geniuses can bash Islam, Muslims, and the Holy Prophet to their own orgasmic satisfaction.

Kaal it is more than trust :) ... the quote is very similar to that in a poster pasted all over new Spain by a Habsburg king! I shall put is up sometime for you :)

Re: # 149Yaar – although it’s a snide comment to make – but nevertheless I am will answer it with utter most honest.

Yaar it’s actually a world-wide phenomenon – you fight and fight & then fight again but eventually you talk and resolve your issues. Pakistani Establishment (Army – and I am being very candid about my feelings) has learned the lesson.
Organizations and Countries like LTTE, IRA, Taliban(s), Rabanni, Northern Alliance, North Koreans, Persians, South Koreans, Taiwanese, Chinese, Russians, Palestinians, Israelis, Syrians, Libyans, and Americans have learned the lesson of negotiating and resolving there issues – amicably ; I find it hard as to why can’t we Pakistanis and Indians?
On my part – I want peace with India which is durable – with a open heart . Nothing to loose and I am sure things will improve in time to come.
Cheers.

GT, unfortunately all systems work just that way...they are built on trust, that trust is betrayed, and systems crumble.

Smarter systems build in checks and balances, repair and renewal mechanisms etc. Still, to go back to IB, I suspect the question is valid (as it is valid asking all parties looking for 'cooperation'): what follows, in their own worldviews, after the 'cooperation?'

It's one thing to be deceived, or even to run into bad people, quite another not to even bother with "due diligence" in any situation. :)

Kaal:

"They begin to talk about trust and cooperation in vacuum (it may also be deliberately downplayed by people who wish to take advantage, in an unfair sense - when they say: trust us! We mean no harm.)"

Yes, let me restate. The liberal elites proposed "Trust us, we will do the best for you. You do not need to get into complicated questions regarding the state etc. For that you need to go to Cambridge and know English. So just leave it to us. We know best."

This patronage system worked for a while ... how long more will it work? I see it crumbling.

This is what feed Islamophobia among Indians - and not only among the Hindus:

Imam puts 'unlimited reward' on Taslima's head

August 17, 2007 19:10 IST


Charging her with defaming Islam and the Prophet, an Imam in Kolkata on Friday declared "unlimited reward" on the head of Taslima Nasreen, the controversial Bangladeshi writer. Taslima was attacked in Hyderabad last week.

Speaking at a rally after the Friday prayers, Syed Mohammed Noorur Rahman Barkati, imam of the Tipu Sultan Shahi Masjid, also demanded that the writer be deported from the country in a month.

"If our demand is not met, there will be an unlimited cash reward for whosoever kills her. The United Progressive Alliance government at the Centre and the Left Front government in the state will be responsible for the consequences," he told the gathering at Esplanade, in Kolkata.

'If you harbour Taslima and Rushdie in India, then drive away all the Muslims from this country,' a banner at the rally said.

Alleging that Taslima had exposed Indian Muslims to ridicule and contempt, the imam threatened to organise a road block in front of the writer's residence in Kolkata after the month of Ramzan.

Majidulla Khan, political spokesman of the Mazlis Bachao Committee, Hyderabad, also spoke. Taslima was attacked by Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen members in Hyderabad during a book launch on August 9.

UNI

okhla:

"All muslims accused of even lesser offences have been sentenced to death."

Can someone verify if this is true. My impression was that many Muslims also got lesser sentences and some were found to be not guilty as well. Those who got the death sentence was proved to be involved in actual conspiracy, not just carrying a gun.

GT, man, I like this GT much better! (and no, I can't take ANY credit for it :))

The problem is that that point of view may be lost on liberals (by that one always means elite liberals). They begin to talk about trust and cooperation in vacuum (it may also be deliberately downplayed by people who wish to take advantage, in an unfair sense - when they say: trust us! We mean no harm.)

Before ANY cooperation, must come proper and necessary amount of distrust and suspicion. We must recognize continued and eternal distrust and suspicion (and it need not be the same amount in every case) as simply, merely, legitimately the cost of continued existence and of doing business.

Kaal:

"So tomorrow, as economic conditions and military powers at home increase, the sense toward fighting will change (unless Indians and others begin to do what you want them to do).

Is that right?"

Of course this is right, not only vis-a-vis Pakistan/India but also India/Burma .... Bangladesh/Burma ... Switzerland/Germany etc. etc. But the key issue is that countries can do what each other want them to do and benifit. Plus, each country should be able to deter each other such that they are able to do what is good for it even if it displeases the other country. With such balances IB's POV will be sustained.

So tomorrow, as economic conditions and military powers at home increase, the sense toward fighting will change (unless Indians and others begin to do what you want them to do).

Is that right?

IB bhai, a good post but one question, for clarity.

Is the sense that there is no use fighting (with India and similar others) because it is not pragmatic (affordable, winnable) to fight at this time, or that that kind of fighting is not morally appropriate over and above the issue of current winnability and affordability?

Re: # 139 harish bhai,
I never intended to side with the 'scums' who kill anyone for whatever cause . I am quite aware of the facts and how the 'terrorists operation' - which took place in then Bombay back in 1992.
Yes, Dawood Ibrahim was involved in the financing phase - the actual operations were conducted by locals on ground.
We share a messy past!
- lets not play politics on graves/ashes of the dead . We ( India / Pakistan ) had a history of conducting operations in the past which resulted only in killing of poors / lower and upper middle classes.
There is a sense in Pakistanis now that there no use of fighting with India - and Indians seems to be the same view but does it matter? We live in a inperfect dictatorship and you in a inperfect democracy but I sincerely hope that things will change.
Inida ( i personaly think ) lost a big chance of not co-operating with President Mushraff who has a very open mind regarding Kashmir Issue - and we would have sorted our difference out couple of years ago.
regards,
IB

Blood brothers

by | M J Akbar


Shamshad Hussain
A Hindi film called Mother India, made by a well-known director, Mehboob, released in 1958, became an unprecedented critical and popular hit of its time. Our parents took us to the theatre with the enthusiasm of missionaries escorting children to a moral science class. The Statesman reported that it almost won the Oscar for the best foreign film, losing to Federico Fellini’s Nights of the Cabria by a solitary vote in the third round.

The narrative was constructed around the memories of an old woman, Radha, eponymous wife of Lord Krishna and therefore Mother of India, who had been abandoned by her depressed husband after he lost his arms in an accident. She had three sons: one drowned; the second was a good boy; the third, Birju, a rebel who grew up to become a dacoit. Impoverished Radha was a paragon of virtue, and spurned the attentions of a leering moneylender, Sukhilala, who demanded sex as interest on his loan. Whether this moneylender was a symbol of the World Bank or not was left unclear, but there were plenty of other allegories. In a climax that had father, mother, brother and sister India in tears, Mother India shot her dacoit-son Birju to save the honour of the village. It was an epic superhit, its peasant-patriotism and femme-nobility high on the approved agenda of a nation that still wanted to believe in itself.

Radha was played by Nargis, a Muslim. Jaipal, Kalyan Singh’s slightly precocious son, thought this ridiculous. Mother Pakistan was a Muslim; how could Mother India be a Muslim as well? Could Muslims partition the motherland and still claim ownership of both nations? “You Muslims are greedy. You want everything. You take your own country, and then say India is your country as well.”

“Yes,” agreed Shyam Singh. “Muslims must make up their minds. They go to Pakistan when they like, they live in India when they want. We Hindus can’t do that.”

“My father was born in Pakistan, so he went to Pakistan. I was born in India, so I live in India,” answered Mustafa, who had inherited his father’s terse logic.

“Ha!” responded Jaipal, “you stayed back because you want the property that your father left behind! You go and see him whenever you want. What difference does it make to you? Only Hindus suffered in the partition of their motherland.”

“What is there to argue about? Indian Muslims marry among us, so they are one of us,” reasoned Kamala, who was always anxious to find balm in the most obscure cupboard, for he hated confrontation of any kind. “Nargis married Sunil Dutt just after the release of Mother India. Sunil Dutt was her son, Birju, who she killed. Sunil Dutt is a Hindu. She married a Hindu, so it’s all right, isn’t it?” Since Freud had not reached Telinipara, no other interpretation was made.

“You mean to say that I have to marry a Hindu in order to become an Indian?” asked Mustafa, with a touch of anger. “I will never marry anyone but a Pathan girl.”

“Why are we taking film people so seriously? It’s all fake. Which one of us is going to find anyone as beautiful as Nargis?” said Kamala, displaying his usual good sense.

“If it’s all make-believe, why do Hindus keep saying Raj Kapoor is much better than Dilip Kumar?” asked Altaf, rising above his usual timidity.

Raj Kapoor and Dilip Kumar were superstars; the first a Hindu and the second, disguised by his pseudonym, a Muslim. Multiple identities stitched disparate imperatives, but loyalties were absolute. A superstar both borrowed and returned identity to his community.

I was bored by this conversation. My favourite star was Dev Anand, the third of the men who dominated the film industry in the fifties. Dev Anand lived on the street and beyond religion. If he had any faith it was in himself. He would gamble with thieves, dance with bar girls, drink to celebrate and win the day without trying to save the nation. Dev Anand was liberation, and gave our generation its first beautiful essay on love and adultery, forsaking the world for the gorgeous Waheeda Rehman in that wondrous classic, Guide. Dilip Kumar and Raj Kapoor carried the past in their eyes. Dev Anand wore the insouciance of the future.

I loved the songs of Dev Anand’s films.

Main zindagi ka saath nibhata chala gaya, Main fiqr ko dhooen main urhata chala gaya.
I dealt with life as it came, I turned worry to smoke rings.
I dreamt of the day I could start smoking.
Jo mil gaya usiko muqaddar samajh liya, Jo kho gaya main usko bhulata chala gaya.
What I got became my destiny, What I lost, I simply forgot.
Could philosophy be more enchanting than this? […]

The best warren for a loaf was the great Anarkali bazaar, named after the dancing girl in the court of the Great Mughal, Akbar, who won the heart of his son and heir, Prince Salim. The magic of myth burnished these names from history. Anarkali, blossom of the pomegranate, made an empire tremble with the flick of an eyelash, lost her prince but won her legend, and found an immortal home in a grave in the heart of Lahore. Akbar, lord of the world, picked up his sword against a cherished but obstinate son who preferred the love of a slave to the demands of empire.

Happily, while Anarkali and Akbar heated my perennially warm imagination, they also resolved those nitpicking dilemmas of Mother India in a film called Mughal-e-Azam (The Great Mughal).

I saw Anarkali reincarnated in the exquisite poise of Madhubala, the actress who defined beauty for a generation. Lahore, mesmerized by the movie, sparkled with her image. She soared above the Mughal skyline of Lahore on dozens of huge billboards as other faces faded in deference to her grace. At Shah Alam Gate, Anarkali looked up in prayer towards God, mysterious, haunting, bewitching, her face framed by a black dupatta and lit by the soft touch of a candle. She lived again in the protective embrace of Salim, glancing around the hem of a white muslin dupatta, her lips parted in a smile that was both a challenge and an invitation, her eyes dancing to a silent melody. And there again, alone, unencumbered by pretenders: she lifted a shimmer of a veil with fingers dressed in jewels; a large nose ring, swaying slightly, was held by a thin bridge of pearls that swept into her hair; her eyes spun gossamer traps that floated and disappeared and her succulent lips – the arc of a bow above, and lush heart of a melon below – destroyed all the laws that kept this world in place: morality, order, obedience, fear.

I saw the emperor through the looking glass of an enchanting slave.

But it was the emperor who gave me back my identity when we went, a cluster of cousins, to see the film. The curtains rose above a dark screen on which, slowly, a map of united India appeared. A deep regal baritone spoke three simple words: “Main Hindoostan hoon!” I am India! I am Mughal. I am Muslim. I am India. My India is not a part of India. It is the whole of India. I am not just Pakistan; I am this vast Subcontinent that sprawls from the rough-diamond mountains of the Hindu Kush in the northwest to the turbulent waves of the Bay of Bengal and the sweet rhythms of the Indian Ocean beyond the shores of sultry, sunburnt Kerala. I am Muslim. I am everywhere.

Through two hours of epic narrative I found myself, my past, my culture, my language, my flirtations, my loves, my rebellion, my poetry, my music, my intrigues, my art, my suffering, my sacrifice, my oath, my father, my mother, my present, and perhaps even my future. Who else could have made this film except an Indian Muslim from Bombay, K Asif, who distilled history in a dewdrop and squandered a fortune in pursuit of an elegant glance? Who else could have been Anarkali except Madhubala, shy and erotic, in life and on screen the quintessential Indian Muslim lady? Life and art overlapped repeatedly like the streams of Muslim and Hindu cultures. Akbar’s son, Salim, was played by Dilip Kumar, named Yusuf Khan at birth. Salim’s mother and the emperor’s wife, Joda Bai, was a Hindu: Salim’s blood fed from both Mughal and Rajput genes. Prithviraj, a towering Hindu Pathan from Peshawar, acted the part of Akbar, an empire-builder with bloodshot eyes and iron will who bowed before Allah while his queen worshipped Krishna. Salim’s childhood friend was Durjan, the son of Raja Man Singh, who gave his life to save Anarkali. Anarkali, a Muslim, danced to an ancient Indian Hindu beat, while the immaculate voice of Tansen floated, paused, rose and fell, went back to the Hindu shastras and then moved four centuries forward to become the music of a contemporary genius, Ustad Bade Ghulam Ali Khan.

They did not toss their heads in the Mughal court, they merely raised their eyes. Anarkali destroyed her nemesis when she looked an emperor in the eye before being led away to death, and passed an immortal judgment: “Yeh kaneez Jalaluddin Muhammad Akbar ko apna khoon maaf karti hai!” This slave forgives Jalaluddin Muhammad Akbar for taking
her life!

In that summer of discovery, Anarkali turned me into a teenager.

‘Elsewhere’ is a section where Himal features writings from other sources that the editors would like to present to our readers. This selection is from M J Akbar’s book Blood Brothers: A family saga, published in 2006 by R

from Vizag (hate to say a Muslim)

#129 Okhla

I realize I am many times harder on the Pakistanis than I need to be.

What the heck, you guys make it too easy! :)

When I moved to the US and read many US newspapers for the first time (it was a while ago), I was particularly struck by such phrases as "Pakistan - India's archenemy". I said, heck, what is an archenemy?! I had never heard (in India) Pakistan being described that way - nor Pakistan having such a perception being mentioned in Indian papers (or by Indian politicos). But then, if one dispassionately examines what the leaders of Pakistan have been doing over the decades, perhaps the Westerners are more accurate - they see things for how those things are rather than the wishful "just another country" across the border perception that SOME Indians would like to see (most Indians, in truth, do not think too much about Pakistan because they have other concerns on their mind).

All of the above having been said, clearly, many of the faults are shared between the two countries - because those faults have the same origin - and, no matter what ideology was force-fed on the west side of the border, we are the same people.

PS: stay off the booze! :)

Tolks,

This religious minority concept is typical of Indian political discourse. Minorities per se - for eg. natives of north America - suffer some disabilities, therefore they needed some incentives to catch up with the rest.

Here in India this blanket brushing of Muslims as minority is not proppa. They are as diverse as Hindus and Christians.

In an open society like India, Muslims, like anybody else had to make their own efforts to rise above. Case in point is a poor girl from Vizag (hate to Muslim) who fought economic disabilities to become an engineer and that too into Infosys.

I put the %age @ 5 for calling a group as minority, it's just an approximation. Look at Sikhs. They are less than 3% of Indian population. Look at their visibility and success.

Despite the constant economic boycott since 90s, Muslism are Gujarat are neck to neck with Hindus in grabbing prosperity. Most of the prosperous Bombay Muslims are not Marathi but Gujju Muslims.

141 Posted by Folio on August 17, 2007 2:44:40 am
Aslam,

!

A population that constituted 50+% in some regions of India (pre-47) cant be called a minority. In a stricter sense any pop group that constituted 5% or less can be called a minority, not a group of 25%.

Even now Muslims @ 15% in contemporary India cant be called a minority.
-----------------------------------------
IMHO using m\words like MINORITY is not enough and i agree with your contention that muslim population vary from 50% to 15 % but never less than 5% the arbitary criteria for being considered minority ,,,many other groups can be defined a minority such as Brahmins, Different linguist group when compared with whole of India or national language Hindi ....And word minority WORD is only politicaly term feebly to imply and not be too abrasive to mention MUSLIM...but the fact to be minority neumerically just like telugu tamil even sikh & jain is a little different than if you are consideredto be a outsider RELIGION which none of the other MINORITIS are ever considered.. what i men is being minority is not only the problem but being of DIFFERENT religion makes double wammy ...now what ever argument may be Two nation theory identification of muslims in ndia as pakistani and given the 4 wars with Pakistan enemy no 1 for India is Pakistan and even well meaning secularist cannot convincing the others that this does not apply to Indian muslim being enemy no 1

Mr. Syed,

'And Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, India’s answer to Nero, who had presided over the destruction of the mosque at Ayodhya, continued to fiddle with the characteristic diligence.'

PVR was the PM of the Union govt. Since law and order is a state subject, PM cant overstep his limitations. At best he made the central forces available for any kinda eventuality.

He banked MOSTLY on the SOLEMN ASSURANCES of Kalyan Singh to Supreme Court. Like many Indians do, this daddu CM Kalyan Singh broke his promise and facilitated masjid's demolition.

There's a positive side to it. That Babri Masjid was a bugbear! Sangh Parivar killed the golden goose. They (BJP) stopped growing after the initial rise that coincided with Babri's demolition.

Are u not aware the masjid demolitions are common in KSA?

(Btw, I said worst things abt Sanghis & their criminal adventure at Ayodhya and the aftermath like Bombay).

Aslam,

Jinnah fighting for underdogs? U must be kidding...the ML leadership shud remind u the bulldogs not any underdogs!

A population that constituted 50+% in some regions of India (pre-47) cant be called a minority. In a stricter sense any pop group that constituted 5% or less can be called a minority, not a group of 25%.

Even now Muslims @ 15% in contemporary India cant be called a minority.

Aslam,

Jinnah fighting for underdogs? U must be kidding...the ML leadership shud remind u the bulldogs not any underdogs?

A population that constituted 50+% in some regions of India (pre-47) cant be called a minority. In a stricter sense any pop group that constituted 5% or less can be called a minority, not a group of 25%.

Even now Muslims @ 15% in contemporary India cant be called a minority.

#137 Posted by IB

Angry Indian Muslims conducted the Bombay Bombings.. most of them Gujratis Memon -
it' was out of anger - and nothing else!

IB Bhai, I know you're a police officer somewhere in Sindh, but I think you got your facts wrong on this one. The blasts were masterminded by Dawood Ibrahim, a Konkani Muslim. Tiger Memon to planned it and it was executed by local Muslims (Marathi?). So it is factually incorrect to say most of the folks involved in it were Memons.

And the blasts may have been an angry response to Babri Masjid, but it was a terrorist act in which hundreds of innocent people lost their lives, so the perpetrators deserve punishment. As for the Shiv Sainiks who massacred thousands of Muslims in Mumbai, they deserve punishment too, but unfortunately, they happen to be powerful. Some day, when enthusiasm for their cause has waned, we hope they'll get their just desserts.

#137 Posted by IB

Angry Indian Muslims conducted the Bombay Bombings.. most of them Gujratis Memon -
it' was out of anger - and nothing else!

IB Bhai, I know you're a police officer somewhere in Sindh, but I think you got your facts wrong on this one. The blasts were masterminded by Dawood Ibrahim, a Konkani Muslim. Tiger Memon to planned it and it was executed by local Muslims (Marathi?). So it is factually incorrect to say most of the folks involved in it were Memons.

And the blasts may have been an angry response to Babri Masjid, but it was a terrorist act in which hundreds of innocent people lost their lives, so the perpetrators deserve punishment. As for the Shiv Sainiks who massacred thousands of Muslims in Mumbai, they deserve punishment too, but unfortunately, they happen to be powerful. Some day, when enthusiasm for their cause has waned, we hope they'll get their just desserts.

Angry Indian Muslims conducted the Bombay Bombings.. most of them Gujratis Memon -
it' was out of anger - and nothing else!

Re: # 133

borivili bhaiyya,

Police do not care whether it is hindu or muslim. Most of them consider the use of danda and violence as the only way to police and ensure order in a communally tense situation.

Most of them care for their jobs only. Some times they kill more hindus than muslims while supressing riots. Riots are a sar-dard for them because it takes away the fun of regular policing. So they ensure that those who are shouting too much get the danda they deserve- and un fortunately the Rage-Boys amongst muslims are in plenty. Especially with the testrone high chants of jihad and killing of kafirs the illiterate muslims come out more often at the behest of the mullahs.

Most of the riots get started by these muslim goons who are high on jehad- especially after Friday namaz sermons.

They kill or stab some one , retaliation happens and then the cycle of revenge follows that culminate in mob violence.

It is wrong to say that ONLY muslims get killed in riots- the ratio is some thing like 40 -60 in most of them.

ek aur baat tu kehta hai ki pakistan ke school mein hinduon ke khilaf bharkate hain but RSS/VHPbjp school in India only brainwash, according to report these school are increasing so more gujraats,

many hindus on chowk also from these schools

AJZ,

Dear writer, great article, do keep writing. But your query remains unanswered, why has there been no justice for the victims of 1992?

A laddu mere pass itna vakt nahi hai is liye jaldi baat karke ja raha hoo, tu bar bar zameen maangta hai mandir ke liye, mein tujhe zameen dunga tu pehle ye batah why in every riot, aligar, meerut, moradabad, bhaaulpur, gujrats is the police killing muslims in their houses and even masjids, in bombay they are evn giving ma behen galis on police radio with recordings. they are leading mobs thereare even photos of police watching as riots and killings are happening,

how can any case go to court police is destroying all the evidence, killing/threatning witness, not even registering FIR is india democracy or mobocracy, you say pakistan is bad but in pakistan there is shia minority and ahmedis and hindus also but police is not killing and rioting

and your judge dont decide case of muslim for 20 25 years do
you hindus hate muslims? how can their be one country this is not possible even in saat janams

Hindus

#131 Posted by laddu

While there are fundamentalist Christian movements in the US, the main controversy is between the atheists and religious people (of all religions) - not between Christianity and non-Christianity.

This is hard for Muslims to comprehend.

clifton bi,

1. American constitution is a secular one- it only pays lip service to the God and was just for consumption of the conservative at the time it was being promulgated. There is a sizable number of people who want this reference to one God eliminated now. This passing refernce to one God cannot be compared to the "Islamic Principles" that the constitution of Pakistans requires adherence to for all its laws and acts.
2. This is wrong in present day India where muslim vote bank is a sizable one to decide the fate of the government.Muslim votes ,as a minority, COUNTS.
3. The recent changes only provides some relief, that does not SUBSTANTIALLY change the position of minorities.
4. Money principle would remain till the time Shariat is considered as some sort of an ideal state laws that Pakistan has to look to. For that you have to CONFRONT the mullahs.

laddu
1. christianity is the state religion in ameirca too ...which means in the same way as pakistan there is a supremacy of one God, idolatory is not considered equal to monotheism.
2. seperate electorates is what muslims wanted in india they are actually to protect the minority. Pakistan is 99% muslim believe me in the general elections noone would bother courting the minorirty vote its worthless, this way there is a fixed representation of minorities ....obviously they cant get two votes which is why they cant vote muslim and also nonmuslim.
3. the rape laws have changed in pakistan ...we have discovered DNA evidence, this is now a moot point.
4. i agree with you on the death - money principle that should absolutely be changed.

#123 BJ, The question of anybody "teaching" anybody else or even anybody "needing to learn" anything does not arise. Why do you assume that any "teaching" or "learning" must necessarily be involved in any interaction between Pakistani & Indian Muslims?

Also, my friend, before you start foaming at the mouth, kindly read my interact #51.

Clifton bi,

Religious minorities are alienated and deprived of equal access to justice in other ways. For instance, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim, the perpetrator may compensate the victim’s family monetarily. If a non-Muslim kills a Muslim, however, the perpetrator faces prison or the death penalty. Sharia courts are also inherently discriminatory against non-Muslims. The Federal Sharia Court (FSC) ensures that all legislative acts and judicial pronouncements, including those of the Supreme Court, are compatible with Islamic law. Additionally, three of the eight appointed members of the court need not even be professional judges. According to Asma Jehagir, Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, the structure of the sharia courts is evidence that, "The government wants to impose a Taliban-style theocratic rule in Pakistan."

The logic of Pakistan constitution's adherence to "principles of Islam" takes us to Shariah. And shariah is the construct of the mullahs.

So Pakistan's foundations are rightly claimed by the mullahs.

There can not bre any equality of treatment for minorities unless this Islamic principles is ERASED, I emphasize- "ERASED", from the constitution of Pakistan.

On June 28, 2001, the Supreme Court ruled that non-Muslims may vote for any candidate at the Union Council level for seats reserved for mayor, deputy mayor, laborers, farmers, and women. However, non-Muslims still are barred from voting for Muslim candidates who run for general seats. Three of the five rounds of elections already had occurred prior to this ruling. Few non-Muslims are active in the country's mainstream political parties. Christian and Hindu leaders conducted a boycott to protest against the system of separate electorates during the local elections.

Clifton bi,

Take for example special rules of evidence that apply in Hadd cases, which discriminate against non-Muslims. For example, a non-Muslim may testify only if the victim also is non-Muslim. Likewise, the testimony of women, Muslim or non-Muslim, is not admissible in cases involving Hadd punishments. Therefore, if a Muslim man rapes a Muslim woman in the presence of women or non-Muslim men, he cannot be convicted under the Hudood Ordinances.

The discrimination against non muslims is part of the agenda of mullah Islam that is embeded in the constitution of Pakistan.

"I have shown you extensively how the constitution of pakistan has pledged EQUALITY for minorities "

This is again a false statement.

Because it may appear that the constitution provides for equality, but other parts of coherence with "Islamic principles" ensures that Hudood is equally applicable on idolator hindus.
Even Ahmedis are targetted by the Pakistani laws which are not considerd ultra vires to the so called constitutional guarantess because the other part of constitution calls for adherence to "Islamic principles"

And pray, what are these "Islamic principles" ?

1. One Allah only.
2. His supremacy over other gods.
3. Finality of Prophet.
4. Shariah

So there goes your claim of "equality" , because Islamic principles DOES NOT BELIEVE in equality of idolators or kafirs with muslims.
So, the reality is that in principle your constitution does not believe in equality between kafirs, idolator and muslims.
That is why the logic of "Islamic principle" - which is Shariah - has rightly been asserted by MMA and the mullahs.

Pakistan by no strech of imagination exclude "shariah" out of the guiding principles of Islam.

"mullahs have no place in religious hierachy .."

That is a completely wrong statement. The Qazis, Muftis, Ayotollahs, Maualvis, Sheikhs and all those Islamic "scholars" are indeed respected and their views have great value in cases involving SHARIAH.

They have a great respectful position in any muslim community and their views and opions hold a primacy over other's views. Some times their views are prescriptory but most of the time their views are mandatory and becomes a statutory law within their community of influence.

#120 Okhla99

(Note: Okhla, for the sake of this discussion, let me assume that you are Pakistani Muslim.)

Minorities ANYWHERE, invariably get the short end of the stick. That does not make such treatment right, of course – but there are right ways to oppose such treatment and then there are the WRONG ways to do so.

The means make all the difference.

And BTW my dear, if guys like you truly care for Indian Muslims, the best thing you all can do is to leave them alone! By and large, the Indian Muslims have survived well and even thrived well in that country. They owe you guys NOTHING!

Your country’s hostile policies toward India – its constant hammering on the inter-community fault lines within India – has been nothing but a source of aggravation and problems for Indian Muslims! Those who have blood ties in Pakistan can not do much about the reality of the blood ties – common sense dictates that they will feel a certain closeness to their extended family members – but even they do not feel any attraction to the grotesque entity that currently goes by the name of your country!

There is nothing positive that y’all can do for the Muslims of India – in fact, they can do a lot better WITHOUT your help! And that is the truth!

Indians at large, including Indian Muslims – need no lessons from Pakistanis on the concept of tolerance! Pakistanis have no CLUE what tolerance is. Had they even the least bit of such clue, they would not be in their current situation! The sub-continent would not be in such doldrums! Perhaps the world too would be spared a lot of trauma and anguish!

What do you wish to teach Indian Muslims – I ask you?!

That it is okay to kill off the minorities?

That it is okay to kill off any segment which does not “belong”?!

That it is okay to kill off elected leaders?

That it is okay to grab power by force?!

Name ONE worthwhile virtue that y’all are capable of teaching the Indian Muslims!!

No hard feelings, yaar, but it is rather difficult to do so, isn’t it?! :(

laddu please let me tell you something you apparently dont know ....mullahs have no place in religious hierachy (we do not belive in arbitration btw us and God) and the mullahs clamoring for the stupidest things are also politically and socially utterly irrelevent.

I would not confuse that with "islamists" a word broad enough to include jinnah and iqbal ....much less moderate mulsims. I have shown you extensively how the constitution of pakistan has pledged EQUALITY for minorities and thats only possible because moderates and reasonable islamists are the overwhelming majority in pakistan, always have been and always will be.

I happen to like alot about sufi philosophy/poetry but sufism and mullahism is equally irrelevent and ineffectual.

Re: # 118

Clifton bi,

I believe that the mullah cult would end one day. What would survive is a benign form of sufism that believes in some verses of Quran and rejects hadiths and the hate verses of Quran.

That paring down would be done by forces of modernity with the help of modern educated muslims.

The future clash is going to be between mullahs and their supporters world wide against the rest of modernity.

In my opinion the modern educated muslim would have to take a stand whether to support the mullahs or go for the modernity.

That moment is right NOW in front of Pakistanis. I fore see a great civil un rest in Pakistan in the coming months and educated muslims would be forced to take a stance for or against the mullahism.

MMA would force Pakistanis to confront the evilness of Quranic hate verses.

The battle lines are now drawn- educated muslims have to now un ambigously prepared for taking sides.

#108 BJ

Indian concept of justice is different for Hindus & Muslims.
Sanjay Datt was exonerated under TADA even though a Supreme Court five member bench had found him prima facie guilty under TADA. The only thing the lower court could have decided was either death sentence or life term. It chose, however, to exonerate Sanjay Datt of TADA offence (procuring and keeping Hand Grenades, AK rifles etc). All muslims accused of even lesser offences have been sentenced to death. And then you talk of hypocrisy, my friend...

*are prevailing*

laddu 24 hrs ago you decided that mullahs were taking over the world, that the relatively secular constitution of pakistan was in imminent threat because the MMA was multiplying by leaps and bounds, - now suddenly the forces of modernity is prevaling ???

what a difference a day can make :)

Re: # 116


This is a cult prepared by mullahs.

This is a "mullah conspiracy" .

This cult would end only when mullahs are eliminated.

Thanks to the forces of modernity even a Jihadi Commando maker like Musharaff has to turn back and start eliminating those he himself created.

The same mujahideen he had asked to climb and occupy the kargil range are now going going to occupy Pakistan.

#114 Posted by laddu

[Actually this question ;

What about 1992? is an attempt to incite.]

Of course. The job of communalist Islamic muth'rfukkers is to spread rumours and accusations about EVERY other religion. I had an Iranian Jewish friend. He told me that in Iran little kids are taught by their parents that Jews eat bread dipped in Muslim blood. In every society, the job of Islamists is to spread lies and hate about their favorite enemy- the non-Muslim. And they will do anything - ANYTHING - to spread this. And one of their favorite strategies is to blame the victim. 9/11 - caused by the US Govt and the Jews. Godhra train incident - the Hindus locked themselves in and burnt themselves. And so on and on. And this gives commie and "liberal" mofos something to hang on to.

Who knows when this accursed cult will be eradicated.

yar tahmed, try eating those quaker oats..they cause all kinda violence in the bowels.

Actually this question ;

What about 1992? is an attempt to incite.

This has been the standard incitement that is being tried by Pakistan based mullahs who ar trying to come to india and 'train' indian illiterate muslims into Dawah Speeches calling for incitement of other muslims asking them to seek revenge for other riots.

The question of what about --? was raised all the time by both the sides during the heinous partition riots.

Both the sides did not stop because the allegation - What about --? kept on enflaming both the sides.

So, next time any one say - What about --?

I would also go back and throw all those cases of riots and terror attack by muslims where the culprits were un punished and say-

Waht about --?

jang #106 Confucius did indeed live on a strange planet. So did Lao Tse. So did William Penn. It was called the planet earth.

And the confucian concept of a "mandate from heaven" was no pie in the sky idea, but one that was taken seriously by the most successful chinese emperors and which competed with other ideas - notably the legalistic or mandarin viewpoint which made a strong state the goal rather than a just state - the two being the ying and the yang of chinese thought through the ages.

In the USA, Penn's Quaker philosophy was no empty idealism but one that has impacted on the history of the US. Quakers refused to fight in wars, including the US Civil War (except once when even they got mad enough to fight off Southern raiders who tried to run off with their horses), and these ideas are the pillars built over 2-3 centuries on which the US Constitution was written.

Quakers non-violence philosophy was later reflected in Gandhi's of course, and Gandhi too lived on the planet earth.

You must put on your space suit and visit this strange planet some day. :-)

#111 Arjun mian

It is true that the worst atrocities do not happen through active participation but through passive tolerance. During the holocaust, not every German (or aven a significant fraction) was out there looking to kill the Jewish people. They merely "tolerated" that outrage!

Over the past fifteen years or so, the average "educated" Pakistani's "tolerance" for Pakistan-sponsored terrorism conducted in India is another case in point!

But such facts are not something to be proud of!

#108 Posted by bjkumar on August 16, 2007 4:18:14 pm

people have the wrong idea of what the possible solution might be. It's not the police training. It's civic society that accepts these kind of things at that moment.

During the 92 riots, the vast majority of hindus, sikhs, christians and parsis thought "muslims sar pe chadh gaye hai" after they rioted post-babri masjid. A lot of people who think the SS is a bunch of goondas were fine with one bunch of goondas teaching another bunch of goondas a lesson. I'm sure they all feel differently now but at that time, group think took over and they condoned the rioting by their silence(if not active encouragement).

And one more thing...

The check from the Bank of "Give Us What We Want, Or We Will Agitate to Go Our Separate Ways" has already been cashed! There is no more to be handed out from that account!

And the people who cashed it sixty years ago are going bankrupt!

#107 Posted by arjun2

Arjun:

My reference to Kashmir was partially a bait for you. You bit ..... So now, can we have you interact more on this board? Going along, I promise that you and i will talk more about Kashmir here .... but today I got to run.

Any Indian citizen has the right to demand justice.

The approach of “my pain was worse than yours – so address mine first” is futile – because whoever suffers a particular atrocity will feel the most sensitive about it and to them, THAT will remain the worst atrocity!

(The Pakistani crowds here are acting highly dishonest – because their simulated anguish (like their simulated everything else) pretends to be based on vicarious pain – through that subliminal “ummah” connection – which as the world knows – is mere make-believe!)

(In reality – Pakistanis do not give a hoot about the Muslims of India – because if their baap and dada had cared the least bit, they would not have left them high and dry back in 1947! (Remember the creep who said – “they will take care of themselves!”) And also, if they had cared the least bit, they would have left India alone instead of persuing a steady policy of terrorism against Indian people!)

Having said above that every citizen has the right to ask for justice – it must be made equally clear that no citizen, however aggrieved or provoked – has the right to take the law in their own hands. People must work with and within the system! Otherwise, India of tomorrow will become just like the Pakistan of today!

There is still the question of what is the most practical thing to do to obtain justice from a large body of population. Unfortunately, there is no “efficient” way to do that. One must reason, ask, remind, even create a nuisance – but all within law – and the only chance of success comes when one has the sympathy and understanding of a large body of the population – which, based on simple math, must include a LOT of whatever the majority is.

Those who include veiled threats, even under extreme provocation – would easily ruin their (slim to begin with) chances even more!

#94 Posted by GT on August 16, 2007 1:04:45 pm


But what about Kashmir? Why are we so placid about the Indian state terrorizing Indian citizens in Kashmir?


Nobody in India believes that the army goes out looking for women and children to kill...No jihadis, no need for counter-insurgency, no collateral damage..

It's the difference between desirable and acceptable. It's desirable to kill the jihadis but acceptable that the women they hide behind get occasionally killed.

regardless, haven't we been told that the kashmiris don't consider themselves Indian citizens?

yar pardesi, salim et al..you guys are talking about some strange planet....its very rare that a political demagogue gets prosecuted for this kinda stuff. please talk about what is remotely possible..or join tahmed ;-)

Pardesi #88 {"This has happened in Pakistan 71 and India 1984, 1992-93 and later in 2002. It does not matter whether the majority butchers are Hindu or Muslim leaders. Immunity from prosecution, hunger for power and unlimited greed drives these bastards. None of these killers were punished - Prime Minister (1984) and Chief Minister (2002) and President (1971)."}

Pardesi Sahib,
Wah Wah. :)
Only when we can recognize, identify, and unconditionally blame mass killings regardless of the identities of the perpetrators or the victims, can we hope to put an end to this vicious, grotesque, and inexcusable curse. Thanks for not being selective like so many others - e.g. "They started it first." or "It was their fault." or "They deserved it."

Ajeya: Well, it has been referred to as the Dec 1992 riots but technically, it was Dec 1992 riots - interval - Jan 1993 riots.

#100 Posted by stuka:

"...what the fukk are we supposed to do ..."

Strengthen democratic institutions which check our barbarism if not through economic incentives then through the fear of more barbaric retaliation.

Try to understand the Mayawati phenomenon in UP; the rise of Badruddin Ajmal and his Assam United Democratic Front (AUDF); the struggle within the Chattisgarh tribals in their support of or opposition to the Maoists. And there may be others. Unlike the European Utopians, which tahmed refers to, these movements are leading to the emergence of desi practical democratic institutions.

#99 Posted by stuka

[That is true nly for the December riots.The December riots started with Muslims rioting in their areas coz Babri Masjid was brought down.]

Somebody correct me if I'm mistaken, but I was under the impression that this article is about the December riots.

[The massive retaliation was very much a mercantile Shiv Sena funded and executed operation. ]

Anybody participating in riots, REGARDLESS of who started it, is by definition a criminal, and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But it is a fact that if Muslims incite violence in India, they are going to get burnt the MOST, because they are lesser in number.

Muslims would be well-advised to not burn down trains filled with people trapped inside, or start killing Hindus in protest against some cause, because then they will be adversely affected MUCH MORE than Hindus.

That's simply how it is. If you don't want to get hit with a brick, don't throw the first stone.

and just to add to #98: going further back from 17th century America to 2500 BC China, Confucius and his disciples (Mencius notably) also wrestled with the same issue of good government, saying a good government received its "mandate from heaven".

So, the good fight goes on...year after year, century after century. Across the world, from China to America. Progress seems slow, barely noticable, with a few steps back once in a while - but by historical standards progress towards good government is being made at galloping speed today.

"While Hindus and Muslims are jumping up and down like monkeys asking for justice vis a vis 1992 riots they have forgotten the Nellie massacre, 1984 (except kabuli), Bhagalpur, Meerut etc. etc"

I take exception to your statement. Plenty of people remember 1984. But what the fukk are we supposed to do when a Sikh PM comes and says we should forget about it? What are we supposed to do when the just human being who killed a criminal like Lalit Maken asks for forgiveness for his just deed from Lalt Maken's daughter? As far as 1984 is concerned, the perps were India's royal family - The Gandhis. There is no hope of justice and so it is better to forget.

WRT to Nellie, the only other massacre of some magnitude (Bhagalpul, Meerut etc are mere blips) it was mainly Bengali speaking Muslims who were the victim. The very same Bengali Muslims who were the initial advocates for the partition of India, the same Bengali Muslims who were responsible for ethnic cleansing of tribals from the Chitagong hill tracts and Hindus from erstwhile East Pakistan. Somehow, I just don't feel any moral outrage when the victims are Bangladeshi Muslims. So, sue me.

Ajeya:

Did you know that the Bombay Riots STARTED with Muslims killing Hindus in Bombay AFTER the Babri masjid was taken down? Hindus did not kill Muslims at Babri Masjid, by the way.

That is true nly for the December riots.The December riots started with Muslims rioting in their areas coz Babri Masjid was brought down. There was retaliation against the Muslims by Shiv Sena as well as police and things calmed down.

There was a fortnight of peace but increasing rhetoric. There was the case of a shack being burned down with the family inside being killed - attributed to Muslims but turned out to be a property dispute and alson the case of the Marathi dock workers being killed which was again blamed on Muslims. The latter was maybe a Muslim phenomenon but no actual proof. The massive retaliation was very much a mercantile Shiv Sena funded and executed operation. Arjun's description of the riots as well as Sanjay Dutt's arse being actually saved by Shiv Sena is correct. The person who had been gunning for Sanjay Dutt was Pawar, Sunil Dutt's rival in Congress.

GT, Pardesi: The questions you raised were raised earlier as well. And what is more, a solution attempted by some of them. The solution is not fully implemented as yet by any means, but it did lead to a good deal of progress in the right direction.

Among the most prominent of these of course was William Penn, who moved from England to found an ideal society of Quakers (foresook war, and called for religious and political freedoms) in what came to be known as Pennsylvania back in the 17th century.

Back then, the church and state in europe would burn anabaptists and other by the hundreds of thousands on the stake, e.g. In the US, the Salem witch craze is the exception to what proves the rule - Americans left behind a lot of the primitive customs of the old world, and showed them the way forward.

And now, thanks to media as well no doubt to many Indian and Pakistani expats (excluding those who are doomed to spend their lives seeing the US as "hardware", i.e. buildings, appliances etc. and being blissfully unaware of the ideals and "software" that made this a great nation), these revolutionary ideas are spreading to the subcontinent as well: The government is not "raj bahadur" that you serve - the people are the "raj bahadur" whom the politicians serve.

Re: # 94
Gt
Some people in India give the example of northern Ireland in relation to Kashmir issue unfairly IMO.

Britain wants northern Ireland to join southern Ireland but majority northern irish (protestant) don’t want to, southern Ireland doesn’t want them either unless they join willingly, but I think eventually they will join southern Ireland.

GT#92:

No disagreement with your post.

Pardesi:

I wouldn't object to your proposal. I think human rights should be the number one priority of UN and an international police would be appropriate for that. The problem is would powerful members of the UN accept such a role for the UN, if its jurisdiction includes them. Remember how the US rejected the plan for an international criminal court?

i have a couple of memories of the 92 riot..although i had left mumbai for a while, i was visiting. once the curfew was lifted there was a sad line of migrant muslim families leaving town for safety. so i asked our local boys..wtf (we never had riots before anyways)? he said, yeah..they are all new to the neighborhood ..look at the new mosque..its fortified with 10-ft high walls.

i got a local politician to get me a ridfe to the airport thru curfew and reached there rather early with some ariline crew. there was no ice at the airport bar. one gora was complaining..so the barkeep said "sala murdey rakhne ke lite barf kam pad rahe hain aur isko whisky mein barf chahiye". so i stuck to beer.

i agree that justice is not to be begged, but demanded.

Let us for the time forget (for the duration that this article is on FP, otherwise I do not even have to ask) the massacres in riots etc. But what about Kashmir? Why are we so placid about the Indian state terrorizing Indian citizens in Kashmir? Why are we swallowing lock-stock and barrell what is being fed to us? Here is a question worth asking by people who know of the writings of Praveen Swamy? Is he in the payroll of the IB? Why does he not pay attention to what the communist parties are doing in Kashmir (he is very left wing otherwise)? Why does he mostly hang around with the police? Why is it that we do not even ask?

DM #91

We are on different page.

Ireland central or regional top official did not butcher its own citizens in thousands. True? You are probably talking about protestant/Irish clashes in northern ireland. In fact British and Irish Prime ministers worked together to solve the issue.

Bosnia - killings - yes, and that's why EU and USA intervened and the criminals are gone. Are you suggesting that UN should have intervened in 1984 or 2002 or 1971. Come to think of it, international forces is not a bad idea to civilize people if the westerns truly value desi lives.

Germany - I am aware of that. That's why I said "in modern times".

What gets me is that we were raised with this stupid notion that we are from this 5000 year old super duper peaceful and non-violent culture (and in case of Pakistan - we are a religion of peace and bengalis are our own brothers - total BS sold worldwide). And here we are killing tens of thousands of folks and there is no collective guilt and if there is one our people are so coward that none will speak or raise voice for justice or action against the criminals at the top. This is true for Pakistan as well as India.

Dearest DM,

Of course you are right. Also, I am not stupid. Let me lay it out.

Consider the mid-day meal program. Allocation for it is going up at a rate greater than that of revenues. Very good you say. But not really. MLAs in Orissa, Assam and Chattisgarh (I am aware of these and there may be more) have been complaining in the legislature that they do not need more money for this program. Why? because most schools do not have cooks and have at most 2-3 teachers. So the teachers spend their time cooking! This is known to policy makers. So why don't they allocate some of the money to the police force or health or infrastructure (on which I have written before in chowk) or for that matter cooks?

Pardesi:
I wouldn't be too hastey in granting certificates to the white people either. Germany was the most civilised European country at the time of WW2. More recently, there have been the examples of Bosnia and Ireland. And it took only one murder of Van Gogh to remove the veneer of tolerance in that most liberal of European countries, Netherlands.

when thousands of sikhs are killed in delhi and other cities and then muslims in bombay surat and later in Gujrat, the country's justice system becomes a silent spectator.

When dalits and tribals are burnt alive and their women are raped and paraded naked, even the cases are not registered in police stations!!

What a democracy!!

Maoists and Naxals don't come from outside...this system forces helpless people to take up arms!!

GT#86:

No surprise, GT. It is true that revenues are exceeding budgeted amount because of the larger than expected growth. But I am sure that you know that in govts, any govts. money can not be spent unless it is allocated in the budget.

The more relevant point is that even if there is more money in the next budget, it would probably be allocated to more education, health and infrastructure. [not that I would blame them for so doing!]

Our part of the world will not change until we become fully evolved humans. We can curse poor white folks all we want, but the fact remains that in modern times, they do not kill their own innocent minority citizens on a massive scale without a burp (conducting formal inquiries to punish the guilty).

We will not become fully evolved until most of the citizens are educated of their rights, and obligations – in other words, develop character. Until then, the majority leaders (the ultimate responsible criminals – the Godfathers) will use these mass murders to cow down their minority opponents if minorities are naïve enough to not play the political game at pace, and rules, set by the majority.

This has happened in Pakistan 71 and India 1984, 1992-93 and later in 2002. It does not matter whether the majority butchers are Hindu or Muslim leaders. Immunity from prosecution, hunger for power and unlimited greed drives these bastards. None of these killers were punished - Prime Minister (1984) and Chief Minister (2002) and President (1971).

Only educated masses can enforce morality at the highest levels. Until then, blaming/firing poor cops or other low level officials will not solve problems.

Minorities need to internalize this for their own good.