Face to face with the Indian Muslims

The writer's name quoted in this article was spelled incorrectly by the translator. It should be Dr.Firoz Mahboob Kamal. To read more articles from this author visit,

www.firozmahboobkamal.com

To read more articles from this author visit,
www.firozmahboobkamal.com

To # 108,

``Confidence is shaken`` ... it`s very sad that in India many people discriminate because of religion. My family is from Hyderabad, and, as you probably know, there is a large Muslim population there. I had a girl once ask me if there were actually any Indians living in Hyderabad. I was like, ``are you crazy? Hyderabad is India so DUH Indians live there`` I find out later she meant hindus by ``Indians`` ... go figure that. Who is Shahrukh khan then, or Abdul Kalam? Aliens?

But don`t pity the muslim case too much. At least don`t pity discrimination against muslims. What is the worst is the Shari`at Law in India... I feel so much for muslim women in India. Even though they live in a secular democratic country, they are still plagued by polygamy, instant divorce and discrimination in the name of their religion. I find it so interesting that many people cite rape as the worst degradation of women... Actually it`s not. What`s worse than Hindus parading naked muslim women on streets and raping them is the Hindu politicians raping the integrity and secularity of India by holding up biased laws (such as the Sharia). I mean, I would much rather be paraded and raped and killed than live a full life devoid of basic human rights, be susceptible to divorce simply by uttering talaq 3 times, or have my husband beat me to pulp, or be considered I am always inferior because I am a woman. Yes, it sounds harsh, but it`s the naked truth.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Thursday, April 11, 2002

To

I have read the article written by Dr Malik. I don’t agree with you fully. If in your country if any state demands indipendence ,would you be able to comply it. (For eg Karachi where the sindhis are demanding Indipendence) even Baluchistan. Even now the Shias are attacked & their places of worship are not spared. If tomorrow the Shias demand a separate country what you will do.

During the 1971 war in Bangladesh many innocent people were tortured, killed & burned by the military ruler Yahya Khan (Butcher of Bangladesh).Your country should hold an indipendent inquiry & punish the culprits. Your country (Pakistan ) talks of gross violation of human rights in India , What about human rights in Pakistan.

What a clean record Pakistan is having.

In every country it is the minorities who are at the receiving end. In Pakistan minorities do not have voting rights. You only talk of TADA & POTO law in India. What about Blasphemy Law in Pakistan which is used to prosecute Non – Muslims. Why are you silent. For eg In Pakistan so many Hindu Temples were descreted, idols stolen. A Hindu leader who was protesting was shot dead. His house was looted & his wife raped. The recent grenade attack on church should server a eye opener. Foreigners are thinking twice if not thrice to enter Pakistan after the Church episode.

When mosques are attacked you protest, condemn. But when Muslims attack religious places of Non-Muslims. You Celebrate.

Awaiting for an early reply

Rajesh

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

The Muslim discrimination is a fantasy

Omar Khalidi

http://www.expressindia.com/ie/daily/19990825/iex2

5059p.html

Most Pakistanis think that Muslims in India are discriminated. Here`s an article which says much about it.

Every so often one hears of discrimination against Indian Muslims in state employment, particularly with regards to civil service, police and the armed forces. Around election time, ``minority cells`` of all political parties surface through the newspapers demanding ``justice`` and fair treatment to the minorities by the Indian state. Is there real discrimination against Muslims just because they are Muslims? Can the alleged discrimination be established in a court of law? Or is this merely a case of fantasy versus reality?

More on Omar Khalidi

Omar Khalidi an Islamic Studies scholar at Massachusetts Institute of Technology on a Agha Khan scholarship.Email: okhalidi@MIT.EDU http://libraries.mit.edu/people/okhalidi.html

Fareed Zakaria - Indian Muslim

Editor of Foreign Affairs, the publication of New York`s influential Council on Foreign Relations, Fareed Zakaria, 36, is somewhat gloomy about India`s future. ``It is sad that Indians succeed in every country except their own,`` he says. ``It says a lot about political institutions and economic policies, and about getting the state right. You can have talented, motivated people, but if you don`t put them in the right environment and give them the right incentive structure, you are not going to see the same achievement.``

Educated at the prestigious Cathedral school in Bombay, Zakaria went to Yale at age 18. ``I felt more intellectually and culturally at home at Yale than I did in India,`` he says. In the last stages of completing his bid for U.S. citizenship, Zakaria has no plans to live in India again. ``I didn`t come here for the money,`` he says. ``My parents were quite comfortable, and in fact, I actually took a drop in living standards.`` The attraction of the U.S. was its intellectual environment. ``I had grown up in a vanishing India that had been a product of English liberalism,`` he says. ``I had to move in one direction or the other: I either had to get back to India and learn more about its indigenous literature and culture, or I had to go the other way and Westernize. For most of the kids in my school, Westernization meant technology, rock music and films. They had lost the language of their parents, and yet their relationship with English was essentially as a business language. So they were in a weird world in which they had no access to any culture on a deep level. That troubled me.``

Zakaria believes India could dominate the next century, but only if it changes dramatically. ``The system in India still responds very slowly to the rest of the world,`` he says. ``You can have software companies and a booming economy, but in the end, you cannot modernize a society without modernizing the state. India needs massive deregulation and a withdrawal of the state from the economic sphere. You still have massive government expenditures in all the wrong areas, unthinkable in most of the Western world and East Asia. The Indian government is poor and it needs all the money it can get for infrastructure, basic health and education. The government is still wasting money, building steel mills and dams, subsidizing cement prices.``

How Indian Muslims Can Be More Successful

Syed Amir, Ph.D. - Pakistan Link

I am writing in reference to Mr. Kaleem Kawaja’s letter (Pakistan Link, March 3, 2000), “Indian Muslims are Patriots”. Mr. Kawaja has been politically active in the Indo-Pak community in the Washington area for a long time, and normally is an exponent of communal harmony. In his letter, he equates his criticism of Indian Government policies, aired in Pakistani-American media, with that of expatriates living in the U.S. who feel free to express their critical views of the administration. I believe the analogy is not quite appropriate. While criticism of Indian policies as they relate to Muslims living there may be legitimate, his choice of the medium of delivery may have been unwise.

In order to appreciate this apparent incongruity, we have to consider the background of the contemporary Indian politics. Muslims living in India, larger in number than in Pakistan, carry the unique burden of a thousand years of history. More importantly, they are held in some degree responsible by many in the majority community for the success of the Pakistan movement in the forties that culminated in the creation of Pakistan. Then, there is the unfortunate legacy, spanning half a century, of acrimony and hatred between India and Pakistan. These special circumstances place the Muslim community in India in a very vulnerable and delicate situation, even though the generation, which spearheaded the Pakistan movement, is no longer around. It follows, therefore, that any expressions of glowing love and friendship for Pakistan by a member of the Indian Muslim community, at this time of heightened tensions, may not be taken in the same spirit as the Lahore declaration made a year ago by Prime Minister Vajpayee.

It does not take a great amount of insight to recognize that Indian democracy at its current state cannot be equated with that of America in its generosity towards and concern for minorities. There might be some historic reasons for it, though they do not fully justify the long-standing neglect of minority rights in India. For centuries, religious and communal passions prevalent on the Indian subcontinent have generated a culture of hate, extremism and bigotry. Traditionally, loyalties have not been based on national identity, but rather on religious affiliations that often transcended national boundaries. This has especially been true of the minority Muslim community. During most of the twentieth century, the Indian Muslim politics was centered on supporting causes affecting other Muslim countries, a policy that was rarely reciprocated. As far back as the first quarter of the twentieth century, for example, the Indian Muslims leadership was agitating for the restoration of the Ottoman Caliphate in Turkey, while there were no strong sentiments for it in Turkey itself. Finally, unconcerned with the opinions of outsiders and to the dismay of Indian Muslims, Mustapha Kamal Ataturk abolished the institution altogether.

Indian Muslims have been living for half a century under the cloud of their perceived sympathies for Pakistan. However, slowly and progressively they are shedding their sense of despair, gaining self-confidence, and demanding their rightful place in the economic and political setup of their homeland. It is critical that the process should be allowed to blossom and mature. Pakistan can help only by staying out of this equation, both directly and indirectly. Indian Muslims are likely to be much more successful in the quest for recognition of their rights, if the majority community accepts the thesis that religious and national identities are not incompatible, and that the loyalty of Indian Muslims to their country is beyond question.

Respect for other religions

Anees Jillani -The News , April 5, 2000

There lives even now a Hindu owner of a middle-sized Hotel in New Delhi who has a Muslim wife. She was married at the time of partition, was abducted, raped but later rescued by the armed forces. Her Muslim husband who had by then migrated to Pakistan was contacted by organisations handling repatriation of such women but he refused to take her back. She was lucky that she came across her present husband while living at one of the rehabilitation centers in early 1948. The young Hindu businessman married her and rescued her from the centre. He insisted that she could retain her religion. Wife of a prominent Pakistani was similarly abducted during partition. Many years later, she came into contact with a Pakistani who had gone to a tailor`s shop in Delhi. Working almost as a slave and without any access to the outside world, she stitched her husband`s name on a piece of cloth and secretly gave to the Pakistani. The latter managed to contact the husband in Pakistan but the husband, who had by then remarried, refused to have anything to do with her wife.

Karan Thapar, a conspicuous Indian Journalist, who recently interviewed General Musharraf on Door Darshan and who was given the general`s tie for praising it, narrated another interesting experience in one of his columns. He was watching an open-air theater about the Kargil war (Indians have nothing better to do than harp on this theme for the past one year now) when he started hearing two Indian jawans disapproving of a scene. Two Pakistani jawans had been captured by the Indians and after a thorough interrogation, they were shown as criticising Pakistan, its leadership, and its military. The Indian jawans sitting in the audience, who themselves had participated in the Kargil war, told Thapar that such a thing can never happen. Jawans even of an enemy can never criticise their own country, military and its leadership. The Indian media, and even some of the senior Indian army personnel, can routinely be seen praising the valiant performance of some of our soldiers during the Kargil war.

The moral of the story from the above three anecdotes is that not all Hindu Indians are rascals and villains; and not all Pakistani Muslims are angels going straight to heaven via Lahore. Both India and Pakistan are big nations in terms of their populations; and thus comprise all sorts of people. If India has produced Bal Thakeray, then it also has Nirmala Deshpande who led a 36-member women peace mission to Pakistan from March 25 to 31. We all know of similar contrasts in our country.

What, however, distinguishes Pakistan from India in this respect is the presence of a Muslim community almost the size of Pakistan living within India. It simply cannot be ignored in a democratic-cum-secular setup. I first visited India in 1985 and found quite a few Muslims still cheering the Pakistani cricket team in a match against India. Not anymore. When asked now about their plight in a Hindu-dominated India, they say that they are fine; worry about your own self. Most of them are more perturbed about the state of mohajirs in Karachi than Hindu-Muslim riots in India.

This is, of course, not to say that India is a perfect example of secular model in the comity of nations. Far from it. It is a country where forces preaching Hindutva are in power and where the Babri mosque was demolished on December 6, 1992. However, what goes to the Indian system`s credit is the fact that the same Hindutva forces had to tone down their rhetoric and even their agenda to remain in power and win elections; construction of Ram mandir is no longer on NDA`s (National Democratic Alliance`s, of which BJP is a constituent) agenda and manifesto. The Indian premier himself called the day of destruction of the mosque the saddest day of his life and there are criminal cases pending against none other than the home minister himself for being involved in the destruction.

Since we have a selective memory, few would recall that some Pakistanis demolished many temples as a reaction to the mosque demolition. Have you heard of any Pakistani ever arrested for destroying those temples or attacking the Hindus? There is a BJP government in power in the state of Gujarat that permitted its civil servants to join Kuppahali S Sudarshan-led RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh); the state government justified its action on the ground that RSS is not a political but a cultural outfit. This permission led to such an uproar in the Lok Sabha and such condemnation by the print media that the BJP eventually bowed to public pressure and withdrew the authorisation on March 8, 2000.

The above anomalies may not be written or talked about in Pakistan but the world community is not deaf, nor is it dumb. They see India as a Third World country attempting to maintain democracy and secularism; they all wish it well because this is the system that most of them also subscribe to. On the other hand, ours is a country which is gradually shifting into the hands of mullahs who talk of Islamic bombs and missiles and who wish to rule the whole world. What an irony because, at present, they cannot even rule themselves. They see India as a country where even the minority communities surpass the population of their own nations and then there is Pakistan where even a single conversion of a Hindu or a Christian is reported in all the major dailies, including the English ones.

We can no longer have it both ways. We cannot aspire to be a fortress of Islam and wish Clinton and Tony Blair to be our best friends. If we want to be Green Fortress, then we will have to content ourselves with Afghanistan`s Mulla Omar and survive like Afghanistan. No one in the world is asking us to change our religions. Islam, in fact, is the second largest belief in many of the countries. All that the world asks us to do is to respect other faiths as well. It is not good enough to say that minorities enjoy full protection of the state. The minorities in Pakistan cannot vote with us; they cannot be elected with us; they cannot become ministers; they are almost non-existent in our armed forces and civil service and the judiciary.

Most important of all, we wish all of them ideally to convert to Islam for their spiritual salvation. I am not so worried about theirs as our own religion because our scale of corruption increases manifold just before Eid during the holiest of holy days in Islam.

I think you are grossly exagerrating the situation to the extent that muslims are having a wonderful time in pakistan. for yoou kind information only a selct group of people the upper middle class above are ok in pakistan and it is same in India in many ways. There is by and large peaceful co-existence and people such as yopourself are the root cause of inciting people`s emotions. It is far better to get your own house in order first and set an example before traversing the rocky path to philosophising. The hindus from lower castes are far far worse off than anybody else in India, I hope this is enough proof for you to understand that it is not a state decision but a way of indian society

`` Why Muslims are uncomfortable in India ? ``

Please read some of my experience::

I live in a town famous for Hindu-Muslim riots

Most of the time riots are initiated by Hindus

and then we have to retaliate( and You bet we

will if we are attacked first , c`mon gotta save my ass).

This statement is supported by the facts like

(1) Bombay riots--refer sarkaria commissions Retaliation -- BOOM BOOM , Burn Baby Burn !!! ,

(2) Meerut-Maliaya riots-- read finding of the inquiry. that bastar# Meerut S.P is still not being convicted--( Of Course Tolerant India ;-) )

(3) Coimbatore genocide-- Read frontline magazine

story around oct98 --( retaliation BOOM BOOM very close to Advani , I think he should

live forever to keep our motivation live )

I can give you more examples but I think its

enough to support my argument and beside this there are evidence and commission reports already

out there.

Some of commission findings gives a detail gruesome account of police brutalities , planned riots and damage to muslim properties , Rape and

video filming of nude muslim womens in surat

(

BTW can anyone give me a single incident

where hindu women were stripped nude and

raped on the streets during 800 years of

muslim rule ?

)

and so it goes....

My experience in Bombay ( Yes I will not call it

Mumbai just because a third grade crimnal read

thakre want it to be )

After I finished my degree , I went to Bombay

to try for a job in Gulf.So here I am sitting

in a office in Andheri , an office employee

took my resume and asked me to wait , and then

I heared

Emp :Sir , He( refering to me ) is a muslim as the

Arab delegation want it.

Sir : Hmm.. I know , these m.f * * * * * Arab wants muslims.

Emp :yes sir and that`s how these Bast$%# muslim

are able to go to Gulf so easily.

Sir :Tell him (me ), to leave his resume and I will try to convince delegation that we couldn`t

find any muslim candidate.

Its exactly what I have heard through my ears belive me..

Experience in Delhi :

I was in Delhi to collect my H1 visa papers

for a job in U.S from a local post office .

when I reached there an employee asked my name and

asked me why I wanted to go to U.S etc

his exact remarks were `` Tuh umreka jake

desh ki gand par laat marega ``

So You want to kick your country`s Ass by accepting job in USA.

I just thought I should contribute something

here from my experiences too, I am an indian

muslim and love my contry but if things like

these happens then your confidence is shaken.

Re: Mjaved

Mr Omar says while answering Goyal

``Goyal’s questions were succintly answered and parried earlier, aye, if the FOOL could only read! But not quite the way he was hoping.:) What does he think he is? A trial lawyer? :) ``

-- Would you not agree with me that Mr Omar`s labelling of Goyal as a FOOL is also uncalled for.

Anyways, I agree with you that my remark of calling him an Idiot too is uncalled for. I apologize.

About not getting obsessed with OMAR, i agree. Which is why i never read his posts, more than the first three lines. And i am pretty sure that i will not read his replies even those three lines at all. It simply is not worth the effort.

Iconoclast

Do you know that in fact there is a very good reason for that fact that there are no universally accepted theories of International Relations? They remain just that, theories. Now mine was mainly about India, and that it remains.

Omar Mirza

Re Truth:

The Medium IS the message.

Marshal MacLuhan

Re: ICON

I also said, `Gladys Stains is a Saint, I`m not.`

So now the new tactic `n chorus is arguing that i`m not coherent. If thats the case, why are you and Goyal so hot and bothered by the message? :)

OMAR MIRZA

RE: Iconoclast (#109)

I think namecalling like ``idiot`` does no good to you or anyone else on this forum and no need to get obsessed with Omer. I hope next time you can do a better job.

regards, javed

Re: Omar

In reply 30, you said

Dear mr. omar.

Hats off to your uprightness. Now the answers to 3 questions by you.

a) 50,000 killed in kashmir. 27,000 of those have been killed by the blood sucking holy warriors of allah. Never mind the dirty pig hindu/sikh soldiers of the hindu government in Delhi.

b) Babri masjid was a forgotten inconsequential masjid in a forgotten town in the middle of nowhere. Did you hear of Ayodhya ever other than in the ramayana, which you would have never heard of given your faithful and rational islam. There is no way i can argue with you about the rationality of the conflict. But there was a running conflict for 75 years. And local muslims had agreed to give it to hindus. How long were the temples in Lahore in conflict before they were demolished.

c) 2000 muslims were killed in bombay you say. Do you know how many hindus were killed in Hyderabad city in connected riots. Or don`t they matter.

Aapka gulam

one dirty inconsequential devious hindu.

Dear Mr Omar Mirza,

How could you pass your exams? You are so incoherent and inconsistent. You couldn`t even read three simple questions. You hope to become a lawyer!! Your schools and university must be derecognised for tolerating you.

Pakistan & muslims don`t need any enemies when they have you as their defender.

Regards

Re: Omar and other Pakistanis

Omar, the basic problem is that muslims in the subcontinent have never understood the structure of hindu society. Hindus are completely fragmented along caste, region and class lines. Hindus have to be tolerant and secular in order to establish a civil society, whether they like it or not. The BJP has realized this painfully. Just look at the political sqabbling going on in New Delhi. This is the way things were before the muslims and the british came along, except that there was no combined army to defend the subcontinent. As a result, any two-bit invader could walk in, exploit the divisions and establish his imperial rule. Earlier invaders had dissolved into hindu society but the muslims and the british refused to do so.

The phenomenon of the Congress party and Mahatma Gandhi was an exception to the rule but muslims interpreted it as if hindus had figured out how to be united. The demand for partition came from this misperception. After independence, the Congress party has virtually disintegrated and hindus are slowly reverting back to their traditional divisive nature. If muslims had played their cards smartly, they could have easily reestablished their rule over the entire subcontinent. Given their population, all they had to do was to form a partnership with a small section of the hindus such as the backward castes and get power at the center. The present demographics show that muslims are nearly 45% of the entire population of the subcontinent. If Sonia Gandhi can be so close to power in New Delhi, how difficult would it have been for elite, aristrocratic muslims backed by a large community ? If there had been civil war, muslims would have won because of their presence in the armed forces and possible help from other muslim nations. Historians have suggested that Sardar Patel had envisioned this possibility which is why he prevailed on the Congress party to accept partition.

It is interesting to speculate what would have happenned if the british had never come to India. It is unlikely that the Mughals or muslim aristrocracy could have continued with autocratic rule forever. It is also quite unlikely that the Mughals and the muslim aristrocracy would have divided their own empire and moved from Delhi to Lahore. The most likely outcome would have been some sort of compromise between muslims and non-muslims. It should be noted that during 800 years of muslim rule, there was not one incident of hindus uniting and presenting a common front. In fact in 1857, hindus sided with muslims against the british to preserve Mughal rule. You may contrast this with the mideast where muslims and christians fought their crusades for centuries.

You are wrong to think that muslims in India are somehow being targeted for discrimination. If that were the case, they would be up in arms as you see in Karachi. The reality is that hindus are too divided to collectively discriminate against muslims. Muslims in India are beginning to understand the social structure and they realize that they are a powerful section of the population that can easily work within the cacophony of hindu divisiveness and get their share of the pie. They are entering the national mainstream in record numbers, they are developing their strength via education and they are flaunting this strength at the ballot as all the parties try to woo their support.

Human Rights Watch May 1996, Excerpt on pattern of Institutional state behavior in Kashmir, and the sanctity of Muslim Kashmiris lives

Since 1993, the Indian government has embarked on a campaign to improve an international image tarnished by the appalling human rights record of its police and security forces. Some of the steps the government has taken have been significant, particularly its decision to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross to provide its humanitarian services in Kashmir. However, many other measures that should have been taken were not: The vast majority of security personnel responsible for abuses are never punished or are subjected only to mild disciplinary measures; nothing has been done to curb the most egregious of abuses - summary executions and torture-or punish those responsible; and instead of ensuring that its troops abide by the rule of law, India has sponsored irregular militias that operate completely outside the law to carry out its counterinsurgency operations. Compounding the tragedy in Kashmir, many of India`s trading partners, eager to embrace one of Asia`s greatest ``emerging markets`` or concerned more with South Asian security relations than with human rights, have muffled earlier criticisms that had earlier served to force India to acknowledge the need for reform.

There is no question that the security threat posed by the militants in Kashmir is genuine. Indeed, as the election neared, a number of militants groups demonstrated that they were prepared to go to any lengths to enforce their will through violent attacks on candidates, campaign workers and other civilians. Their indiscriminate use of landmines and other explosive devices reveals a deep callousness toward civilian life. These actions have contributed to the erosion of civil life and security in Kashmir, and no militant group has shown any interest in ending abuses by its forces, even though their behavior has lost them much support among civilians in Kashmir.

However, the Indian government`s counterinsurgency campaign has only exacerbated the situation. As was the case in Punjab, there is little to distinguish between the abusive tactics of the security forces and their agents and the militants they have come to Kashmir to fight. If this strategy continues, and there is no effort to disarm the militias who are responsible for much of the violence now claiming Kashmir, the May 1996 elections will be worse than meaningless. They will herald the beginning of a period of lawlessness in Kashmir that India may not be able to control.

As a new government takes power in New Delhi, the international community should seize the moment to test the government`s promise of transparency by pressing India to disarm all irregular militias, fully investigate all reports of abuse and punish those responsible, and provide for full access to Kashmir for the specialized U. N. human rights bodies-the Special Rapporteurs on Torture and Summary and Arbitrary Execution and the Working Groups on Disappearances and Arbitrary Detention-and for international human rights organizations. Arms sales and other forms of military cooperation to both India and Pakistan should be suspended until both countries end their support for abusive forces-including state forces, militias, and militant groups-operating in Kashmir.

Secular, Tolerant India`s other and true face

This is the work `institutional` of state forces

Killings

Since 1989, an estimated 50,000 Kashmiris have been killed by the Indian forces stationed in Kashmir. The Indian Forces have been given a free hand to kill any person they choose.

Torture & Custodial Deaths Victims in custody are treated as bodies of flesh and bones. The punishment starts at the time of arrest; abusive language is used and rifle-butts are struck on their legs. In the interrogation centres they are tortured by some methods only unique to the Indian army. Rape and Molestation of Women. An estimated one million women have either been bereaved, tortured or humiliated and beaten up or killed; many hundreds have been subjected to barbaric sexual assaults. Sexual harassment is used as a weapon to subvert people into submission.

This is a documentary testimony of horror in Indian Occupied Kashmir; of atrocities perpetrated on a people wanting to end foreign military occupation of their homeland. Since the beginning of the recent uprising in January 1990, the Kashmiris have been demanding and end to 48 years of Indian forced rule. What is depicted here is only part of the reality of Indian atrocities since no journalists, human rights and humanitarian organisations, or tourists were allowed to enter Occupied Kashmir until very recently. The real story will be told only when Indian occupation forces have left Kashmir.

The extent of torture, killings and rapes perpetrated on Kashmiri people by Indian forces are already creating a new record of atrocities. Gouging of eyes, cutting off of men`s genitals, use of ever new methods of torture and endless curfews would shame Hitler`s SS death squads. The Indian occupation army`s deviltry such as gang-rapes, burning of entire villages and crops, destruction of economic life of whole communities and genocide of the Kashmiri people in defiance of international human rights laws, are everyday affairs.

This database represents only a minute proportion of the Indian atrocities in Kashmir as the majority go undocumented.

GOYAL SPECIAL

PTV televised news on April 26 condemning atrocities being committed by Indian forces on Kashmiri Muslims observing Muharram procession. Indian forces baton charged the mourners with full force to disperse them. During the process they arrested many Kashmiris and put them in the jail.

I take note of the Irony that while it has been 7 years since the demolition of Barbri Masjid in `Secular` India, it has not been rebuilt despite a number of promises by the Indian govt to do so.

Quite the contrary, work on Ram Madir continues unabated. It is now suggested that Babri Masjid be rebuilt elsewhere.

Whereas, in the aftermath of the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 and widespread anti-Muslim riots in India, which resulted in over 2,000 Indian Muslim, `endangered and nationally protected tigers` dead, there were indeed anti-Hindu riots in Islamic/Fundamentalist/Intolerant Pakistan. While few Hindu lives were lost, approx 30 small Hindu temples were damaged and destroyed. These however were promptly repaired and rebuilt with the intolerant, bigotted Pakistani govt`s funding.

If Indian Secularists don`t like TRUTH. They should CHOKE on it. But they continue ... to unabashedly take the `Nazar` off/utarnaa of Indian Secularism.

Omar Mirza

JAI HIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Trans: (Burn Baby Burn)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Scoreboard of the match in progress

The debate thus far can be characterized/summarized as the following;

A list of allegations about India by me and analysis expanding into a theory

A proposed theory of incremental cultural genocide, discrimination and oppression

Facts supporting thereto conveniently disregarded of course by my critics.

Statements repeatedly that I am not propagating ONE TRUTH of any kind, because frankly I have learned that there are usually 2 sides to any coin. Therefore I have restricted myself repeatedly by stating that I attack only the hypocrisy of those who propagate their biased one sided TRUTH in utter disregard of reality and indisputable facts, or even the POSSIBILITY of another truth. It is this POSSIBILITY ALONE that I have set forth, yet they continue to deny the existence of even the POSSIBILITY of more than ONE Truth. So, who is the ideologue? Me? Or them that walk with blindfolds in the night? Then despite my repeated preemptive statements that accusing me of bigotry would not get them off the hook as far as my arguments go, they have found themselves doing precisely that in a futile attempt to discredit my arguments by attacking me as a bigot. Pathetic. And this, despite the fact that I have clearly told RR that he has the potential to become one of my favorite idolaters! How could I more clearly reaffirm my belief in the eternal brotherhood of man?

RR seems particularly asfixiated with the notion that all facts I have brought forth mitigating against a Mythical Secular Tolerant India, are ‘ahistorical.’ Even to the extent of denying the relevance of events just a few weeks old, or ignoring them, which present evidence (just evidence I say) even of the lack of the free exercise of religion in India, and thus belie the claims of its SECULARITY. This qualifies as institutional discrimination, especial attention N. As the sum of what the author of this article relates, TAKEN AS A WHOLE, NO ONE FACT, BUT THE SUM TOTAL of them, leave one irresistable conclusion about a community in decline. Everything naturally must be viewed from the naturally ‘objective’ prism of an abstract, Mythical Secular Tolerant India and thus explained away as an ‘abberation’ removed in both time and place from Indian realities. This is the sum of RRs logic. Now they are reduced to stating that I ‘hate’ India, therefore, everything I state should naturally be taken with a grain of saffron. Basically they are saying that a Jew has no right to formulate an objective opinion about Nazi German history or Germany today. By the way Icon, I clearly told you that womyn is a Saint, I’m not. I’m usually not one to turn the other cheek. I prefer dishing it out, right back. And I can take it coming back.

Goyal’s questions were succintly answered and parried earlier, aye, if the fool could only read! But not quite the way he was hoping.:) What does he think he is? A trial lawyer? :)

Narain has chosen a nice tack, the common law method of reasoning, entirely predictable btw N, but well used. In fact, my personal belief in a level playing field or a fair shake, is actually worthless standing alone. Whether I speak of India or America. But the author has not expressed belief, he has told the tale of an entire journey thru India. After India breaks up historians will look back at this an important prediction, and emperical evidence in explaining why India fell apart, when its history gets written.

Furthermore, the 2 ‘Indian Muslims’ as has become clear from their various posts are not in an of themselves representative in a substantial manner of the class of Muslims.at large in India, given their social status, views on religion, and closely admitted familial ties to Hinduism. These are not the norm. They are not in any way, ‘the chosen voice of Indian Muslims at large.’ Therefore the representative character of their views comes into question. My views articulated here on the other hand represent the sentiments of 9 out of 10 Pakistanis. And even then, I have refrained from stating anything more than characterizing them as ‘ONE POSSIBILITY, ’ recognizing I might be accused of bias, and lack of objectivity.

R.Rs comment, on the logical impossibility of Secular Indians ever recognizing the validity of the 2 nation theory has probative value in analysing Secular Indian thought. He states, ‘It would mean WAR now.’ He’s quite right of course. It would tear apart not only the ideal of a multiethnic, multiclass stratified and multireligious India, but India itself. The process is already in motion. All the explosive ingredients are there. India, is a PRISON of nations (and classes), much like the former Federal Replublic of Yugoslavia, and the former Soviet Union. Before Indians point to Pakistan, I might point out that the situation with Bangladesh was different, we were 1000 miles apart, seperated by a hostile India between us. Bengali nationalism once it caught hold like a common cold, was unstoppable. It developed into Asthma and severe flu. It was incurable. India should apply that lesson to its 20 or so odd Bangla type situations building up within itz borders, and remember that what goesc around comes around, particularly nationalist viruses. This is why they must clutch on desperately at Kashmir, no matter what. They know losing it, means the disintegration of India itself. Therefore the stalemate drags on. Sindhi, Balauch, Pathan nationalism is a nationalism bereft of SUBSTANCE, of legitimate greviences. This I recognize is my subjective opinion. Therefore it poses no threat. A strong boot is enough to deal with it. Most importantly, the masses are not disenchanted, and activists working against the integrity of the country, unlike India. It is hardly any wonder that India opposes NATO strikes on Yugoslavia designed to end the humanitarian nightmare Serbs have created in Kosovo, which follows the wars instigated in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia by them , much as India interveaned in conflicts around it over history. We too have seen Bangladesh ripped apart from West Pakistan. Tribalism is the future. United India has none but civil strife and unending violence, a direct result of its policy of suppressing various groups desires and leaving them frustrated across the country. While this might be applicable to Pakistan, Islam provides a stronger ideological imperative then Secularism in India vis-a vis geographically contingious Pakistan today. Islam is inherently an expansive ideology that knows no borders, it is the ideology of conquest, Indian Secularism is without the ritual and spiritual glue that binds and holds Pakistan together. We can justify executing nationalists as traitors to both Country and G-D, India cannot. Ahmadis and Shias are not in a position to demand a separate homeland. Weak Indian coalition govts cannot begin to address these types of problems in India. Strong governments will eventually come about thru either constitutional changes or voter disenchantment in India. Whether these govts to follow in the future will be either Secular or dhoti-oriented is an open question. Dhoti-oriented govts can only serve as a catalyst for the break up of India and accelerate various independent revolutions from below. As both a historian and political scientist my job is to anlayse why this is either so, or not. I only point to the telling road signs along the road that India has chosen, nothing more. But as the mere POSSIBILITY of this awful truth confronts Indian intellecutals, they rapidly lose their patience. That too, is telling. If EVERYTHING I said was w/o any basis, we wouldn’t be having this debate at all. There is something definitely rotten over there in India. Indian Cows are coming home, their chickens are all now coming to roost. Welcome to the new Mellinium. Chaos and anarchy is the future of India. I don`t insist on this as gospel truth, i only regard it as one very plausible outcome of unfolding events. History will prove me right or wrong. Either way, Indians will play out the game.

OMAR MIRZA

RE: Omar and Islam in America.

``..I honestly believe that the American system is not in general prejudiced against minorities[Abner Louima,and Rodney KIng may well disagree with me]``

Well, there you have summarized my position on Indian secularism too. I firmly believe that there is no institutionalized prejudice against the minorities, though individuals may have their own perspectives. A few muslims may disagree with me (as quite a few blacks would with you), but the fact that you base your perception of reality on a few personal opinions and totally discount the views of others (while taking an objective view in the case of america) points to your initial anti-india bias.

``Muslims will find America to be a safer place than India when it comes to wondering whether they

will be the next victims of religiously motivated violence. ``

Of course they would, but simply because of the fact that america is a much safer place per se. I find america a much safer place than India, and I`m Hindu!

``State Assemblymen now court their votes outside mosques, the mayor of N.Y too finds himself standing outside a mosque before prayers have ended courting votes. ``

You could as well have been talking about India. Look at Mulayam Singh, look at the TDPs dilemma that it cannot join the BJP for fear of losing the muslim vote, even though this means power at the centre. And if that is not enough, let me inform you about the regular Roza-iftar parties that are organized by everyone from the president down to the local party bosses. You could argue that the muslims are deceived by politicians of all hues, but you cannot argue that they are powerless. And that is the stength of democracy and secularism.

``I stress I have no problems with Secularism, just Indian secularism, because it is not quite what it purports itself to be.``

Why? Other than your biases, what objective proof have you given of institutionalized suppression of the Indian muslims?

``faithful defenders of India...who paint an overly rosy picture as I said earlier, and are prepared to gloss over Truth itself in the process.``

I agree with you. India is pretty lawless sometimes, and things are not often what they should be.

Narain

It seems that Mr Omar Mirza won`t shutup. So here are my questions again.



Mr. Omar1974,

Before making final rebuttal/comments, kindly answers my questions. You love to write, so write whatever you can. But kindly don t digress from these points. We know all about your views on Jinnah, TNT, conditions of muslims in India and other topics in this world.

Kindly restrict yourself to enlightening us on following simple questions

1. Give us benefits of your superior intellect on whose Islam is right, Shias or Sunnis?

2. Are Ahmediyas Muslim?

3. Bangladesh are predominantly muslim. Why do you call them bengalis and not muslims? Another location on same site is full of your insights on Bengali gaddars !!

re: Omar

Now a person like Omar is also very familiar to us secular Indians. We see them all the time. Lets get past their myopic view of so called REALITY. And focus on the damage they do. This article makes some allegations which I tried to refute earlier. I am not sure what it means to Omar though. He takes his view of Islam and his view of Hinduism (his 2 polarities) and casts it on us secular Indians. He does this to whip up paranoia. This happened in 1947. Two extreme views of the Ummah bigot and the reciprocative Hindutva based (ideologially at least) Hindu `bigot` are used to polarize all other views. He strings together random unrelated incidents leaving out relevant details in the middle, but in the process `painting` a picture of his `reality`. He takes a simple reference made by the author ``Instead, the Hindu fundamentalism of BJP has achieved a stronghold.`` of which he has no proof or idea of what exactly is going on or for that matter referring to. Does he know the present state of the BJP in India ? Once his views on SECULAR EDUCATION are clear (education is unity of purpose good for all citizens) he takes that to ultimately shove Urdu down everybody`s throats. DO YOU REALIZE THAT A LOT OF US BELIEVE THAT HINDI AND URDU HAD A FIGHT AND DRAGGED EVERYBODY ELSE IN (oooh !! deep thought head hurts now). If he wants to debate on Indian politics, or Hinduism, or Islam in India, or the secularism of India, the constitution of India, or the Civil laws then he needs to categorise them properly. Currently, his views are being called extremist simply because they are crossing many different independant areas (a lot of which his view is a mere 2 feet because of the the now foggy green glasses) and all that is coming through are his CONSISTENT biases. In short his unrelated, often contradicting, cut-n-paste from different `Islam Khatre Mein Hain` publications are not really explaining what he is trying to say. All I get to know is what he HATES !
More on secularism and tigers later. this is taking a lot of time, but please bear with me.....

Why is it so hard to believe that in a pluralistic society people will come up with world views which reconcile and accomodate everything around them ?
Why is so hard to believe that with seculrism institutionalized for the last 50 years, some of us (for numbers please go follow the electorate ballot) Hindus, Muslims, and every other `type` of Indian alike BELIEVE in secularism. Where our politics, our personal religions, our education, our state all comes in different buckets.
I speak from personal experience and do not in any way claim that this is the majority opinion or otherwise. We have grown up in a pluralistic society where symbols of every religion and its followers are always in your face, on your TV, in your media, your national holidays, in your homes, at work. We have had people-to-people contact across religions all our lives as neighbours, school mates, team mates, city mates, country mates. We have shared `unity of purpose`. SOme of us have friends, family, relatives that cross religions and see everyday.
Omar talks of a world with multiple polarities, yet he denies every but the existence of 2 polarities (the Ummah vs the rest). Why can`t a Muslim who has grown up in a secular environment have a secular world view which actually is more representative of the different polarities ? Earlier I mentioned a friend of mine who is somewhat of an Ummah bigot to highlight a particular world view. But there are numerous Muslims friends & relatives who are not. LIkewise for HIndus, you will find all types. When he starts describing `his` Indian, `his` Hindu, `his` secularism, he again denies the existence of the various polarities.
HOnestly how many of you have had similar prejudices against entire groups of people and were rather pleasantly surprised when you actually made people-to-people contact, that afterall each and every one of us is an individual. THis may have come after stepping into the pluralistic and secular US. BUt in India a lot of us live with a pluralistic REALITY everyday. I share a little anecdote with you, please don`t take this as Indo-Pak mud slinging. I was in a cab the other day with desi bhraa. We had a very interesting conversation. He mentioned that all his life we had grown up with stories of bloody tussles with Hindus, but when he came to the US and was helped by Hindus, he wondered why he had all these prejudices about these people who he did not even know. He then said that he thought it was because he had never really met or known a Hindu or for that matter, Jew, all his life. He had no reason to believe anything but the `fables` he had heard. He had no way to prove or disprove it. I find this to be really true. I grew up with one version of Muslims handed down to me by my parents from their personal, rather bitter experiences, yet everyday I had other Muslims to interact with in school. Looking back over the years I can clearly see how we came up with a secular world view which we even passed on to our parents, to a great extent.

Secular Indians ideologically reject the 2 Nation theory. This is simply because in their world view multiple religions do co-exist. And in fact, any kind of division based on religion, be it in school, at work, at social functions, political representation directly threatens all of them. No, this has nothing to do with Pakistan. This is not a re-unification theory. This has nothing to do with the existing `foreign policy` with Pakistan. For us to accept the 2 Nation theory means we go into a civil war NOW. We may argue about it with Pakistanis but that is simply academic. But vis-a-vis Indians, we have debated this at length all through out growing up and it forms the cornerstone of our `unity of purpose` the foundation of our (Indian HIndus and Muslims) shared space. Just like accepting the 2 Nation theory forms the `unity of your purpose`. Now we don`t need to confront each over this do we.
A crazy circular loop which could be infinte unless we ctrl

Focus on Human Rights

India: Millions Face Abuse

Press Releases

State, Central Authorities In India “Criminally Negligent”

April 23, 1999

Violence Against ``Untouchables`` Growing, Says Report

April 14 1999

Inquiry Needed Into Calcutta Institute Censorship

April 9, 1999

Enron Defense Of Human Rights Abuse Rejected

January 28, 1999

Rights Group Urges Action on Massacre in Bihar, India

January 26, 1999

U.S. Corporation Complicit in Abuses in India

January 25, 1999

HRW Letter: Killings of Dalits in Andhra Pradesh

July 28, 1998

HRW Disappointed At India`s Position On International Court

June 16, 1998

Today more than one-sixth of India`s population, some 160 million people, live a precarious existence, shunned by much of society because of their rank as ``untouchables`` or Dalits-literally meaning ``broken`` people-at the bottom of India`s caste system. Dalits are discriminated against, denied access to land, forced to work in degrading conditions, and routinely abused at the hands of the police and of higher-caste groups that enjoy the state`s protection. Despite the fact that ``untouchability`` was abolished under India`s constitution in 1950, the practice of ``untouchability`` remains very much a part of rural India.

India`s government has done little to address long-standing human rights concerns, including violence against the country`s ``untouchables,`` or Dalits. Dalits are discriminated against, denied access to land, forced to work in degrading conditions, and routinely abused and even killed at the hands of police and high-caste groups.

Other marginalized groups in India are also under threat. Religious intolerance has been promoted by leaders with close ties to the governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Assaults on church workers, nuns and priests, and arson attacks on churches and other property have increased sharply in Gujarat, and there have been violent incidents in other states, including Orissa.

In Maharashtra state, the U.S. energy conglomerate Enron has been complicit in serious human rights abuses. Enron owns 50 percent of the Dabhol Power Corporation -- the largest single foreign investment in India whose new power plant is largest private power project in the world. Security forces hired by the project have routinely beaten and harassed people demonstrating peacefully against the power plant. Dabhol has indirectly benefited from other repressive government actions aimed at quelling opposition to the plant.

The government has also failed to address ongoing concerns about abuses by its forces in Kashmir. Despite government claims that ``normalcy`` has returned to Kashmir, Indian troops in the state continue to carry out summary executions, disappearances, rape and torture. Militant groups in the state have also killed civilians. A 1998 government offensive in Doda and the border districts has revived patterns of abuse by Indian forces that had abated in the Kashmir valley, where the conflict has been centered since it began in earnest in 1990.

Children are often the victims of abuse in India. Though illegal, bonded child labor is endemic throughout India. Street children in India are routinely detained illegally, beaten and tortured and sometimes killed by police. India`s failure to implement its own laws has contributed to these abuses.

Indian Democracy and Secularism at work in Kashmir

PTV televised news on April 26 condemning atrocities being committed by Indian forces on Kashmiri Muslims observing Muharram procession. Indian forces baton charged the mourners with full force to disperse them. During the process they arrested many Kashmiris and put them in the jail.

Re: Omar



One clarification .. The Indian government is today against the LTTE. So am I and so are my brothers in Canada. Today everyone of us have realized that LTTE as a force i idealogically bereft of any sanity. All we hope for is peace. The Indian government is against Prabhakaran for Rajiv`s murder . It is not against all LTTEs or those who were from the LTTE in the past. GET IT.

That apart, The Sri Lankan Tamils are not against the Sri Lankan Tamil Muslims. Tamils by themselves are not Hindutvavadis. They for the most part are pro-muslim. There are enough muslims even today in the LTTE. The LTTE is a pro-tamil organization not a pro-tamil hindu. Don`t talk about things you don`t understand or know about ? Stick to sueing everybody on planet earth (BTW are you taking your bar exams at all ?)

Note : While there are many tigers in India, there are some hyenas in Pakistan. The dry and arid mountainous climate of Pakistan is conducive for such hyenas who desperately need a kill. And since hyenas don`t eat hyenas but only the other animals, they look to the tigers for supplying them with their food. And this food is in plenty in neighbouring India. Earlier these hyenas tried the same with Bangladesh which was when they lost one leg. Pity the Bangladeshi tigers did not knock off the hyenas teeth instead.... so much for zoology.

Wah, how brilliant , omar. You are worthy of being a mirza for being so subtle in allegory. you are great.....

iconoclast

Re: Omar

As I had promised earlier this message would be posted by me everytime you post something that ridicules Indian secularism. Happy reading ..

You said ,

``If you can convince her (gladys stains) alone, that India is both Secular, and tolerant, and democratic and pluralistic as a society, then I will speak out no more against the myth of a Secular tolerant India. ``

-- Now honour your words and stop speaking against the (myth or not) of a secular tolerant India. Gladys Stains had publicly acknowledged that she considers India a secular and tolerant enough. She does not perceive the act of a few hooligans as the act of the majority of the people. ( i had given her actual words and the related URLs earlier ). Lets see how long you can hold your honour.

Iconoclast

Re-posting due to Server problem

There is a ‘tiger’ (as I previous defined the term) here, who has embraced the very real ‘tigers’; LITTE terrorists and their hard core supporters openly. He proclaims his eternal brotherhood with the very people he acknowledges financially, politically, and militarily support the LITTE in Sri Lanka. His acknowledgement of this bloody deed is just 2 articles below in the replies section. The irony of course is that he has openly proclaimed his eternal brotherhood with the very same people thirsty for his brother’s blood. His innocent brother’s death, he has not taken it upon himself to avenge. Far from that, he has embraced his brother’s killers while they are still dressed in their bloodied rags, soiled by the hardly coagulated blood of his true brothers, the hapless Sri Lankan Muslims. His brother’s children, were orphaned only yesterday, they have not yet stopped crying, the tears in their eyes have not yet stopped flowing, much less dried up, yet he sings the praises of peace and amity with their killers. May G-D have mercy on the souls of such misguided ‘tigers’, blinded by the ideology they have sold their souls for; Indian Secularism above all. It seems they care for little else. Nothing is amiss, if Secularism is the shroud that covers thy brother’s butchered corpse. We live merrily, for yet another day. Singing joyful secular songs of freedom. Having exchanged cumbersome green glasses for more trendy Saffron tinted red ones. No, that is being too generous. Such people carry a white cane and wear dark glasses only. The sun has long ago set for them, they no longer make use of their vision. They don’t need it anyway anymore. They dream upon Indian Secularism. Tis become their Salvation in this life, and the hereafter. They prostrate themselves daily at its feet. ROOZ Prasad charhatee hain iss ko yeh loog. ROOZ Saaley Aarti utaar tay hein! For such blinded fools the lord of the worlds has stated clearly that if they prefer the company (this part I distastefully relate but it is the Truth) of Jews, Christians, etc then their accounting on the day of judgement will not be with us, but with them instead. (I am paraphrasing a ‘politically incorrect’ Quranic verse herein).



Omar Mirza

JAI HIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is a ‘tiger’ (as I previous defined the term) here, who has embraced the very real ‘tigers’; LITTE terrorists and their hard core supporters openly. He proclaims his eternal brotherhood with the very people he acknowledges financially, politically, and militarily support the LITTE in Sri Lanka. His acknowledgement of this bloody deed is just 2 articles below in the replies section. The irony of course is that he has openly proclaimed his eternal brotherhood with the very same people thirsty for his brother’s blood. His innocent brother’s death, he has not taken it upon himself to avenge. Far from that, he has embraced his brother’s killers while they are still dressed in their bloodied rags, soiled by the hardly coagulated blood of his true brothers, the hapless Sri Lankan Muslims. His brother’s children, were orphaned only yesterday, yet he sings the praises of peace and amity with their killers. May G-D have mercy on the souls of such misguided ‘tigers’, blinded by the ideology they have sold their souls for; Indian Secularism above all. It seems they care for little else. Nothing is amiss, if Secularism is the shroud that covers thy brother’s butchered corpse. We live merrily, for yet another day. Singing joyful secular songs of freedom. Having exchanged cumbersome green glasses for more trendy Saffron tinted red ones. No, that is being too generous. Such people carry a white cane and wear black glasses only. The sun has long ago set for them, they no longer make use of their vision. They don’t need it anyway anymore. They dream upon Indian Secularism. Tis become their Salvation in this life, and the hereafter. They prostrate themselves daily at its feet. ROOZ Prasad charhatee hain iss ko yeh loog. For such blinded fools the lord of the worlds has stated clearly that if they prefer the company (this part I distastefully relate but it is the Truth) of Jews, Christians, etc then their accounting on the day of judgement will not be with us, but with them instead. (I am paraphrasing a ‘politically incorrect’ Quranic verse herein).



Omar Mirza

I take note of the Irony that while it has been 7 years since the demolition of Barbri Masjid in `Secular` India, it has not been rebuilt despite a number of promises by the Indian govt to do so.

Quite the contrary, work on Ram Madir continues unabated. It is now suggested that Babri Masjid be rebuilt elsewhere.

Whereas, in the aftermath of the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 and widespread anti-Muslim riots in India, which resulted in over 2,000 Indian Muslim, `endangered and nationally protected tigers` dead, there were indeed anti-Hindu riots in Islamic/Fundamentalist/Intolerant Pakistan. While few Hindu lives were lost, approx 30 small Hindu temples were damaged and destroyed. These however were promptly repaired and rebuilt with the intolerant, bigotted Pakistani govt`s funding.

If Indian Secularists don`t like TRUTH. They should CHOKE on it. But they continue ... to unabashedly take the `Nazar` off/utarnaa of Indian Secularism.

Omar Mirza

Reposting, seems not to have made it in order submitted 1st

Since the Truth seems to have eluded many, including Truth itself, therefore it bears repeating. Neither do I claim to be in possession of any divine Truth, nor do i tolerate those who wish to propagate any divine Truth as political orthodoxy without challenging them, be they in clerical or secular garb. Neither to put it mildly am I am proponent of Religious Rule by self-declared-divines who claim communion with godot. In fact the Truth is far from it. But stand me in front of an idea I deem hypocritical! Why you shall hear an earful. Reports of my bigotry are greatly exaggerated. It’s a convenient tool to attempt to discredit my argument which when necessary is prepared to proclaim the ‘possibility of another Truth’ even to the extent of near lewdness in cyberspace, (an occasional sledgehammer:).

Islam in America. Hmm. Well, since I honestly believe that the American system is not in general prejudiced against minorities[Abner Louima,and Rodney KIng may well disagree with me] (Unlike India where from one perspective its hard for a muslim-sucker to get an even break), I think Muslims will find America to be a safer place than India when it comes to wondering whether they will be the next victims of religiously motivated violence. The American muslim community has started to assert its growing political power. State Assemblymen now court their votes outside mosques, the mayor of N.Y too finds himself standing outside a mosque before prayers have ended courting votes. The American-Paki vote/contributions will not soon be forgotten by former Senator Larry Pressler, an ardent and all too willing tool of the Indian Congressional lobby. The Muslim community has organized itself at a local level in many places across the land of freedom, this is but the first step towards grass roots political involvement. Long term demographic trends favor muslims in both North America and the U.K. Again I stress I have no problems with Secularism, just Indian Secularism, because it is not quite what it purports itself to be. But I think if you look back at my comments regarding the manticore etc and what that means for Indian muslims you’ll come to the realization that I have never actually embraced a Uni-dimensional view. So too do I reject the Uni-dimensional views trotted out here on Chowk by faithful defenders of India, watched over closely by their zoo keepers, who paint an overly rosy picture as I said earlier, and are prepared to gloss over Truth itself in the process. In fairness, to both India and myself, ‘there is more to us than meets the jaundiced eye.’

Regards,

Omar Mirza

AN ODE TO A POLITICALLY CORRECT CHOWKIE LIBERAL

A little to the left

A little to the right

Tis well done

If we accomplish all without fright or fight



Its all right

‘cause we’re all so bright

Never mind ugly truths

Never mind borrowed lies

Never mind uncomfortable sighs

Alls well that ends without a fright or a fight

Its all right

‘Cause we’re all so bright

Lets hear it for

Safe Speech, not Free Speech

Where were they, these liberals?

When my one of my Uncles was branded a genocidal butcher right here on Chowk while they silently watched?

Where were they, these liberals when India celebrated her Union with a Secular bride with the slaughter of my paternal grandparents by Sikhs in ’47 in front of my father and Uncle’s eyes?

Where were they, these Chowkie liberals,

When my aunt was carried off to be raped and killed by the very same Sikhs on the very same

Indian-Secular-honeymoon night?

Where were they these Chowkwallas when my father and Uncle were left for dead in pools of their own blood in the orgy of the celebrations of the Indian-Secular honeymoon?

Outta the closet now, Out! Out! Come crawling outta the woodwork now! I wanna hear your voices!

Or, is it all right

`Cause we`re all so bright

By Omar Mirza

ALL MY POSTS SHOULD BE READ IN ASCENDING ORDER

On Second thought ... continuing from my last post, perhaps I should not have used the word, `clash`, perhaps a more appropriate word is `mating`. The end result of the mating between Secular India and Hindu Fundamentalism is likely to be neither entirely secular nor entirely fundamentalist. It shall be a bas#ard. An entirely Indian bas#ard. This is after all Indian reality, and this is the idea that Salaman Rushdie expresses so clearly about Indian-ness. I understand.

If my language seems a bit brutal, you can put it down to the fact I have just begun to learn Croquet. Perhaps when I have quite mastered the art of swinging a mallet, for I expect like a good vintage wine to improve with the passage of both time and age, you shall begin to lust for my ever sweet verbiage as you would the sensuous whores, er actresses of your fancy. Reality is for those suffering from a distinct lack of alcohol.

Regards as always, (grin)

Omar Mirza

One Truth, deserves anothor. The irony is NOT lost on me. (There being 2 sides to every coin) However, I had better place my bet on whether Indian Secularism will survive its clash with Hindu Fanaticism soon, with a Bombay bookie, while the odds are still in favor of the former, and the latter is still regarded as a dark horse, not quite a full fledged CONTENDER YET. If i really want to make a killing, i should act sooner rather than later, time is against me if i`m to make a few quick bucks.

Omar Mirza

JAI HIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OMAR MIRZA

RE: Faraz

``The fact remains that Pakistan`s ideology is

tied to history not just to an abstract political

concept.``

I actually do believe that Pakistan was founded

on a bogus and bankrupt ideology, and I certainly

hope that I am right. I just cannot believe that

it is true that people could want to segregate

people, and kick out a section of their own

community, on the basis of religion alone. And

then you complain about untouchability being a

``hindu`` problem? I find it really shocking that

you think that only muslims could have found the

Kosovo situation appalling, and that too only

becoz the afflicted were themselves muslims. Get

a world view man!

Now you talk about Pakistan`s ideology being tied

to history. So maybe you can answer this question

which I have asked many times, and on many

forums: When did this alleged oppression of

muslims by the Hindus take place? Was it so

widespread that partition was the only way out?

How is it that all manner of religous communities

have found shelter and prospered in India

(christians, jews, parsi`s etc), yet it was only

the muslims that were ``oppressed``?

Faraz:

India is not supporting NATO not because of lack of sympathy of the Kosovars but because of the stupidity of the NATO bombing. If you think that NATO should be supported just because the people who are suffering at the hands of the Serbs are Muslims, then you are blind and bigoted. Your enemy`s enemy is not necessarily your friend.

If you would be uncomfortable living in India, I`m sorry to hear that. Part of the reason why Muslims are uncomfortable in India is because of the creation of your country. Its easy for you to be smug now. And to be exactly parallel, you should compare the lives of miniscule minorities of Pakistan against lives of Muslims in India. You were not the only people living in todays Pakistan - that you think your comfort determines whether Pakistan makes sense is reflective of the self-absorption of the Muslim League and Pakistan.

Re: Faraz

`` I would like to see exactly what it is that people are finding offensive. That he thinks Muslims are discriminated against in India? ``

-- While Omar is entitled to his views, his statements at times borders on the fringe of lunacy . He is the only poster who makes a post and then claims credit for his intelligence and victory. He comes across most of the time as one confused individual who thinks that he has come across a brilliant idea and starts espousing his cause with little or no concern to what the others have to say about it.

`` exactly why are some people so touchy? ``

-- Because in spite of the BJP and the RSS we Indians in general would like to think of our country as secular. Unlike in Pakistan where the state and the religion symbolises the same. This essential dichotomy is near to our heart since it is the very fabric of our existence. For you discrimination might be okay, for us it must be fought . See the difference, don`t ya ?

`` Consequently, any mention of discrimination against Muslims in India is seen as an attack against secularism in India and thus a vindication of the 2 nation theory. Absolute crap! ``

-- I agree with this statement. However Rana`s statement is probably due to the frustration of replying to Omar and not having him take cognisance of it.

`` 2. You would think the Indian secularists themselves would be most concerned about the treatment of Muslims in India today. ``

-- Indian secularists ofcourse are concerned about treatment of all minorities. Did you not see the way the whole country reacted to the recent anti-christian events. In fact, the Indian secularists are concerned more about the treatment of all its people . Thus they need to be as concerned about a muslim in Bihar as a christian in Orissa or a Hindu in Kashmir. They however are not perfect....but they are atleast trying hard to discern the truth.

`` That does not mean I cannot have an honest opinion as to the treatment of minorities there. We are living in the information age after all. And from what I have seen on TV ``

-- What you see or hear on TV is subject to perception. You also see hindi movies, i suppose. Did you feel that Indian Muslims are doing great when you see that the leading film stars who make millions of ruppees are all Muslims. You would`nt ? When you look at how well i am doing, will you believe that discrimination is not as you perceive it in India ? again you will not.. because you would like to believe only what you want to believe??

``I have to say I would not feel cormfortable living in India as a Muslim. ``

-- True.. just as much as i would probably feel if i had not been an Indian Muslim . We are not trying to get the approval of anyone outside india on our secularism. All we need is the approval of those within india. This whole argument actually really does not matter. We don`t have to convince anyone outside our country of our secularism or discrimination .

`` 3. Last but not least let`s talk about Kosovo. Can anyone explain to me why a country with 200 million Muslims (who supposedly have political power and are not discriminated against) is not actively opposing the genocide in Kosovo by a communist dictator and instead protesting the secular and democratic nations trying to put a stop to it? ``

-- We are infact against the genocide in Kosovo as much as any other muslim nation is . It is just that we are against the bombing by Nato since we perceive it as a violation of boundaries . Let me put it this way, we are just plain scared of what might happen if a rebellion is created in say tamil nadu by the tamil seperatists, and a government in the center mishandles it and it becomes a genocide and people start moving to srilanka, and if the NATO starts bombing India....

Now that you raised this issue, let me ask you something else, why are the muslim nations such as Arabia, Iraq, Iran, and the gulf countries, plus Malaysia and Indonesia not committed towards the Kosovars as Pakistan is ?? Is it probable that Pakistan is taking the concept of the Muslim Ummah more serious than the other islamic countries do ?????

Tailpiece :

Many people are proud of many different things when it comes to their nations.

Nawaz Sharief may be proud that there`s is an Islamic nation.

BJP might claim Garv se kaho hum hindu hai.

But for an average indian such as myself (muslim or not), pride comes from the fact that religion does not decide my government. And this pride needs to become more real than it is now.

iconoclast

Re: OMAR1974

Omar, please educate a lost soul, but just what excatly do you gain by posting a litany of InterActs!?

Would it not be beneficial to your arguments if you could put your arguments-comments in one posting? My friend, you are creating an impression of a dis-organized mind despite your legal credentials and that is hardly conducive towards a career whose bread and butter is the concise employment of lexiographic skills!

My friend, and I say this in a jest, you are pulling on so many InterAct! threads that you are in danger, if you do not watch out, of tearing apart the fabric of your logic at its very seams!!!

re: Omar

I beg your pardon but I think you misunderstood what I wrote about. I understood the comparison you made and saw it as being completely ridiculous and irrelavant. You just wanted to talk about tigers. Tigers don`t kill for religion, and other man made differences, the way we humans do. Tigers are very noble in that sense. They kill for food and rarely become man eaters. The ones who do are old, maimed (injured from charra fire of poachers).

I found it ironical that you picked tigers, and I decided to play along. I arrogantly stated that ``Hindu India`` with its ``multiple truths`` which see the divine in a lot of things (including tigers) even protects ``tigers`` and is the only country with a program of its nature. I happened to have numbers on it. It is and will be the last remaining abode of ``tigers in the wild``.

I also asked about when ``Tigers`` got extinct in Pakistan (this Indo-Pak peniscontest is only for the benefit of Omar, I apologize to the rest cause I agree this should not be an Indo-Pak mudslinging contest).
Or were there any similar programs for ``wildlife`` in Pakistan ?

Omar its good to be a legend in ones own mind but then sometimes its not.

It is interesting to see Omar being labeled an extremist. He has an interesting way of putting things, but I would like to see exactly what it is that people are finding offensive. That he thinks Muslims are discriminated against in India? Oh there`s a radical thought. Minorities are discriminated against in Pakistan as well; exactly why are some people so touchy? Just some points about the debate, I thought should be made:

1. Most Important: Partition happened, deal with it. It seems most Indians while wholeheartedly accepting the practical reality of Partition, still think of it as bankrupt from an ideological viewpoint. Consequently, any mention of discrimination against Muslims in India is seen as an attack against secularism in India and thus a vindication of the 2 nation theory. Absolute crap! Whether or not India is able to fully enforce secularism (and it is currently not), has no bearing on whether Pakistan was a legitimate cause. I personally hope India does become what they claim to be on paper (ie the world`s largest democracy). The fact remains that Pakistan`s ideology is tied to history not just to an abstract political concept. Thus, it matters not, what you guys are able to establish now...it matters what you were not able establish 60 odd years ago. The Jews would all be Eqyptians today, if the Pharoah hadn`t been such a dickhead..it matters little how progressive Eqypt is today.

2. You would think the Indian secularists themselves would be most concerned about the treatment of Muslims in India today. I am sorry to say but to me, it seems they are much more interested in defending Mother India than they are in ensuring its secularist credentials. And I understand your objections about posters not having visited India; I, too, have not (I would like to go...but the chances for a visa would be remote). That does not mean I cannot have an honest opinion as to the treatment of minorities there. We are living in the information age after all. And from what I have seen on TV (including the abomination at Ayodhya), heard from Indian Muslims myself (and not just one or two), read in the papers (from the likes of Thackeray and Advani)..I have to say I would not feel cormfortable living in India as a Muslim.

3. Last but not least let`s talk about Kosovo. Can anyone explain to me why a country with 200 million Muslims (who supposedly have political power and are not discriminated against) is not actively opposing the genocide in Kosovo by a communist dictator and instead protesting the secular and democratic nations trying to put a stop to it?

Re: Omar, #71

Although I don`t subscribe to your extremist rhetoric, you do make some points which are not based entirely on fantasy. However, Rana is not too subtle, is he? Subtlety is an art form that has either not been mastered by our Indian friends or it has been mastered by them just too well!

The latest irrefutable information. Ice cream melts in the sun. This is due to hindu deviousness. They give ice cream to muslims because the ice cream will melt and muslims will have to buy another cone. Ultimate and irrefutable proof that hindus are out to exploit and destroy muslims. They will stab muslims in the back on little or no pretext.

That is the whole reason why pakistan was formed.

Jawahara:

Yes we all contribute to this hatred. The sad thing about the internet is it provides for this hatred to be propagated and to stick. In this way, the Internet has empowered everybody, including haters. Earlier, you would have to meet a bigot like Omar1974 to encounter his hatred. Now here he is on my computer screen, an unwanted guest. Yes, I know I can turn it off but then I would be turning off other people as well. And consider the medium as well. Earlier, if Omar1974 managed to make it on a newspaper, he would get printed one day and disappear, like a bubble that emerges form the water and disappears. Now here his rantings stay and persist for days on end. I move between a cynicism and a hardening after I read Chowk but I know there are some moral principles that I must adhere to regardless of experiences with the Omars of the world - thats what keeps me from getting sucked into hatred.

I believe your desire to get H out of BHU and M out of AMU is a common secular mistake. Do you want everybody to wear Mao tunics and eat the same food and like the same colors. Your unstated assumption that religion is inherently evil and divisive is plain wrong. Remember materialism is not the answer. Marx said ``Religion is the opium of the masses, the heart of a heartless world, the soul of a soulless world``. Dont throw the baby out with the bathwater.

In this frenzy of who is right or wrong, who does what to whom, and who does it first, I find one thing staring at me in the face. We do it. All of us do it and we do it to each other.

I guess I agree with Wasiq on the fact that this religious divisiveness is part of an increasingly dangerous trend in the whole subcontinent.

There is no one side which is totally right or wrong. Muslims and Hindus both start riots. More Muslims in India get killed in these because they are simply outnumbered. If they had a chance they would inflict similar damage too.

In a sadly bizarre way, both groups are really too alike for comfort. If one took away the identifiers of religion their hatred and their actions would be eerily similar at a basic level.

So the solution, if ever there is to be one, is to target the paranoias from both sides and attitudes and actions. A pipe dream, I know.

On a somewhat unrelated note, I would have as many problems if BHU did not admit Muslims and had Muslim teachers as I would AMU not doing the same for Hindus. They are institutions of higher learning. Let`s not, at least, taint them with this seperationist crap. In fact I would like to delete the middle identifier of `H,` and `M` from both. :-)

Just a random gathering of thoughts.

From Letters to the editor Dawn

India`s `secularism`

THIS refers to Mr Mihir Dalal`s letter (Dawn, April 8) which was in response to Mr Feroz Shah Gilani`s letter published earlier under the caption ``Vajpayee`s statement``.

Although Mr Vajpayee is no more at the helms of affairs, yet his statement being representative of the Hindu mind needs to be commented upon to dispel Mr Dalal`s misgivings.

It is indeed correct to say that (officially) India is not a Hindu republic and that it has the second largest Muslim population in the world. But the ground realities bring out a different picture. In fact, Mr Dalal himself exposes the double standards employed by India. If India could condemn use of force against Iraq, then why is it quiet when Kosovo Muslims are driven out of their ancestral homes by brute force used by Serbs. It rather chose to side with the aggressors.

India`s securalism is nothing but a hoax and its reality by now is well known to the world. The plight of Indian Muslims need not be described. Their share in services is negligible (about 4.1%. India boasts of Ghalib, yet Urdu is not taught in schools. Where was India`s securalism at the time of the demolition of Babri mosque?

The atrocities being committed by Indian troops in Kashmir continue unabated and no Indian leader has ever condemned that. Why no voice is raised in India to stop the killing of innocent Kashmiri Muslims? The utterances of Bal Thakeray about Indian tour of Pakistani cricket team and the digging of cricket pitch at Delhi by his zealots clearly brings out the Hindus` hatred of Muslims veiled behind the thin facade of securalism.

I think perhaps Mr Dalal is not aware of the background of the partition of the subcontinent and the emergence of Pakistan. In addition to various other factors, it was basically the Hindu intransigence and intolerance towards Muslims that compelled them to demand Pakistan.

Again, Mr Dalal might not be aware of the fact that Mr M.A. Jinnah - the creator of Pakistan - started his political career by joining the Indian Congress party and he worked wholeheartedly to promote Hindu-Muslim unity which won him the title of the Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity. But, alas, due to Hindu leadership`s narrow-mindedness and prejudice towards Muslims, he was forced to give up his efforts.

Even at the fag end of freedom struggle against the British in 1946, Mr Jinnah accepted a constitutional scheme presented by a cabinet mission sent to India by the British government to resolve the Hindu-Muslim political conflict and to grant freedom to India.

This plan envisaged a loose type of federation which could have kept the subcontinent united. But although the cabinet mission plan was accepted by Mr Jinnah in the larger interest of Muslims and the people of the subcontinent, it was rejected by Nehru for no reasons at all except his peculiar stubbornness and the deep-rooted prejudice against the Muslims. Had the Hindus been a little accommodating towards Muslims, there would have been no Pakistan.

There is no change in the Hindu attitude towards Muslims not-withstanding the recent bus yatra of Mr Vajpayee and the cricket diplomacy.

The nuclear tests in May last year and the recent missile testing by India forced Pakistan to undertake the same exercise. A question can be asked: whom India is afraid of and against whom bomb and missiles would be used? Every Pakistani knows the obvious reply. If Mr Dalal has a different answer, I stand corrected.

MUHAMMAD ZIA KAYANI