They Shoot Kashmiri Pandits, Dont They?

84 by ali87 on March 31, 2003 1:23pm PT

“Do you expect Muslims to sing this? “
”Could you really expect a Muslim to sing, ``To thee I call Mother and Lord! ``? “
”Most Hindus neither understand nor appreciate what it means to be a Muslim. They expect us to be just another form of Hindu only praying another god but accepting other Idols when we come across them. “

Of course, we do know very well, that to be a Muslim, means to ‘reject’ all other religions, isn’t this the first condition, a ‘shart’, to look down upon them?
To say it ten times a day: “There is no God but Allah”. If you indulge in ‘idol worship’, you go to hell.
Of course we know, you Muslims are scared like hell of all the punishments that you may get if you do this or that.
Does Islam say that if you don’t respect your country then you go to hell? No.
Islam says if you don’t indulge in ‘Muslim brotherhood’ then you go to hell, but you are allowed to hate your country. But don’t ever harm another Muslim; you may hate a kafir Hindu, as that will take you to heaven.

If Hinduism has a room for manifest and diverse form of prayers, this is what makes it tolerant. That is why so many Hindi songs have “Allah”, “Khuda” words freely used…and no Hindu takes offence from their usage. Even Hindu kids/adults sing the songs with these words…no problem there.

Urstruly: ”Even educated and informed people propagate this false expectations. “
O yes, educated people should tell the uneducated ones, that Muslims are a different lot, they are never changing obstinate people, opinionated people.

And by the way, you being an Indian hate calling India your ‘motherland’, for you it is like ‘idol worship’.
But Pakistanis like Musharraf has been constantly addressing his country as ‘motherland’ in his speeches. “We will do anything do defend our motherland”..he uses this word time and again. From where did he get this phrase? Isn’t it a Hindu concept, to idolize’ your country (or a cow) as a mother? Matrbhumi…bharat mata…and now pakistan-mata?

If a Pakistani head who hates India so much can call his country ‘mother’, then you Indian Muslims (who stayed behind in secular India, who grows up in a multi-religious atmosphere) should have had no reason to be ashamed of doing so, unless and until you hate India and hate Hindus more than a Pakistani does.

ahmadzai # 73

You can believe whatever makes sense to you. Others will judge you according to the quality of your beliefs. I would request you to give some thought to the words of M. P. Bhandra who acknowledges that the world does not consider Pakistan`s word to be of 22-carat quality -

``If we are really serious about finding some solution to this intractable problem, we have to come clean with world opinion. We will have to confront our jihadists some day, better now than never. The jihadist mentality was tried once before in East Pakistan with disastrous results.``


Gulf News, not a newspaper published by the GOI, just published the following -

http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/news.asp?ArticleID=82300

See ahmadzai, Indians do not give much importance to what you or Pakistani military think about India or Kashmir. To us it is a problem of violence and fanaticism, and we will face it as that. The question is what you want to do with Pakistan itself.

#88 by Urstruly on March 31, 2003 1:56pm PT
“No one in India today asks its govermnet, what happened to 80,000 Kashmiris who lost their lives because of INdian Army; No one in India today questions why women and children are being raped by their army and why government has given your army full immunity through the draconian laws like Disturbed Area Act of 1991”

Sometimes it is 30,000 Kashmiris (an imaginary and exaggerated figure anyway)..and it increases to 50,000 then 60,000 and now goes on to 80,000.
Urstruly, didn’t you see at the time of Gujarat riots, that in a democracy like India with the unforgiving media that it has, nothing can go unnoticed? Neither was the number of Hindu nor that of Muslim victims exaggerated in Gujarat and true account was given even if goes against the govt? And Hindus were the first to critise unbiasedly, the killings of muslims too.
And you mean to say, 80,000 killings in kashmir? Unnoticed by the press?…absolute rubbish.
And the account and amount of army raping women and children..is again and again overemphasized and exaggerated. Maybe, such incidents did occur at some time, we don’t know. But maybe that was also a fraud.
Now recently, the terrorists came dressed as military men and killed 24 Pundits, so can’t they wear a uniform to rape their women and make it look like army has done it? After all, the men in the ‘terrorist training camps’ are more ‘starved’ than the military men.
And looking at the fact that they so freely indulge in cutting noses and spoiling faces of women..they can do anything…

re: tempral

...dude, relax....no need to get excited because i called your crush on that female urstruly...

Pakistan`s ruling elite has been demanding a plebiscite as the panacea to end all injustice in Jammu & Kashmir. But what constitutes a fair plebiscite? Ensuring the fairness of the mechanism of casting and counting of votes is a part of it. But a fair plebiscite in Jammu & Kashmir needs to be much more than that.

A plebiscite cannot be fair if it allows the majority to infringe on the fundamental rights of an unpopular person or minority. Thus, even if a referundum in Iran were to validate Ayatollah Khomeni`s fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it will not turn the deadly fatwa into fair and democratic action.

The plebiscite that Pakistan`s ruling elite demands in Jammu & Kashmir cannot be fair, in spite of every thing, if they are merely the means to destroying the age old regious diversity of the land.

``Kashmir Banega Pakistan`` is not a slogan of the Kashmiris, by the Kashmiris and for the Kashmiris. It is a slogan engendered and nurtured in the cantonments of `Pindi, Lahore and Sialkot that aims to impose the religious homogeneity of Pak occupied Kashmir (PoK) on the rest of Jammu & Kashmir as well. Here`s an article that articulates the pitfalls of plebiscite on the plank of ``self-determination.``


The Horizon
30th October, 1998

Self-determination Isn`t Always Sacred
by Pravin Satsangi

Self-determination is fast becoming the most abused concept of our times. When Woodrow Wilson coined the word, it was to verbalize his compassion and concern for fellow human beings. But the political arm of terrorists,like those in Kashmir, use the word in a way that is a travesty of the lofty principles that had animated President Wilson and is a cruel mockery of human rights. No one can possibly be left in doubt about this
once he witnesses the plight of the quarter million Kashmiri Hindus who have had to flee their ancestral home in the face of fanatical terrorists from abroad seeking self-determination for the Muslims in Kashmir.

The political representatives of the terrorists in Kashmir weave the word ``self-determination`` into their righteous chants in a clever public relations effort to glean support for their goal of turning Jammu and Kashmir in the mold of ethnically cleansed Pakistan. The world needs to be informed that self-determination of ``their`` people is ruthlessly violating the human rights of others.

Self-determination is indeed a basic human right. But it loses its sanctity when self-determination of a group implies marching orders for the rest. Ofcourse, people don`t leave their homes voluntarily. They have to be persuaded. That means killing them untill everybody gets the idea.The massive ethnic cleansing of 1947 in Jinnah`s Pakistan is an example of self-determaination of this evil variety. Pakistan lived upto its name by becoming a ``cleansed land`` within weeks of independence. And now Kashmir is taking a leaf out of Jinnah`s book. Self-righteous chanters of
``self-determination`` with direct Pakistani assistance seem well on their way to stamping out religious diversity from Jammu and Kashmir.

Will we never learn the cruel lessons of history? The previous UN Secretary General Boutros-Ghali put it about as bluntly as could be: ``If every ethnic, religious or linguistic group claimed statehood, there would be no limit to fragmentation. Peace, security and economic well-being for all would become even more difficult to achieve.``

Self-determination for a group must never sanctify the violation of human rights of another. Automatic self-determination, for whosoever shouts the loudest, is a sure recipe for tragedies like Kashmir. It is the greatest of evils to allow one person`s self-determination to degenerate into his neighbour`s extinction. Kashmir desperately calls out for respite from fanatical terrorists from abroad who have turned the land into a living hell.

Abraham Lincoln courageously faced down those that chanted ``secession`` to perpetuate the evil of slavery. We, too, must summon the courage to confront those that chant ``self-determination`` in heedless pursuit of Jinnah`s evil ideology of religious apartheid.

#84 by ali87:

``Not only is the imagery makes strong referneces to India as an Idol it also refences to Druga and Lakshmi.

Could you really expect a muslim to sing ``To thee I call Mother and Lord! ``?``

A modern Christian has no problem with using imagery of Greco-Roman heritage. A ``Herculean effort`` is applauded, not derided. The ``Muse`` is always respected. People do talk of their ``Odyssey`` with anything but contempt. And they know exactly how an ``Apple of discord`` can cause dissension.

Ali87 would be a better person if he can not just tolerate but even repeat the beautiful ``pagan`` imageries that he is taking exception to. A.R.Rahman did exactly that when he sang ``Ma Tujhe Salaam``. And, yes, A.R.Rahman is a bigger man for it than Ali87 can ever be if he continues to stick to his bogotry.

rsridhar #91
rsridhar, I agree with ali78 #84 wrt the Masjid and Sanghis.

And I don`t think its as simple as a case of hatred(vande matram) or accomodation or sense of separateness(Personal law).

Its an issue of Muslim identity, too, very much like Tamil identity or Marathi identity. This issue also has be tackled within the Muslim communities. IMO it must happen at the pace decided by Muslims themselves.

Re the masjid, it became too late for Muslims to `accomodate` the minute the masjid was demolished.

Now its a matter of principle whether force of an unruly mob can be allowed to prevail over the rule of law, whether force can be used to impose the will of a majority over the rights of a minority. We are all stake holders in this principle, because we are all minorities in many situations, including simple ones like when goondas go around asking for protection money.

I too find the order to dig very disturbing, perhaps new information could `cut the Gordian knot` , but its a lot more likely the exercise is only giving scope for obfuscating the issue and the principle at stake further.

Urstruly#88
``My heart goes out for you but I do not have moral courage to ask those whose women and children are raped and their houses burnt down to not hurt you.``
I admire your moral courage to at least admit that these killings were carried out by the so-called freedom fighters. My question to you is why you cannot condemn their actions? Which hadis or surah of quran stops you from asking them to spare innocent children and women?
Couldn`t someone use your logic to say, ``How can I ask the Indian govt. to stop their cordon and search operations since muslims are known to sympathise with terrorists or the hindus from retlating against muslims for the Godhra killings?`` Accepting guilt through association is a dangerous thing.
In any case, your logic does not apply to these 24 hindus. They did not abandon their muslim brothers but stuck with them when others left. How do you know that they supported the actions of the Indian govt.? Do you know that their loss was mourned most by their weeping muslim neighbours?
And what precedent is there for the Kashmiri pandits to trust that they will be treated fairly in an independent Kashmir or Pakistan? How many Hindus or Sikhs are left in Pakistan. Even after more than half a century, the proportion of Hindus keeps going down, not only in Pakistan but also in Bangladesh while that of Muslims in India keeps going up despite facing some discrimination and insecurities. Before you ask Hindu or Buddhist Kashmiris to put their trust in the hands of their Muslim brethren, you should be able to show it to them how well you have treated your minorities.

temporal #87
Your definition of bigot seems to be `those Hindus who disagree with Farzana`. There is no such dictionary definition, not even if Farzana is a gasp! Muslim.

And there is a glaring lack of objectivity here. Very often on chowk, Indians here post news items reporting terrorists killings in J&Kashmir, those who are killed are almost always Muslims, that fact is clear when the news items include names of victims.

These Indian posters almost always rant at jihadis and Pakistanis and the Pakistani govt when posting these news items. At that time no one arguing with them remembers the religion of Indian posters, which is always Hindu.

Now that the issue is deaths in Kashmir of HINDUS, specifically, you now accuse the Hindu Indians here like rsaxena of thinking only of their own coreligionists. THIS BALLOON DOESNOT FLY.

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

Scout:

``stuka, ``A Hindu is killed for his religion alone.``

no kidding? all the deaths in the valley are due to religion, the whole issue is of religion...... where have you been? ``

You missed the point. Frazana said that Muslims in the valley have also been killed by terrosists. She is correct. However, a Muslim terrorist is not killing a a fellow Muslim because of religion. It is because of affinity with the Indian state.

I was not making some vast conceptual point. I was being specific to the targeting of Hindus in the valley by terrorists. In that sense, it is Hindus, not Muslims, who are killed because of their religion.

Urstuly:

Beat it, dude. Ain`t no one listening to your caterwauling.

PMishra:

Yeah, same here. It`s not even the same as Sarey Jahan sey Accha, which is accorded status equivilant to the national anthem.

A pleasant irony that crocodile Urstruly`s post immediately followed the definition of ``bigot``! Sometimes fate works in mysterious ways ...

re: #83 by soysauce
How does one force anyone to sing a national anthem or a patriotic song like Vande Mataram? This is like Karunanidhi, the Tamil politician, telling a cheering crowd of his DMK supporters that Tamilians are being forced to learn Hindi and they need to resist. How does one do it? Do you place a gun over someone`s head and force him/her to recite Vande Mataram or learn Hindi? These are dubious arguments put forward by dubious politicians. In a democracy, you have a free choice. You cannot be forced.

``Rapproachement has to be based on give and take. What are the hindus willing to give in return for the masjid? A promise that they would not insist on a uniform civil code or something equally weighty?``

This is not a business transaction. Muslims are faced with a rising tide of Hindu fundamentalism. This affects Hindus as much as muslims. So, do not make it into a Hindu- muslim thing. Muslims need to join secular Hindu forces and this is one way of doing it. Right now there is a complete polarisation. Do you have any better ideas?

Besides, muslims have nothing to lose. Masjid in question has not seen a religious call of the mullah for many years now and is not being used as a religious place by muslims for the last several years.
Sridhar

re:#84 by ali87
Most hindus do not know the meaning of Vande Mataram. Thanks for giving us the English translation. The original sanskrit song is a real beauty, that is, if you know what is being said. As i said, in this day and age, few Indians know or care about the rea meaning of Vande Mataram.
Eveything then boils down to one thing: symbolism. Vande Mataram somehow has become symbolic of Hindutva. I did not think anything was objectionable in this song (to a muslim) until i came to the part which talked about Lakshmi, Durga etc. But, then, the Hindu who wrote it (Bankim Chatterjee) imagined India to be a mother and described all her attributes. That, again, is full of symbolism. None of this is to be taken literally. That is why, i say, there is a huge gap between Hindu and muslim mindset. Most hindus do not have a problem reciting ``Sare Jahan se Achha``, written by a great urdu poet, who later migrated to Pakistan. Should we banish this great patriotic song because it is written by a Pakistani? That would be unthinkable. Not even Bal Thaceray has suggested this so far (I hope i am not giving him new ideas!). Embrace the song for what it is: just a song in praise of India. Let not the muslims fall prey to hatred.
sridhar