The Great Turn-On

#68 by FarzanaVersey on November 17, 2003 0:57am

``Amnesia is a great weapon. Who wants to remember 1984? That was Indian Sikhs.``

Can you be more explicit Farzana, when you talk about all the other minorities does that include Nagas, Mizos, Sikhs, Christians, Konkanis, Laddakhi, Buddhist, Gonds, Santhals and rest of the others.

Romair # 58
Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. I have traveled to your country, visited Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad and Hyderabad and I did not see any of these beautiful people. This is another lie you guys are fed like one Pakistani Soldier is equal to ten Indian soldiers.

Faruk

FarzanaVersay # 68
“Had India gone ahead with the limited autonomy plan with the sadar-e-riyasat idea, Kashmiris would have had more sense of security and confidence in the Indian government. The groups that are aligned to Pakistan have got legitimised through a process of osmosis. May I say somewhat like the British East India Company did here…yes, I have criticised the government, because it has been the failure of successive establishments (not just the BJP) and my solution has always been: let Kashmiris decide…which is not easy. I have often reiterated that there will not ever be a complete governmental solution because it helps both countries. And this article too merely pointed out that -- why search for a futile peace at the political level?”

I don’t think Kashmiri’s will be better off with more autonomy. In fact in my opinion we should remove Article 370 and let every one invest in Kashmir and that will have a positive effect on the local economy and lives of the people.


Regards,

Faruk

FarzanaVersey # 67
“About giving away Indian Kashmir on a platter, last night I saw the BJP”s S.S. Ahluwalia on TV saying that Mahatma Gandhi gave away some land to make Pakistan! We still cannot accept the existence of a country that was created for ideological reasons, and it shows in your platter theory.”

If you think Indians don’t accept the creation of Pakistan just ask any Indians if they want them back. You will get only one answer “Hell No!” That convinces me that we have accepted the creation of Pakistan.

Regards,

Faruk

Dear Farzana:
The Indo-Pak negotiations has been an on-again, off-again tamasha for as long as one can remember. The mandarins on both sides have a knee-jerk reaction. I think that Vajpayee is sincere in seeking a rapproachment with Pakistan and wants to go down in history as the person who ended the enmity between the two countries. In his own way, probably Musharraf does want peace, too but his thinking, accurately reflected in our roamir, is that what Pakistan has, it keeps because the ``Kashmiris`` there are happy even though they have obliterated any sign of Kashmiriyat in their part and, unlike Indians, have turned it into an overwhelmingly Panjabi enclave. I think that the Pakistanis committed a himalayan blunder by neotiating a treaty with the Chinese on the areas of Kashmir occupied by them; they could only do so if they had sovereignty over POK, and if they have sovereignty, so did the Indians on the part held by them.
The problem with Musharraf is that he always thinks like a commando he is, concerned only with tactical victories. As I had said at that time, Musharraf`s performance at Agra could be considered brilliant except for the fact that he forgot that a summit has to result in a befuddled win-win situation. He made Vajpayee look bad and started making statements in Agra which made the old man look like a puppet in the hands of Advani, and foreclosed the possibility of another summit in the near future.
The 12-point proposal made by India incorporated mostly the points which the Pakistanis had themselves wanted. The inclusion of 20 children`s treatment appeared as an insult to Pakistanis and this should have been anticipated as such by the Indians. However, I think it was a response to the genuine goodwill in India by the Noor phenomenon and, if I recalll, had been initially made at that time.
I am not blaming the Pakistani bureaucrats but the bureaucratic mentality per se. Somehow, I think that if the proposal had come from Pakistanis, the Indians probably would have also offered something ridiculous such as the Pakistani counter proposal of assisting Kashmiri victims of Indian counter-insurgency.
On the future of Kashmir to be determined by Kashmiris, I beg to differ. Kashmiris have to be part of the equation but so do Indians and Pakistanis. And the views of Kashmiris would have to be determined in some other way than through a plebiscite. Any plebiscite would inevitably turn into for-or-against-islam, which would undoubtedly strengthen the born-again TNTites in India.
And finally, I think that the peace process in India has suffered a setback from an unlikely source, the misfortunes of the US in Iraq and Afghanistan. If the Bush shock-and-awe had succeeded, we would have seen the Americans exerting some real pressures on the leadership of the two countries to ``facilitate`` a meaningful dialogue.

#63 by stuka:
``How does any other country come into the picture? Regarding plebiscite, the Kashmiris did want it. The problem is that we have begun to see the Kashmir struggle from the Pakistani perspective and use counter arguments to that, rather than to the core issue. ``

Hmm, interesting point. Maybe you can expand on that? I am not sure if I agree with you, but I do see some validity in your perspective. How can any initiative intra-Kashmir be successful if Pakistan kills it thru its proxies. Recent split in Hurriyat is an example. I tend to go with conventional view that we have to outlast Pakistan in fighting the insurgency before any meaningful accords can be made. I would be interested in hearing an alternative point of view. Whereas you have criticized the government in the past, you have not really provided an alternative vision. If you have one, I would be interested in reading about it.]

Had India gone ahead with the limited autonomy plan with the sadar-e-riyasat idea, Kashmiris would have had more sense of security and confidence in the Indian government. The groups that are aligned to Pakistan have got legitimised through a process of osmosis. May I say somewhat like the British East India Company did here…yes, I have criticised the government, because it has been the failure of successive establishments (not just the BJP) and my solution has always been: let Kashmiris decide…which is not easy. I have often reiterated that there will not ever be a complete governmental solution because it helps both countries. And this article too merely pointed out that -- why search for a futile peace at the political level?

#64 by gujjubania:
[What Indian Muslims like Farzana Versey and Co. who talk about or wish for `Self-determination of Kashmir` and `Kashmir is for Kashmiris` don`t realise is that if ever India loses Kashmir on the virtue of Kashmir being a Muslim majority - there will then be no reason for the Hindus of India to restrain themselves from kicking the muslims left in the Indian mainland out of India.]

Say that again? Certain provisions were made for the Kashmiris in the Indian Constitution. I did not whisper in Dr. Ambedkar’s ears…if Kashmir is ever lost, it will not be due it its Muslim majority position. Go to Nagaland and find out how many Muslims are there…

As for Hindus of India not being able to restrain themselves from kicking the Muslims out, first India will have to change its Constitution and declare that it is a Hindu country. Then it will have to face a backlash from the Muslim citizens who are a part of this nation and want to be a part of it always.

[Even the majority of Hindus who are basically tolerant ,moderate and decent sort will turn against muslims.]

I doubt that. As for the wonderful adjectives, have you looked in the mirror lately?

[Is it not so typical of these characters to preach Secularism when in a minority and practise Fundamentalsm when in majority?]

We have majoritarain fundamentalism in our country. Who are these characters you speak of? If it is Muslims, then this is precious…you are saying that we preach secularism when in a minority, which would mean that we are essentially a peace-loving group in India. Then why would the Hindus want to kick us out? The point is not about secularism, but egalitarianism and justice. These concepts do not enter thick heads. Take care. You will need to polish the soles of your feet too…

#47 by AnOrdinaryHindu:
[Musharraf did what he was expected to do - refused to have any mention of terrorist infiltration, and strode back to Pakistan, blaming India once again.
So long as Vajpayee is in office, India will continue to lurch from one such blunder to another in its dealings with the Pakistani military.]

You mean to say he declared that at the last minute? It has always been Pakistan’s stand (no terrorist infiltration). He blamed India for scuttling things at the last minute. Honestly, we conducted the proceedings shabbily. Please do talk to a few reasonable Hindus and they will agree.

The problem is not just with Vajpayee, but with the manner in which the government in power manages to have two streams of thought and action running parallel. It is like Mama pampering the baby and then saying, “Papa will scold you”. Important events in the country are not children in a nuclear family waiting for the two parents to work out their little roles.

#56 by arjun_m:
[Nobody wants to forget those shameful incidents....but bringing them up during completely unrelated discussions in an attempt to bludgeon with guilt anyone who disagree with you is simple disingenous....]

My argument had enough substance in it. These events were not brought in to act as a crutch. I will have to quote that part of the test in full to repeat the context to you…
***
“Just how pugnacious we are will be evident from a letter in ‘The Asian Age’ against an article – “Hindus and Muslims: Home Truths” -- by Pakistani writer Hafizur Rahman. We were told that a Pakistani has no moral right to write about what Indian Hindus think. Mr. Rahman had talked about North and South India as ethnic entities. No, screeched the respondent, they are not, the differences are cultural. Profound. But the letter writer was not through yet. He stated, “I will humbly suggest that after the ethnic cleansing of the Hindus and the Sikhs from the land of their forefathers in present Pakistan, Mr. Rahman and his compatriots should forget the Hindus of India, and allow them to live in peace.”

Amnesia is a great weapon. Who wants to remember 1984? That was Indian Sikhs. But I would humbly request Pakistan to leave the Hindus alone lest the minorities are saddled with them suffering from a persecution complex and then if someone comes to their rescue we might want to call them traitors, just as Indian Muslims are whenever some Pakistani talks about minority persecution in India.

The majority community being left in peace is the need of the hour. Not peace with an enemy.”
***
[In any case: pray tell..if you think a joint declaration was going to be signed in Agra, the one some people without evidence say advani scuttled, what was going to be in the joint declaration? Was India going to give Indian Kashmir away on a platter?]

Certainly not. But don’t you think there would have been something in there that might have paved the way for a better understanding? About giving away Indian Kashmir on a platter, last night I saw the BJP”s S.S. Ahluwalia on TV saying that Mahatma Gandhi gave away some land to make Pakistan! We still cannot accept the existence of a country that was created for ideological reasons, and it shows in your platter theory.

[do you seriously believe that? And if you don`t, do you think the pakis were going to settle for anything less than that?]

The question is not about what the Pakistanis would settle for, but what we think the Kashmir’s want.
__

As for another comment like, “Every one knows you are biased. Every Muslim is. But even in Ramadan???”…as a Hindu you are not doing much better. To tell me, “This thalee main khana usimain thookna. Normal” may give you a big high, but a part of that food on the thalee is mine, I have helped sow the seeds, watch it grow and harvested and even cooked it. The thalee is not yours alone. And by I, I mean every citizen of my country.

“But hey ...Rudalee we pay for you....”
Yeah? Then show me the money… and yes take away that goddamn spittoon. Isn’t that what you guys use when you cannot digest the meal…chup-chaap thookna where no one can see…and then get into hysterical delusions about others spitting in the thalee.

Pakistani general awam is probably better looking......


Wake up guys...are you in your right mind???
Have you been to Mumbai or Delhi University- I just ask the guys who have been to the universities in Karachi or Lahore and DElhi and Mumbai and ask them to compare the crowds. The Indian universities have the best chicks and the most gorgeous looking guys and gals.
Perhaps you woud find the hijabs of Karachi university better laced!!!!!

#48 by saminshah on November 16, 2003 5:06am PT
After All they Are guardian of US(Indian Muslims)

These Romairs and their Ba$tards are manipulators and perverts par excellence who have only one agenda- fatten their egos by using Islam and then subjugate the illiterate ummah with their cleverly woven discourses of LIBERATION. Innumerable dictators have become the self appointed saviours of the masses by using Islam the world over- military men with specialization in killing have used it to cloak their SATANIC intentions.
And their KHURAFAAT can only stop when Pakistani AWAAM gets out of its stupor and overthrows the army rule in their country.

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

Farzana:

``True, the aid arrived, but there was resistance. And a hundred questions. However, I did not intend to mislead with the comment. I promise. ``

That is fine. Just wanted to point it out.

``Re. Agra, if they found a loophole that late in the day, it speaks volumes about how our government rules. I think my statement about being prepared before getting to the table stands. ``

Well, to be fair to the Indians, they had repeatedly asked Pakistan for papers before the conference. The Pakistani bureaucrats too had wanted to prepare papers but Musharraf was adamant that he would talk man to man with Vajpayee and not let bureaucrats get involved. This is not ``Indian POV`` but commonly known fact, and that is a reason they had a 2 hour meeting. But, whereas the outcome of a successful meeting and personal chemistry can do wonders, the chance of failure too is high. Also, in India, the decision making process is institutionalized whereas in Pakistan it is a 1 man show. Necessarily, though we may look like bad guys doing so, our decision making is slower but more deliberate.

``I agree that they cannot do so politically, but surely commentators can say what they want? Don’t we write about their honour killings, their hudood ordinance, their sunni-shia riots, their madrassas? ``

Oh yes. I misunderstood your statement. I agree.



``The fact is that L.K.Advani has been chosen to talk to the Hurriyat. We are not agreeing to Pakistan’s point of view, but they do have a point of view that they have a right to express. A part of Kashmir is theirs. As for jehadi struggle, Kashmir has been struggling on its own even without a jehad. That is the common voice. ``

Agreed.

``How does any other country come into the picture? Regarding plebiscite, the Kashmiris did want it. The problem is that we have begun to see the Kashmir struggle from the Pakistani perspective and use counter arguments to that, rather than to the core issue. ``

Hmm, interesting point. Maybe you can expand on that? I am not sure if I agree with you, but I do see some validity in your perspective. How can any initiative intra-Kashmir be successful if Pakistan kills it thru its proxies. Recent split in Hurriyat is an example. I tend to go with conventional view that we have to outlast Pakistan in fighting the insurgency before any meaningful accords can be made. I would be interested in hearing an alternative point of view. Whereas you have criticized the government in the past, you have not really provided an alternative vision. If you have one, I would be interested in reading about it.

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

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

re: yogiraji ji # 45

``Every Muslim is``

This seems to reflect your anger at the blame being passed on to Indian negotiators at Agra. Yet we must be fair. There is absolutely no way Saminshah, Ballukhan, and Nasah can be included in the category of people you have in mind.

I have learnt that the greatest challenge Indians face is to separate the issue of Indian Muslims from that of Pakistan. Pakistanis have an inbuilt incentive to keep reminding Indians that Muslims in India are Pakistanis waiting for a chance to break up their country once again.

At least I have been very impressed that while some Indian Muslims may follow Pakistani line, more and more are forthrightly telling Pakistanis that Muslim Indians are not Pakistani moles. And that their interests lie with other Indians in India.

I respectfully request all Indians not to hold Mr. Fosa as the model for all Muslim Indians. True, Mr. Fosa tends to be far more vocal and very visible, which makes it hard to be patient with the lies and innuendos told repeatedly ad nauseum. Still patriotic and honest Muslim Indians who respect Hindus and thus actively speak out against those lies from across the border are our greatest strength. Hindus too must overcome their resentments and give these Muslim Indians all the respect they so richly deserve.

No effort is costless. The effort that Saminshah, Ballukhan, and Nasah have been making to refute Pakistani claims of Muslim Indians being Pakistani agents is most significant and most laudable. We too need to protect these stellar Indians from Pakistsani insinuations and our own doubts. That is the cost of living next to a country that has, until now at least, been more concerned with the `welfare` of Muslim Indians than the welfare of its own citizens.

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

FarzanaVarsey #43: ``When that event takes place, it will happen zor-shor se…I am touched that you people will rush from the West just for that…and yet you say that Pakistanis are better looking…"

Yes, I will have to book my flight. Pakistani general awam is probably better looking, but Indian entertainers, models, actresses/actors are quite a bit better looking than their Pakistani counterparts.......