The Secularity of India

re: tahmed32 # 385

I am all for peace between our nations and I have no love for the BJP. All I was trying to point out was that India never threatened the independence of Pakistan, there was never a threat to occupy Pakistan like the US has done in Iraq.

Regards,

Faruk

tahmed32

I acknowledge having seen/read your post #389.

I suppose Nader Thiasi wouldn`t like to see this in India. After all, if one calls oneself an Islamic nation, then you can do anything!

`We slit his throat for propagating Christianity`

Reuters
Posted online: Friday, July 02, 2004 at 1338 hours IST

Kabul, July 2: Afghanistan`s Taliban guerrillas say they cut the throat of a Muslim cleric after they discovered him propagating Christianity and warned foreign aid workers they would face similar treatment if they did the same.

Taliban spokesman Abdul Latif Hakimi telephoned Reuters on Thursday to say that the guerrillas killed Maulawi Assadullah in the remote Awdand district of Ghazni province the previous day.

``A group of Taliban dragged out Maulawi Assadullah and slit his throat with a knife because he was propagating Christianity,`` he said.

``We have enough evidence and local accounts to prove that he was involved in the conversion of Muslims to Christianity.``

Provincial officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

Hakimi charged that a number of foreign aid agencies were also involved in spreading Christianity in Afghanistan, where the adherents to the religion are in a tiny minority.

``We warn them that they face the same destiny as Assadullah if they continue to seduce people,`` he said.

The fundamentalist Taliban, which was overthrown by US-led forces in late 2001, has declared a holy war against the continuing foreign troop presence in the country and views aid workers as legitimate targets in this battle.

The Taliban has killed at least 33 foreign aid workers since the start of last year, including Frenchwoman Bettina Goislard of the UN refugee agency, who was gunned down in the town of Ghazni, the provincial capital, in November.

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

rajsingh #388 Ok, that clarifies it: those were questions you were asking me, albeit in a round about manner. I will in that case try to answer them:

you write: ``Is it being said (denied) that Pakistan has not threatened India with nukes in the past? ``

No. In fact Pakistan has explicitly retained the option for first use of nuclear weapons if it feels threatened. And, while recognizing the serious dangers of a nuclear holocaust, I believe this is the correct approach. Defense against India after all was the purpose that drove successive Pakistani leaders to pursue the nuclear weapon. (the Indian governments persuit of the same, on the other hand, represented the same purposeless delusions of greatness that I see from some of your less sensible countrymen on chowk). Incidentally, the US itself persued nuclear weapons after WWII as a counterweight to the numerical superiority of the soviet forces in europe.

you write: ``Is it being said (denied) that Clinton offered all the goodies to Pakistan and even indicated treating India as int. pariah if Pakistan does not go ahead with its nuclear tests? ``

No, I am not saying anythng about this. What is the point you are trying to make? Now that you mention it, I will say that history has proved (so far) that Pakistan made the right decision in giving the Indian governemnt a response in kind in 1998, rather than bowing to international pressure. Taught the BJP clowns some basic lessons in reality.

you write: ``Is it being said (denied) that after Advani made some noise, Pakistan had no recourse but to go ahead with its tests? ``

No, of course not. But as I said above, it was the right choice. Certainly, it was a difficult decision and I know that there were tremendous pressures on Nawaz Sharif in both directions (military wanting to respond in kind, the international community wanting Pakistan to show restraint, and the Pakistani population greatly fearful). BJP politicians antics certainly strengthened the case of the Pakistan military, but in all likelihood they would have gone ahead in any case. As I have always said, with enemies like hindutvas morons, Pakistan does not need any friends.

you write ``Now do tell me what is convoluted, and what assumptions are in the above? ``
Just look at the way you framed your above questions to me (i.e. in the form of assertions of ``it is being said/denied), and I hope you will see why what you write seems convoluted.

finally: ``As to your saying it indicates I do not have any arguement, well, Sir, see above again and notice, not just an arguement but I am talking with facts. ``

I will have to go back to your original post (written several days ago) to see what your original point was, but hopefully I have answered your questions. If there still remain some questions that you wish to ask, or conclusions you wish to share, I will be very pleased to respond. But please be direct, since I know you dont mean to be rude or anything like that.

tahmed32

Post # 378

Quote:

---

`` More seriously, of course we can all look at the same facts and draw different conclusions. ``

---

Not much of a disagreement on this. However, don`t know how this is (the part quoted above) applicable here or the need for it. Especially when in my post #376, there hardly are any conclusions. They are more of questions.

Quote:

---

`` However, I am a bit confused by what you write. To start at the top: you write

``Is it being said (denied) that Pakistan has not threatened India with nukes in the past? ``

---

If you replace `Is it being said (denied)`` with, `Are you saying (denying)` ....that Pakistan has not threatened India with nukes in the past` ....I think, there should not be any confusion anymore on this aspect. Likewise, other questions/sentences too are to be read in the same manner.

As far as possible, I avoid writing on the lines of I/You/He/She said. That is to avoid making things personal and try to keep neutral and issue based (in the course of discussion/debate), if possible. It is with the same intent, had written post #376.

Quote:

---

Who is saying or denying this?

---

Post # 375 says: `` When you have to make an argument as convoluted and full of assumptions ``.

Now do tell me who has written the above? Is it not denying what has been written in post #371 (Post 376 is saying the same as post 371) ?

Quote:

---

And what is the point you are trying to make here?

---

Same point as in post#371. And that was in reponse to post #370 where it was being claimed, `` If you point a gun at someone, and back off only when the other person pulls out his own gun, then it is a bit hard to argue that you never really meant to shoot.``

Point is/was that it is not applicable to India as India was reacting to a situtation. It is not India that pointed a gun at Pakistan first but it had been other way around, albeit not so publicily. So when India pointed a gun, that was a reaction (referring to threats to India in the past) and at the same time, tried its best to make sure that the other party (Pakistan) too prove that it has a gun and show it publicily (recall, all along it had been threats and talk of the gun only), and face the music alongwith India.

I hope it is more clear now.

As to saying it was a tongue in cheek remark, well. ......:)

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

How would you Islamic thugs react if a state government in India run by Hindus prevented Muslims from going to Ajmer dargah? But a government headed by a Muslim can prevent Hindus from going on their pilgrimage!

Surely, this is an instance of the non-secularist nature of India but I don`t expect to see Nader Thiasi and his ilk complaining.

From the BBC:

Police stop Hindu pilgrim march

Police in Indian-administered Kashmir have stopped more than 100 Hindu pilgrims from trekking to the Hindu cave shrine of Amarnath.
The pilgrims, mostly Hindu holy men, set off on the trek two weeks ahead of the official start of the pilgrimage.

They were stopped on a road leading to Sonmarg which serves as the base camp for the journey.

The state authorities are keen to limit the pilgrimage as it requires tight security in this disputed region.

The pilgrims staged a protest sit-in against the police action.

Reports say the pilgrims set off on the journey ahead of the official schedule at the instigation of the Amarnath Yatra Action Committee which is opposing the state administration`s decision to limit the pilgrimage to 45 days.

The Amarnath shrine is situated almost four thousand metres above sea level.

Faruk #384 Agreed that our generals were at fault with their ``proxy war`` policy, and that certainly was the direct cause of the million men. Nevertheless, hope you will understand that as a Pakistani national, while I may consider the policies of the Pakistan government to be at fault, I would still consider it unacceptable to have a foreign army invade Pakistan. And that is why, while I think Pakistan should persue the path of peace with India to the point of having a joint front against islamic militants (the common enemy of the civilized world), it should do so from a position of strength. And to that extent, I think Musharaff`s policy is exactly right. Hopefully, one day both nations will mature enough to discard their weaponry (like the europeans have done after centuries of useless bloodshed). I doubt if it will happen anytime in the next couple of decades though.

Other things, we can agree to disagree upon. But I hope you will reflect on some of the things I pointed out earlier with respect to BJPs ideology that has no place in today`s world. Just as the Islamist ideology as no place in today`s world either.

gujjubania alias shamsul: I have said all I wanted to say to you.

Re: tahmed32 # 372
“I dont think we are on a tangent. How is threatening a neigboring country with your military might anything less than threatening its independence?”

The threat was in retaliation to the insurgents coming over from Pakistan and killing Indians. There is a big difference between retaliating to something and threatening action and threatening the independence of a nation.

“In fact Advani said as much when he said that the rules were now changed on Kashmir after blowing those 5 bombs and before Pakistan gave him a dose of reality and leading him to discover the virtues of peace with Pakistan.”

India has been well aware of Pakistan’s nuclear capability for a while. The threat was to force Pakistan to conduct nuclear tests and attract sanctions that it was not prepared for. It worked. As far as Advani discovering the virtues of peace, I would say lets agree to disagree on that.

Regards,

Faruk

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

niki #380 I have no problems with your finding India and Pakistan to be incomparable. That is your point of view, and I respect that. I do feel sorry for you having specimen like gujjubania, jay thakeray, arjun, harimau, for countrymen. There is simply no one comparable to them among Pakistanis (except urstruly, although even he has a sense of humor to balance off his nutty views). These fellows can only beat their single tune drum, trying to prove God knows what. I never would have imagined such morons existed if I had not come to chowk. But maybe that`s just me. :-)

On the other issue: I am not sure what gave you the idea that I (or any other Pakistani) have any particular concern for Indian muslims. We certainly dont want any more of them in Pakistan. Nor are they culturally like us anyway. We certainly dont need any more immigrants in Pakistan. We are still trying to encourage millions of Afghans to go back to their country after they had settled in Pakistan for over a decade. Biharis in bangladesh have been clamoring to be allowed to resettle in Pakistan ever since 1971, but there has been no great public interest in them. And India has given us rascals like maudoodi and zia. (not to mention time wasters on chowk like me).

I too have been to India, and rest assured the type of poverty I have seen in India I never saw in Pakistan. I agree India is doing better than Pakistan, but why does every second Indian come in beating this drum? As I said, both countries remain the cesspool of the world. Only thing is that most Pakistanis (going by chowk posts) are humble enough to accept this reality, while Indians go about beating their drum. I sense it has to do with some psychological insecurities. I find real life Indians to be perfectly reasonable people, but I dont know what kind of specimen get sent to chowk. Maybe it is a RAW conspiracy to ruin this website. (Just kidding, btw. Many of your countrymen on chowk are dumb enough to take it seriously).

Anyway, seriously, you are obviously a decent chap. Be proud of Indian achievements, but dont forget the realities that your own countrymen tried to bring to your attention in the last elections - India is home to the largest collection of poverty stricken people in the world. The rest of the world is miles ahead of India, and all you are doing is trying to catch up. Just as we are trying to do in Pakistan.

gb #377 you write ``ndian nukes are indigenous in nature , so testing in 1998 was basically experimental in nature and essential for the development process. While Pak`s testing in response was merely a case of detonating the existing Chinese made nukes. ``

With remarks like this, India does not need any nukes. All they need is you, and all of us Pakistanis will die laughing at your remarks.

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

rajsingh: #376 That was a tongue in cheek remark, and the smiley was intended to make that clear. More seriously, of course we can all look at the same facts and draw different conclusions. That is human nature, and the best we can do is make sure that there is some logical link between the facts and the conclusions.

However, I am a bit confused by what you write. To start at the top: you write

``Is it being said (denied) that Pakistan has not threatened India with nukes in the past? ``

Who is saying or denying this? And what is the point you are trying to make here? Please clarify, and I will do my best to respond.

The same goes for the other sentences you write which start with ``It is being said``.