PDA

View Full Version : the state of gujurati muslims


al Furqaan
December 15, 2007, 11:58 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7143958.stm

while we are celebrating eid and being with our families and loved ones, we should remember in our du'a those countless muslims in gujurat (and around the world) to whom eid does not bring any joy into their unfortunate lives. we must remember that is only a blessing from the Almighty that we are not amongst them ourselves.

sandpiper
December 15, 2007, 12:09 PM
hmm... I knew that. Those [edit]
Please refrain from ad hominem attacks. This post was a violation of a number of forum rules. Any more blatantly bigoted comments like that and we mods will be forced to take drastic measures!

Rabz
December 15, 2007, 12:31 PM
Very very sad indeed.

All i can say is those things would never happen in Bangladesh.
We might have our slight difference, but we don chop our neighbours into pieces.

Biggest example was this years almost simultaneous celebration of Eid-ul-Fitr and Durga Puja.

It would be wrong to blame the whole of India for that incident.
Im sure the Nodi guy doesnt speak for the whole billion.

Electrequiem
December 15, 2007, 12:55 PM
I remember my uncle was telling me about the horrid conditions of Muslim communites in some parts of India...there are sewage lines located "strategically" next to mosques and madrassahs, etc...

Ah, may God deliver them from such savage atrocities. Ameen.

israr
December 15, 2007, 04:11 PM
I have got some facts which I don't want to reveal, but may Allah give them the strength and patience.
Oh Allah, listen to our pleas.

sufism
December 16, 2007, 04:34 AM
hmm... I knew that. Those [edit]

that was a pathetic comment. What is this?? we don have mods around?? How could some one make such a racial comment? How old are you bro?? You should know you don represent real Bangladeshi values. Do you understand that some BD hindus and people from west bengal may visit this forum?? By the a way, I am a practicing muslim but would never generalise people based on their race or religion. I hardly write here, but could not stop myself from protesting against your remark. Utterly disghusting.
I ask the mods to take firm action against such remarks.

Bengaliprince176
December 16, 2007, 08:32 AM
that was a pathetic comment. What is this?? we don have mods around?? How could some one make such a racial comment? How old are you bro?? You should know you don represent real Bangladeshi values. Do you understand that some BD hindus and people from west bengal may visit this forum?? By the a way, I am a practicing muslim but would never generalise people based on their race or religion. I hardly write here, but could not stop myself from protesting against your remark. Utterly disghusting.
I ask the mods to take firm action against such remarks.


thank u sufism for keeping ur honour! thank god their are still people like u on this board, looks like ur the only Bangladeshi Muslim who protested what he said. it took more than 12 hours for the mods to take action..unbelivable! its funny how [edited] like Sandpiper make such generalised statemets about a few Hindu extremists, when he shud look at how parties like Jamaat E islami have not even been banned, and dont even recognise the day that many Bangladeshis are celebrating today!

Fazal
December 16, 2007, 10:06 AM
thank u sufism for keeping ur honour! thank god their are still people like u on this board, looks like ur the only Bangladeshi Muslim who protested what he said. it took more than 12 hours for the mods to take action..unbelivable! its funny how [edited] like Sandpiper make such generalised statemets about a few Hindu extremists, when he shud look at how parties like Jamaat E islami have not even been banned, and dont even recognise the day that many Bangladeshis are celebrating today!

I agree with you with the first part that we should keep this place as civil as possible, its all our duties by notifying objectionable comments to the mods... not just wait and see approach and the complain the mod for not taking the action sooner. But your comment " only Bangladeshi Muslim who protested what he said." is by itself a generalization and putting fuel to fire. Do we need this?

on your 2nd part of your comment (in bold), one wrong doesn't make another wrong right. If you feel talking about J Islami issue, you are welcome to create a thread, raising the issue here is a disparate attempt to divert the issue of discussion (of this tread) here in my opinion.

Bengaliprince176
December 16, 2007, 10:15 AM
I agree with you with the first part that we should keep this place as civil as possible, its all our duties by notifying objectionable comments to the mods... not just wait and see approach and the complain the mod for not taking the action sooner. But your comment " only Bangladeshi Muslim who protested what he said." is by itself a generalization and putting fuel to fire. Do we need this?

on your 2nd part of your comment (in bold), one wrong doesn't make another wrong right. If you feel talking about J Islami issue, you are welcome to create a thread, raising the issue here is a disparate attempt to divert the issue of discussion (of this tread) here in my opinion.


fazal bro, the topic is about Gujurati Muslims, not a bashing of Hindus! im surprised that u havent even objected to the comment as of yet,[edited] No Bangladeshi Muslim apart from Sufism said anything, thats the truth and the mods took their time to act, perhaps i am wrong, and maybe there just was no mod, im not blaming the mods or any posters for these things. just an observation.

the topic once again is of gujurati muslims, a good set of people, many live in UK, one of my best friends is an Ismaili from Tanzania. the situation is unfortunate of Gujurat, that Modi will be gone soon, if sense prevails. if i insulted u, then my apologies, i have no quarrel with u "Dada" ;)

Fazal
December 16, 2007, 10:27 AM
fazal bro, the topic is about Gujurati Muslims, not a bashing of Hindus! im surprised that u havent even objected to the comment as of yet, [edited] No Bangladeshi Muslim apart from Sufism said anything, thats the truth and the mods took their time to act, perhaps i am wrong, and maybe there just was no mod, im not blaming the mods or any posters for these things. just an observation.

the topic once again is of gujurati muslims, a good set of people, many live in UK, one of my best friends is an Ismaili from Tanzania. the situation is unfortunate of Gujurat, that Modi will be gone soon, if sense prevails. if i insulted u, then my apologies, i have no quarrel with u "Dada" ;)


Bengaliprince176,

Please don't assume things and then accuse people of not reacting. There was a game going on and as usual nobody cares much about forget cricket at that time. I never saw what was written and moderated. You are accusing other Muslim Banldeshi in this website for not protesting, how can people protest if the haven't seen it? And by the way, did you protested? ... or just waited and enjoyed and that now you can blame later on? You claimed it was there for a while. My question instead of complaining, what you had done in that time? Did you complained right away or not?

Please don't attack the wrong people if you are offended. As I said there are plenty of Bangladeshi Muslims in this site who will work with you to keep this site clean. But attacking them in generalized way is not going to help your cause.

Bengaliprince176
December 16, 2007, 10:38 AM
Bengaliprince176,

Please don't assume things and then accuse people of not reacting. There was a game going on and as usual nobody cares much about forget cricket at that time. I never saw what was written and moderated. You are accusing other Muslim Banldeshi in this website for not protesting, how can people protest if the haven't seen it? And by the way, did you protested? ... or just waited and enjoyed and that now you can blame later on? You claimed it was there for a while. My question instead of complaining, what you had done in that time? Did you complained right away or not?

Please don't attack the wrong people if you are offended. As I said there are plenty of Bangladeshi Muslims in this site who will work with you to keep this site clean. But attacking them in generalized way is not going to help your cause.


i only saw the comment this morning, as may several others, im talkin abt the people who have seen it i.e living in a different time zone. i have protested since i saw it. in case u are mistaken, my comment was an observation that sufism protested others did not. i am not attacking them at all. where did u get that idea? and when i said "looks like ur the only Bangladeshi Muslim who protested what he said, i blatantly meant out of the people who had seen it. next time i will make sure i have added that piece of detail.

like i said, if u and many of those have bin offended my comments then i apologise.

Rabz
December 16, 2007, 02:03 PM
I saw what Sandpiper had to say.
And this is precisely why i tried to ignore and brash off his post.
Cuz that would give rise to a debate within a debate, and hence, would change the core of the subject topic.

The topic of this thread is about the miserable state of the Gujrati Muslims and how they were treated by the Gujrati Hindu in that infamous riot.

Now we dont want to start there, do we?
Cuz then it would give rise to another whole new topic.


It would be wrong to blame the whole of India for that incident.
Im sure the Nodi guy doesnt speak for the whole billion.

If you had read the posts carefully before jumping on to blame "every other Bangladeshi Muslims", it probably would have served you better.

Surely Sandpiper doesnt speak for all of us.

rubel_18
December 16, 2007, 02:29 PM
I didnt even see what he wrote but from wat is bein sed it was so stupid and immature of him to say sumthing like dat, that is so innapopriate. I personally hav sum hindu frends and I know that they wud be deeply offended by what he sed and its not rite, I personally feel ashamed to know that there are sum ppl like that on this forum that just judge a whole race or religion just on a few minority of idiots.

al Furqaan
December 16, 2007, 02:35 PM
Jamaat E islami have not even been banned, and dont even recognise the day that many Bangladeshis are celebrating today!

actually, you will find that JI is UNIVERSALLY disliked on BC...anyone who aids, abbets, or otherwise supports the genocide of their own people is a cockroach and deserves to be crushed. unlike ICF where i'd estimate that at least 10-25 percent of the members have pro-BJP or shiv sena viewpoints. however, thats there business and i post on their forum but never mention that. and they have anti-muslim posts there far more frequently than we do or pakpassion.

however, the underlying reason for the JI's beliefs/actions were for reasons of islamic unity and most BC members would agree that islamic unity is a noble idea.

HereWeGo
December 16, 2007, 02:36 PM
Instead of trying to be over critical about India and Modi we should look into our own country. Here Ahmadiyas had to suffer the same fate in the hands of Fundamentalists. Our government than also kept a blind eye.

We should look into our system before we criticize someone elses.

al Furqaan
December 16, 2007, 02:36 PM
actually even as of now, 236 PM sunday EST, there are only 69 views of this thread.

sandpiper
December 16, 2007, 02:38 PM
exactly my point of view.
actually, you will find that JI is UNIVERSALLY disliked on BC...anyone who aids, abbets, or otherwise supports the genocide of their own people is a cockroach and deserves to be crushed. unlike ICF where i'd estimate that at least 10-25 percent of the members have pro-BJP or shiv sena viewpoints. however, thats there business and i post on their forum but never mention that. and they have anti-muslim posts there far more frequently than we do or pakpassion.

however, the underlying reason for the JI's beliefs/actions were for reasons of islamic unity and most BC members would agree that islamic unity is a noble idea.

al Furqaan
December 16, 2007, 02:41 PM
Instead of trying to be over critical about India and Modi we should look into our own country. Here Ahmadiyas had to suffer the same fate in the hands of Fundamentalists. Our government than also kept a blind eye.

We should look into our system before we criticize someone elses.

remind me the last time that last time that we butchered, burned, and raped 2000 people in a matter of weeks. i must have forgotten about it.

personally ahmadiyyas are not muslims and by calling themselves that they are guilty of false advertising. if start selling something i make in my kitchen as Coca Cola, i'll get sued unless i change the name of my product.

but they have every right to practice their religion without hindrance.

Parisa
December 16, 2007, 02:41 PM
completely agree with bengaliprince.....he was correst.....dont know what all the other commotion was about.....

Bengaliprince176
December 16, 2007, 02:59 PM
actually, you will find that JI is UNIVERSALLY disliked on BC...anyone who aids, abbets, or otherwise supports the genocide of their own people is a cockroach and deserves to be crushed. unlike ICF where i'd estimate that at least 10-25 percent of the members have pro-BJP or shiv sena viewpoints. however, thats there business and i post on their forum but never mention that. and they have anti-muslim posts there far more frequently than we do or pakpassion.

however, the underlying reason for the JI's beliefs/actions were for reasons of islamic unity and most BC members would agree that islamic unity is a noble idea.

i care very litle about BJP and Shiv Sena, they have nothing to do with me and they are just wrong and should not be given chance to take part in elections, just as i belive most members here have nothing to do with Jamaat. my comparison was to prove that exactly, there are both extremist parties in both countries. as for the Indian forum, that is sad to hear, but what can the Hindus who dont share the same values do apart from denounce it. why bring such stuff to a Banglacricket forum as Sandpiper did i.e attack the Hindu members?? if it was aimed at me, wud i be here if i hated Muslims and Bangladesh??

Parisa
December 16, 2007, 03:02 PM
i care very litle about BJP and Shiv Sena, they have nothing to do with me and they are just wrong and should not be given chance to take part in elections, just as i belive most members here have nothing to do with Jamaat. my comparison was to prove that exactly, there are both extremist parties in both countries. as for the Indian forum, that is sad to hear, but what can the Hindus who dont share the same values do apart from denounce it. why bring such stuff to a Banglacricket forum as Sandpiper did?? wud i be here if i hated Muslims and Bangladesh??

and plus bengaliprince isnt even bangladeshi....so its nice for him to support banglacricket this way.....we should be grateful......

Bengaliprince176
December 16, 2007, 03:06 PM
and plus bengaliprince isnt even bangladeshi....so its nice for him to support banglacricket this way.....we should be grateful......

haha thank parisa didi ;) but there is no need for any1 to be grateful, we are just here for Bangladesh cricket and me and many others are here for that.

Parisa
December 16, 2007, 03:08 PM
haha thank parisa didi ;) but there is no need for any1 to be grateful, we are just here for Bangladesh cricket and me and many others are here for that.

no we are here for banglacricket.......not just bangladesh cricket.....bring in all bengalis including west bengal!!!!!!!!!!!

rubel_18
December 16, 2007, 03:09 PM
and plus bengaliprince isnt even bangladeshi....so its nice for him to support banglacricket this way.....we should be grateful......

He isnt Bangladeshi but he is Bengali so he shud technically support Bangladesh anyway...lol just jokin.

al Furqaan
December 16, 2007, 03:12 PM
i care very litle about BJP and Shiv Sena, they have nothing to do with me and they are just wrong and should not be given chance to take part in elections, just as i belive most members here have nothing to do with Jamaat. my comparison was to prove that exactly, there are both extremist parties in both countries. as for the Indian forum, that is sad to hear, but what can the Hindus who dont share the same values do apart from denounce it. why bring such stuff to a Banglacricket forum as Sandpiper did?? wud i be here if i hated Muslims and Bangladesh??

to be honest, hindus like you don't have to denounce BJP or shiv sena. if you have nothing to do with them, then 2 questions: why should denounce something you have nothing to do with? and what good would your denunciation do given you have nothing to do with them?

this just like all those neo-con hatemongers who looked for the american muslim community to denounce acts of terrorism.

my post was more directed, not towards you, but some of the other indian posters - won't name any names - who come in saying that they believe the cliche that "extremists exist in all countries" however only point out islamic examples here in BC and not-so-cleverly try to hide behind the "but we have radical idiots too so i'm not just rubbing it in your face" spiel.

my point is that there are plenty of anti muslim sites and forums where one can post such discussions and inflammatory rhetoric. just as i can jump in any time there and start talking about BJP or hindutva. but i don't. my silence is not an acceptance of their BS or a denial of their biggotry. it is rather the understanding that although ruffling their feathers might be fun, it does not a) portray a positive image of islam/muslims b) achieve any success or c) reslove any of the questions or issues. this does not mean that i never engage in debate, but i pick my battles considering a whole range of variables. most muslims do not want to engage in that types of discussions, BC included. personally i don't mind an exchange of thoughts but whatever...

DJ Sahastra
December 16, 2007, 03:17 PM
These kind of threads lack basic objectivity.

To sum up what the original poster wants to say:

Muslims in gujarat displaced because of riots are living in a pathetic condition. Their condition is pathetic because:
a) They are muslims and
b) They are from Gujarat whose government is led by BJP.

Where they lose objectivity and credibility is on both accounts. Lets look at the corresponding story that never makes it to the headlines:
Lakhs of Hindu refugees from Kashmir live in Delhi in utterly miserable conditions in makeshift camps and shanties. Many of their wives and daughters have been forced to earn livelihood by prostitution. And this because they were forced to leave their place of residence on account of threats from terrorists.
a) They are Hindus and
b) They are in Delhi whose government is led by Congress

Atleast they don't have journalists rushing in to portray their misery on BBC and CNN and elsewhere because it won't make news. What if they are living in abject misery and pathetic conditions - afterall they are Hindis living in a hindu Majority country so who cares.

The point - we can wear selective glasses and paint whatever picture we want. Gujarat Muslims can atleast complaint "Ah, we are miserable because we are muslims" - scores of Hindus, many displaced from their homes on account of terrorism or Dams or Roads or Industrial complex or riots cannot even have that kind of complaint.

The government apathies and irresponsibilities, horrible as they are, are consistent and often biased towards muslims thanks to their access to media to pressurize. For eg. Hindus living in refugee shanties in Delhi since 80s are yet to get any relief. It is only 27 years and counting! They range in Lakhs and they make not even 1/100th of the news as a 1000-2000 muslim families in Gujarat.

al Furqaan
December 16, 2007, 03:46 PM
DJ,

these threads to indeed contain much subjective thought. i'll admit my initial post was utterly subjective - given that your statement on KP refugees is true. however, the subjectivity of my post was exceeded only by the fact that it was posted in a mostly muslim forum.

this is just like the pro BJP type posts that appear in ICF. no different. however i personally refrain from posting controversial topics there (although some paki posters do not). and thus i have called out the fellows who have posted anti muslim type stuff here while not condemning the anti muslim posts there.

Alien
December 16, 2007, 08:48 PM
andpiper make such generalised statemets about a few Hindu extremists, when he shud look at how parties like Jamaat E islami have not even been banned,

BengaliPrince, given how its the second post and myself including many others didn't get a chance to see what sandpiper wrote. And when we did get the chance to see it it was edited and I couldn't make out who exactly he was making shots at and moved on.

Judging from other threads, we do feel for all sectors of community (muslims or hindus) that suffer discrimination. Parties like Jamaat are like McDonald's franchise, you seem them (outlawed or not) in most third world countries with a sizable muslim minority/majority.

Jamaat in BD are Rajakars, who caused hardship to muslims more than Hindus during the war, coz they dubbed their own people in and made themselves responsibles for thousands of murders. When it comes to Jamaat, its not about hindu-Muslim, its about good and evil and as u can see steps are being taken to make them outlawed and have those war criminals on trial.

al Furqaan
December 17, 2007, 02:35 PM
http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/showthread.php?t=24211

Jamaat basically unanimously condemned here...

RazabQ
December 17, 2007, 05:59 PM
DJ, speaking as myself only: Any sense of injustice I or you might feel that someone like Daud Ibrahim is walking about freely is repeated in double dosage when I see someone like Modi not just walk about as a free man but stay in power as an ELECTED official. That tells me there is a majority of people who have _CHOSEN_ a known race-riot abettor to represent them.

DJ Sahastra
December 17, 2007, 08:27 PM
DJ, speaking as myself only: Any sense of injustice I or you might feel that someone like Daud Ibrahim is walking about freely is repeated in double dosage when I see someone like Modi not just walk about as a free man but stay in power as an ELECTED official. That tells me there is a majority of people who have _CHOSEN_ a known race-riot abettor to represent them.

RazabQ,

There are no simple answers as very few people understand the dynamics of Gujarat or even India. I will definitely return to this but i recommend you read this news to understand to some extent why Modi keeps winning.

wwwdotrediffdotcom/news/2007/dec/15gujpoll.htm (http://************************/news/2007/dec/15gujpoll.htm)

(please replace dot with . for some reason i am unable to put in the url for rediff)

Why Mohammad Shafi Mansuri will vote for Modi

Modi is communal, but he is an efficient administrator. According to me, if Modi keeps aside communalism, he is the best ruler.
Modi uses communalism only during elections. In the last five years, we haven't faced riots. Muslims have had no problems whatsoever in the last five years. Modi is only indulging in the business of communalism to trade communalism for votes. The politics of Gujarat is such that if they don't use communalism, Modi can't return to power.
If he decided to talk only about development, then he would have faced anti-incumbency. My own shop was burnt down in the riots of 2002. I have suffered a lot during the riots. I lost goods worth Rs 1.5 lakh. But I have earned more than enough to recover my losses.
We are living a comfortable life here. I am happier now than I was in 2001. This is only possible because I don't brand the communal mob as 'Hindus'. That was merely a 'communal crowd' and not the 'Hindu community.'

Read rest of the news article at the link above.

Beamer
December 17, 2007, 09:38 PM
Soon as rediff is mentioned, any notion of credibility is gone, just as those pro-jamati newspapers in Bangladesh.

DJ Sahastra
December 17, 2007, 11:17 PM
Soon as rediff is mentioned, any notion of credibility is gone, just as those pro-jamati newspapers in Bangladesh.

Beamer,

You are not happy with Rediff, so here is a similar piece from Indian Express/CNN-IBN.

What is interesting is the quote in bold.



Are educated Muslims more likely to support the BJP? The data shows that the highest support for the Modi government comes from educated Muslims. College-educated Muslim support for the party is more by 16 percentage points as compared with illiterate Muslims. Similarly there is a clear class divide in the Muslim support for the party. Richer Muslims intend to vote in more numbers for the BJP as compared with poorer Muslims. About 19 per cent among the rich Muslims said they would vote for the BJP as compared with only 5 per cent from the poorer section of the community.
Narendra Modi’s style of functioning and governance in Gujarat finds more supporters among the young and educated Muslims than among older and uneducated Muslims.

By Indian Express/CNN polls, 13% muslims are gonna vote for BJP and majority of those votes will be from young and educated muslims.

Btw, rediff is not known as mouth-piece of Hindus or a communal newspaper in any circle. The exact opposite is true as far as perception goes as likes of Praful Bidwai get lot of space and Rediff has likes of Aziz Hanifa on-board. So i didn't understand you equating it with Jamaat mouthpiece.

When i quoted that article from rediff, my point was not about what source or what story but of what i know because of my interactions with Gujarati Muslims in Bombay. There is much more to Gujarat than what media may want you to believe and that's the reason why media fails to understand why Modi keeps winning.

Geeta Pandey, the author of the article on BBC, in her coverage on riot victims, got so engrossed with Muslim victims that she forgot - they were huge (if not the same) number of non-muslim victims too. And whether you are writing for BBC or Rediff, the moment you lose perspective in order to enhance your acceptability, you lose credibility. There were hundreds of Hindu victims in Gujarat riots and when you choose to turn your face away from them in an attempt to find more acceptance among the global audience that has and wants a fixed image of that event, you lose credibility.

RazabQ
December 17, 2007, 11:33 PM
D J - are you excusing the age old maxim "end justifies the means"????? I am the best administrator and (as per some my Indian colleagues) one of the least corrupt officials around. But to get elected I will abet communal riots. And that makes it "okay"????? That my friend is a slippery slope.

As to news sources, in my mind BBC is miles ahead in my book than Rediff, so I'm not ready to attribute loss of perspective to the latter's editorial board so readily.

I appreciate you digging up these stories though - definitely food for thought and further proof of yet another axiom: "politics makes for strange bedfellows"

DJ Sahastra
December 18, 2007, 12:45 AM
RazabQ,

As i said earlier, this has its shades of gray and hence any line or approach will have it's inherent shortcomings.

Anyways, what i was stressing on is:

1. Modi will get elected or has gotten elected because most Hindus and some Muslims will vote for him. Interestingly, Muslims voting for him are mostly young, educated and prosperous muslims - indeed a food for thought.

2. Modi will get elected or has gotten elected because his oppopents lack the credibility in eyes of majority of Hindus and lot of muslims too.

It is like in between the two, they find Modi & his party more capable of leading Gujarat than Congress.

3. BBC is indeed miles ahead of Rediff. But that doesn't mean every piece coming out of BBC is well-researched and balanced. I have myself wrote to BBC many a times and have mails officially from them apologizing for factual inaccuracies. While source indeed plays a role in how much importance a particular writing should get, i always look at the content of an article too. Heck, if there is a well-researched article on Jamaat newspaper, i will definitely read it and quote it more than a poorly written and lop-sided article on BBC/CNN etc - but i know that the disadvantage of "what source it is coming from" will be there.

Beamer attacked Rediff on wrong grounds - it may not have the newsworthiness of BBC but it definitely hasn't shown any signs of religion specific bias - atleast you'll agree with me on that.

I have seen riots and rioteers stare-naked and from close-quarters and know that feeling. I know what goes through your mind when you and your family's survival is at stake. I was in Mumbai during the riots of '93 and only 16. I have seen and was a part of our whole family getting ready with iron-rods, kitchen-knife etc inside confines of closed and locked doors - every knock on the door akin to the knock of death. Painful reminders.

Modi's success in Gujarat is less of his success and more of the failure of parties like Congress, JD etc. to address the grievances of the other aggreived party. In their bid to appease Muslims and project themselves as the only party that cares for Muslims (During elections, it looks like a clown show), they forgot that there are communities besides Muslims too and they are hurting too - they lost families and loved ones and dear ones too. Afterall, Gujarat riots started because of Godhra massacre of 58 Hindus burnt alive in trains - how many of us remember or want to put in a gentle reminder to the cause when discussing the effects?

RazabQ
December 18, 2007, 02:19 AM
Also, just as per Indian census, Muslims constitute only 8-9% of the total population of Gujarat, so their vote can't be the decisive factor for Modi. Seems his election strategy is quite shrewd.

RazabQ
December 18, 2007, 02:25 AM
Umm, while the tragedy of 58 people burn alive is indeed horrific, I seem to recall some Banerji report and some other reports which found the fire to have been caused by accident ... I'll go google to verify

RazabQ
December 18, 2007, 02:28 AM
And I find Rediff to be equivalent to the Reader's Digest. Their articles definitely have a religio-conservative bent to them but it's often subtle and overall quality is not too shabby ... I mean to talk about Rediff's perception of fairness, do we really want to dig up all the BC posts on their cricket rankings system? :)

oracle
December 18, 2007, 02:55 AM
AAARGHH'''''Just saw the name of Modi. Sorry DJ, I like your cool headed stance most of the time but I don't buy your argument that the media fails to understand Modi and reasons why people vote for him. In fact many Indians I know resent the fact that many of his sympathisers are NRI's who unfortunately tend to have a skewed and often at times extreme right wing views coupled with free enterprise.

He is a downright fascist so much so that even within the BJP he scares the daylight out of them. Remember that Hitler was also a great coordinator and organizer who could not be nipped in
the bud during the 20's.

RazabQ
December 18, 2007, 03:01 AM
http://www.tehelka.com/story_main35.asp?filename=Ne031107gujrat_sec.asp

From another Indian regular of the web-site. Makes for a scary reading!

Tintin
December 18, 2007, 03:28 AM
Remember that Hitler was also a great coordinator and organizer who could not be nipped in the bud during the 20's.A supporter of Hilter in the mid-late thirties would have probably claimed that, that he persecuted the Jews, eliminated freedom of opinion and slaughtered his political opponents are all irrelevant, because he made Germany more prosperous than they ever were.

PoorFan
December 18, 2007, 03:45 AM
I wonder why these type of vague story needed to show Muslim support towards BJP, why not just name a few ( or if any, sorry for my ignorance ) front-line Muslim represents / leaders in BJP? Wouldn't that be more specific / significant proof of Muslim support to Mr. Modi than those scattered examples, mostly those depends and shows lack of political choice? More even as RazabQ pointed, this isolated number of so called Muslim support cant make any difference In Gujarat and BJP politics IMO, other than a colorful front-page article I guess.

There must be some other strong reason why Modi get elected repeatedly, looking for Muslim support behind this seems ... rather too sweet to be called as a 'secularist + democratic' leader./:)

Modi is communal, but he is an efficient administrator. According to me, if Modi keeps aside communalism, he is the best ruler.
Modi uses communalism only during elections. In the last five years, we haven't faced riots. Muslims have had no problems whatsoever in the last five years. Modi is only indulging in the business of communalism to trade communalism for votes. The politics of Gujarat is such that if they don't use communalism, Modi can't return to power.
If he decided to talk only about development, then he would have faced anti-incumbency. My own shop was burnt down in the riots of 2002. I have suffered a lot during the riots. I lost goods worth Rs 1.5 lakh. But I have earned more than enough to recover my losses.
We are living a comfortable life here. I am happier now than I was in 2001. This is only possible because I don't brand the communal mob as 'Hindus'. That was merely a 'communal crowd' and not the 'Hindu community.'

<!--StartFragment -->Are educated Muslims more likely to support the BJP? The data shows that the highest support for the Modi government comes from educated Muslims. College-educated Muslim support for the party is more by 16 percentage points as compared with illiterate Muslims. Similarly there is a clear class divide in the Muslim support for the party. Richer Muslims intend to vote in more numbers for the BJP as compared with poorer Muslims. About 19 per cent among the rich Muslims said they would vote for the BJP as compared with only 5 per cent from the poorer section of the community.
Narendra Modi’s style of functioning and governance in Gujarat finds more supporters among the young and educated Muslims than among older and uneducated Muslims.

Ganguly da
December 18, 2007, 08:14 AM
hmm... I knew that. Those [edit]
Please refrain from ad hominem attacks. This post was a violation of a number of forum rules. Any more blatantly bigoted comments like that and we mods will be forced to take drastic measures!


fortunetly, i didn't get a chance to read what you wonderfully wrote but i'm sure it was fueled by deep emotions when you read about a biased article written about your brothers. I feel you man. Imagine how me and many others like myself felt when we read this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1670410.stm or http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1645499.stm or http://quandaryreflection.blogspot.com/2007/08/gang-rape-and-murder-of-minority-hindu.html OR http://www.ghrd.org/default.asp?ID=2403 << click on case stories to find hundreds of hindu gang rape cases with very recent dates. And that was bangladesh only.

Here is pakistan:

http://muslimwatch.blogspot.com/2007/03/hindu-women-gang-raped-in-pakistan.html

shocking: http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2007/2158/

Here is Kashmir:

genocide/atrocity not reported by leftist indian media committed by islamic terrorists from pakistan on Kashmiri hindus:
http://www.kashmiri-pandit.org/sundry/genocide.html

Ganguly da
December 18, 2007, 08:33 AM
remind me the last time that last time that we butchered, burned, and raped 2000 people in a matter of weeks. i must have forgotten about it.

personally ahmadiyyas are not muslims and by calling themselves that they are guilty of false advertising. if start selling something i make in my kitchen as Coca Cola, i'll get sued unless i change the name of my product.

but they have every right to practice their religion without hindrance.

not that it matters(big or small, crime is a crime), but where did u get the number 2000 is beyond me plus in that number there are many hindu victims as well, but i'm sure you overlooked that...let me remind you when was the last time hindus were butchered in your country.

1941 28.0
1951 22.0
1961 18.5
1974 13.5
1981 12.13
1991 10.52
2001 9.2 [2]
^^^^ percentage of hindus ....notice the gradual drop, this is not due to low birth ratio but due to mass no. of people slowly leaving BD or being forced out or were killed.

http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/hrfeatures/HRF48.htm


PART from Wikipedia: Hindus were first attacked in mass on 1992 by the Islamic fundamentalists. More than 200 temples were destroyed[in response to 1 mosque being destroyed]. Hindus were attacked and many were raped and killed [10]. the events are widely seen as a repurcussion against the razing of the Babri Mosque in India[11]. Taslima Nasrin wrote her novel Lajja (The Shame) based on this persecution of Hindus by Islamic extremists. The novel centers on the suffering of the patriotic anti-Indian and pro-Communist Datta family, where the daughter gets raped and killed while financially they end up losing everything.

On November 2, 2006, USCIRF criticized Bangladesh for continuing persecution of minority Hindus. It also urged the Bush administration to get Dhaka to ensure protection of religious freedom and minority rights before Bangladesh's next national elections in January 2007


ALSO 2001: mass exodus of Hindus from bangladesh to west bengal, over night many gang rapes, forced land grabbing under VESTED PROPERTY ACT

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1645499.stm --- what went on...

Alien
December 18, 2007, 09:24 AM
not that it matters(big or small, crime is a crime), but where did u get the number 2000 is beyond me plus in that number there are many hindu victims as well, but i'm sure you overlooked that...let me remind you when was the last time hindus were butchered in your country.


Hindus did suffer under BNP but compared with India, I wouldn't call it "butchered". Please dont exaggerate. Your hatred of Muslim, Islam and anything to do with Islam is well known fact from previous threads.


1941 28.0
1951 22.0
1961 18.5
1974 13.5
1981 12.13
1991 10.52
2001 9.2 [2]
^^^^ percentage of hindus ....notice the gradual drop, this is not due to low birth ratio but due to mass no. of people slowly leaving BD or being forced out or were killed.

Says who? Who the hell said that drop in percentage is because Muslims "killing" hindus?
You take your statistics from no where from biased sources. More like "anti-Muslim" sources. If hindus chose to migrate then thats not our problem. They can go to India to live in a hindu majority nation if it suits them, else they are most welcome to stay in their homeland.


PART from Wikipedia: Hindus were first attacked in mass on 1992 by the Islamic fundamentalists. More than 200 temples were destroyed[in response to 1 mosque being destroyed]. Hindus were attacked and many were raped and killed [10]. the events are widely seen as a repurcussion against the razing of the Babri Mosque in India[11]. Taslima Nasrin wrote her novel Lajja (The Shame) based on this persecution of Hindus by Islamic extremists. The novel centers on the suffering of the patriotic anti-Indian and pro-Communist Datta family, where the daughter gets raped and killed while financially they end up losing everything.

On November 2, 2006, USCIRF criticized Bangladesh for continuing persecution of minority Hindus. It also urged the Bush administration to get Dhaka to ensure protection of religious freedom and minority rights before Bangladesh's next national elections in January 2007


ALSO 2001: mass exodus of Hindus from bangladesh to west bengal, over night many gang rapes, forced land grabbing under VESTED PROPERTY ACT

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1645499.stm --- what went on...

Yeah, now I get it. Been reading too much of Taslima Nasrin lately eh? Those American-British media have it in their blood to make us look bad. After the CTG took over, some idiot (looked like a Rohingya) got beaten up and they made a 30 minuted current affair report on that.

I totally agree Hindus weren't treated any better than they were in the past. In a country of 144 million, you get atleast a 2 million crackpots running around who are disliked by others (muslim and non-muslims alike). I am refering to Jamaat and all hardcores fanatics.

Many hindus migrated because they simple looked for better life abroad. Take Tapan Chowdhury for example. This guy was my next door neighbour in Moghbazar. Recently he popped up in Canada citing "he received death threats in BD". I wonder who the hell is gonna bother running after him after all he is just a singer. People like him do lot of crap, take political assylum just to make it to other shore. Its called "migration" not butchering.

Parisa
December 18, 2007, 11:31 AM
hindus vs muslims? both sides have attacked each other previously. the mumbai bombings last year were done by muslims and it is a known fact that hindus have tortured muslims in india for many years and still do. both have played part in physically hurting the other. nowdays the muslim people are just getting stronger though.

Kabir
December 18, 2007, 11:46 AM
1941 28.0
1951 22.0
1961 18.5
1974 13.5
1981 12.13
1991 10.52
2001 9.2 [2]
^^^^ percentage of hindus ....notice the gradual drop, this is not due to low birth ratio but due to mass no. of people slowly leaving BD or being forced out or were killed.

http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/hrfeatures/HRF48.htm

That's the most ridiculous and nonsensical comment I've ever seen; specially when it comes from an adult looking person. Not sure if you're still in your late teens or something, but these stats mean NOTHING from the perspective of what you're saying.

You need some grade 5 mathematics and are in urgent need of LOGIC 101 crash course.

Just tells me how much you don't know about Bangladesh but still want to go and screm in the dark. For people like you, here's a little Bangladesh 101.

- There's religious freedom for EVERY religious grop...go to BD at your puja time. Even some Muslims and Christians participate in those.
- There has been no Hindu v Muslim riots
- There's little to no job discrimination in current time...it existed long time ago

On the other hand, for fact, my grandfather wrote in one of his published books:

"My teacher, a religious hindu man, once came and grabbed me by my ears...soon after that, he washed his hands with milk, coz he had committed the sin of touching a Muslim boy".

Learn, and live with your eyes open.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 11:49 AM
im sure these facts show hindus are converting, because the number of muslims
have increased to 90% at the moment, plus in wikipedia it says the decline of hinduism of these facts and figures, i wonder when it will be up to 100% its only a matter of time now:).

Kabir
December 18, 2007, 11:49 AM
And on top of it, for the sake of not changing the direction of this thread, for once you should discuss the problems and issues of YOUR country. We know of our problems in Bangladesh..and we don't avoid talking about them. When it is about Gujrati Muslims and Hindus, the focus should remain in Gujrat.

It won't take much long to open a thread on Calcutta and how the Muslims in there are treated. That's close to your home...you should know very well. And if you don't know, that means you're usually scared lying under your bed while the Muslims in your city are being tortured like they are in Gujrat.

Kabir
December 18, 2007, 11:51 AM
im sure these facts show hindus are converting, because the number of muslims
have increased to 90% at the moment, plus in wikipedia it says the decline of hinduism of these facts and figures, i wonder when it will be up to 100% its only a matter of time now:).

Never. In Bangladesh, the liberal society is accustomed to accept different religious faiths. It's just pathetic when some individuals try to prove Bangladesh as crap. Like Sohel bhai said, this is probably the most peaceful nation where so many people from so many different religious backgrounds live in so much peace.

Parisa
December 18, 2007, 11:52 AM
And on top of it, for the sake of not changing the direction of this thread, for once you should discuss the problems and issues of YOUR country. We know of our problems in Bangladesh..and we don't avoid talking about them. When it is about Gujrati Muslims and Hindus, the focus should remain in Gujrat.

It won't take much long to open a thread on Calcutta and how the Muslims in there are treated. That's close to your home...you should know very well. And if you don't know, that means you're usually scared lying under your bed while the Muslims in your city are being tortured like they are in Gujrat.

maybe he GANGULY DA joined banglacricket for the same reason why i joined indiancricket.net.....to promote my country

Kabir
December 18, 2007, 11:58 AM
maybe he GANGULY DA joined banglacricket for the same reason why i joined indiancricket.net.....to promote my country

But please don't do the same as he did, ie. be a chicken and speak of a third country...coz you know nobody will defend the third country.

DJ Sahastra
December 18, 2007, 12:01 PM
Alien,

Not everything is alright with Bangladesh vis-a-vis minorities - i'll leave it at that.

Tintin,

When people start comparing Modi to Hitler, they lose the plot right there.

1. Modi has never been accused of starting the riots. The worst he was accused of was "reacting 3 days too late to control the riots".

2. His administration was accused of covering up for people involved in riots, especially Hindus.

3. There is no campaign (before or after the riots) to annihilate the "race of Gujarati Muslims"

Let us give it to him, even Modi's worst detractors don't accuse him or his government of any systematic persection or alienation of minorities before or after the riots else you would've seen mass-exodus of Muslims from Gujarat following 2002 riots.

Gujarat riots remain an aberration. But 800 Muslims and 250 Hindus killed in a riot - how does that become genocide, holocaust, pogram etc ?.

RazabQ,

Justice Nanavati commision was already probing the event and had a detailed report - Lalu decided to pull up a fast one and go one-up among his "secular voter" with his Banerji Report stunt. Even before Banerji went to collect his findings, people knew what his report is gonna say. Lalu-Banerji combination was essentially aimed at the Muslim population with a message "See, we are your only true friends".

That is Indian politics for you.

Oracle,

Modi is no Hitler and Hitler was no Modi. We are giving him way too much credit - Gujarat has not become Germany yet nor are Gujarati Muslims anywhere close to even falling in number by 1%. When overstretching their observation, media misses the point - if ever he was accused of anything, it was of being a "Nero" or mor specifically, of calling in the police to curb the riots a little late than anticipated.

RazabQ,

Tehelka sting has so many holes that they are actually an embarassment to the Indian press. Read a rebuttal by Arvind Lavakare.

B.P. Singhal, former IPS and ex-Rajya Sabha member, sent out to a newspaper his signed article that contained a nugget deserving entry in the cartoon panels of Robert Ripley’s Believe It Or Not!

Below is that item in Singhal’s own words:

“Aaj Tak harped on the same old refrain that ‘Modi did not call the Army until three days had passed’. When the TV channel contacted me on phone to get my response, I told the anchor that the Godhra carnage took place on February 27, 2002, that the Hindu backlash commenced on February 28 and the Army was doing flag march on the forenoon of March 1… He cut me short by saying that ‘This is exactly what we had said, no action was taken by Modi on 29th, 30th and 31st thus giving three clear days to the murderers…’ I had to cut him short by reminding him that the date 28th was 28th of February 2002 and there were no 29th, 30th or 31st in that month. The phone was of course disconnected.”

That sums up the "Tehelka" sting. Btw, this is not the first time that Tarun Tejpal (of Tehelka) has tried to pull up a quick one. What makes it worst is, our mainstream media is forever willing to carry the "sting" on it's front page but never the rebuttals except for some small mid-page disclaimer.

It is true that Gujarat riots are a blot on our nation as a whole and it is also true that Muslims bore the brunt of the riots. There was a picture in the newspaper of a muslim man with his folded hands and in tears asking to be left alone and that image haunts me sometimes. I pray such things don't repeat ever again.

With that, i need to excuse myself from this thread. This has a potential disaster written all-over it, both in terms of degradation (i see it going downhill) and in terms of how much of my time it sucks in.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 12:12 PM
i am sure a lot of people in bangladesh are converting,
when i went to bangladesh in 2002, i converted this boy
into a muslim next to my village, if a british boy can do that
then any bangladeshi can, im sure the figures reflect that,
not the violence and killings of hindus!

DJ Sahastra
December 18, 2007, 12:15 PM
i am sure a lot of people in bangladesh are converting,
when i went to bangladesh in 2002, i converted this boy
into a muslim next to my village, if a british boy can do that
then any bangladeshi can, im sure the figures reflect that,
not the violence and killings of hindus!

Mohsin,

Out of curiosity, how old was this boy that you converted?

Parisa
December 18, 2007, 12:18 PM
the friction between all the south asian countries needs to stop. india and pakistan were never best of friends and we all know the relatonship between pakistan and bangladesh. we should all try to love one another as we are all asians regardless of the differences in religion. we all eat curry, we all wear asian clothes, we all listen to asian music....we all should promote to the world our similaritiy in culture.there is not another india, pakistan, bangladesh in this world. we are the only ones therefore we should stick close to each other.

Fazal
December 18, 2007, 12:25 PM
Khaiseee What she is doing here?

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 12:50 PM
Mohsin,

Out of curiosity, how old was this boy that you converted?
oh yeah, well he was about 4 or 5 years old:-D

Bengaliprince176
December 18, 2007, 01:01 PM
And on top of it, for the sake of not changing the direction of this thread, for once you should discuss the problems and issues of YOUR country. We know of our problems in Bangladesh..and we don't avoid talking about them. When it is about Gujrati Muslims and Hindus, the focus should remain in Gujrat.

It won't take much long to open a thread on Calcutta and how the Muslims in there are treated. That's close to your home...you should know very well. And if you don't know, that means you're usually scared lying under your bed while the Muslims in your city are being tortured like they are in Gujrat.

im sorry kabir bhai, i have to disagree with u, Kolkata, has had very few probelms since Direct ACtion Day long way back in 1946, only recently was a curfew imposed after 61 years. and that had nothing to do with Communal distrubances but rather a violent (though it was planned that nobody wud get killed- i.e burning of cars) protest by Muslims because of the Governement and Taslima case...but that is another case. Remember it was Kolkata where Sheikh MUjib Rahman kept refuge and he was a hero among most of the people of Kolkata, he won congress some much needed seats in 71, shorty after the communists came to power....

i am not saying that there are not a few probelms in Kolkata but i assure u, thanks to the communist governemtn (the one thing they can do right) there has been harmony between all communities up till this Taslima incident.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 01:03 PM
the friction between all the south asian countries needs to stop. india and pakistan were never best of friends and we all know the relatonship between pakistan and bangladesh. we should all try to love one another as we are all asians regardless of the differences in religion. we all eat curry, we all wear asian clothes, we all listen to asian music....we all should promote to the world our similaritiy in culture.there is not another india, pakistan, bangladesh in this world. we are the only ones therefore we should stick close to each other.

india and pakistan can never get along because, they went through three wars
together in thier history which is bad, the fight over kashmir has made both
countries to make nuclear weapons, plus muslims and hindus will never get along.
If all countries Pakistan, Bharot and Bangladesh stayed as India like 60 years ago
then we could have a good relationship with each other, if only the British didnt invade India, then Muslims and Hindus could have lived happily ever after:D.#
But thats history and life for the us and the world:waiting:.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 01:06 PM
man...another thread has gone in vain
people just go off the topic like anything..oh well

RazabQ
December 18, 2007, 01:09 PM
DJ - when two other Indian posters - who have been regulars here for much longer, and whose moderate and even-handed views I very much respect - make points which you feel compelled to dispel, then I too see no further point in engaging on a discourse on this matter with you.

Cheers

Beamer
December 18, 2007, 01:10 PM
Have anyone read the comments by the posters of rediff following an article? One have to wonder why the lowest of the low, when it comes to communalism and hindu bigotry, flock there in hordes? Rediff does it in a subtle way, like Razabq said, and does nothing to moderate the vitriol and leaves it there for everybody to see. If that is not passive support for bad behaviour, I don't know, what is.

Outcome of this thread has one possible positive result. Sympathizers of faschism and defenders of their mouthpiece are out.

RazabQ
December 18, 2007, 01:11 PM
As Mod:

Guys, please lay off any temptation to make personal attacks. You will notice that the vast majority of debate on this thread has been conducted in a civil tone with emphasis on the points of the matter, and not what the poster might be doing under the bed!

Parisa
December 18, 2007, 01:12 PM
india and pakistan can never get along because, they went through three wars
together in thier history which is bad, the fight over kashmir has made both
countries to make nuclear weapons, plus muslims and hindus will never get along.
If all countries Pakistan, Bharot and Bangladesh stayed as India like 60 years ago
then we could have a good relationship with each other, if only the British didnt invade India, then Muslims and Hindus could have lived happily ever after:D.#
But thats history and life for the us and the world:waiting:.

if that is gonna be the attitude then we might as well remain as we are. and we might as well let the british live in us forever. so sad......the asians won't ever get along.......what will the rest of the world say? shame to south asians!

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 01:17 PM
if that is gonna be the attitude then we might as well remain as we are. and we might as well let the british live in us forever. so sad......the asians won't ever get along.......what will the rest of the world say? shame to south asians!
no what im saying maybe we should go back as being 'india' all of us,
man that would be so better, is they what you're tryin 2 say?

Beamer
December 18, 2007, 01:18 PM
A supporter of Hilter in the mid-late thirties would have probably claimed that, that he persecuted the Jews, eliminated freedom of opinion and slaughtered his political opponents are all irrelevant, because he made Germany more prosperous than they ever were.

I agree Tintin. You know, there are some fickle lot in Bangladesh as well, who never cease to tell us how honest Jamati leaders are and how they will make the economy strong and the country prosperous. It often comes from their educated supporters who are intellectually dishonest and bigoted to the core. Its a credit to BD general population that they know who they are and this why Jamat in a election doesn't manage more than 20 seats in a 300 seat Sangshad. If you are on the right side of humanity, you just can't support ideologies of supremacy practiced by JI and BJP . Fundamentally, they are very much alike, and its sad to see educated people defending them.

Parisa
December 18, 2007, 01:21 PM
no what im saying maybe we should go back as being 'india' all of us,
man that would be so better, is they what you're tryin 2 say?

why should we go back to being indian? never! so many bengalis died fighting to create bangladesh that they will never be fogotten. no what i am saying is that despite being bengali, pakistani or indian we should all respect and love each other as we are the only south asians in the world. we have more or less of the same culture. we are damn asians at the end of the day so why fight?

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 01:27 PM
why should we go back to being indian? never! so many bengalis died fighting to create bangladesh that they will never be fogotten. no what i am saying is that despite being bengali, pakistani or indian we should all respect and love each other as we are the only south asians in the world. we have more or less of the same culture. we are damn asians at the end of the day so why fight?
omg i just realised why shud we never go back as being indian
how stupid of me without thinking of the creation of bangladesh sorry,
yeah i do agree with you we should be friends with each other, but
these days its just violence and..more violence thats the problem with
us south asians, we focus so much on politics, look at Pakistan and Bangladesh
now people are going mad and crazy, that's why i think we're still poverty
because the corrpution is on high level, when we develop then we'll see if
we south asians can get along, long way ahead, head's up.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 01:30 PM
i know how al furqaan feels now about this thread,
we should be realising and discussing what the
gujarati muslims are going through, they going through pain
i mean just go to this website and check it out what
kind of threatment they're recieving by Hindus: http://indianterrorism.bravepages.com/gujarat%20pictures%204.htm

Parisa
December 18, 2007, 01:31 PM
pakistanis speak urdu. indians speak hindi and many other langauges. bengalis speak bengali. bangaldesh india and pakistan each have their own history. that will never be erased. but loving and respecting these 3 countries is a positive sign that will improve our stability as well as show the world what south asia's all about!

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 01:36 PM
pakistanis speak urdu. indians speak hindi and many other langauges. bengalis speak bengali. bangaldesh india and pakistan each have their own history. that will never be erased. but loving and respecting these 3 countries is a positive sign that will improve our stability as well as show the world what south asia's all about!
man you love south asia dont you:)
i just love my bangladesh that's all,
dont want to go more further:-|

Parisa
December 18, 2007, 01:38 PM
man you love south asia dont you:)
i just love my bangladesh that's all,
dont want to go more further:-|

i love south asia yes.....south asia wouldn't be completed without pakistan india or bangladesh. all three of those countries. we all bring in more culture to south asia.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 01:41 PM
has anyone viewed the pictures from the website i gave,
...horrific and shocking isnt it
makes me so angry what they're doing to Muslims,
homes destroyed and burnt, shops looted, and even
worse...burning all muslims they see in gujarat:hairpull:
(go through all pages/numbers, so much killings
made me so angry!!!)

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 02:02 PM
http://indianterrorism.bravepages.com/hindumob20.jpg
AHMEDABAD INDIA: An Indian Muslim stranded on the first floor of his house and surrounded by Hindu extremists, begs them not to burn his family and house on March 01, 2002. The police was standing by, watching the tragedy unfold without lifting a finger to help this man. Moments after this picture was taken, the man, along with his entire family was burnt to death by the Hindu mob, and his house looted.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 02:04 PM
http://indianterrorism.bravepages.com/gujarat%20pictures%201.htm

Kabir
December 18, 2007, 02:10 PM
The pics are making me shiver.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 02:17 PM
The pics are making me shiver.
gives me a slight feeling of revenge fury!

Parisa
December 18, 2007, 02:18 PM
this world would be so much more peaceful without men.....but then again the world wouldn't move without men

Beamer
December 18, 2007, 03:11 PM
Mohsin

No need to fan the fire. I was just curious, what is your stance on JI and similar Islamist parties of Bangladesh?

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 03:16 PM
Mohsin

No need to fan the fire. I was just curious, what is your stance on JI and similar Islamist parties of Bangladesh?
if they dont accept the independence of bangladesh then the hell with them,
but i dont support the others though, they will bring in the shahriah law and
everything with it and people wont want that, but I do want Bangladesh as a
Islamic Republic, with the same laws as Pakistan, where it doesnt make it
a very secular country.

Beamer
December 18, 2007, 03:24 PM
You don't want sharia law, yet you want us to be an Islamic Republic. Don't get it. What's the point of one without the other? And of course, you have forgotten, or chose to ignore the founding principles of Bangladesh, something we had to fight for to establish. So, you don't except the independence of Bangladesh?

Please, stop posting cruel pictures of human suffering. Everybody knows what BJP, RSS, Sang Parivar etc are capable off, well except one or two here.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 03:30 PM
Yeh i said, if they dont except the independence of bangladesh the 'hell' with them
then, and i dont get why they want to be part of pakistan, its just proper madness,
oh yeh wat was the name of those people who supported the soldiers, saw it
on tv people using shoes battering some black poster of somthin?
(if i dont want independence of bangladesh, i would never be in Banglacricket then)

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 04:35 PM
Contemporary practice

There is tremendous variety in the interpretation and implementation of Islamic Law in Muslim societies today. Liberal movements within Islam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam) have questioned the relevance and applicability of sharia from a variety of perspectives; Islamic feminism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_feminism) brings multiple points of view to the discussion. Several of the countries with the largest Muslim populations, including Indonesia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia), Bangladesh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh) and Pakistan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan), have largely secular constitutions and laws, with only a few Islamic provisions in family law. Turkey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkey) has a constitution that is officially strongly secular. India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India) and the Philippines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippines) are the only countries in the world which have separate Muslim civil laws, framed by Muslim Personal Law board (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Muslim_Personal_Law_Board), and wholly based on Sharia and the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Code_of_Muslim_Personal_Laws_of_th e_Philippines&action=edit). However, the criminal laws are uniform. Some controversial sharia laws favour Muslim men, including polygamy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy) and rejection of alimony (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_bano).
Most countries of the Middle East and North Africa maintain a dual system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism_in_the_Middle_East) of secular courts and religious courts, in which the religious courts mainly regulate marriage and inheritance. Saudi Arabia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) and Iran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran) maintain religious courts for all aspects of jurisprudence, and religious police (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_police) assert social compliance. Laws derived from sharia are also applied in Afghanistan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan), Libya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya) and Sudan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudan). Some states in northern Nigeria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigeria) have reintroduced Sharia courts.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-8>[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#_note-8)</SUP> In practice the new Sharia courts in Nigeria have most often meant the re-introduction of harsh punishments without respecting the much tougher rules of evidence and testimony. The punishments include amputation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amputation) of one/both hands for theft, stoning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning) for adultery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery) and apostasy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy).<SUP class="noprint Template-Fact">[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]</SUP>
Many (including the European Court of Human Rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rights)) consider the punishments prescribed by Sharia as being barbaric and cruel. Islamic scholars argue that, if implemented properly, the punishments serve as a deterrent to crime.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-9>[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#_note-9)</SUP> In international media, practices by countries applying Islamic law have fallen under considerable criticism at times. This is particularly the case when the sentence carried out is seen to greatly tilt away from established standards of international human rights. This is true for the application of the death penalty for the crime of adultery, and other such punishments such as amputations for the crime of theft and flogging (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellation) for fornication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fornication) or public intoxication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intoxication). [1] (http://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/nigeria0904/5.htm)
Though Islamic law is interpreted differently across times, places and scholars, following fundamentalist's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_fundamentalism) literal and traditional interpretations, Muslim scholars believe it should legally be binding on all people of the Muslim faith and even on all people who come under their control.<SUP class="noprint Template-Fact">[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]</SUP>
A bill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%28proposed_law%29) proposed by lawmakers in the Indonesian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia) province of Aceh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aceh) would impose Sharia law on all non-Muslims, the armed forces and law enforcement officers, a local police official has announced. The news comes two months after the Deutsche Presse-Agentur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Presse-Agentur) warned of "Taliban (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban)-style Islamic police terrorizing Indonesia's Aceh".

Alien
December 18, 2007, 06:45 PM
Alien,

Not everything is alright with Bangladesh vis-a-vis minorities - i'll leave it at that.


DJ, being the minority alway sucks. In any nation you will face discrimination, no matter how subtle or outright that may be. Thats because its the general tendency for humans to pin point whats seperates us (skin color, religious beliefs, political preferences, sexual preferences etc) as opposed to what unites us (citizens of same country, same language etc).

Different people deal with these differences differently. Most like us in this forum will over look it and consider each other as peers, but elsewhere like in Darfur, they will simply gun you down along with the rest of your type.

So saying that, yes not everything is right but Bangladesh on that note we don't stand out. Discriminations also exists against Hindus in Indonesia where there is a sizable minority in Bali. Aside from several glaring incidents in the past when BNP coalition took over, rest has been all good.

If you are looking for a discrimination-free nation then I am afraid there isn't any.

Alien
December 18, 2007, 06:49 PM
if they dont accept the independence of bangladesh then the hell with them,.

They can accept whatever they want. The reason why everyone is so pissed off with them is because they "dubbed people" in. Not because they they don't like our independence.

Lot of people, during the days of BAL-BNP clashes and riots feel that we were better off under Pakistan. Doesn't make them Rajakars. Only that they haven't lived under that regime thats all.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 06:53 PM
They can accept whatever they want. The reason why everyone is so pissed off with them is because they "dubbed people" in.
whats wrong with dubbing people in your party??

Alien
December 18, 2007, 06:57 PM
whats wrong with dubbing people in your party??

Hmm..I guess by dubbing people in, the Pakistan Army can come by and shoot em. That makes them complicent of their murder.

Moshin
December 18, 2007, 07:01 PM
Hmm..I guess by dubbing people in, the Pakistan Army can come by and shoot em. That makes them complicent of their murder.
wait wait... they still got connections with the Pakistani Army??
very interesting.

Ganguly da
December 18, 2007, 07:51 PM
That's the most ridiculous and nonsensical comment I've ever seen; specially when it comes from an adult looking person. Not sure if you're still in your late teens or something, but these stats mean NOTHING from the perspective of what you're saying.

You need some grade 5 mathematics and are in urgent need of LOGIC 101 crash course.

Just tells me how much you don't know about Bangladesh but still want to go and screm in the dark. For people like you, here's a little Bangladesh 101.

- There's religious freedom for EVERY religious grop...go to BD at your puja time. Even some Muslims and Christians participate in those.
- There has been no Hindu v Muslim riots
- There's little to no job discrimination in current time...it existed long time ago

On the other hand, for fact, my grandfather wrote in one of his published books:



Learn, and live with your eyes open.

i'm not going to comment on your 1st part, because that will create a huge argument.

however to your last part, hindus have done that to each other also, especially lower caste, and usually teachers used to be brahmin so they would do that to lower caste people...that's due to social backwardness, not religious hate.

wrong `un
December 18, 2007, 08:39 PM
I wish religion existed just as a personal ethical guidance to people who cannot rely on their own conscience. The sense of belongingness to any religious group is really scary.

The suffering of any human being should pain us the same be it a person who have the same faith or not.

shaad
December 18, 2007, 08:47 PM
personally ahmadiyyas are not muslims and by calling themselves that they are guilty of false advertising. if start selling something i make in my kitchen as Coca Cola, i'll get sued unless i change the name of my product.

al Furqaan, I am afraid your analogy is flawed. First, Coke can sue you because they own the trademark on the name "Coca Cola," while you don't. No one really owns the trademark on "Muslim" or "Islam".

Second, the Ahmadiyyas consider themselves Muslims, even if other Muslims don't. Yes, I am aware of the doctrinal differences, but from their eyes, their perspectives, they are not guilty of false advertising. Note that many of the statements of al-Qaeda label as non-Muslims many people that you would consider Muslims, e.g. members of the Shia community. Note also that there are still a small number of Catholics who view Protestants as heretics and thus not real Christians. Similarly, and being played out in the Republican presidential race, is the issue of Mormons being considered non-Christians.

but they have every right to practice their religion without hindrance.

Agreed, and that includes the right to consider themselves Muslims even if others don't.

On a different note, I think part of the reason that we haven't encountered as many communal problems as say our neighbours in either Pakistan or India is because we view ourselves through a prism of both cultural/ethnic identity (Bengali-ness) and religion (Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.). This prevents religion from being the dominant focus of our identity -- if our self-identity was entirely comprised of being Muslim say, then we would have to give up Rabindranath, and for that matter, even Nazrul. And while I am all in favour of the more-inclusive Bangladeshi self-identity, I'll be the first to admit that for most people the cultural/ethnic identity of being Bengali cuts deeper.

I suspect what we saw in Gujarat was the weakness of a national pan-Indian self-identity when faced with a much stronger religious self-identity, particularly when the latter was enflamed by demagogues. I think the lesson we can learn from that incident is that while we might be fortunate in having a cultural/ethnic identity that might partially mitigate attempts at extremism arising from our religious identities, we should still be on our guard against people and practices who would hijack our faiths to achieve such unsavory goals.

Beamer
December 18, 2007, 10:14 PM
Some great points by Shaad. It also helps that we are a pretty homogenous nation with very little ethnic/cultural diversity, though in a small scale, we too did encounter clashes in the CHT where pan-bengali identity isn't, or wasn't, the dominant part of the demography. Even Pakistan, a nation based on the idea of a homeland for Islamic identity, continues to suffer from ethnic tension in different provinces though they are all muslims.

Sohel
December 18, 2007, 10:19 PM
al Furqaan, I am afraid your analogy is flawed. First, Coke can sue you because they own the trademark on the name "Coca Cola," while you don't. No one really owns the trademark on "Muslim" or "Islam".

Second, the Ahmadiyyas consider themselves Muslims, even if other Muslims don't. Yes, I am aware of the doctrinal differences, but from their eyes, their perspectives, they are not guilty of false advertising. Note that many of the statements of al-Qaeda label as non-Muslims many people that you would consider Muslims, e.g. members of the Shia community. Note also that there are still a small number of Catholics who view Protestants as heretics and thus not real Christians. Similarly, and being played out in the Republican presidential race, is the issue of Mormons being considered non-Christians.

Agreed, and that includes the right to consider themselves Muslims even if others don't.

On a different note, I think part of the reason that we haven't encountered as many communal problems as say our neighbours in either Pakistan or India is because we view ourselves through a prism of both cultural/ethnic identity (Bengali-ness) and religion (Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.). This prevents religion from being the dominant focus of our identity -- if our self-identity was entirely comprised of being Muslim say, then we would have to give up Rabindranath, and for that matter, even Nazrul. And while I am all in favour of the more-inclusive Bangladeshi self-identity, I'll be the first to admit that for most people the cultural/ethnic identity of being Bengali cuts deeper.

I suspect what we saw in Gujarat was the weakness of a national pan-Indian self-identity when faced with a much stronger religious self-identity, particularly when the latter was enflamed by demagogues. I think the lesson we can learn from that incident is that while we might be fortunate in having a cultural/ethnic identity that might partially mitigate attempts at extremism arising from our religious identities, we should still be on our guard against people and practices who would hijack our faiths to achieve such unsavory goals.

Agree 110%.

Only GOD is omniscient and only He will sort us out. We do not have a Pope-like figure, in fact such intermediaries are specifically prohibited in Islam as "shirk", to approve or excommunicate anyone from Islam. Personal views and practices on Islamic creed notwithstanding, I find any and all exclusionary practices to be contrary to piety, the fundamental effect of ones willful submission to GOD and GOD alone, and the subsequent liberation because of that sincere and total submission. Personally as a Muslim, I have always found it more rewarding to stay focused on the cultivation of my own individual submission rather than "exclude" others, not just politely "shun" others if dialogue proves to be futile. Social responsibility, the struggle for social justice and speaking the truth are all integral parts of that jihad (endeavor), passing judgment in order to exclude and or silence is not. Only GOD knows what is truly in the hearts of His creations, and only He can judge.

That said, IMHO the primary injustice plaguing South Asian societies in particular is the violence of socio-economic class-based, almost caste system-like exploitation of the majority of our so-called citizens, irrespective of religious identity. The systematic poverty robs our people of a fair shot at actually pursuing what is their fundamental right as human beings. In Bangladesh for example, I see (privileged minority) Muslim on (marginalized majority) Muslim (moral, economic and social) violence to be the most obvious problem. Wealth and vanity tend to be the great equalizer amongst the iniquitous and THAT is the real issue.

There have always been religious-Fascists from almost every faith - "almost" because I cannot think of any Tibetan Buddhists having done the same - who have exploited basically unfounded popular insecurities to scapegoat entire communities for narrow political gain, and they need to be resisted. Other than that, it's about "wealth and vanity" in the beginning and "death and taxes" at the end.

shaad
December 18, 2007, 11:06 PM
That said, IMHO the primary injustice plaguing South Asian societies in particular is the violence of socio-economic class-based, almost caste system-like exploitation of the majority of our so-called citizens, irrespective of religious identity. The systematic poverty robs our people of a fair shot at actually pursuing what is their fundamental right as human beings. In Bangladesh for example, I see (privileged minority) Muslim on (marginalized majority) Muslim (moral, economic and social) violence to be the most obvious problem. Wealth and vanity tend to be the great equalizer amongst the iniquitous and THAT is the real issue.


Sohel, it's good to have you back. I think Naomi Hossain's book Elite Perceptions of Poverty in Bangladesh (University Press Ltd.) and a more recent article (http://www.newagebd.com/slate/2007/may/01.html) by her in Slate (the Bangladeshi Slate, that is) are particularly germane to the economic disparities in our nation. Note that the usual assumption by the elite that the poor represented no threat (hence no real urgency for change) is beginning to be challenged.

al Furqaan
December 18, 2007, 11:39 PM
1941 28.0
1951 22.0
1961 18.5
1974 13.5
1981 12.13
1991 10.52
2001 9.2 [2]
^^^^ percentage of hindus ....notice the gradual drop, this is not due to low birth ratio but due to mass no. of people slowly leaving BD or being forced out or were killed.

ganguly brother,

percentage of muslims in india plunged also from 1946 to 1948...does this mean it was a result of low birth rate or that tens of millions were killed? no.

india is a hindu country just as bangladesh and pakistan are "muslim" countries. this is truth, fact, reality, and also the perception of the majority of insiders and outsiders. to find that hindus are leaving bangladesh for india should not come as a surprise. its like finding rich people streaming out of the ghetto.

sure its better to be a hindu in india than it is to be one in india. and i am sure there are many instances of muslims being treated better in india than hindus in bangaldesh.

but we do not communal riots every 5-10 years, or bombings at mosques and mudirs alike evey 2-3 months.

there was gujurat riot, and then there was babri riots which were 10 times bigger to scale, etc...

************************************

the point of my thread was to point out the sufferings of gujurati muslims. this is independent of the sufferings of bangladeshi hindus, or kashmir hindu refugees in delhi, or muslim kashmiris in kashmir or wherever.

second, i condemn every act of injustice against every religions minority in bangladesh by so called "muslims". whether they are hindu, ahmadiyya, christian, buddhist, or whatever.

i consider unjust anything which is unfair to a person because of his religion.

thirdly, and most important and frequently forgotten by all (myself included). everyone has a softer spot for their "own people", whatever way you choose to categorize it as. and i believe all people are this way except those who have no affiliation (i.e humanists). to say otherwise is just not true. just not true. so it shouldn't be suprising at all that muslims will have a soft spot for muslims and that hindus will have a soft spot for hindus.

what is important is that we heed the Divine call in the Qur'an, from surah 4, verse 135:

O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well- acquainted with all that ye do.

al Furqaan
December 18, 2007, 11:50 PM
Agreed, and that includes the right to consider themselves Muslims even if others don't.

absolutely. they have every right to say whatever they want. they can even trash islam if they wish. however, with the right comes the right to label them as non muslims.

we cannot criticize them or ridicule them as many do with islam claiming "that islam can be critqued". or misrepresent them as terrorists or what have you.

Sohel
December 19, 2007, 12:52 AM
Sohel, it's good to have you back. I think Naomi Hossain's book Elite Perceptions of Poverty in Bangladesh (University Press Ltd.) and a more recent article (http://www.newagebd.com/slate/2007/may/01.html) by her in Slate (the Bangladeshi Slate, that is) are particularly germane to the economic disparities in our nation. Note that the usual assumption by the elite that the poor represented no threat (hence no real urgency for change) is beginning to be challenged.

Thank you for the kind sentiments Shaad, it is good to be back. Some of the things I missed most about BC were your posts and comments. Thank you also for the article.

You are absolutely right about our marginalized majority becoming more aware of their rights and running out of patience. Working in Bagerhat now and TNT-bausti amongst other urban shanties have made that infinitely clear to me.

Alien
December 19, 2007, 12:57 AM
wait wait... they still got connections with the Pakistani Army??
very interesting.

What planet r u from?

Rabz
December 19, 2007, 01:58 AM
Where is Sandpiper??

:mad::mad::mad:

Ganguly da
December 19, 2007, 04:34 AM
Good to see some neutral and positive feedbacks, especially from shaad, sohel and al furqaan.

Ganguly da
December 19, 2007, 04:38 AM
i love south asia yes.....south asia wouldn't be completed without pakistan india or bangladesh. all three of those countries. we all bring in more culture to south asia.

you have a nice signature. matir manoosh....shotti kotha indeed.

Parisa
December 19, 2007, 07:17 AM
you have a nice signature. matir manoosh....shotti kotha indeed.

thank you ganguly da....u know i just recently became a fan of him.....

Parisa
December 19, 2007, 07:19 AM
I wish religion existed just as a personal ethical guidance to people who cannot rely on their own conscience. The sense of belongingness to any religious group is really scary.

The suffering of any human being should pain us the same be it a person who have the same faith or not.

this is what i believe in too.very strongly.with or without religion we can survive with our conscience.

Sohel
December 19, 2007, 07:19 AM
A little food for thought for my fellow Bangladeshis: Indian's enjoy us talking about their issues just about as much as we enjoy listening to them talking about ours. Religion has very little to do with it.

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 11:49 AM
On a relevant note, here is an article published today in Kashmir Herald. When you are reading the article, pls also read my first response to this thread.

I need to mention it that i have no relations or even any kind of contacts with the writer below.


http://www.kashmirherald.com/main.php?t=OP&st=D&no=341

Godhra carnage vs. Pandits exodus
J. N. RAINA

On-again, off-again nature of talk about 2002 Gujarat riots, on the heels of Godhra carnage, is preposterous. It is outrageous and disgusting to raise such issues, rendered irrelevant with the passage of time, to tarnish the image of India, booming with economic activity. It is disrespectful to the nation of one billion people.


The so-called ‘Tehelka expose’ has, in fact, exposed the hollowness of pseudo-secularists, who flourish on such ‘gossip’. Such loose discussions, brought to the fore repeatedly, should be put to an end once for all. The drum-beaters of secularism are deliberately orchestrating of what they call ‘sting operation’, when the Assembly elections in Gujarat are approaching. It is the height of stupidity to claim that the ‘expose’ just ‘coincided’ with the announcement of the Assembly poll in Gujarat.

In the first instance, such ‘exposures’ are politically-motivated. The ‘power hungry’ Congress politicians know when and how to operationalise their ‘mischievous designs’, how to indulge in dirty tricks and how to mould public opinion. They raise the bogey of Gujarat riots, without bothering to mention about Godhra mayhem, in which 58 Hindu Kar Sevaks were roasted alive while they were traveling in the Sabarmati Express. The reaction to Godhra was Gujarat riots.
The question is what was the need to reopen healed up wounds. If it was needed at all, why ‘publicity’ was not given to these killings six months earlier? What was done is done; cannot be undone. No sane person will gloat over the killings or justify them.
But raising such issues repeatedly cannot be justified. More so since the secularists across the country did not bother to talk about the gruesome killings of nearly 1200 Kashmiri Hindus in early 1990 and later in sporadic incidents of ethnic cleansing. These killings and the resultant mass exodus of 5, 00,000 Hindus from Kashmir Valley are a blot on the Indian democracy.
Hardly 15,000 Hindus are left in the valley now. Have they no right to live in their land of birth? Have they no democratic rights? The Human Rights organizations and the Amnesty International are just feigning ignorance about the apathetic conditions of the Kashmiri Hindus. So far the Indian Government’s internal policy priorities are concerned human rights of Kashmiri Pundits have been locked in the boot.
Since there is so much talk about post-Godhra carnage by secularists, may I ask them why they are not equally strident in the case of Kashmiri Hindus’ plight. Why don’t they pause for a while to wonder what was the fault of the Kashmiri Hindus to be marginalised and neglected in their own country? What crime had they committed against the majority Muslim community in the Valley?
After the mass exodus, their houses were looted and set on fire. Temples and other places of worship were burnt down. The Hindus were compelled to dispose off their properties at throwaway prices, so that they don’t dare to return to the Valley. Is this secularism? Is this democracy? No eyebrows were raised about the pogrom of the Kashmiri Hindus.
For Kashmiri Hindus, secularism has been buried in the graveyards of Kashmir. The moderate Muslims were helpless as the radicals are holding the sway. And they just advised the ‘Hindu brethren’ to leave for lack of security.
To cap it all, some maverick writers believe that killings of Muslims in Gujarat, as exposed by Tehelka, should not be suppressed. Does it mean, what has happened to Kashmiri Hindus and non-Kashmiri Hindus, who had also settled there for decades, should be suppressed? It is shameful. Why was not any commission set up to go into the killings and forcible exodus of Kashmiri Hindus?
Why are there one-sided sting operations? Is it not a new weapon in the hands of the secularists to divide the society on communal lines, keeping in mind the vote bank policy?
The authorities in Godhra, soon after the mayhem, had made an unsavoury statement that those who had burnt alive the karsevaks were “uneducated, without jobs and poor. Most of them, called Ghanchi Muslims, live in poverty and have no economic activity” How amazing? The Godhra officials were forced to make confusing statements to suppress the truth about Godhra.
These tactics are sure to boomerang and destroy the age-old residual communal harmony. They should realize such exposures will retaliate on them, just like terrorism has boomeranged on Pakistan. Dr Sachidananda Sinha has well said: “Where there is no vision, the people perish”.
Maverick writer Farzana Versey argues that the cause of Kashmiri Hindus has been romanticized. In a recent news paper article, “Fission Kashmir” (September 7, 2007) she remarks: “Unlike the 140 terrorist groups, the Pandit lobby is strong. It can organize itself. Displaced Pundits are now demanding reservations in the Jammu and Kashmir legislature and government jobs, as well as setting up of three townships in the Valley for their rehabilitation”. What is wrong in making these demands?
Unlike Versey, some Pakistan journalists appear to sympathise with Kashmiri Pundits. They visited the migrant camps in Jammu and saw things for themselves. They have taken up the cudgels for speaking the truth. For the past 17 years, the Pundit community has lost its cultural moorings. They have lost their identity as an ethnic group, and are unable to preserve their traditions and customs.
Some Indian journalists are talking about ‘nailing the guilty of Gujarat’. Their response is based on Tehelka’s investigations, which, according to them, has ‘provided evidence on tapes ‘of stories relating to the Muslims’ killings by top functionaries of the BJP and Sangh Parivar.
Well, if that is indeed the case, what about nailing known JKLF activist Bitta Karatay, who, in a recent TV interview had claimed responsibility for killing scores of Hindus, with many more on his hit-list. He was in jail for 16 years on the charge of murdering a score of Kashmiri Hindus. The Supreme Court has released Karatay recently for ‘want of evidence’.

The author is a Pune, India based Kashmiri Pandit journalist.

Parisa
December 19, 2007, 12:06 PM
guys u r all talented in contructive arguments.....guess this website helps you to improve ur english lol

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 12:07 PM
RazaqQ,

This thread really has many an answers to the questions raised by the thread itself.

As a Muslim, Al Furqaan is pained at the plight of Muslims suffering from Gujarat riots. Nobel as his intentions are, they only highlight how religion has affected us - we are no longer interested in plight of the groups outside our own domain.

As a Muslim, SandPiper gets so angry with the Plight of Gujrati Muslims that he is ready to condemn and annihilate Hindus/Kufrs everywhere.

As a Muslim, Mohsin not only thinks conversion is the reason for dwindling number of Hindus in Bangladesh but also takes pride in having "converted a little boy" to Islam with so much of an ease . If that is not enough, the pictures of Gujarat Riots feed him with "fury of revenge".

These are well-educated and privileged members - if they can be blinded by fury of revenge, more concerned at the plight of Muslims in Gujarat than the less privileged of their own countryman and be ready to annihilate and condemn a whole lot of people who don't share their beliefs and religion, i guess we don't really need to look at people of Gujarat & elsewhere who indulged in riots. Afterall, they don't see those pics - instead they have performed last rites of people burnt alive, people with their throats slit and left in the drains to gurgle out blood and die - that my friend has many times bigger impact than those pics.

If world is still a sane place to live, maybe we need to look at the response from Shaad, Sohel NR, Alien etc. and i am sure if things get back to normal even after such gruesome riots, it is because we have people who can think and restrain thenselves in those decisive moments.

Moshin
December 19, 2007, 12:10 PM
What planet r u from?
i just did not get anything of what you said

al Furqaan
December 19, 2007, 12:26 PM
As a Muslim, Al Furqaan is pained at the plight of Muslims suffering from Gujarat riots. Nobel as his intentions are, they only highlight how religion has affected us - we are no longer interested in plight of the groups outside our own domain.

this is the way everyone thinks. even you.

however, it is not correct to say that al Furqaan does not care for the minorities in bangladesh. we bangladeshis, take great pride in the fact that, unlike our "bigger brothers" (India and pakistan), we do not have communal problems on their scale despite have an comparable minority population. bangladesh is not pakistan nor is it india and there is no reason to see it becoming as such.

thats the bottom line. abuses do occur, but people don't get dropped like they do in pakistan or in india.

Moshin
December 19, 2007, 12:42 PM
As a Muslim, Mohsin not only thinks conversion is the reason for dwindling number of Hindus in Bangladesh but also takes pride in having "converted a little boy" to Islam with so much of an ease . If that is not enough, the pictures of Gujarat Riots feed him with "fury of revenge".
if anyone had the oppurtunity of doing what i done, they would grab
that moment with great pleasure and delight thinking 'I have done good'

It must fill everyone with a fury of revenge, i mean they are our
muslim brothers and sisters being killed, im sure it makes everyone
else just as mad as i am right now:hairpull:.

BanCricFan
December 19, 2007, 12:47 PM
[quote=DJ Sahastra;578377]RazaqQ,

As a Muslim, Mohsin not only thinks conversion is the reason for dwindling number of Hindus in Bangladesh but also takes pride in having "converted a little boy" to Islam with so much of an ease . If that is not enough, the pictures of Gujarat Riots feed him with "fury of revenge".

These are well-educated and privileged members - if they can be blinded by fury of revenge, more concerned at the plight of Muslims in Gujarat than the less privileged of their own countryman and be ready to annihilate and condemn a whole lot of people who don't share their beliefs and religion, i guess we don't really need to look at people of Gujarat & elsewhere who indulged in riots. Afterall, they don't see those pics - instead they have performed last rites of people burnt alive, people with their throats slit and left in the drains to gurgle out blood and die - that my friend has many times bigger impact than those pics.

[quote]

DJ,
Very weak and distasteful reasoning- to say the least!

Moshin
December 19, 2007, 12:50 PM
DJ, Very weak and distasteful reasoning- to say the least! to be honest i agree with you, what are you trying to say DJ?

Beamer
December 19, 2007, 01:00 PM
Its clever how the focus has been deliberately shifted from Modi and the plight of Gujrati minorities ( not just muslims, but adivasis, and other lower caste members ) to Kashmiri pandits and their flight. Not mentioned obviously that close to 90,000 muslims have perished in the hands of Indian security forces since 1989. Not surprised. Anyone who is interested in defending Modi and his crooked ideology will spin it that way.

Beamer
December 19, 2007, 01:02 PM
World would be a saner place if more people thought like Tintin as well.

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 02:32 PM
Al Furqaan,

Let me quote your original message.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7143958.stm

while we are celebrating eid and being with our families and loved ones, we should remember in our du'a those countless muslims in gujurat (and around the world) to whom eid does not bring any joy into their unfortunate lives.

On occassion of EID, you want Muslims on the forum to read about the plight of 2000 or so muslim families displaced in Gujarat because of riots and want to remember the Muslims in Gujarat in particular and around the world in General for their unfortunate lives.

The focus is clearly the plight of Muslims in Gujarat.

You could've focussed on the plight of Bihari Muslims in Bangladesh or the Rohingya Muslims (as someone started the thread on) or Minorities in Bangladesh or even general public in Bangladesh (I am sure there many living in conditions equitable or worse than those Gujaratai Muslims).

You could've chosen the occassion of EID to focus on the plight of human beings in general world-over.

You could've chosen to focus on some recent event that concerns Muslims in particular or Muslims/Human Beings in general - that would've still made some sense.

Using the occassion of EID to call upon people to remember and focus on those 2000 families of Gujarati Muslims with whom i am sure you have as much in common as the Muslims in Somalia, from an event 5 years back - it does come out with questionable intentions & motives.

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 02:34 PM
It must fill everyone with a fury of revenge, i mean they are our muslim brothers and sisters being killed, im sure it makes everyone
else just as mad as i am right now:hairpull:.

Mohsin,

Thank you for making the point.

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 02:40 PM
"These are well-educated and privileged members "

BDCricFan,

My above comment applied for all three examples - quoting only Mohsin part is unfair.

And by Privileged member, i was not hinting at their standing on this board but at the resources within their reach - with full access to internet i am sure they are not in the same "privilege" league as people to whom full access to one meal is a luxury.

If you find any comment as distasteful, my apologies.

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 02:48 PM
Its clever how the focus has been deliberately shifted from Modi and the plight of Gujrati minorities ( not just muslims, but adivasis, and other lower caste members ) to Kashmiri pandits and their flight.

Pls don't blame the inability on your part to understand the context to "shift of focus". Read my very first post where i had clearly mentioned how "plight of refugees because of riots, terrorism, dams, road etc" is subject to same government apathy and regardless of whether you are Hindu or Muslim or the government is a BJP or the Congress". The analogy of Kashmiri Pundits is very important in that sense. The analogy of Kashmiri Pundits is important in understanding the media and the govt. machinations in India and to put things in their proper context and perspective.

Btw, there was no original focus on "the plight of Gujrati minorities ( not just muslims, but adivasis, and other lower caste members" but on Gujarati Muslims & Gujarati Muslims alone.

Not mentioned obviously that close to 90,000 muslims have perished in the hands of Indian security forces since 1989.

And i am sure you got your figures of 90000 from your "reliable" sources since you had so many issues about the credibility of sources. So what is that source, Mr Beamer - Pakistan Ministry of Foreign Affairs or Pakistan's official mouthpiece for Kashmir Propoganda, the APHC or some Pakistani Newspaper?

Maybe it's time your read your own posts to see who is spinning what.

World would be a saner place if more people thought like Tintin as well.

That part i agree.

That still doesn't take away my right to respectfully disagree with him or anyone based on the issue and what our respective understands of that issue are.

Beamer
December 19, 2007, 04:06 PM
Dear DJ

I care little about Pakistan and their spin machine when it comes to Kashmir. I am not disagreeing that many kashmiri Pundits were and continue to be uprooted because of the situation there. Please, do not associate me with some Islamic right activist or something. I am a pretty secular human being and if you care to read my posts about JI in other threads, you will see, where I am coming from. I am vehemently opposed to religion in public sphere and because of that stance, I despise religious merchants of all faith who use it to win elections and kill people in the "name" of their faith. I wished you would denounce Modi for what he is. But, you chose not to, so, I would assume you passively support his ideology and his politics.

Anyway..have a good one. I think, I am done here. Besides, there is more fun on the bengali cooking thread right now..

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 04:18 PM
Dear DJ

I care little about Pakistan and their spin machine when it comes to Kashmir. I am not disagreeing that many kashmiri Pundits were and continue to be uprooted because of the situation there. Please, do not associate me with some Islamic right activist or something. I am a pretty secular human being and if you care to read my posts about JI in other threads, you will see, where I am coming from. I am vehemently opposed to religion in public sphere and because of that stance, I despise religious merchants of all faith who use it to win elections and kill people in the "name" of their faith. I wished you would denounce Modi for what he is. But, you chose not to, so, I would assume you passively support his ideology and his politics.

Anyway..have a good one. I think, I am done here. Besides, there is more fun on the bengali cooking thread right now..

Beamer,

I am sure you are not any Islamic rights activist, and to be honest, i wouldn't have problem with that as long as it is not affecting the lives of those who don't agree with your views.

At the same time, it was disappointing to see you quote that numbers that are often repeated by people/sites catering to Pakistan's interest.

Do i denounce Modi for what he is, Absolutely. But that was not what anyone was talking about. Instead, the initial posts focussed on beating up Indians for the plight of Muslims.

Anyways, thanks for your clarification. I have no issues with you or anyone - just had to put the perspective from the other side.

Finally, i can be out too. This thread is killing me.

Beamer
December 19, 2007, 04:32 PM
Well, Lets put it this way, quoting rediff to trivialize the matters of muslims and their state in Gujarat is disappointing to me. I am not alone who perceive rediff as a mouthpiece for Hindutva ideology. Its fine. You are free to have your own political view. But, you cannot denounce one extreme ideological view while supporting a similar ideological view of different faith. Me, I dislike both Modi and Golam Azam. It will be hypocritical of me to rile against Modi and at the same time, support killer Golam Azam..

later bro..

Moshin
December 19, 2007, 04:43 PM
Some people have not understood what secular really means,
if you want to know what it really means, listen to Allama Sayeedi
LINK>: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1tweLP7N9GE
I can tell you Bangladesh is not ONE. (I think)
He says secularism is created by Satan, its the truth.

RazabQ
December 19, 2007, 04:59 PM
As mod: Mohsin - pipe down please. You are trying to ratchet the level of antagonism on this thread with your extreme positions.

As myself:

Beamer, your last post pretty much covers my thoughts on some of the responses here.

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 05:37 PM
Well, Lets put it this way, quoting rediff to trivialize the matters of muslims and their state in Gujarat is disappointing to me. I am not alone who perceive rediff as a mouthpiece for Hindutva ideology. Its fine. You are free to have your own political view. But, you cannot denounce one extreme ideological view while supporting a similar ideological view of different faith. Me, I dislike both Modi and Golam Azam. It will be hypocritical of me to rile against Modi and at the same time, support killer Golam Azam..

later bro..

Beamer,

A good number of Muslims in Gujarat vote for Modi. It is a known truth - i did not chose rediff by design. When you didn't like Rediff, i quoted the relevant poll-related stats from Indian-Express and CNN-IBN.

Coming from Bombay, which is my hometown and where i grew up with mainly Gujarati Hindus & Muslims (a propserous community in Mumbai by all stretch), i didn't need Rediff or Indian Express or CNN-IBN to say what i said. It is like you know something from the city you are raised in but still have to find links elsewhere to explain it.

Whether one likes it or not, when discussing Modi & Gujarat & votes, it is important to table all the relevant aspect.

And to be honest, in my knowledge, this is the first time EVER that anyone has referred Rediff as a "mouthpiece for Hindutva ideology". I am not sure if even Tintin agrees to this. Rediff can be accused of not being a quality news portal - but "Hindutva Ideology", well i'll keep my eyes open to see if it caters to anything like that.

Moshin
December 19, 2007, 05:50 PM
i dont understand why the muslims would vote for him,
Nerendra Modi was the one who responsible for all
the 2002 violence in Gujarat ever since he was the
chief minister of Gujarat, and the United States government
didnt allow a visa for him because he was responsible
for "severe violations of religious freedom". He was even
claimed as a terrorist by them, would Muslims really vote 4 him?
Lashkar-e-Toiba also announced to assinate him:
"take revenge for the "injustices caused to the Muslims in Gujarat"
Not a pursuation of voting for him, but killing him
<SUP></SUP>

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 05:56 PM
Btw, before i quit this thread, i must mention that i find Mohsin quite honest and unsophisticated. At no point did i find anything that he mentioned as offensive or intimidating. His simple posts and simple observations only made me pause and think what is exactly going on out there somewhere. He brings in the perspective of someone who has information from mostly one type of source and one side of an event and has been simple in bringing forth also what goes in their mind when exposed to those kind of information.

Something for everyone to ponder over.

Moshin
December 19, 2007, 06:03 PM
Btw, before i quit this thread, i must mention that i find Mohsin quite honest and unsophisticated. At no point did i find anything that he mentioned as offensive or intimidating. His simple posts and simple observations only made me pause and think what is exactly going on out there somewhere. He brings in the perspective of someone who has information from mostly one type of source and one side of an event and has been simple in bringing forth also what goes in their mind when exposed to those kind of information.

Something for everyone to ponder over.
Are you sure? I hate to admit, but I am sophisticated when coming into
discussions and posting opinions, most rarely do get taken seriously,
but anywayz thanks:).

Ganguly da
December 19, 2007, 07:41 PM
Its clever how the focus has been deliberately shifted from Modi and the plight of Gujrati minorities ( not just muslims, but adivasis, and other lower caste members ) to Kashmiri pandits and their flight. Not mentioned obviously that close to 90,000 muslims have perished in the hands of Indian security forces since 1989. Not surprised. Anyone who is interested in defending Modi and his crooked ideology will spin it that way.


ahh just when the thread was coming to a peaceful conclusion...

90,000?? reading a lot of DAWN lately? and even if that was true, I bet out of 90,000 'muslims' 89,900 would be terrorists shipped overnight from POK. It's funny how you claim to be a neutral yet you never mention the 'muslim' terrorists and their victims.

Out of curiousity...what do you think of hundreds of 'muslims' being slaughtered by their own 'muslim' brothers in pakistan and iraq? yesterday they discoverd another mass grave with victims shot in the head for being shia..what's your take on that? <<< "shift of focus"

Parisa
December 19, 2007, 07:47 PM
these arguments should win BC Argument of the Year award!! its contructive, thoughtful and definitely entertaining! i might not agree with some of the things mentioned but i love the way the aruguments are set forward! i especially like the way ganguly da argues.....and kabir.

Ganguly da
December 19, 2007, 07:49 PM
if anyone had the oppurtunity of doing what i done, they would grab
that moment with great pleasure and delight thinking 'I have done good'

It must fill everyone with a fury of revenge, i mean they are our
muslim brothers and sisters being killed, im sure it makes everyone
else just as mad as i am right now:hairpull:.

out of curiousity, what did you do to convert that boy? candies? lolipops? or just money like christian missionaries....

also do you have a chart of no. of people you convert? What's your target? What do you think of islamic britain? if you had the chance to convert everyone in britain, would u do it if so how? is there a 'how to convert' guide or are you planning on authoring one?

al Furqaan
December 19, 2007, 09:05 PM
90,000?? reading a lot of DAWN lately? and even if that was true, I bet out of 90,000 'muslims' 89,900 would be terrorists shipped overnight from POK. It's funny how you claim to be a neutral yet you never mention the 'muslim' terrorists and their victims.



difficult to say. after all terrorists do not wear uniforms now do they?

now it is a universal fact that the mossad intelligence agency in allegiance with shin bet as well as the CIA are the best in the business. they have the best training, equipment, technology, and the big thing: money.

even with all that, 70% of the lebenese killed by the IDF in the 2006 war were civilians. meaning that only 30 % or so were terrorists. in order for the indian army to surgically have a combatant kill rate of 99.88 % as you have suggested, the indian intel must be overwhelmingly superior to that of mossad or CIA. which is obviously not the case.

al Furqaan
December 19, 2007, 09:09 PM
Beamer,

I am sure you are not any Islamic rights activist, and to be honest, i wouldn't have problem with that as long as it is not affecting the lives of those who don't agree with your views.

At the same time, it was disappointing to see you quote that numbers that are often repeated by people/sites catering to Pakistan's interest.

Do i denounce Modi for what he is, Absolutely. But that was not what anyone was talking about. Instead, the initial posts focussed on beating up Indians for the plight of Muslims.

Anyways, thanks for your clarification. I have no issues with you or anyone - just had to put the perspective from the other side.

Finally, i can be out too. This thread is killing me.

good post...

al Furqaan
December 19, 2007, 09:20 PM
Al Furqaan,

Let me quote your original message.



On occassion of EID, you want Muslims on the forum to read about the plight of 2000 or so muslim families displaced in Gujarat because of riots and want to remember the Muslims in Gujarat in particular and around the world in General for their unfortunate lives.

The focus is clearly the plight of Muslims in Gujarat.

You could've focussed on the plight of Bihari Muslims in Bangladesh or the Rohingya Muslims (as someone started the thread on) or Minorities in Bangladesh or even general public in Bangladesh (I am sure there many living in conditions equitable or worse than those Gujaratai Muslims).

You could've chosen the occassion of EID to focus on the plight of human beings in general world-over.

You could've chosen to focus on some recent event that concerns Muslims in particular or Muslims/Human Beings in general - that would've still made some sense.

Using the occassion of EID to call upon people to remember and focus on those 2000 families of Gujarati Muslims with whom i am sure you have as much in common as the Muslims in Somalia, from an event 5 years back - it does come out with questionable intentions & motives.

1) i could also have used the eid to mention the plight of palestinian muslims, or darfur muslims, or bihari bangladeshi muslims. of course, thats correct. but also irrelevant. that question would come regardless of what group i mentioned. i chose gujarat because i had a recent link available. had that link been one of kurds in turkey and the timing come in ramadan, i would have used the sentiment of that month for that plight.

2) because muslims are supposed to be like "one body, when the finger hurts, the entire body suffers" mentioning the plight of gujarati muslims incorporates the plight of all muslims, whether it is known to us or not. simple concept.

3) my intentions were to have a thread just like the one we have: a honest, moderate discussion without the need to lock it up.

4) btw, i don't understand the reason for this last post, since i have already admitted, and proven that all ppl (myself included but far less than most others) have a soft corner for their own people. i never denied it, in fact i have proven it though i find it to be a fairly self-intuitive thing.

cheers

Beamer
December 19, 2007, 10:10 PM
Beamer,

A good number of Muslims in Gujarat vote for Modi. It is a known truth - i did not chose rediff by design. When you didn't like Rediff, i quoted the relevant poll-related stats from Indian-Express and CNN-IBN.

Coming from Bombay, which is my hometown and where i grew up with mainly Gujarati Hindus & Muslims (a propserous community in Mumbai by all stretch), i didn't need Rediff or Indian Express or CNN-IBN to say what i said. It is like you know something from the city you are raised in but still have to find links elsewhere to explain it.

Whether one likes it or not, when discussing Modi & Gujarat & votes, it is important to table all the relevant aspect.

And to be honest, in my knowledge, this is the first time EVER that anyone has referred Rediff as a "mouthpiece for Hindutva ideology". I am not sure if even Tintin agrees to this. Rediff can be accused of not being a quality news portal - but "Hindutva Ideology", well i'll keep my eyes open to see if it caters to anything like that.

I don't doubt that some muslims vote for BJP in Gujrat. It will be abnormal if they didn't. It is after all a political party, and I am sure, there are popular leaders in some constituencies who are less ideologue and actually does work beneficial to the people. I don't know what percentage of people actually belongs in that category. But, I take your word for it.

Rediff has quality. It definitely caters to the religious right a la Weekly Standard of USA, and has a overwhelming tendency to highlight news that puts muslims in a negative slant. Scroll down at the end to see the comments and posts. Full of vitriol and unashamed bigotry conveniently unattended by mods.

Beamer
December 19, 2007, 10:23 PM
ahh just when the thread was coming to a peaceful conclusion...

90,000?? reading a lot of DAWN lately? and even if that was true, I bet out of 90,000 'muslims' 89,900 would be terrorists shipped overnight from POK. It's funny how you claim to be a neutral yet you never mention the 'muslim' terrorists and their victims.

Out of curiousity...what do you think of hundreds of 'muslims' being slaughtered by their own 'muslim' brothers in pakistan and iraq? yesterday they discoverd another mass grave with victims shot in the head for being shia..what's your take on that? <<< "shift of focus"

Until you came to deny it a natural death..

No. Don't read Dawn. Your bet of 100 innocent dead out of 90,000 is probably wrong. Not surprised that you would think way. See, people like you will even deny the innocent of a peaceful death.

I denounce every muslim terrorist and all terrorists. Just wasn't the thread for it.

Yes, Its terrible what's been happening in Iraq, Pakistan, India and elsewhere. No point sugarcoating it. Todays muslims have a lot of problem and they must stand in front of mirror first to acknowledge and recognize the problem.

See, not that difficult. I am an equal opportunity religio-politics basher. Nothing good ever came out of it.

Now, stop wasting my time..

al Furqaan
December 19, 2007, 10:58 PM
I don't doubt that some muslims vote for BJP in Gujrat. It will be abnormal if they didn't. It is after all a political party, and I am sure, there are popular leaders in some constituencies who are less ideologue and actually does work beneficial to the people. I don't know what percentage of people actually belongs in that category. But, I take your word for it.


DJ, this is a poor way to show that the BJP is good or has good intentions towards muslims. there were some Jewish rabbis at Mahmoud Ahmedinijad's holocaust denial conference. but it doesn't mean that holocaust deniers are friends to jews or that ahmedinijad's regime is philo-semetic.

there are black republicans (remember the Banks' from fresh prince and Alan Keyes). there are jewish anti-semites (chomsky) but this doesn't mean that that extreme minority's decisions are indicative of the group as a whole.

and this is to say nothing of counfounding factors which beamer mentioned in his post. there are always confounding factors.

bharat
December 19, 2007, 11:33 PM
DJ, this is a poor way to show that the BJP is good or has good intentions towards muslims. there were some Jewish rabbis at Mahmoud Ahmedinijad's holocaust denial conference. but it doesn't mean that holocaust deniers are friends to jews or that ahmedinijad's regime is philo-semetic.

there are black republicans (remember the Banks' from fresh prince and Alan Keyes). there are jewish anti-semites (chomsky) but this doesn't mean that that extreme minority's decisions are indicative of the group as a whole.

and this is to say nothing of counfounding factors which beamer mentioned in his post. there are always confounding factors.

With the cost of dragging myself into this post (which I have been avoiding) ..I would want to point out in here that there is a good chunk of Muslims (predominantly shia..) who are supporters of the BJP.Infact a cursory look at any house (shia majority)in the old city of UP and to some extent Hyd ,you would see photographs of Atal (BJP leader) along with that of a Shia Ayatullah.

as a last note ..India is a paradox ..

it is.It has (had) a Muslim as a President, the hearthrob(s) of Bollywood,richest man on one hand and Gujarat riots one hand (again I agree with the comparison of nero with Modi rather than that of Hitler )

Also it has one of the biggest refugee problem ..refugees not from a different country but rather Hindhus (in a Hindhu majority country) from kashmir pushed down to live in shants in Delhi.

Yes, India is a Paradox.But atleast it gives its minories a chance.(sometimes at the cost of the majority ..but that is India for which I am proud) .A chance, by not being a theocracy...unfortunately not granted by other country around India including BD (which is a suprise ..especially considering the principles on which BD was formed)

DJ Sahastra
December 19, 2007, 11:51 PM
I don't doubt that some muslims vote for BJP in Gujrat. It will be abnormal if they didn't. It is after all a political party, and I am sure, there are popular leaders in some constituencies who are less ideologue and actually does work beneficial to the people. I don't know what percentage of people actually belongs in that category. But, I take your word for it.

Beamer,

Thank you for taking my word but i was not talking the "normal small percentage of vote" that any party can get from any cross-section of it's voters based on the image of local candidate etc.

The results of vote pattern by Muslims conducted by National Election Survey (NES) for 2004 elections in which BJP lost indicated that BJP & it's allies got 11% Muslim votes. The key-word here is BJP & it's allies - many of BJP allies like JD(U), Telugu Desam, AAIDMK etc had good standing amongs Muslim voters and BJP (or rather the NDA) benefitted.

In states like UP & Delhi where BJP fought most of the seats alone, the percentage of vote of Muslims for BJP dropped to 2% & 3% respectively. I repeat - 2% vote for BJP in UP & 3% vote for BJP in Delhi. In state like J&K and Kerala where BJP had no allies, it secured 1% and 2% vote respectively.

Those 1%, 2% and 3% (and they translate to big numbers) are your "normal" muslim votes for BJP which is because of good candidate image and all the factors that you mentioned.

Guess what percentage of Muslim votes BJP polled in Gujarat - 20%. Mind you, it fought the elections in Gujarat alone - no partners unlike in Southern states or states where it had allies with good standing in Muslim community.

20% of Muslim votes for BJP in Gujarat is NOT normal 2% or 3% votes that BJP gets in UP & Delhi are.

Al Furqaan,

Read my response above.

Rediff has quality. It definitely caters to the religious right a la Weekly Standard of USA, and has a overwhelming tendency to highlight news that puts muslims in a negative slant. Scroll down at the end to see the comments and posts. Full of vitriol and unashamed bigotry conveniently unattended by mods.

If you are making your assumption about Rediff's leaning because of comments at the bottom, then it is misleading. Rediff comments are unmoderated or very poorly moderated so it is always a sleazy pigfight. I can't recall when was the last time i bothered reading "readers comments".

Anyways, i don't want Rediff to take the focus away from what i was saying. Lets kick Rediff out.

Beamer
December 20, 2007, 12:06 AM
Last para is indeed very interesting. Are you talking about 2004 election, post Godhra? That would be even more compelling. Just wondering what the mitigating factors were? Sometimes, in face of calamity, humans have shown the tendency to adapt in difficult conditions, by actually embracing the destructive force that seeks to undermine them to ensure their survival. In other words, if voting for you, keeps my family safe, I might do it for the time being. Ha ha..just speculating. Don't count it out though.

DJ Sahastra
December 20, 2007, 12:23 AM
Last para is indeed very interesting. Are you talking about 2004 election, post Godhra? That would be even more compelling. Just wondering what the mitigating factors were? Sometimes, in face of calamity, humans have shown the tendency to adapt in difficult conditions, by actually embracing the destructive force that seeks to undermine them to ensure their survival. In other words, if voting for you, keeps my family safe, I might do it for the time being. Ha ha..just speculating. Don't count it out though.

Beamer,

The truth is, Gujarat riots cost BJP a lot of Muslim votes. In 2004 elections, Congress got 66% of Muslim votes in Gujarat compared to 20% of the BJP. If not for the riots, those 20% would've been much higher and congress's kitty even leaner.

Conversely, post 2002 riots, While BJP lost significant Muslim votes in Gujarat, it made up for it with siginificant % gains in Hindu votes in Gujarat than it would have normally done. The general apathy and the manner in which mainstream media conducted itself vis-a-vis aggrieved Gujarati Hindus indeed amalgamated their votes - top bosses in Congress still regret not saying rights things at the right time.

Beamer
December 20, 2007, 12:28 AM
[quote=DJ Sahastra;578704]Beamer,

Thank you for taking my word but i was not talking the "normal small percentage of vote" that any party can get from any cross-section of it's voters based on the image of local candidate etc.

The results of vote pattern by Muslims conducted by National Election Survey (NES) for 2004 elections in which BJP lost indicated that BJP & it's allies got 11% Muslim votes. The key-word here is BJP & it's allies - many of BJP allies like JD(U), Telugu Desam, AAIDMK etc had good standing amongs Muslim voters and BJP (or rather the NDA) benefitted.

In states like UP & Delhi where BJP fought most of the seats alone, the percentage of vote of Muslims for BJP dropped to 2% & 3% respectively. I repeat - 2% vote for BJP in UP & 3% vote for BJP in Delhi. In state like J&K and Kerala where BJP had no allies, it secured 1% and 2% vote respectively.

Those 1%, 2% and 3% (and they translate to big numbers) are your "normal" muslim votes for BJP which is because of good candidate image and all the factors that you mentioned.

Guess what percentage of Muslim votes BJP polled in Gujarat - 20%. Mind you, it fought the elections in Gujarat alone - no partners unlike in Southern states or states where it had allies with good standing in Muslim community.

20% of Muslim votes for BJP in Gujarat is NOT normal 2% or 3% votes that BJP gets in UP & Delhi are.

Al Furqaan,

Read my response above.



If you are making your assumption about Rediff's leaning because of comments at the bottom, then it is misleading. Rediff comments are unmoderated or very poorly moderated so it is always a sleazy pigfight. I can't recall when was the last time i bothered reading "readers comments".

Not at all. I have come to that conclusion after years of reading their articles. It is biased, but of good quality. The ultra nationalistic feel good stories aside, it takes careful decision to put articles that puts muslims in negative light. Bangladesh bashing is another matter and that domain is extended to even cricket. Posters just get hooked on the bait. So, I got ticked off to see you using rediff to justify Modi, for right or wrong. I will be alarmed as well if "dainik shangram"- jamati mouthpiece, starts interviewing hindus singing praise of JI. I will take it with a pich of salt. Agree, kick rediff out and we have a good discussion. I wish same can be dealt to mohsin and ganguly da. But, I have no power on such things...

Beamer
December 20, 2007, 12:47 AM
DJ

So, 2004 saw an increase in muslim votes for BJP compared to 2002, some two years removed from the riots. Then, the natural progression of things should indicate that 2007 would be even better, in terms of muslim percentages of vote, since that riot is farther more in distant memory. Then, why is the compulsion right now to claim, "they deserved it"- Modi, when the vote back would have increased perhaps more than 20%? Could it be that increase in muslim votes equals to decrease in hindu votes?
If that is the case, what does it say about present day hindu Gujrati's who had once proud Gandhian tradition? If you have to pit one community against other to appeal for votes, then, to me, it is a sad state of affairs. To be fair, our BNP does it to certain extent as well. Though they don't directly pit hindus against muslims, they rachet up the rhetoric against Awami League by constantly preaching that voting for them, means surrendering to India, read- hindus. I find both to be pathetic.

DJ Sahastra
December 20, 2007, 12:50 AM
Are you sure? I hate to admit, but I am sophisticated when coming into discussions and posting opinions, most rarely do get taken seriously, but anywayz thanks:).

:)

I demand that you be read with the seriousness that you deserve :).

Beamer
December 20, 2007, 12:53 AM
:)

I demand that you be read with the seriousness that you deserve :).

oi chele tar islami jor ( fever ) khub beshi/:)

DJ Sahastra
December 20, 2007, 01:16 AM
DJ

So, 2004 saw an increase in muslim votes for BJP compared to 2002, some two years removed from the riots. Then, the natural progression of things should indicate that 2007 would be even better, in terms of muslim percentages of vote, since that riot is farther more in distant memory. Then, why is the compulsion right now to claim, "they deserved it"- Modi, when the vote back would have increased perhaps more than 20%? Could it be that increase in muslim votes equals to decrease in hindu votes?
If that is the case, what does it say about present day hindu Gujrati's who had once proud Gandhian tradition? If you have to pit one community against other to appeal for votes, then, to me, it is a sad state of affairs. To be fair, our BNP does it to certain extent as well. Though they don't directly pit hindus against muslims, they rachet up the rhetoric against Awami League by constantly preaching that voting for them, means surrendering to India, read- hindus. I find both to be pathetic.

Beamer,

Dec-2002 were State Assembly elections whereas 2004 were Indian Parliament (National) elections. I am trying to get the corresponding numbers for Dec-2002 and it has me curious too given that Dec-2002 elections were held in the aftermath of riots.

Added Later:

I have been unable to get any numbers (vote %) for dec-2002 elections vis-a-vis gujrati muslims. I would be glad if anyone can dig it from any source.

The exit polls for 2007 Assembly elections predict 13% Muslims in Gujarat to vote for BJP with preference among young and educated Muslims to vote for BJP than the old and uneducated ones.

As for Gujrati Hindus, as i mentioned earlier, they stayed with Modi and supported him for one simple reason - no other party thought it fit to speak for them during the time when they were living in as much fear and insecurity as their Muslim counterpart. Modi's victory was more a failure of his opponents in that crucial moment of reckoning - a failure which they are yet to rectify.

al Furqaan
December 20, 2007, 01:16 AM
With the cost of dragging myself into this post (which I have been avoiding) ..I would want to point out in here that there is a good chunk of Muslims (predominantly shia..) who are supporters of the BJP.Infact a cursory look at any house (shia majority)in the old city of UP and to some extent Hyd ,you would see photographs of Atal (BJP leader) along with that of a Shia Ayatullah.

question: how do you know how many shia houses have pictures of atal? i find it hard to imagine that you have walked into the living room of a great many muslim houses throughout india. it would take a lifetime just to tour 1 per cent of all muslim households in india.

i find this argument as untenable as one where i say that i have found a great many bangladeshi hindus hanging pictures of jinnah or sher e bangla on their walls. lets suppose, in the highly unlikely case, that that is true. how would i know? i've never been inside their house to find out...

DJ, i highly doubt that 20% number...but even if its true, it means that 80 % did not vote for BJP (or didn't vote at all). 80 % is a pretty good indicator of a whole.

DJ Sahastra
December 20, 2007, 01:21 AM
oi chele tar islami jor ( fever ) khub beshi/:)

Beamer,

As much as his posts may spund like coming from some Islamist, my gut feel is he is a kid who is posting his simplistic views. Reminds me of my kid-brother who blabbers stuff that he has absolutely no clue about and are often not meant to be taken seriously.

It would be sad if he is used as a punching bag - just my thoughts.

RazabQ
December 20, 2007, 05:20 AM
Do i denounce Modi for what he is, Absolutely. But that was not what anyone was talking about. Instead, the initial posts focussed on beating up Indians for the plight of Muslims.See I would have stopped paying attention to this thread from a non-mod perspective a long time ago if you had stated that bolded part as your opener.

In fact, to be sure, I just re-read your first post here. At the very first mention of Modi in this thread (by me) your response wasn't: "hey i personally detest this guy, but there are some complex reasons why he gets votes". Rather it was merely "there are some complex reasons why he gets votes". You can see why Beamer and I would jump all over you now don't you?

Moshin
December 20, 2007, 08:12 AM
oi chele tar islami jor ( fever ) khub beshi/:)
ei ki bolen, amar islam fever khub beshi? no no i aint a very
extreme type of person with islam, i just think having a bit
of religion is quite good, so knowledge is balanced.

Moshin
December 20, 2007, 08:26 AM
out of curiousity, what did you do to convert that boy? candies? lolipops? or just money like christian missionaries....

also do you have a chart of no. of people you convert? What's your target? What do you think of islamic britain? if you had the chance to convert everyone in britain, would u do it if so how? is there a 'how to convert' guide or are you planning on authoring one?
If I had the oppurtunity of making people Christians into Muslims then
I will have strategic plan, I will have to get many brothers who are willing
to take the challenge of converting people, but a lot of knowledge is needed
before going out there, you'll see many of them know nothing, so i'll have
to make them know more about the religion, and practice them on how
to speak in public, in many busy streets of London there are christians who
just sing and sing and say jesus this jesus that, but that will never work
in this type of society into conversion

there's so many people here who dont have a religion but yet, they celebrate christmas, it just proper madness, and our faith in religion is much stronger than any other in the world right now, so to convert like over 50 million people in Britain, is like highly unlikely, but my minimum target is like atleast 1000 people:), thats enough aint it? But the responce will be quite low after 9/11 and July 2006, i dont think people will be willing to come and join Islam:-|.
By the way the boy was very intellegent, he understood very well,
even the mother wanted to convert, but the husband well very strict.

DJ Sahastra
December 20, 2007, 11:07 AM
See I would have stopped paying attention to this thread from a non-mod perspective a long time ago if you had stated that bolded part as your opener.

In fact, to be sure, I just re-read your first post here. At the very first mention of Modi in this thread (by me) your response wasn't: "hey i personally detest this guy, but there are some complex reasons why he gets votes". Rather it was merely "there are some complex reasons why he gets votes". You can see why Beamer and I would jump all over you now don't you?

RazabQ,

I didn't feel this thread was anything about my approval or disapproval of Modi nor did i look at your direct question to me that way. My response to you was contextual - i still don't understand why it was important for me to start my response with a disclaimer. it didn't occur to me right until your last post that you were looking at my personal opinions of Modi, which is of absolute zero importance when discussing why he won and may win the gujarat elections.

I don't approve of Modi. And i don't approve of Gujarat riots being referred as Pogrom or Holocaust or Genocide or Gujarat being equated as Nazi-Germany with Modi as Hitler.

Fazal
December 20, 2007, 11:38 AM
I doubt they are any way realted to each other. Just see the picture below

http://mangalorean.com/images/newstemp13/20071025gujarath5.jpg
Modi

http://www.sahasraadhipura.org/img/Pak_Har_ktp_small.jpg
Shahastra

Do you see any similarities?

DJ Sahastra
December 20, 2007, 11:54 AM
Fazal Mamu,

You really need a break!!!

Here, read my classic "Dayal Baba"

http://www.xanga.com/IndusCreed

Scroll to "From DJ Tiesto To Dayal Baba" and chill out.

"Nijer kola age ano
Keno porer kola dhore tano?
Sheshe kola eto sulle keno ebar bujae deo
Shob kola khaowa shesh hole ebar nijer kola khao"

Btw, I am much more at home in my Pabna residence than in Javanese Temple Complex :).

Fazal
December 20, 2007, 11:56 AM
Fazal Mamu,

You really need a break!!!

Here, read my classic "Dayal Baba"

http://www.xanga.com/IndusCreed

Scroll to "From DJ Tiesto To Dayal Baba" and chill out. I am much more at home in my Pabna residence than in Javanese Temple Complex :).

Ah ha.... then this is the real YOU. Now I see the similarities. So how you are related to Modi?:-D

DJ Sahastra
December 20, 2007, 12:02 PM
Ah ha.... then this is the real YOU. Now I see the similarities. So how you are related to Modi?:-D


Same Race, Same IQ and we both wear glasses :-D.

Ganguly da
December 20, 2007, 10:40 PM
If I had the oppurtunity of making people Christians into Muslims then
I will have strategic plan, I will have to get many brothers who are willing
to take the challenge of converting people, but a lot of knowledge is needed
before going out there, you'll see many of them know nothing, so i'll have
to make them know more about the religion, and practice them on how
to speak in public, in many busy streets of London there are christians who
just sing and sing and say jesus this jesus that, but that will never work
in this type of society into conversion

there's so many people here who dont have a religion but yet, they celebrate christmas, it just proper madness, and our faith in religion is much stronger than any other in the world right now, so to convert like over 50 million people in Britain, is like highly unlikely, but my minimum target is like atleast 1000 people:), thats enough aint it? But the responce will be quite low after 9/11 and July 2006, i dont think people will be willing to come and join Islam:-|.
By the way the boy was very intellegent, he understood very well,
even the mother wanted to convert, but the husband well very strict.

LOL...:lol:

RazabQ
December 25, 2007, 05:46 AM
Anybody seen the election results there?

One World
December 25, 2007, 08:36 AM
In fact many Indians I know resent the fact that many of his sympathisers are NRI's who unfortunately tend to have a skewed and often at times extreme right wing views coupled with free enterprise.

He is a downright fascist so much so that even within the BJP he scares the daylight out of them.

It is clear that a small bunch of socio-economically tyrant group is behind him regardless of religion to make the most out of political advances even with the cost of communal inharmony and the blood sucking, black marketeering low class BD politicians seem to possess better values not to influence religious riots to ensure a seat in the parliament. E-)

al Furqaan
December 25, 2007, 02:19 PM
Anybody seen the election results there?

yea...sad results. modi got re-elected. oh well, what else can you expect?

i actually checked out BJP's website. it was actually kinda funny. the BJP claimed that it was not theocratic party, and according to their site, thats actually true. they never make any mention of implementing hindu laws or anything.

however one glance at the inordinately high number of times the words "muslim", "islam" and 'islamic" appear on the page of a hindu group is indication enough of their ulterior intentions. the particular page i read was nothing but a vitriolic rant scheme of incitement, if ever there was one.

it would have been understandable, and even justified, if it was a movement lashing out at the Mughal rulership. but seeing as how thats a good 200 years old, its nothing short of incitement against an already disenfranchised muslim community.

DJ Sahastra
December 25, 2007, 02:23 PM
"an already disenfranchised muslim community"

Care to explain in what way are muslims "disenfranchised" ?

al Furqaan
December 25, 2007, 02:41 PM
"an already disenfranchised muslim community"

Care to explain in what way are muslims "disenfranchised" ?

the way minorities are disenfranchised in all societies...

DJ Sahastra
December 25, 2007, 04:43 PM
the way minorities are disenfranchised in all societies...

Al Furqaan,

Unless you are confusing overall prosperity or inter-human conflicts (based on caste, religion etc) with disenfranchisement, i don't understand your statement "the way minorities are disenfranchised in all societies".

Atleast, it doesn't hold true for progressive democracies (India, US, UK and i am sure Bangladesh too unless there is anything that debars the minorities from holding a particular position or enjoying a particular privilege).

Saying "Muslims in India are disenfranchised" is a blatant insult - Muslims in India have hold posts all the way upto the President, including Many Chief Ministers. Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Kerala have all seen Minority Chief Ministers - a rare occurence for any democracy. Considering Maharashtra had less than 10% Muslim community, it gets even more significant.

al Furqaan
December 25, 2007, 08:59 PM
Unless you are confusing overall prosperity or inter-human conflicts (based on caste, religion etc) with disenfranchisement, i don't understand your statement "the way minorities are disenfranchised in all societies".

yes, thats pretty much what i meant. holding public office by a few token members of a minority community doesn't mean much at all, especially when that member severs all ties with the cultural ties that make him one of that minority group. iran has jewish MPs, yet its quite obvious that ahmedinajad is a raving anti-semite.

if and when a minority can stand up and be elected as a minority, than that society truly is a progressive one. to date, thats been extremely rare everywhere even in the "bastions of liberal thought". only example i can cite is catholic JFK winning the presidency in protestant america. that too by mentioning that he was a candidate "who just happened to be catholic".

no society is willing to let an outsider in and be their leader, not unless the outsider sheds all characteristics which differentiate him from the insider. ever stop to wonder if kalam would be president had he openly read the quran every night instead of the gita?

bharat
December 26, 2007, 10:06 AM
yes, thats pretty much what i meant. holding public office by a few token members of a minority community doesn't mean much at all, especially when that member severs all ties with the cultural ties that make him one of that minority group. iran has jewish MPs, yet its quite obvious that ahmedinajad is a raving anti-semite.

if and when a minority can stand up and be elected as a minority, than that society truly is a progressive one. to date, thats been extremely rare everywhere even in the "bastions of liberal thought". only example i can cite is catholic JFK winning the presidency in protestant america. that too by mentioning that he was a candidate "who just happened to be catholic".

no society is willing to let an outsider in and be their leader, not unless the outsider sheds all characteristics which differentiate him from the insider. ever stop to wonder if kalam would be president had he openly read the quran every night instead of the gita?

Well, Al Fraruqa India had two other Muslim Presidents , one Dr.Zakir Husain how is a Muslim scholar ( a cursory net search would indicate that he was far from being the 'insider') and Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad.Hope that answers your question about Kalam.

Also, the present P.M Mr.Singh did not shun his kirpan nor his religion to be an 'insider'.

The present Chief Minster of my state is a devout Christian ...

I could go on and on with examples.

If your parameters of being a progressive state are applied, India would win hands down, leave alone its theocratic neighbors , it would US and the EU to shame.

I know India has to improve on this front, but we have only a few secular countries to catch up with.Our constitution (being a secular) has provided the foundations for the same..we will get there.(As my mulim friend would say ..Insha Allah)

Moshin
December 26, 2007, 11:53 AM
yea...sad results. modi got re-elected. oh well, what else can you expect?

i actually checked out BJP's website. it was actually kinda funny. the BJP claimed that it was not theocratic party, and according to their site, thats actually true. they never make any mention of implementing hindu laws or anything.

however one glance at the inordinately high number of times the words "muslim", "islam" and 'islamic" appear on the page of a hindu group is indication enough of their ulterior intentions. the particular page i read was nothing but a vitriolic rant scheme of incitement, if ever there was one.

it would have been understandable, and even justified, if it was a movement lashing out at the Mughal rulership. but seeing as how thats a good 200 years old, its nothing short of incitement against an already disenfranchised muslim community.
We all know Modi is known as the, Merchant of Death, but I dont think this is bad for the people of Gujarat, which includes the Muslims in the state, because Modi is known for building the economy of Gujarat, for example the state's economy has been growing over 10% a year in his rule, which is much higher than the national average of India, and many of the people in Gujarat now feel wealthier than ever living under the government of BJP in the state. So I dont think it is really bad news at all I think if he is doing a good thing, and most of the people in the Muslim community have favoured as Modi as the State leader of which I have read, but the victory of Modi I dont really know if it is injustice or not, can someone care to explain:callme:

al Furqaan
December 26, 2007, 03:02 PM
Well, Al Fraruqa India had two other Muslim Presidents , one Dr.Zakir Husain how is a Muslim scholar ( a cursory net search would indicate that he was far from being the 'insider') and Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad.Hope that answers your question about Kalam.

Also, the present P.M Mr.Singh did not shun his kirpan nor his religion to be an 'insider'.

The present Chief Minster of my state is a devout Christian ...

I could go on and on with examples.

If your parameters of being a progressive state are applied, India would win hands down, leave alone its theocratic neighbors , it would US and the EU to shame.

I know India has to improve on this front, but we have only a few secular countries to catch up with.Our constitution (being a secular) has provided the foundations for the same..we will get there.(As my mulim friend would say ..Insha Allah)

alright Borat,

1) the post of president in a parliamentary system is almost exclusively ceremonial. he is a de facto "leader" which is why we hear so much about prime ministers.

2) you might be right about zakir hussain, but again he was a de facto leader, had he been the prime minister u would have had a point. even 'theocratic' bangladesh has hindu leaders in the awami league

3) since when does a few token "leaders" represent empowerment of the whole?

4) and lets not forget some of these "leaders" were themselves the victims of the proverbial lynch mob (muslim MP got torched himself). this probably doesn't even happen in Iran with the iranian jewish MPs.

5) PM manmohan is a sikh and since sikhism is an indian religion, he already counts as an insider. this is doubly true considering that some elements of hinduism consider sikhism, jainism, and buddhism as sects within greater hinduisim and not as seperate religions given that nanak, mahavira, and buddha were all hindus born into hindu families as well as the shared characteristics of the dharmic religions. so many hindus wouldn't consider a sikh or a jain or a buddhist as an outsider.

6) you mention the christian chief minister of your state, but what about the christian prime minister candidateof your country, sonia gandhi? would she have won? did she eventually become prime minister? could she have? and if she could, why didn't she?

al Furqaan
December 26, 2007, 03:05 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7160164.stm

we generally don't have this in BD

bharat
December 26, 2007, 04:03 PM
Al Furqaan ( I got it right this time ..not intended )

My above post was in response to your question about Kalam.Did my above post answer your question about the Indian people accepting a Quran reading Muslim as their President?

Bengaliprince176
December 26, 2007, 04:08 PM
alright Borat,

1) the post of president in a parliamentary system is almost exclusively ceremonial. he is a de facto "leader" which is why we hear so much about prime ministers.

2) you might be right about zakir hussain, but again he was a de facto leader, had he been the prime minister u would have had a point. even 'theocratic' bangladesh has hindu leaders in the awami league

3) since when does a few token "leaders" represent empowerment of the whole?

4) and lets not forget some of these "leaders" were themselves the victims of the proverbial lynch mob (muslim MP got torched himself). this probably doesn't even happen in Iran with the iranian jewish MPs.

5) PM manmohan is a sikh and since sikhism is an indian religion, he already counts as an insider. this is doubly true considering that some elements of hinduism consider sikhism, jainism, and buddhism as sects within greater hinduisim and not as seperate religions given that nanak, mahavira, and buddha were all hindus born into hindu families as well as the shared characteristics of the dharmic religions. so many hindus wouldn't consider a sikh or a jain or a buddhist as an outsider.

6) you mention the christian chief minister of your state, but what about the christian prime minister candidateof your country, sonia gandhi? would she have won? did she eventually become prime minister? could she have? and if she could, why didn't she?


lol ive had enuf of this thread, dont want to get too involved now, but SOnia Gandhi was rejected quie extremely and unnessacrily becoz she was Italian, not because she was Christian, even though its beluved in India that she pretty much decides for Manmohan Singh when making decisions

al Furqaan
December 26, 2007, 05:08 PM
Al Furqaan ( I got it right this time ..not intended )

My above post was in response to your question about Kalam.Did my above post answer your question about the Indian people accepting a Quran reading Muslim as their President?

it did, but what about the post of president itself? is it really such an important position to hold? and if so many muslims have been president why not PM? because there is a real and true difference between the positions.

many US states have black governors. heck we've had 2 black Sectretary of States. but we won't have a black, or brown, or yellow president until the white population becomes the minority.

btw, i was wondering where u got fruraqa from, lol. farraka i could understand, but frurqua...hehe

and you still got it wrong, the first 'a' is lower case :d

BanCricFan
December 26, 2007, 05:30 PM
yes, thats pretty much what i meant. holding public office by a few token members of a minority community doesn't mean much at all, especially when that member severs all ties with the cultural ties that make him one of that minority group. iran has jewish MPs, yet its quite obvious that ahmedinajad is a raving anti-semite.


Al, anti-israel/anti-zionism doesn't make one a raving anti-semite! I boycott all the Israeli produce as much as I can and am totally against the state of Israel and its zionist policies. I have no problems with the ordinary jewish folks. I know at least four jews whom I consider to be friends. Obviously, they are liberals and interestingly, two of them are against Israel/zionism!

Back to the topic...

DJ Sahastra
December 26, 2007, 11:49 PM
Al Furqaan,

One thing i have noticed is that you have already convinced yourself about certain notions and you are merely going in circles.

First, you want to prove that it was possible for a Muslim to become a President, it was because he was "non-practicing" kind. When someone shows you the example to the contrary, instead of accepting and withdrawing that part of your comment, you throw a new gauntlet "Oh, But President is for the namesake only and not an executive head".

When someone gives you the example of CMs, who are the executive head of the state the same way as PM is for the country, you carefully ignore/avoid it. And we have had both Muslim and Christian CMs (mind you, Christians are less than 5%). And CMs are the executive heads of the state - atleast you can't accuse them of being "token" posts, "token" presence etc.

When someone gives you the example of a minority Sikh PM in our country, you want to slip it under the rugs with "Oh, But Sikhism is regarded as a part of Hinduism".

All Indians (Media included) know that for all practical purpose, the current executive powers are all vested in Sonia Gandhi (and people had voted her party to power, despite her national and religious background). If she couldn't become a PM, it is because of her origins and her reluctance to surrender her Italian Passport for quite a many year, and the constitutional difficulties at letting a foreigner become the PM of a country.

But then, for all her religious credentials, Sonia did get people's votes and was a PM candidate bar her eligibility. That couldn't satisfy you either.

You want to push on how you have few Hindu leaders in AL, well, guess what, we have MANY muslims leaders in Congress, Janata Dal, Samajwadi Party and fractionwise, and at all level, and far exceed your "token presence" critera by any barometer that you may have. They will outweigh whatever number of elected Hindu MPs you have in your country proportionately or otherwise - we both know. A few Hindu leaders in AL don't compare to our Minority CMs or Presidents - they only compare to a few muslim leaders in our major political parties and even that leaves MANY muslim leaders without their corresponding equivalence. So please spare me the BD example.

If we have a Muslim leader who displays capabilities needed to get himself elected as the PM of the country, he will. Even if he displays 3/4th the capability of a corresponding Hindu leader, he will still win cos that is how our politics is. Not that it matters but Priyanka Gandhi, Sonia's daughter and already married to a christian is already the next PM in line, if Congress can win again.

Electrequiem
December 27, 2007, 12:19 AM
Although India's secularity (formally, at least) is more vast than Bangladesh, I've always felt that inter-religious skirmishes and/or differences in India are much more inflamed than in Bangladesh.

One World
December 27, 2007, 12:31 AM
Although India's secularity (formally, at least) is more vast than Bangladesh, I've always felt that inter-religious skirmishes and/or differences in India are much more inflamed than in Bangladesh.

Its not only religion, even genealogical diversity and hereditary introduction always gets the priority over post modernized antagonism in modern India. Its probably because the whole Indian culture is based on classified social system that goes beyond ancient civilization. The truth is India while politically is a complete paradox socially they are utterly succesful. Probably because they were able to tame the low caste to their minimized ratio of job opportunities or they were able to stop the turban people to fight for their own country or they were able to divert the Tamil seggregation from main land to Srilanka or they were able to sleep tight keeping eyes closed about the seven sisters or they really do not care to get a solution about Kashmir or they do not care how many BD people died on the border during shooting practice of BSF.

Whatever it is it itself is a political wonder! India's strong foreign policy surpasses all its internal weaknesses and feeble links to keep its economy running and make it prosper.

About this thread what I find most members are beating around the bush and discussions are plopping around the surface a lot.

al Furqaan
December 27, 2007, 01:29 AM
First, you want to prove that it was possible for a Muslim to become a President, it was because he was "non-practicing" kind. When someone shows you the example to the contrary, instead of accepting and withdrawing that part of your comment, you throw a new gauntlet "Oh, But President is for the namesake only and not an executive head".

thats true. i threw the gauntlet. however, that in no way shape or form negates the veracity of said gauntlet.

When someone gives you the example of CMs, who are the executive head of the state the same way as PM is for the country, you carefully ignore/avoid it. And we have had both Muslim and Christian CMs (mind you, Christians are less than 5%). And CMs are the executive heads of the state - atleast you can't accuse them of being "token" posts, "token" presence etc.

it is a token post. if there are 10 people in a room and one of them is treated well representatively, its a token gesture. of course i don't expect that most or all minorities get polictical posts; thats ridiculous. but i do expect them not to be butchered in communal riots. having a muslim CM in some far away state means nothing to a person killed in say gujurat.

All Indians (Media included) know that for all practical purpose, the current executive powers are all vested in Sonia Gandhi (and people had voted her party to power, despite her national and religious background). If she couldn't become a PM, it is because of her origins and her reluctance to surrender her Italian Passport for quite a many year, and the constitutional difficulties at letting a foreigner become the PM of a country.

But then, for all her religious credentials, Sonia did get people's votes and was a PM candidate bar her eligibility. That couldn't satisfy you either.

valid points. and i will concede that you are right here.

You want to push on how you have few Hindu leaders in AL, well, guess what, we have MANY muslims leaders in Congress, Janata Dal, Samajwadi Party and fractionwise, and at all level, and far exceed your "token presence" critera by any barometer that you may have. They will outweigh whatever number of elected Hindu MPs you have in your country proportionately or otherwise - we both know. A few Hindu leaders in AL don't compare to our Minority CMs or Presidents - they only compare to a few muslim leaders in our major political parties and even that leaves MANY muslim leaders without their corresponding equivalence. So please spare me the BD example.

If we have a Muslim leader who displays capabilities needed to get himself elected as the PM of the country, he will. Even if he displays 3/4th the capability of a corresponding Hindu leader, he will still win cos that is how our politics is. Not that it matters but Priyanka Gandhi, Sonia's daughter and already married to a christian is already the next PM in line, if Congress can win again.

thats true. however, i doubt what few hindu leaders we have in BD would get gassed and torched during a riot - of which we have far fewer than India or Pakistan.

indian muslims are far ahead of minorities in BD/PAK on many key criteria, however that doesn't negate the fact that some or many of their lives are resting in a precarious balance. this is doubly true of pakistan, but simply not true of bangladesh.

if the choice came between having a token muslim leader in the society in which i lived or the saftey and well being of me and my family, I would probably choose the latter.