02-08-2006, 06:11 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->besides, if bombay presidency, punjab, oudh et al, can coume with some sort of counter missionary movement, then why cant other states?? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if other states can come up with resistance against Islamic invaders then why couldn't Bengal? or maybe you can tell us how come there was no largescale retaliation during partition in Bengal (who as per you are one of the people in India who know how to fight), even the cowardly and non martial South Indians were way ahead in retaliation (according to Pandit Sunderlal's report 200,000 Muslims got killed all over Hyderabad), even during Direct Action Day the lead for retaliation was taken by Bihari and UP Hindus in Calcutta and Sikhs, that is why Muslim authors and Bengali Hindu (p-secs) routinely try to shift the blame onto outsiders (Bihari Hindus) as the ones responsible for Direct Action Day. I will quote a Bengali himself on this:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From the next day however, that is August 18, Suhrawardyâs goons and compatriots (some of whom had nothing to do with the riots) started getting a taste of their own medicine. The lead was taken by the Hindu Kalwars (ironmongers and scrap dealers) from Bihar and U.P., who were then joined by Sikhs and Hindu Bengalis. Armed with crowbars, Kripan (the Sikh dagger), swords and other lethal weapons they set out to avenge the last two daysâ depredations. In this they showed an incredible ferocity that was not hitherto known to exist in them. As with Hindu dwellings, there was also widespread torching in Muslim areas. Suhrawardy was probably not prepared for any reprisals from Hindus whom he must have taken as followers of Gandhi, and therefore necessarily incapable of violence. The massacre of Muslims in retaliation therefore took him by complete surprise. It is primarily these reprisals that forced him to call a halt to the devilry that he had, by unspeakable abuse of state power, unleashed. Meanwhile the atrocities rolled on to the 19th, by which time the Hindus had more than evened the score. A senior Imperial Police officer told Ashok Mitra that on the 18th Suhrawardy was found sitting forlornly at the Lalbazar control room table, mumbling to himself âMy poor, innocent Muslimsâ! [31]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A Muslim view of the Killings has been recorded in Mizanur Rahamanâs book âKrishna Sholoiâ in Bangla, meaning âBlack Sixteenthâ[38]. Mizanur Rahaman is an important contemporary literary person of Dacca, and is the editor of a trimonthly publication called Mizanur Rahamaner Patrika (Mizanur Rahamanâs Magazine). His is an eyewitness account, for he was then about thirteen, and a student of class eight in Mitra Institution (Main) of Calcutta at the time, and used to live in the predominantly Hindu area of Garpar. Mizanur Rahaman cannot, by any standards, be called a particularly communal or partisan Muslim, and yet in his writing there is a constant effort to whitewash the guilt of the Muslim League in the killings. He describes a conversation between himself and some of his Hindu classmates, in which he describes the call for âDirect Actionâ to be one of a strike against the British. He describes how he was caught in a crossfire of hurled brickbats between the two communities on Raja Dinendra Street in North Calcutta, and in that state was badly hit by a stick-wielding Bihari milkman. He has tried to establish that the rioting started not after Suhrawardy's Maidan speech, but early in the morning, and Muslims were casualties from the very beginning. And he has laid the blame for the riots squarely on the Bihari community of Calcutta, absolving both Bengali Hindus and Muslims from any complicity in the process.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://bengalvoice.com/
All states can't be everything you want them to be, some like Bengal had no large scale retaliation against Muslims while the South Indian states never had strong missionary traditions partly due to the Dravidian movement (in Tamil Nadu). In other areas like North and East Lanka which are still Tamil areas there has been a civil war going on for over 20 years now and the Tamils are reduced to grinding poverty which missionary vultures are utilising, you can answer my questions about Bengal in the Bengal history thread since I don't want this thread to get sidetracked too much.
And if other states can come up with resistance against Islamic invaders then why couldn't Bengal? or maybe you can tell us how come there was no largescale retaliation during partition in Bengal (who as per you are one of the people in India who know how to fight), even the cowardly and non martial South Indians were way ahead in retaliation (according to Pandit Sunderlal's report 200,000 Muslims got killed all over Hyderabad), even during Direct Action Day the lead for retaliation was taken by Bihari and UP Hindus in Calcutta and Sikhs, that is why Muslim authors and Bengali Hindu (p-secs) routinely try to shift the blame onto outsiders (Bihari Hindus) as the ones responsible for Direct Action Day. I will quote a Bengali himself on this:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From the next day however, that is August 18, Suhrawardyâs goons and compatriots (some of whom had nothing to do with the riots) started getting a taste of their own medicine. The lead was taken by the Hindu Kalwars (ironmongers and scrap dealers) from Bihar and U.P., who were then joined by Sikhs and Hindu Bengalis. Armed with crowbars, Kripan (the Sikh dagger), swords and other lethal weapons they set out to avenge the last two daysâ depredations. In this they showed an incredible ferocity that was not hitherto known to exist in them. As with Hindu dwellings, there was also widespread torching in Muslim areas. Suhrawardy was probably not prepared for any reprisals from Hindus whom he must have taken as followers of Gandhi, and therefore necessarily incapable of violence. The massacre of Muslims in retaliation therefore took him by complete surprise. It is primarily these reprisals that forced him to call a halt to the devilry that he had, by unspeakable abuse of state power, unleashed. Meanwhile the atrocities rolled on to the 19th, by which time the Hindus had more than evened the score. A senior Imperial Police officer told Ashok Mitra that on the 18th Suhrawardy was found sitting forlornly at the Lalbazar control room table, mumbling to himself âMy poor, innocent Muslimsâ! [31]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A Muslim view of the Killings has been recorded in Mizanur Rahamanâs book âKrishna Sholoiâ in Bangla, meaning âBlack Sixteenthâ[38]. Mizanur Rahaman is an important contemporary literary person of Dacca, and is the editor of a trimonthly publication called Mizanur Rahamaner Patrika (Mizanur Rahamanâs Magazine). His is an eyewitness account, for he was then about thirteen, and a student of class eight in Mitra Institution (Main) of Calcutta at the time, and used to live in the predominantly Hindu area of Garpar. Mizanur Rahaman cannot, by any standards, be called a particularly communal or partisan Muslim, and yet in his writing there is a constant effort to whitewash the guilt of the Muslim League in the killings. He describes a conversation between himself and some of his Hindu classmates, in which he describes the call for âDirect Actionâ to be one of a strike against the British. He describes how he was caught in a crossfire of hurled brickbats between the two communities on Raja Dinendra Street in North Calcutta, and in that state was badly hit by a stick-wielding Bihari milkman. He has tried to establish that the rioting started not after Suhrawardy's Maidan speech, but early in the morning, and Muslims were casualties from the very beginning. And he has laid the blame for the riots squarely on the Bihari community of Calcutta, absolving both Bengali Hindus and Muslims from any complicity in the process.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://bengalvoice.com/
All states can't be everything you want them to be, some like Bengal had no large scale retaliation against Muslims while the South Indian states never had strong missionary traditions partly due to the Dravidian movement (in Tamil Nadu). In other areas like North and East Lanka which are still Tamil areas there has been a civil war going on for over 20 years now and the Tamils are reduced to grinding poverty which missionary vultures are utilising, you can answer my questions about Bengal in the Bengal history thread since I don't want this thread to get sidetracked too much.