08-20-2007, 03:09 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Viren+Aug 20 2007, 03:28 PM-->QUOTE(Viren @ Aug 20 2007, 03:28 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ajatshatru: Your last line is too broad a statement and certainly not true. You only have to look at people like President Abdul Kalam. Even Feroze Khan showed more spine defending India while in Pakistan than rest from majority community who were with him then. I could go on with a list here.
The problem is that some shrill voices have taken our the stage in media and movies and in name of "secularism", basic common sense has been shoved off. The goals to shove these screechers of stage and hold them accountable for their words/deeds. No point painting all with one brush. Doing so, you plan right into their hands.
[right][snapback]72259[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have heard President Kalam was raised by a Hindu Brahmin family.
It is an open secret in film industry that majority of Feroz films were financed by the underworld. Regarding Pakistan incident, you talk of 'rest from majority community'. If by rest of 'majority community' you mean Mahesh Butt, his mother is a Muslim and this man is a staunch anti-Hindu. Sometime back âButtâ even went to Assam to campaign for the Muslim party that has been primarily set up by Bangladeshi illegal immigrants.
By defending actions of certain Muslims, what makes you so sure you are not 'playing right into their hands'? Or âplaying right into handsâ of this pseudo-secular leftist lobby headed by Teestha, Arun âdhotiâ Roy, Prafool Bidwai, Shabana & gang or maybe not displaying 'Stockholm syndrome' by your posts?
You have given example of Feroz Khan. What Feroz said in Pakistan was commendable but I donât remember commenting in my last post that all Muslim are not patriotic Indians. I merely said that a âliberal Muslimâ is an oxymoron.
Also, while Muslims can definitely be patriotic, convince me that 'when push comes to shove', majority of IMs would necessarily not put their religion even before their country?
One more thing, when Jinnah started talking of two nation theory, it was MAJORITY of Muslims in states like U.P. and Bihar that backed Jinnah saying muslims cannot peacefully co-exist with Hindus so they want a seperate state. Now are you even going to whitewash history to prove Muslims are even more patriotic than the 'majority community'?
Has it occurred to you that most Muslims may think it is perfectly all right for them to put their religion even before their country and still be patriotic? Can you vouch for the fact that all Indian Muslim's idea of patriotism may be exactly similar to that of a Hindu?
And if you read Quran, the book talks of â Universal Muslim brotherhoodâ and Muslims all over the world not recognising national boundaries.
So could you point out exactly what is not true in my last post?
The problem is that some shrill voices have taken our the stage in media and movies and in name of "secularism", basic common sense has been shoved off. The goals to shove these screechers of stage and hold them accountable for their words/deeds. No point painting all with one brush. Doing so, you plan right into their hands.
[right][snapback]72259[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have heard President Kalam was raised by a Hindu Brahmin family.
It is an open secret in film industry that majority of Feroz films were financed by the underworld. Regarding Pakistan incident, you talk of 'rest from majority community'. If by rest of 'majority community' you mean Mahesh Butt, his mother is a Muslim and this man is a staunch anti-Hindu. Sometime back âButtâ even went to Assam to campaign for the Muslim party that has been primarily set up by Bangladeshi illegal immigrants.
By defending actions of certain Muslims, what makes you so sure you are not 'playing right into their hands'? Or âplaying right into handsâ of this pseudo-secular leftist lobby headed by Teestha, Arun âdhotiâ Roy, Prafool Bidwai, Shabana & gang or maybe not displaying 'Stockholm syndrome' by your posts?
You have given example of Feroz Khan. What Feroz said in Pakistan was commendable but I donât remember commenting in my last post that all Muslim are not patriotic Indians. I merely said that a âliberal Muslimâ is an oxymoron.
Also, while Muslims can definitely be patriotic, convince me that 'when push comes to shove', majority of IMs would necessarily not put their religion even before their country?
One more thing, when Jinnah started talking of two nation theory, it was MAJORITY of Muslims in states like U.P. and Bihar that backed Jinnah saying muslims cannot peacefully co-exist with Hindus so they want a seperate state. Now are you even going to whitewash history to prove Muslims are even more patriotic than the 'majority community'?
Has it occurred to you that most Muslims may think it is perfectly all right for them to put their religion even before their country and still be patriotic? Can you vouch for the fact that all Indian Muslim's idea of patriotism may be exactly similar to that of a Hindu?
And if you read Quran, the book talks of â Universal Muslim brotherhoodâ and Muslims all over the world not recognising national boundaries.
So could you point out exactly what is not true in my last post?