Radicalisation Of Indian Muslims -2

[Guest]

Others have probably read the following already, reproduced here for the benefit of Jill, nix and like-minded:
Jihad, the Arab Conquests and the Position of Non-Muslim Subjects
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->According to the Zafer Nameh, our main source of information for Tamerlane's campaigns, written at the beginning of the 15th century, Tamerlane set forth to conquer India solely to make war on the enemies of the Muslim faith. He considered the Muslim rulers of north India far too lenient towards pagans, that is to say, the Hindus. The Zafer Nameh tells us that, "The Koran emphasizes that the highest dignity to which man may attain is to wage war in person upon the enemies of the Faith. This is why the great Tamerlane was always concerned to exterminate the infidels, as much to acquire merit as from love of glory."
At Delhi under the pretext that the hundred thousand Hindu prisoners presented a grave risk to his army, Tamerlane ordered their execution in cold blood. He killed thousands, and had victory pillars built of the severed heads.  On his way out of India, he sacked Miraj, pulled down the monuments and flayed the Hindu inhabitants alive, "an act by which he fulfilled his vow to wage the Holy War."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Tamerlane also spread islamic love in the Middle-East. See the same url.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>INDIA</b>
"On the evidence of Baladhuri's account of the conquest of Sind, there were certainly massacres in the towns of Sind when the Arabs first arrived..."C.E. Bosworth

The Muslim conquest of Sind was masterminded by Hajjaj, the Governor of Iraq, and effected by his commander Muhammad b. Qasim in 712 A.D.  Qasim's instructions were to "bring destruction on the unbelievers...[and] to invite and induce the infidels to accept the true creed, and belief in the unity of God... and whoever does not submit to Islam, treat him harshly and cause injury to him till he submits."

After the capture of the port of Debal, the Muslim army took three days to slaughter the inhabitants, but thereafter Qasim is more tolerant allowing many to continue their professions and practise their religion.  This is not acceptable to Hajjaj, who, on receiving Qsaim's report of his victory, wrote back :"My dear cousin, I have received your life -augmenting letter. On its receipt my gladness and joy knew no bounds. It increased my pride and glory to the highest degree. It appears from your letter that all the rules made by you for the comfort and convenience of your men are strictly in accordance with religious law. But the way of granting pardon prescribed by the law is different from the one adopted by you, for you go on giving pardon to everybody, high or low, without any discretion between a friend and a foe. The great God says in the Koran [xlvii.4]: O True believers, when you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads.  "The above command of the Great God is a great command and must be respected and followed. You should not be so fond of showing mercy, as to nullify the virtue of the act. Henceforth grant pardon to no one of the enemy and spare none of them, or else all will consider you a weak-minded man. Concluded with compliments. Written by Nafia in the year ninety three."  Later, Hajjaj returns to the same theme: "My distinct orders are that all those who are fighting men should be assassinated, and their sons and daughters imprisoned and retained as hostages." Obedient to a fault, Qasim, on his arrival at the town of Brahminabad, "ordered all the men belonging to the military classes to be beheaded with swords. It is said that about 6000 fighting men were massacred on this occasion, some say 16000. The rest were pardoned."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><i>MAHMUD OF GHAZNI</i> (969 -The real conquest of India by the Muslims dates from the beginning of the 11th century. In 1000 A.D., the head of a Turco- Afghan dynasty, Mahmud of Ghazni first passed through India like a whirlwind, destroying, pillaging and massacring, all of which he justified by constant references to the Koranic injunctions to kill idolaters, whom he had vowed to chastise every year of his life. As Vincent Smith put it, "Mahmud was a zealous Muslim of the ferocious type then prevalent, who felt it to be a duty as well as pleasure to slay idolaters.  He was also greedy of treasure and took good care to derive a handsome profit from his holy wars."  In the course of seventeen invasions, in the words of Alberuni the scholar brought by Mahmud to India,: "Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country, and performed there wonderful exploits, by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions, and like a tale of old in the mouth of the people. Their scattered remains cherish, of course, the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims."  Mahmud began by capturing King Jaipal in the Punjab, then invaded Multan in 1004. On conquering the district of Ghur, he forcibly converted the inhabitants to Islam. Mahmud accumulated vast amounts of plunder from the Hindu temples he desecrated, such as that of Kangra. "Mathura, the holy city of Krishna, was the next victim.  'In the middle of the city there was a temple larger and finer than the rest, which can neither be described nor painted'. The Sultan [Mahmud] was of the opinion that 200 years would have been required to build it. The idols included 'five of red gold, each five yards high', with eyes formed of priceless jewels. 'The Sultan gave orders that all the temples should be burnt with naphtha and fire, and leveled with the ground.  'Thus perished works of art which must have been among the noblest monuments of ancient India." [VA Smith 207] At the battle of Somnath, the site of another celebrated Hindu temple, 50000 were killed as Mahmud assuaged his lust for booty.

Mahmud was equally ferocious with those whom he considered heretics such as Dawud of Multan. In 1010, Mahmud invaded Dawud 's kingdom and slaughtered a great number of his heretical subjects.  While Muslim historians see him as one of the glories of Islam, in reality, Mahmud was little more than an avaricious bandit undeserving of admiration.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><i>FRUZ SHAH</i>

In 1351, Firuz Shah ascended the throne and became ruler of the North of India. Though in many ways an enlightened man, when it came to religion was a bigot of the first order.  He is said to have made "the laws of the Prophet his guide."  He indulged in wholesale slave -raiding, and is said to have had 180000 slaves in his city, all of whom "became Muslims."  But, as Vincent Smith says, he could be most savage when his religious zeal was roused. He seized a number of Shias, some he executed, others he lectured, and their books he burnt.  He caused the ulama to kill a man who claimed to be the Mahdi, "and for this good action", he wrote, "I hope to receive future reward." He went to visit a village where a Hindu religious fair was being held, which was even attended by some "graceless Musalmans." He wrote: "I ordered that the leaders of these people and the promoters of this abomination should be put to death. I forbade the infliction of any severe punishment on the Hindus in general, but I destroyed their idol temples and instead thereof raised mosques."  Later a Brahman who had practised his rites in public was burnt alive. Firuz Shah was simply carrying on the tradition of the early Muslim invaders, and he sincerely believed "that he served God by treating as a capital crime the public practice of their religion by the vast majority of his subjects [i.e.Hindus]."  Firuz Shah also bribed a vast number of Hindus into embracing Islam, by exempting those who converted from the jizya or poll-tax, which was otherwise rigorously enforced, even on Firuz Shah, when due allowance is made for his surroundings and education, could not have escaped from the theory and practice of religious intolerance. It was not possible for him to rise, as Akbar did, to the conception that the ruler of Hindustan should cherish all his subjects alike, whether Muslim or Hindu, and allow every man absolute freedom, not only of conscience but of public worship. The Muslims of the fourteenth century were still dominated by the ideas current in the early days of Islam, and were convinced that the tolerance of idolatry was a sin."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Those ideas are still current, because they are fundamental doctrines of that great religion of peace: islam.
[For the section on the muslim heretic Akbar the great - see the url]
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><i>AURANGZEB  (1618-1707)</i>

Akbar's great grandson, Aurangzeb, was, in total contrast, a Muslim puritan, who wished to turn his empire into a land of orthodox Sunni Islam, ruled in accordance with the principles laid down by the early Caliphs.  Once again, we enter the world of Islamic intolerance -- temples are destroyed (during the campaigns of 1679_80, at Udaipur 123 were destroyed, at Chitor sixty-three; at Jaipur sixty-six); and non -Muslims  become second class citizens in their own country.  The imperial bigot, to use Smith's phrase, reimposed the "hated jizya, or polltax on non-Muslims, which Akbar had wisely abolished early in his reign." Aurangzeb's aim was to curb the infidels and demonstrate the "distinction between a land of Islam and a land of unbelievers."  "To most Hindus Akbar is one of the greatest of the Muslim emperors of India and Aurangzeb one of the worst; to many Muslims the opposite is the case. To an outsider there can be little doubt that Akbar's way was the right one.... Akbar disrupted the Muslim community by recognising that India is not an Islamic country: Aurangzeb disrupted India by behaving as though it were." [Gascoigne 227]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
India and beyond:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>BUDDHISM AND BUDDHISTS</b>

"Between {the years} 1000 and 1200 Buddhism disappeared from India, through the combined effects of its own weaknesses, a revived Hinduism and Mohammedan persecution" Edward Conze [117] "[Buddhism in India] declined after Moslem conquest of Sindh, A.D.  712, and finally suppressed by Moslem persecution A.D.1200 " Christmas Humphreys

"It is partly, no doubt, because of the furor islamicus that post-Gupta remains are surprisingly few in Bihar..." J.C.Harle [199]

Qutb ud din Aibak, described as "merciless and fanatical", sent his general, Muhammad Khilji, to the northern state of Bihar to continue the Muslim conquests that began in late 12th century.  Buddhism was the main religion of Bihar. In 1193,the Muslim general, considering them all idolaters, put most of the Buddhist monks to the sword, and a great library was destroyed.  "The ashes of the Buddhist sanctuaries at Sarnath near Benares still bear witness to the rage of the image-breakers. Many noble monuments of the ancient civilisation of India were irretrievably wrecked in the course of the early Muslim invasions. Those invasions were fatal to the existence of Buddhism as an organized religion in northern India, where its strength resided chiefly in Bihar and certain adjoining territories. The monks who escaped massacre fled, and were scattered over Nepal, Tibet, and the south.."

The Muslim conquests of Central Asia also put an end to its Buddhist art. As early as the 8th century, the monasteries of Kizil were destroyed by the Muslim ruler of Kashgar, and as Benjamin Rowland says, "by the tenth century only the easternmost reaches of Turkestan had escaped the rising tide of Mohammedan conquest.  "The full tragedy of these devastations is brought out by the words of Rowland: "The ravages of the Mongols, and the mortifying hand of Islam that has caused so many cultures to wither for ever, aided by the process of nature, completely stopped the life of what must for a period of centuries have been one of the regions of the earth most gifted in art and religion."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The following is not India, but ancient Persia (Iran):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>ZOROASTRIANS</b>

According to the Tarikh-i Bukhara, a history of Bukhara written in about 944 A.D., Islam had to be enforced on the reluctant inhabitants of Bukhara.  The Bukharans reverted to their original beliefs no less than four times: "The residents of Bukhara became Muslims.  But they renounced [Islam] each time the Arabs turned back. Qutayba b. Muslim made them Muslim three times, [but] they renounced [Islam ] again and became nonbelievers. The fourth time, Qutayba waged war, seized the city, and established Islam after considerable strife....They espoused Islam overtly but practiced idolatry in secret."

Many Zoroastrians were induced to convert by bribes, and later, out of economic necessity. Many of these "economic converts" were later executed for having adopted Islam to avoid paying the poll tax and land tax. In Khurasan and Bukhara, Zoroastrian fire-temples were destroyed by the Muslims, and mosques constructed on these sites.  The Tarikh-i Bukhara records that there was considerable outrage at these acts of sacrilege, and there was a concerted resistance to the spread of Islam.  One scholar sums up the situation thus: "Indeed, coexistence between Muslims and Zoroastrians was rarely peaceful, cooperation was fleeting, and conflict remained the prime form of intercommunal contact from the initial Arab conquest of Transoxiana until the late thirteenth century A.D."A similar situation existed in Khurasan: "The violent military conflicts between the forces of the Arab commander Abd Allah b. Amir and the local Iranian lords, combined later with the destruction of Zoroastrian religious institutions, produced lasting enmity between Muslims and Zoroastrians in Khurasan. "The early conquests of Zoroastrian Iran were punctuated with the usual massacres, as in Raiy. If the town put up brave resistance to the Muslims, then very few men were spared, as for example, at Sarakh, only a hundred men were granted amnesty, the women were taken into captivity; the children taken into captivity were brought up as Muslims.  At Sus a similar situation emerged - about a hundred men were pardoned, the rest killed. At Manadhir, all the men were put to the sword, and the women and children enslaved.  At the conquest of Istakhr, more than 40000 Iranians were slaughtered. The Zoroastrians suffered sporadic persecution, as their fire-temples and priests were destroyed, as for example, at Kariyan, Kumm and at Idhaj. In a deliberate act of provocation the caliph al Mutawakkil had a tree putatively planted by Zoroaster himself cut down. Sometimes the fire temples were converted into mosques.The fiscal oppression of the Zoroastrians led to a series of uprisings against the Muslims in the 8th century. We might cite the revolts led by Bihafarid between 746 and 748; the rising of Sinbadh in 755.

Forced conversions were also frequent, and the pressures for conversion often led to conflict and riots as in Shiraz in 979.To escape persecution and the forced conversions many Zoroastrians emigrated to India, where, to this day, they form a much respected minority and are known as Parsis.  Conditions for the Zoroastrians became even worse from the 17th century onwards.  In the 18th century, their numbers, to quote the Encyclopaedia of Islam (2 ed),"declined disastrously due to the combined effects of massacre, forced conversion and emigration."  By the 19th century they were living in total insecurity and poverty, and suffered increasing discrimination.  Zoroastrian merchants were liable to extra taxes; houses were frequently looted; they had to wear distinctive clothing, and were forbidden to build new houses or repair old ones.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Further examples of islamic love are to be found at the same url.

More on how islam genocided Zoroastrians: Islamic era history of Zoroastrians of Iran through political analysis and historical letters, which is a paper on The systematic genocide of Zoroastrians in post-Islamic Iran

[Bharatvarsh]

They are trying for another partition:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Open all doors to Bangladeshis
N Jamal Ansari
Illegal migration from Bangladesh is an issue that demands humane consideration. It is a matter of deep concern that the issue is being viewed and debated on communal lines. In his article, "East Pakistan-II" (October 28), Udayan Namboodiri says, "Bangladesh, a little nation, is a big headache for India."

India's refugee policy remains self-contradictory. The Tibetans have made Dharamshala their second home. Sri Lankans have been welcomed in Tamil Nadu. Chakmas have got judicial protection in Arunachal Pradesh. Interestingly, Hindus from Pakistan were given warm welcome in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.

Hindus from Bangladesh, too, can settle in India. But the migration of Muslims from that country is a "big headache" for those who are seeing the problem with tinted glasses. Saner elements of the Indian society and ruling elite must realise that our refugee policy is hostage to Right-wing politics.

Migration of people, both legal and illegal, for better economic opportunities, is a global phenomenon. The United States, too, faced similar problem from Latin Americans, particularly Mexicans. The US has liberally naturalised many illegal immigrants. But India is yet to adopt this humane approach.

Civil and police administration initiate drives to detect illegal Bangladeshi migrants. Such drives cause harassment to Indian Muslims, particularly the Bangla-speaking ones. These drives are tools to torture India's second largest religious group. The Governments of India and Bangladesh must work hard to find ways to solve this problem.

Theoretically, the rights of immigrants, irrespective of their religious tag, were ushered in by signing the International Conventions on Civil and Political Rights (1966), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the Covenant of Economic and Social Rights (1966) and the Conventions on Racism (1965) by India. But despite these protections, real legal protection evades these helpless refugees.

India is a secular democratic nation. As a major power of the region, it should take a leading role in evolving a regional convention and mechanism - as the Africans did in 1967 and the Americans in 1984. When we deal with refugees, we are dealing with helpless human beings. The issue should not be considered along religious lines. Either stop all immigration or allow all immigrants.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?m...t&counter_img=4<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This moron doesn't realise that it wasn't the Hindus or Sikhs in Pakiland or beggardesh that asked for partition but his co-religionist vermin in those 2 countries.

[agnivayu]

For the so called western lady (which I highly doubt, unless you are one of those crazy western leftists who are scared of Islam). Your race commited many harmful things against Hindus, so you cannot really be seen as objective, besides the Muslims will take over Europe pretty soon and form the republique du Euroarabia, so you won't have the spare time like today to worry about Hindus.

[shamu]

<!--QuoteBegin-Jill+Nov 3 2006, 02:26 PM-->QUOTE(Jill @ Nov 3 2006, 02:26 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Didn't Hindu kings fight each other even BEFORE islamic invasion? So what's the difference between hindus slaughtering people, and muslims doing the same? None.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, Hindu kings fought, but they had rules of war! That is why they released many defeated kings, including Alexander the Great(great because of what?, why don't you westerners say Ghengiskahn the Great who did the same things at much grander scale?), Ghory etc. Hindu kings never built fortresses before islamic invasion, where as European kings built castles, and muslim kings built fortresses because they expect others to do to them what they would do to others. Hindu wars did not harm unarmed population, they fought at specified places, and there wouldn't be wars without declaration of war.

Do you see any similarities between modern Geneva conventions and thousands of years old Hindu war guidelines? May be you should learn more about Hinduism from practicing Hindus before you pass any comments. Atleast spend some time to read Hindu translations of Indian puranas to know some of these.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Muslims and Indians </b>
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Is Sachar the new Mandal?
There is a creeping disquiet as to the manner in which the report of the Justice Rajinder Sachar committee - inquiring into the state of Muslims in Indian society, and their demographic and economic profile - has been force-fed into public debate. Selected portions of the report have been leaked. The Prime Minister has reacted to and validated these leaked reports and said that education of Muslims is the top priority of his Government. The Congress has reacted predictably by assuring the minorities of its unstinted support. Finally, taking their cue from ambiguous passages quoted from the Sachar report, familiar sections have begun to raise the demand for reservations for Muslims. The entire focus will now shift to this contentious if bogus issue. Everybody knows religion-based quotas are constitutionally untenable - so the Government will make a big song and dance about not conceding them while using the rest of the Sachar recommendations to resort to unabashed patronage in the run-up to the Uttar Pradesh election. This minorityism script is so familiar and so distressing that one wonders if the Congress has learnt anything at all from the polarised politics of the late 1980s - of how "hard secularism" is self-defeating and leads only to a Hindu backlash, inevitably even if gradually. The whole idiom of the Sachar report episode reflects certain obsolescence, a throwback to the age of the Mandal Commission and its report. In these circumstances, exactly what the (partial) implementation of a report achieves matters less than the political noise generated while announcing it. Dividing a cake kept small by an artificial scarcity is not the route to national prosperity. Neither is making strange, almost insulting comparisons of how Muslims stand vis-à-vis Dalits or the relative opportunities for Muslim and Hindu OBCs.

<b>The language the Prime Minister is using and the philosophy of the Sachar report is completely contradictory to contemporary India. </b>This is no longer a land of scarce capital or of stunted ambitions. The state no longer has a monopoly on setting the parameters of national well-being. Why just a Muslim child, any young Indian - with the drive, academic aptitude and marks - should be able to become a doctor or an engineer or get a management degree if he or she so desires. There should be an abundance of seats, and it is the duty of the state - or of a state-regulated, equal-opportunity system - to ensure that no candidate who gets admission into a technical college, for instance, misses out because his or her parents can't afford the fee. A combination of bank loans, of merit and need-based scholarships, of "special area" fellowships - designed for regions with poor educational indices - should be used to ensure that, to use a familiar phrase, "no child is left behind". Built into this is a compelling argument for an urgent expansion of seats available to students. The Government cannot do it alone, and should not do it alone. Just as the growing demand for school-level education in English is increasingly met by the private sector, higher learning too must come to be accepted as legitimate business. <b>The question of educating India - or of unleashing its entrepreneurial genius into millions of small businesses - concerns every Indian. By reducing it to a closely-held Muslim issue, Justice Sachar and the UPA are not helping India.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<b>Zakir Naik is running a terrorist training camp</b>

[Guest]

looks like we all got a punching bag and jumped on to that opportunity. and while in all this Jill had already left. She must have felt abused on being called a "western woman".

[Bharatvarsh]

Well anish those types never come back to reply, I knew it in the beginning itself but I replied because other people visiting this forum might get the impression that if no one replied then she must be writing the truth.

[Hauma Hamiddha]

See the title of this Article

"Hindu schoolboy turned terrorist planned to kill thousands"
See how Hindu-s are blamed when the fact it is plain that this guy was a Moslem. Even as the article states he converted to Islam and became a terrorist. So why bring in Hindus? Even Nizam Shah and Imad Shah were brAhmaNa-s converted to Moslems- it is the software not hardware that matter!

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Time to reign in the clergy</b>
Dr MI Husain Farooqi, Lucknow, India
November 1, 2006
It is high time that the renowned Islamic scholars, Maulana Rabe Nadvi and Maulana Dr Kalbe Sadiq, suggest ways and means to curb the activities of self-styled ulema  who are in the habit of issuing irrational and unwarranted edicts (fatwas) in print and electronic media, thereby becoming the objects of ridicule themselves and ruthlessly damaging the image of Muslims.

They transgress their limits and create hatred and malice amongst different sections (sects) of the society. There must be some laws in Shariah to check hate mongers.

Long back, Sir Syed, the great Muslim reformer, was humiliated and declared kafir by these very people.

First it was Imrana, then Sania Mirza dress code, Gudia’s marriage and <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>now annulment of nikahs  (marriages) of two hundred men belonging to Barelvi sect, in a village of Moradabad who participated in funeral namaz  led by a Deobandi Muslim scholar.</span>
These incidents and the resulting fatwas  are also a blessing in disguise because Muslim intelligentsia has started realising that the authority of the so-called Muslim clerics over illiterate masses all these years has only harmed the cause of Muslim society.

Religion on one hand has been highjacked by extremists and on the other by these elements. A sustained movement against obscurantism and bigotry has to be launched to keep Islam as the progressive religion.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Pakistani effect on Indian muslims.

[Guest]

Older event, but one for the archives. Apologies for any errors in translation.

http://www.elsevier.nl/nieuws/buitenland/n...6855/index.html
<b>Muslims cause bloodbath amongst Hindus</b>
Monday 1 May 2006
Islamic rebels in the Indian part of the Kashmir province have murdered at least 35 Hindus and wounded 10 others during two attacks on villages in a remote mountain area in the south of the region.

A massacre took place in the village Thawa, east of the Jammu city in the south of Kashmir. There, 22 victims from three villages were taken away, driven together into the house of the village chief, mistreated and shot dead from close range, as announced by a police representative on Monday.

<b>Unarmed</b>
An eyewitness said that about ten rebels in uniform ordered the Hindus to come to a gathering at the village chieftain's place. There they were divided into two groups and were executed on the spot. 'They pumped bullet after bullet into the group of unarmed people,' said the witness.

Elsewhere in the same region, twelve more bodies of kidnapped Hindus were found on Monday, most of them cattleholders in the remote mountain area.

<b>Negotiations</b>
This is the largest attack by muslim rebels in the Pakistan-contested Indian part of Kashmir since the two countries concluded a ceasefire in 2003. On the coming Wednesday, the Indian PM Manmohan Singh will consult with moderate muslim leaders about a solution to the conflict. Indian security services have already warned about an increase in the separatist violence in the run-up to the negotiations.

Supported by neighbouring country Pakistan, muslim rebels took up arms against the Indian goverment in 1989 in the mostly islamic Kashmir. The uprising has so far cost more than 60,000 lives (literally: deaths). Particularly/especially Hindu civilians are often the victims of violence emanating from extremist muslims.

By Bas Benneker

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Moslims richten bloedbad aan onder hindoes</b>
maandag 1 mei 2006 15:18

Islamitische rebellen in het Indiase deel van de provincie Kashmir hebben tenminste 35 hindoes vermoord en tien anderen verwond bij twee overvallen op dorpen in een afgelegen berggebied in het zuiden van de regio.

Een massaslachting had plaats in het dorp Thawa, ten oosten van de stad Jammu in het zuiden van Kashmir. Daar zijn 22 slachtoffers uit drie dorpen weggevoerd, samengedreven in het huis van het dorpshoofd, mishandeld en van dichtbij doodgeschoten, zo meldde een politiewoordvoerder maandag.

<b>Ongewapend</b>
Een oogetuige zei dat ongeveer tien rebellen in uniform de hindoes sommeerden mee te komen naar een bijeenkomst bij het dorpshoofd. Daar werden ze in twee groepen verdeeld en ter plekke geëxecuteerd. ‘Ze pompten kogel na kogel in de groep ongewapende mensen,’ zei de getuige.

Elders in dezelfde regio werden maandag nog twaalf lijken gevonden van ontvoerde hindoes, de meesten van hen veehouders in het afgelegen berggebied.

<b>Onderhandelingen</b>
Het is de grootste aanval van moslimrebellen in het door Pakistan betwiste Indiase deel van Kashmir sinds de twee landen in 2003 een wapenstilstand sloten. Aanstaande woensdag overlegt de Indiase premier Manmohan Singh met gematigde moslimleiders uit Kashmir over een oplossing voor het conflict. Indiase veiligheidsdiensten hebben al gewaarschuwd voor toename van het separatistische geweld in de aanloop naar de onderhandelingen.

Gesteund door buurland Pakistan namen moslimrebellen in 1989 de wapens op tegen de Indiase regering in het overwegend islamitische Kashmir. De opstand heeft tot nog toe meer dan 60.000 doden gekost. Vooral hindoeïstische burgers zijn vaak het slachtoffer van geweld van de kant van de extremistische moslims.

Door Bas Benneker<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Bharatvarsh]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Friday, September 29, 2006

Trouble with Muslims in Kerala
By John Cheeran

What's wrong with Muslims in Kerala?
Muslims in India are considered to be a economically weaker section.
They are poor, and largely illiterate.
The leaders of Muslim community would like us to believe that a Hindu-majority state is responsible for the pathetic condition of Muslims, conveniently ignoring the past of Mughal emperors. Think Taj Mahal!
Arguments can go on and on this subject.
But let me quickly take you to Kerala where a lot had been done by the Left front governments to uplift Muslims. Communist Chief Minister EMS Namboothiripad was instrumental in carving up country's first Muslim majority district, Malappuram, in 1957 so that the community could gain from a sustained development programme.
And even now only two districts enjoy a Muslim majority in India, the other being Murshidabad.
Now Kerala is fearing that Malappuram is on the path to become an Afghanistan.
Why is it so?
Muslim League, a party led by a religious leader, owes its political existence to the simple fact that Malappuram has a Muslim majority. There are more Muslims in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal than in Kerala but Muslim League cannot win a single seat in those states.
In Kerala, Muslims have amassed considerable political and financial muscle thanks to its youth working in Gulf countries.
But this political and financial muscle have not forced Kerala Muslims to look forward and mesh with other sections of the society.
And fault for this squarely lies with Muslim community; not anyone else.
Muslims demand democracy when they are short in numbers; in such scenarios they fear they will be swamped by the majority. That's why Muslims want a democracy in India whereby they can still practice sharaiah laws.
Please look across the border to Pakistan. There is no democracy in Pakistan and the reason is clear to you.
In Malappuram, the sheer dominance in numbers game has empowered the Muslim community. To be specific, the male Muslim.
Also the money orders from Gulf countries add the financial muscle to Muslims there. Travel through Malappuram district and you will likely to get a sneak peek into what life could be in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Young Muslim women are walking the streets, clad in burqas.
It was an uncommon sight in the Kerala of 60s and 70s and 80s.
What's so special about Muslim women that they have to be converted into mobile tents? What do they have which Hindu and Christian women haven't got?
The idea is to show how we (Muslims) are different from others. There is no zeal to let the girl child pursue her talents, follow the path of education.
For the surge in burqa-clad women in Malappuram there is an element of neurosis too. Most of the young Muslim men from Malappuram are doing menial jobs in Saudi Arabia, UAE and other Gulf countries. These guys go to Kerala, marry teenage girls and spend a few months with them, teaching them life's lessons and return to their thraldom in Gulf countries.
Leaving wives alone at home lead to anxiety of all sorts in such men.
Then, the solution to keep these young Gulf widows away from vice is to cover them in burqas..And it is Islamic too. A practical solution perfected by the religion..
I consider this, keeping women as chattel, as one of the key factors of Malappuram's descent into Afghanistan.
Only in August and September I travelled through Malappuram and the Muslim anger was visible very much in the district's street corners.
Stop, the Muslim man hunt, some of the posters screamed out... I was surprised to see such posters in Kerala. But then it is Malappuram. I came to know that they were protesting against the arrest of a few Muslim youth, SIMI activists, by Kerala Police as part of combating terrorist activities in the state.
So what do Muslims in Malappuram expect? Can't Kerala Police arrest Muslim youth, if they are acting against the state?
Is being a Muslim a license to do anything, or dirty tricks, you please?
There are people getting arrested everyday by police in Kerala, across all religious sections. I haven't so far come across from Hindus and Christians that they are being hunted by Police.
I remember reading a news story in The Indian Express in Kerala early this year.
A tailor's shop was vandalized by enraged Muslim mob. After reading the headline, first I thought the incident would have happened in Kashmir.
I was shocked to read the dateline of that story. It happened in Kozhikode district.
Muslims were enraged because the non-Muslim tailor was taking measurements of the Muslim women who approached him for stitching blouses and other dress materials. His customers, Muslim women themselves, did not have any problems with tailor taking their measurements. They never once complained that tailor was misbehaving with them. But the Muslim men cannot stomach this in Kerala, in 21st century...
How can a kafir touch a Muslim woman?
So what do they do? flex their muscles..
I could not believe that this was happening in Kerala!
Is the problem, then with Muslims themselves or rest of the society?
The third example I would like to present is this...
The Left Front government in Kerala sacked its chief secretary. Muslims protested against the move, initiated by none other than CPI (M) stalwart V.S. Achuthanandan.
Why did Muslims protest against removing the chief secretary? Because he (Mohammad Riazuddin) was a Muslim. Comrade Achuthanandan says Riazuddin was thoroughly incompetent and an embarrassment to the government. And interestingly it was Achuthanandan himself who suggested in the past that Riazuddin should be made the chief secretary simply because no Muslim had reached thus far.
Little did Achuthanandan care then for the competence of the man.
Now I want to bring to your attention two important aspects of Kerala's social life where Muslims' regressive attitude comes to fore.
If you look at Kerala's sports and arts scene, you would be tempted to believe that there are no Muslim women in the state..
In the land of P T Ushas, Shiny Wilsons and Anju Georges, why there are no Muslim women athletes?
Yes, there was a Mujitha Begum (hardly a success story) , years ago but that was a remarkable exception than a trend.
Christian girls from a poor background (Rosakutty, Bijimol, Princy and a legion of them) have won over their hardships to bring international glory to India where as young Muslim girls end up as brides for senile Arabs.
Who is to be blamed? Muslim men or rest of the society?
Take the case of Malayalam movie industry...We have a trend of young actresses--Meera Jasmine, Kaavya Madhavan, Gopika (Girly), Bhavana, Manju Warrier, Nayantara and Asin...Unfortunately I can't find a single Muslim girl among the starlets...
Why it is so?
Is acting a sin?
Yes, there is Shakeela, but again she is a rebel...
And the tragedy of the situation is exacerbated by the fact this is happening in a state that worshipped Prem Nazir and now deify Mammooty..
Who is to be blamed? Muslim men or rest of the society?
If that is the case of sport and art in Kerala what about service-oriented professions?
A quick look reveals that it is Christian and Hindu girls who become the lifeline of their families these days by becoming qualified nurses.
Why there are a very, very few numbers of nurses from Muslim background in Kerala?
Women are there to give birth, and nothing else, is it?
No what do all these examples show?
It shows that Muslims in Kerala (well, the majority of them) do not want to accept realities and are not ready to assimilate with the mainstream.
The truth about Kerala is what director T. V. Chandran portrayed in his classic "Padam Onnu Oru Vilapam."
The opening and final scenes of that movie shows how backward and reactionary Muslims in Kerala are.
No amount of attars from Arabia can conceal that stench.
No tall concrete towers can conceal that hideous reality.
Afghanistan is not just a geographical reality.
Afghanistan is a state of mind..

http://johncheeran.blogspot.com/2006/09/tr...-in-kerala.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Muslims sieged from within </b>
Pioneer.com
Swapan Dasgupta
Those who have read William Dalrymple's The Last Mughal, a masterly reconstruction of the final days of the Timurid dynasty, <b>would have noticed something odd about the rag-tag court of Bahadur Shah Zafar: The near-total absence of Hindus.</b>

It is not that the Delhi of early-1857 was a Muslim enclave; <b>Dalrymple suggests that half the city was Hindu. Indeed, Hindus dominated the trade and commerce of the city. It was the loans from Hindu bankers in Chandni Chowk which subsidised the dissolute lifestyle of the Mughals. And yet, Hindus barely got a peep into the world spawned by the Mughal court. India's majority community were the proverbial "extras" in the official life of Mughal Delhi</b>. 

It is instructive to delve into this history to comprehend the orchestrated tear-jerking by the advance guard of the Rajinder Sachar Committee studying the condition of Indian Muslims. Based on Dalrymple's reconstruction, two conclusions are in order.

<b>First, that ghettoisation of the Muslim community cannot be attributed to either the Gujarat riots of 2002 or the formation of the RSS a few decades before. Like the British who naturally kept to their own Civil Lines, the Muslims (the trading communities are an important exception) have traditionally stuck to their community enclaves for the sake of social comfort and solidarity.</b>

<b>Second, the status of Muslims as a disadvantaged community is of relatively recent origin. For nearly 700 years, until the British forged their Indian empire, the Muslims perceived themselves as the rulers of Hindustan. The Muslim elite dominated the "high" culture which set the tone for the others. The traditional Brahmanical culture and learning was effectively marginalised. At the dawn of British rule in the beginning of the 19th century, the Muslims were quite clearly a privileged cultural minority in India.</b>

<b>That the Muslim elites didn't take to English education with the same alacrity as upper-caste Hindus has been well documented. The loss of political power proved quite traumatic for Muslims and a substantial chunk of its elite retreated into a sullen sulk - a mindset that nurtured the Wahabi movement and other efforts at socio-religious exclusiveness</b>. The small but influential English-educated middle class spawned by the Aligarh Movement carried some of these separatist impulses into the political arena. Pakistan was the outcome.

<b>Most Indian Muslims did not make Pakistan their home, but an overwhelming majority of the Muslim upper and middle classes did</b>.<b> In 1947, the Indian Muslims sank into depression, having been deserted by their traditional and emergent leadership</b>. A strategic tie-up with the Congress prevented this hopelessness from finding political expression but it was always an awkward relationship born of desperation.

Have five decades of Independence made a difference? If the statistics released by the Sachar Committee are any guide, Muslims are broadly on par with Dalits in terms of socio-economic status. Considering that the traditional Brahmanical social order reduced Dalits to sub-human status, the progress made by the beneficiaries of reservations has been marked. In addition, the ritually-disadvantaged Backward Castes have complimented their clout in the rural economy with political muscle. Today, the OBC demand is for a greater role in the modern sectors of the economy.

Since 1947, the Muslim progress has been tardy. The community has enriched itself patchily - in the Malabar spice trade and in the leather and carpet industries - and used its exploding numbers to perfect the art of tactical voting. In social terms, however, the Muslim community still appears unwilling to embrace modern and scientific education. Its record of women's empowerment has been scandalous and there is even community resistance to the polio vaccine. The Muslim leadership has successfully used the appeal of religion and en-bloc voting to resist the encroachment of progressive social legislation into the community.

The problem is not opportunities or institutional hurdles; the real obstacle is an inward-looking and regressive mindset. The Sachar Committee can shed tears for the plight of Muslims but unless the community itself shows a willingness to eschew the past and embrace modernity, affirmative action will become the instrument for the empowerment of medievalism. It will tear India apart yet again
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<b>American and Israeli policies thrashed at Delhi symposium on West Asia</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Seema Mustafa, veteran journalist and editor of the Asian Age, said t<b>hat the gameplan of the US is very complex. It is not just oil they are after. They also want to control the hearts and minds of the people in West Asia. Every resistance to their schemes, she said, is dubbed as “terrorism”. </b>Many holocausts are being perpetuated against the Palestinians. Worst kinds of atrocities are heaped on the people of West Asia but no one talks about this.

Speaking about Lebanon, <b>Seema Mustafa said that the defeat of Israel in Lebanon is very important in the long run. A kind of genocide of an entire nation in Palestine, of women and children, is going on</b>. Americans define terrorism in a particular way in order to peddle their interests. Freedom fighters of yesterday like Bin Laden and Taliban are terrorists today and terrorists of today will be freedom fighters tomorrow as we are hearing that Karzai is asking the Taliban to join his government in Kabul<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Speaking on the Palestine/Israel issue, Bidwai said that Israel is a pathologically troubled and disturbed society. Today the Israeli democracy is so disturbed that it is ready to disfranchise its Arab citizens. He said that terrorism and counter-terrorism have destroyed Israel.

Speaking on the scene nearer home, <b>Praful Bidwai said that our current National Security Advisor MK Narayanan, after he had retired as a government servant in 2001, spoke to Toronto policemen in very disturbing tones quoting from Islamophobic texts chapter and verse. Narayanan in that speech had said that the solution of terrorism lies in the Gayatri mantra. And this man is now our National Security Advisor. Narayanan has turned the fight against terrorism into a communal war, Praful Bidwai said adding that terrorism is bad but state terrorism is far, far worse. </b>In Hiroshima, over a hundred thousand people died while only 3500 died in the attack on the World Trade Centre.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->He said that when Narasimha Rao became prime minister in early 1990s, <b>Times of India asked RSS chief Deoras what was the one thing he wanted from the Rao government? Deoras said he wanted it to recognise Israel. Bidwai recalled how the National Security Advisor under the NDA government went to a Jewish conference in the US seeking close cooperation between India and Israel. T</b>he government has changed since, Bidwai observed, but the foreign policy has not changed a bit. We must press them to stick to the Common Minimum Programme of the UPA. Praful Bidwai said Israel is not a normal state. Rather it is a rogue state. If India changes its policy, a strong message will go to Israel.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Narayanan refered Gayatri Mantra, so now he is communal for Fool Badboo
His US Visa should be revoke forever.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Haj subsidy balloons to Rs 385 cr </b>
Sidharth Mishra | New Delhi
Cabinet okays hike in number of pilgrim by 10,000
With 10,000 more pilgrims being allowed to undertake Haj pilgrimage this year, the Government subsidy is all set to mount to Rs 385 crore approximately.

The Centre on Thursday decided to enhance the quota under its subsidy scheme to 1.1 lakh pilgrims from the existing one lakh.

The decision was taken at a meeting of the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The movement of second batch of pilgrims from India to Saudi Arabia during Haj 2006 is due to commence later this month. Air India, which is hired by the Central Haj Committee to ferry the pilgrims, will add more flights from India to Saudi Arabia this year.

<b>The Cabinet also approved a proposal for transportation of other Haj pilgrims by Air India or Indian from Kolkata, Calicut, Nagpur, Aurangabad, Patna, Guwahati, Jaipur and Srinagar. The increase in number under subsidy would add an additional burden of Rs 3.5 crore</b>

According to Central Haj Committee vice-chairman Hasan Ahmed, the committee charges between Rs 85,000 to Rs 1.2 lakh from each pilgrim who registers with them. The pilgrims are required to pay an airfare of Rs 12,500 directly to Air India for flight to Jeddah. The Government subsidises the remaining part of approximately Rs 45,000 fare.

<b>The subsidised part of the airfare is paid by the Government directly to the airlines costing the taxpayer nearly Rs 385 crore. "It's wrong to say that the subsidy is going either to the Haj pilgrim or the Haj Committee</b>. The Government pays the air-carrier directly. There are other airlines, which are carrying passengers at much discounted rates. But since Air India is official carrier, we have to go through them," Ahmed said.

"Of the money we charge, Rs 25,000 is refunded to each pilgrim in Saudi currency on their arrival in Jeddah towards food expenses. We keep the remaining amount for their accommodation and local transport in Saudi Arabia during the period of pilgrimage," Ahmed added.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Reserved to be backward </b>
Pioneer.com
Balbir K Punj
<b>Every Indian has a right to education. Therefore, when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stressed that Muslims needed to have wider access to education - he recently said so at the conference of the state commissions for minorities - there was an element of hypocrisy in it. Do they need access as Muslims, or as Indian citizens?</b>

The term "minorities" in India includes, besides Muslims, other groups like Parsis, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, etc. <b>Even Hindus are a "minority' in Jammu & Kashmir, Meghalaya, Nagaland and some other States. </b>Significantly, the purported political definition is confined only to Muslims and does not apply to other minorities like Christians, Parsis and Sikhs. If this country were to practice any kind of organised discrimination against minorities, the other minority communities too would feel the pinch. The fact is they don't.

Among Army officials, for instance, there are a large number of Sikhs and Christians. The present Chief of Staff is a Sikh; there was a Christian General and Chief of Staff in the Army and several Lt Generals and Major Generals representing that religious group. Christian girls are seen all over India contributing to society as nurses and stenographers. They are also employed in a large number of private sector institutions, employed at many levels from receptionists to executives. The only reason they get these jobs is because they are educationally forward; they work as hard as anybody else to acquire the necessary qualifications and skills. And the community of Parsis, which counts less than a lakh, is on top in all walks of life, be it law, business or fashion.

The Prime Minister should have honestly questioned his audience on this difference between Muslims and other minorities.<b> Why is it that other minorities do not find any problem in getting access to education and jobs either in public or in private sector? There is no reservation for these classes of people in Government or public sector jobs and yet they are rubbing shoulders with the majority</b>.

The Prime Minister lost an opportunity to urge the Muslim leadership for introspection and find out what the reasons were that made the community backward. <b>Even within Muslims, there are a few communities (like the Boras) that are quite affluent and are active in many businesses and professions. This should come as an eye-opener</b>. The fact is that the Muslim leadership, both religious and secular, is the enemy of the community they claim to represent because it is they who brainwash their followers to reject modern education. <b>But the Prime Minister and other 'secularists' cannot afford to be so politically incorrect by saying so.</b>

Why is the political class shy of asking the Muslim leadership to focus on their own weaknesses? In many middle class households, both man and wife work. If Muslim wives are not allowed by their men to be employed, their families will obviously have lower income, lower standard of living and less financial capability to put their children in good schools.

This reality will not change by mouthing slogans and blaming others for Muslim underdevelopment. It is unfortunate that the Prime Minister chose to confine himself to mouthing slogans. When self-denial of jobs because of religious taboos takes place on a national scale, the average income gap between non-Muslim and Muslim families goes on widening year after year and its impact runs through the entire community.

<b>Why is it that a substantial chunk of Muslims prefer to send their children to madarsas and feel contended that they learn Islam only, that too, in Arabic - not Indian languages, English and other subjects relevant in today's competitive world? Muslim child marriage is rampant and though law forbids it, the right to child marriage is claimed on the basis of their religious texts. It is as plain as a pikestaff that if any community limits itself to religious education, it will not be eligible for jobs in the modern global economy.</b>

Since the UPA Government came to power, there has been this cry of Muslims being neglected, thus requiring the state's assistance to the community, in other words, reservation. There is a deliberate attempt to play the constraints within the community down, its refusal to modern education and insistence on keeping children out of non-religious schools. All these factors have contributed to keeping the Muslim community backward forever.<b> The community is ever ripe for exploitation by clerics on the one hand and 'secular' politicians on the other</b>.

How come so many Muslim actors of the Mumbai film industry have been able to conquer the Indian audience if there is discrimination against them? Why is it that music maestros like Ustad Bismillah Khan and Ustad Allauddin Khan are venerated by the Indian public? Why is it that Ustad Amjad Ali Khan and a host of others are the toast of the country? Many such instances may be given in every field of endeavour - sports, cinema, music, fine arts, science, business, etc.

Instead of hollow gestures addressed to Muslims, Mr Manmohan Singh should have questioned the failure of the Muslim leadership to use the huge funds it receives from abroad to build schools and colleges for Muslims? For instance, the Christian community is only less than three per cent of the Indian population. But look at the number of educational institutions of high repute it has created. Then, the DAV schools, for instance, have been built on internal resources. The Prime Minister should have plainly asked the Muslim leadership whether Hindus could expect Government jobs by sending their children to Vedic pathashalas and Christians to Sunday schools? Muslims have to evolve with the changing times before it is too late.

In the refusal to ask these basic questions and the ad nauseam repetition of the same litany of Muslim backwardness, Mr Manmohan Singh has a design: To create the right climate to reserve jobs for Muslims on the ground of 'discrimination'. The move is as divisive as the British ploy of reserved constituencies for Muslims in the 1930s, a move that sowed the seeds of Partition in 1947.

The political ploy is evident. But the greater regret is that the prop in this game, the Muslim community, is content to live with miasma. It refuses to realise that the politicians are pushing the Muslim community to eternal backwardness.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

‘<b>Haj subsidy unIslamic, use that money on our education, health’</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><i>Leaders, from Jamiat-e-Hind chief to Law Board member, say subsidy must end, it’s vote-bank politics </i>
NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 16: At a time when even the Prime Minister is emphasising that Muslims need to be given greater access to modern education to remove their social backwardness, several Muslim intellectuals, religious scholars and leaders are suggesting that the Government scrap the Haj subsidy and spend the money instead on schools, healthcare and other basic infrastructure for the welfare of the community. <b>Some even describe the subsidy as “vote-bank politics” and say it’s unIslamic to undertake any obligation during Haj.</b>

Demanding an end to the subsidy, Maulana Mehmood Madani, Rajya Sabha member and general secretary of the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Hind, says<b> “It is against the Shariat to be under any kind of obligation while undertaking Haj. According to the Quran, only those Muslims who can afford the expenses should perform Haj. It’s recommended only for adult, financially able and sane Muslims.” </b>

Others like S Q R Ilyas, convenor of the Babri Masjid Committee and a senior member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), call the Haj subsidy<b> “a sop to gain political mileage.”</b>............
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All muslim who had used subsidy for Haj had did "haram" ?????

NDA extended Haj subsidy and now its a big drain.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Madarsa students hoist Pakistani flag </b>
Pioneer.com
Guwahati
Over a thousand madarsa students, annoyed over a Congress street play depicting the beard of a Muslim political leader being pulled off, had held a protest rally with the Pakistani flag in Assam's Nagaon district.

<b>The Madarsa Students Union members at Hojai sub-division in the district took out the rally with the Pakistani flag at Doboka town on November 4, on the last day of campaigning for the Jamuna- mukh assembly constituency</b>, official sources said today. Local dailies have published photographs of the students with the Pakistani flag.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is a great news, now next step should be, send them to Pakistan through "Samjhuta Express" without return ticket. I hope Pakistan will full fill their dreams.
Good Luck!!!

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1973657.cms
<b>Should the subsidy on Haj be withdrawn? Yes</b>- - B N Shukla, Petitioner against haj subsidy
Indeed, the subsidy should be withdrawn. First, because it's against constitutional norms and second because it's increasing the gap between the Muslims and people of other faith. Articles 14, 15 and 17 of the Constitution provide equal status to all Indians.

These articles also restrict the government from giving benefits to a particular faith at the cost of others. But every year, the government spends over Rs 300 crore on over one lakh Hajis. Special flights are run. AC Haj houses have been built across the country.

They are provided free food and lodging during their trip. However, no such subsidy is given to others. A Hindu do-es not get a subsidy to visit Amarnath or Mansarovar. Sik-hs don't get special assistance to visit Nankana Sahib.

Buddhists get no help for visiting Sarnath and Christians, too, do not get anything to visit Ro-me. Then why only Muslims? The reason: all the political parties believe in vote bank politics. Critics may say special arrangements are made by the government for Kumbh Mela, Amarnath yatra etc.

But the fact is, the government only looks after the administrative arrangements, which it does for all festivals irrespective of religion. <b>It's the duty of the government to maintain law and order. Every visitor to Kumbh Mela has to buy a ticket. The free kitchens are run privately.</b>

<b>Special trains and buses are run for Kumbh Mela, but people have to buy tickets for travelling. It's not subsidised. Even Islamic countries do not give subsidies for Haj. </b>

There would have been no issue if similar subsidies were given to non-Muslims, including those whose religious plac-es are situated outside India. In fact, I'm not in favour of any subsidy for pilgrimage to anybody because it puts a huge pressure on the exchequer.

Some may argue that the Haj subsidy is actually a discount, as the government-owned airlines get bulk business. Then why is such a discount not given to others who travel in large numbers during their pilgrimage season? <b>Haj subsidy is only for Muslim appeasement</b>.

<b>Politicians are out to appease them. It's evident from the way they organise iftar parties. Ironically, no one is ever seen hosting lunches for little girls during Navratri</b>.

<b>My writ petition was filed in '95, when two of my friends were killed in a landslide on their way to Mansarovar. That's when I realised that the government makes no arrangements for Hindu pilgrims</b>.

It was pending before the HC for 11 years. The government never replied to the notices. Now that a interim order has been issued, there is a flutter. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Islamic Fundamentals for Hindu Dummies</b>
Subramanian Swamy
[The writer is a former Union Law Minister]

Recently, thanks to Shri Vedantamji of the VHP, I had visited Thondi
and Rasathipuram Municipalities of Ramanathapuram and Vellore districts
respectively, and was truly shocked by what I saw. Both these municipalities
are in Muslim majority areas, and the Local Bodies election had empowered the
Muslims with their capture of the municipalities.

<b>The Muslim--ruled municipalities have thereafter converted these areas
into mini  ‘Darul Islams’, in a Hindustan of 83% Hindus! The minority Hindu
areas of the municipality were thus denied civic amenities, funds for schools,
garbage clearing etc., and sent notices in Urdu. Hindus were bluntly told
convert to Islam if they wanted civic facilities. </b>

I could not believe that in South India this was possible where Hindus are
actually above national average at 90 percent of the population. I know that in
Kashmir valley, Muslims who are in majority have actively or passively connived
in driving out half a million Hindus out of their homes and made them refugees
in their own country. Temples have been demolished in the valley on a daily
basis. The world could not care less. An American had once told me: “Why should
we care? Indian democracy is led by the majority who are Hindus and you want us
to talk about the human rights of the community of rulers?”

Such atrocities are happening not only in Kashmir, but in other parts of India
as well in pockets wherever Muslims are in majority, e.g., Mau and Meerut.  In
pocket boroughs of  India thus, Darul Islam has today returned to India after
two centuries. Considering that a demographic re-structuring is slowly but
surely taking place, with Hindu majority shrinking everywhere, Darul Islam in
pockets might indeed, like amoeba, proliferate, coalesce, and jell into a
frightening national reality---<b>unless we Hindus wake up and take corrective
action now,  actions for which we shall of course not get a Nobel Peace Prize. </b>

Darul Islam is a Muslim religious concept of a land where Muslims rule, and the
non-believers in Islam are termed as ‘Dhimmis”. The term ‘Dhimmi’ was coined
after the Jews were crushed in Medina[Khaybar to be exact], and the defeated
Jews accepted that if they did not convert to Islam, then they would accept
second class status politically, culturally, and religiously. This included
zero civil rights including the right to modesty of women, and the special tax
jizya.

There is thus no scope for Muslims and non-Muslims uniting as equals in the
political, cultural, or social system in a Darul Islam where Muslims rule.
<b>Secular order in India thus is possible only when Muslims are not in power.</b>
Thondi, Rasathipuram, and other places prove that the Muslim mind suffers from
a dangerous duality---of seeking secularism when out of power and imposing a
brutal demeaning theocracy for non-Muslims when in power.

It is this duality that patriotic Hindus must re-shape by modern education and
other means, as also retain its demographic overwhelming majority in India. We
do not have much time, in fact about 45 years, as the X-graph of statistical
regressions estimated by J.S. Bajaj and colleagues shows. ‘X’ represents the
two trends—Hindu percentage declining and Muslim percentage rising, and
intersecting in the year 2061.

The ‘dhimmitude’ of Jews in Medina and later in Mecca represents the beginning
of religious apartheid inherent and basic to Islamic mores, and practiced long
before what we saw in South Africa on the basis of colour and race, and that
which became prevalent during the Islamic imperialist rule in  parts of India.
Hindus were dhimmis for six hundred years in those parts of  India despite
being a bigger majority in the country than even today. <b>Hence, a majority is
not enough. Hindus need also a Hindu mindset to be free.</b>

In his Presidential address to the Muslim League in Lahore in 1940, Mohammed Ali
Jinnah had articulated this concept of apartheid in his own inimitable way:

<i>“ To visualize Hindus and Muslims in India uniting to create a common nation is
a mythical concept. It is only a fancy dream of some unawakened Hindu
leaders….The truth is that Hindus and Muslims are two different civilisations….
  since their thought process grow on different beliefs.”</i>

Large sections of Muslims in India then had rejected Jinnah  and his concept of
non-compatibility of  Muslims with Hindus. But after Independence and
Partition, instead of building on this rejection by many Muslims, the Nehru era
saw increasing pandering precisely to the religious element that believed in
this apartheid. Indira Gandhi vigorously continued this appeasement thereby
nurturing the apartheid mentality of Muslim orthodoxy.

But the final undermining of the enlightened Muslim came when the government
capitulated in the Shah Bano case. Thousands of Muslims had demonstrated on the
streets demanding that the government not bring legislation that would nullify
the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Shah Bano case but in vain. <b>Rajiv Gandhi, I learnt later, on counsel from his Italian Catholic family, had surrendered to
the hard line clerics who protested that the Supreme Court had no right to
interfere and to defacto amend the Shariat, the Islamic law code. These
relatives on a directive from the Vatican thought that if secular law would be
applied to Muslims, it can be to the Christians too</b>.

This was a nonsense argument of the Muslim clerics, since the Shariat had
already been amended, without protest, in the criminal law of India. The Indian
Penal Code represents the uniform criminal code that equally applies to all
religious communities. <b>I therefore ask the clerics: if a Muslim is caught
stealing, can any court in India direct that his hand at the wrist be cut off
as the Shariat prescribes? If Muslims can accept a uniform criminal code what
is the logic in rejecting the uniform civil code?</b>

In India, Dhimmi status for Hindus during Islamic imperialist rule has had other
social implications. Defiant Brahmins and Kshatriyas who had refused to convert
and chose to remain Hindus,  were forced to carry night soil and suffer great
indignities for their women folk. Or it meant gross mental torture. Guru Tegh
Bahadur, for example, had to see his sons sawed in half, before the pious
Guru’s own head was severed and displayed in public.

The debasement of Hindu society then was such that those targeted valiant
Brahmins and Kshatriyas who had refused to convert and thus made to carry night
soil, were disowned by other Hindus and declared to be asprashya  or
“untouchable”.  <b>The ranks of the Scheduled Caste community which was not more than 1% of the population before the advent of Islam in India, swelled to 14
percent by the time Mughal rule collapsed.</b>

<b>Thus, today’s SC community especially those who are still Hindus, consists
mostly of those valiant Brahmins and Kshatriyas who had refused to become
Muslims but preferred ostracization and ignominy in order to remain Hindus.</b>
<b>Hindu society today should offer koti koti pranams to them for keeping the
Bhagwa Dhwaj of Hindu religion flying even at great personal cost and misery</b>.

I have already written enough in these columns about Hindus being under siege
from Islamic fanatics and Christian proselytizers. I have suggested that we can
lift this siege only if we develop a Hindu mindset, which is a four dimensional
concept. But that mind must be informed, and understand why others do what they
do to Hindus before we can defeat their nefarious designs. Here I suggest
therefore that we Hindus must understand the true nature of Islam before we can
formulate a strategy to defeat those who threaten us. In a later column I will
write about the true nature of Christianity and how to combat the menace of
religious conversions of Hindus.

At this juncture let me add even though I oppose conversion as violence, as
Swami Dayanand Sarasvati bold wrote to the Vatican Pope, nevertheless if an
Indian Muslim or Christian changes his religion to Hinduism today, I will not
regard it as conversion because it is a return to the Hindu fold of those whose
ancestors had been forcibly converted.

Islam is not only and merely what is stated in the Koran. Islam is a trilogy of
Koran, Sira and Hadith. This trilogy defines a “true” Muslim or believer.
Therefore those who sing praises of the Koran to prove that Islam is
intrinsically humane, have not read the Sira and Hadith. While Koran is a
compilation of revelations of Allah to Mohammed through angel Gabriel, Sira is
essentially a biography of Mohammed, while Hadiths are a collection of
proverbs, poems, and practices of Mohammed. Thus Islamic theology is Koran plus
what the Prophet said or did. This is borne by content analysis of the trilogy.
Koran has 153,000 words, while Sira has 408,000 words, and Hadith compiled by
Bukhari has 338,000 words. Hence, Koran is just 17 % of Islam, while Sira and
Hadith are 83% and about Prophet Mohammed.

For 13 years in Mecca, Mohammed preached the Koran and managed to convert just 150 persons. But in Medina, Mohammed did and said what is contained in Sira and Hadith. Within 10 years he became the King of Arabia, and converted 100 percent of the people who survived the sword of Islam.

To enforce his revelations, Mohammed resorted to Jihad, which meant sacred
violence as a process of spreading Islam. Holy war is just one phase of Jihad,
because Jihad is a process. It is in Sira that one finds a detailed manual of
the complete strategy of jihad and political dimension of Islam. Sira is about
how Mohammed dealt with those who disagreed with him. In Mecca, Mohammed was conciliatory because he was in a hopeless minority. But he became completely
different in Medina,

<b>While Koran is personal to every Muslim or believer, Sira and Hadith affect
non-believers. </b>Islam as a trilogy is obsessed with what to do with unbelievers
and non-believers. Unlike Hinduism, which says not a word against
non-believers, in fact says that other religions also lead to God, Islam is
harsh on them, and justifies violence against them as sacred. The choice to
non-believers in Islam is: convert or accept dhimmitude. Hence, the explanation
for Thondi, Rasathipuram, Mau etc., and the duality in ethics practiced by
Muslims everywhere. A true Muslim is Dr.Jekyll when in minority, and Mr. Hyde
when in majority.         

So what should we Hindus do ? First, recognize that being a pious Hindu is not
enough. Hindus must unite and work to install a Hindu-minded government. If 35%
of the 83% Hindus unite to vote for a party, absolute majority is attainable.

If Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha, RSS, and VHP decide to mobilize the voter to support a party that espouses an approved Hindu Agenda, then the union government is within reach through the ballot box. Second, search for those Muslims who are ready to openly and with pride declare that their ancestors were Hindus. My guess is that about 75% of Muslims will be ready to do so. These are the Muslims who can be co-opted by Hindus to fight Islamic fundamentalism. If we do not do so, then the Muslim clerics will have a free run of their fanaticism.

For this a required reading is Sri Sri Ravishankar’s Hinduism & Islam: Dedicated
to the People of Pakistan Who have Forgotten Their Own Roots
[www.artofliving.org]. In this Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has shown how “Muslims have
completely forgotten that their forefathers were Hindus, so they have every
right to vedic culture”. He in fact traces the pre-Islam origins of the K’aaba
and many key words in Koran as of Hindu origin. Third, invest heavily in
primary education to make it world class, ban the madrassas for any student
below 21 years, and make Sanskrit a compulsory language for all students.     
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->