• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Radicalisation Of Indian Muslims
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Secular vend for Islamist cause </b>
Balbir K Punj
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.George Santayana

The beeline that 'secularists' of various hues - the CPI(M), Congress and Muslim League - are making to the Coimbatore Central Jail to pay their political obeisance to Abdul Nasser Madani will astonish only the uninitiated. The jailed jihadi reportedly masterminded the February 14, 1998, Coimbatore serial blasts that killed 59 people, but narrowly missing the main target, then BJP president LK Advani. Madani's communally inflammatory speeches predate his involvement in the Coimbatore blasts. Because of all these 'qualifications' he is a 'secular' icon in the muddy waters of Kerala's electoral politics.

<b>The 'secularists' strategy is to exploit Madani's influence, real or perceived, on Muslim vote-bank. Madani, on behalf of his People's Democratic Party, has promised support to the CPI(M) dominated LDF coalition.</b> It may well be construed as a political fatwa for Muslims of Kerala - who form 24 per cent of the State's population of 32 million - to vote for the CPI(M) and its allies. In the 2001 Assembly election, Madani had supported the Congress-led UDF. So, in spite of his bloody record and spewing communal vitriol, he is not politically untouchable for any of the 'secular' branded parties.

Similarly, in poll-bound Assam, the UPA Government is engaging in a duplicitous deal with the ULFA (now no more than an extension of the ISI) with the sole objective of garnering votes by projecting itself as the peacemaker in Assam. The UPA Government has reintroduced the IMDT Act through the backdoor by selectively altering the provisions of the Foreigners Act 1946, applicable to Assam alone. The matter is now sub judice in the Supreme Court.

It is rather curious that ULFA has suddenly changed its tone before the election. While earlier it used to exhort people to boycott polls, this time it has called for voting for a party that defends Assam's interests. While refraining from naming any party in particular, ULFA's tacit reference is towards the Congress, not AGP or BJP, if one were to read between the lines. Can protecting infiltrators, as modified Foreigners Act does, be called a step in Assam's interest? The ongoing election in Assam is perhaps the State's last chance to protect itself from turning into a greater Bangladesh. The next Assembly election, coinciding with the next Census, might be a date too late for Assam.

ULFA was a secessionist outfit of insurgents when it was formed three decades ago, and remains so till today. But its degeneration from a reluctant formation opposed to infiltration to an outfit supporting infiltration is worth noting. This changeover occurred roughly 15 years ago. Prafulla Kumar Mahanto's first tenure as AGP Chief Minister (1986-1990) was the high noon of ULFA's destructive activities. Being a product of the same movement, ULFA was known to have access to the corridors of power in Dispur.

But as ULFA overreached itself with extortion activities from the tea-gardens, and Unilever group airlifted to rescue one of its beleaguered tea estate managers, it brought about AGP's embarrassing fall. The relationship between the two was estranged since then. Today ULFA's ISI-commissioned leadership is based in Dhaka, Bangladesh. For the last 15 years, it has been subservient to the forces of jihad. ULFA camps are teaching Assamese to would-be insurgents in Bangladesh. Thus ULFA's care and concern for Assam's 'interests' is totally false.

ULFA has refused to observe the ceasefire with the Government of India and abandon its demand for independent Assam. It has been going around blasting oil facilities, killing police personnel, and kidnapping businessmen in Assam. There is nothing to indicate that ULFA has seen the light of reason (it won't, unless the heat is turned on it).

But now that it has abjured violence on the election eve, calling on people to vote for a party that "defends Assam's interest", isn't there a conspiracy of peace between the ULFA and the Congress? It is thus concluded that the secularists are enlisting Madani's support in Kerala and ULFA in Assam to save 'secularism'. One has still to see a bigger contradiction.

<b>The 'secular' Congress and Communists are today hell bent on a rerun of history that led to partition along communal lines. Recently, the UPA Government amended the Foreigners Act 1946 for selective applicability in Assam to facilitate Bangladeshi infiltrators.</b> Then, the Kerala Assembly passed a unanimous resolution seeking the release of jihadi Abdul Nasser Madani incarcerated in Coimbatore Central Jail.

Why talk to Ms Khaleda Zia about closing down terror camps in Bangladesh when demographic aggression against India continues? Why talk to President Musharraf to rein in his anonymous jihadis when you are pleading the cause of an Al-Ummah middleman?

In 1919, Mahatma Gandhi espoused the cause of the Caliphate, and put the entire weight of the Congress party behind a pan-Islamic movement. <b>Gandhi wanted to rouse feverish Islamic passion for serving the cause of Swaraj by yoking Khilafat with Non-Cooperation movement. But this botched movement ended in massacre of Hindus as the Moplah riots in Malabar (1921) were followed by a string of other violent incidents. Eventually, Gandhi had to concede in frustration that every Hindu was a coward and every Muslim a bully</b>.

All through the 1930s and 1940s, the Communist Party of India supplied MA Jinnah with intellectual justification for his demand for Pakistan. The concepts of the "right to self-determination" and India as a "federation of independent states" came from the Marxists. But ironically, the Marxists were completely cleansed of the newly carved out state of Pakistan.

Today, as Islamic fundamentalism is asserting itself from the US to Australia, 'secularism' is reviving itself with renewed vengeance. But this feverish revival appears to approach only a terminal end. The jihadi fires are stroking India in too many theatres. 'Secularism' will find the burgeoning population of Muslims and their increasing jihadi assertiveness too hot to handle.

In the centenary year of the formation of the Muslim League in Dhaka (1906), Shahi Imam of Delhi's Jama Masjid Ahmed Bukhari has called for the formation of a federation of Muslim organisations, eschewing 'secularism'.

'Secularism' has always been a distasteful compromise for Muslims in independent India. It has, at best, been a strategy to survive in a truncated country, after having achieved Pakistan and cleansed Hindus and Sikhs from its territories. At worst, it has been inertness. Muslims always have a grouse that 'secularism' has failed them. <b>This seems to be an echo from the pre-independence days when they accused the Congress of "Hindu hegemony" and dissociated themselves from the party. But how the Congress became a 'secular' party from a 'Hindu' one is not difficult to understand if we address the issue methodically</b>.

After the departure of the British and creation of Pakistan, many Muslims in independent India faced a dead end. The fundamentalists had not migrated to their dreamland and were citizens of a country for whose dismemberment they had worked in cooperation with invaders. They were sandwiched between guilt and insecurity.

The Congress was now no longer a struggling party they could mock at but the ruler of this land. So vote-for-protection deal was struck with the party. But subsequently, the Congress was overtaken by other secularist brands in cultivating Muslim vote-bank. The Congress and other 'secular' parties have stooped to crude 'competitive' secularism to gain Muslim votes.

<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>While many Hindus fear that communal reservation, Sharia'h courts, infiltration, anti-Bush, anti-cartoon rallies turning violent against Hindus presage a repetition of 1947, many fundamentalist Muslims feel they are better positioned now to re-establish Islamic rule in India by letting 'secularists' do their work. The 'secularists' are vending Islamic fundamentalism under the brand name of 'secularism'. With 'secularists' like these, who needs Islamists? </span>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What on earth is wrong with the Muslims?
April 6, 2006

What on earth is the matter Muslims in the Indian sub-continent? And when one speaks of the subcontinent one includes under that rubric all three countries, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

One had hoped that once Pakistan was conceded Muslims who decided to stay on India would learn to live in peace with the non-Muslim majority. Any Muslim who felt that he was being oppressed had total freedom to leave India and migrate to Pakistan.

Or, for that matter, to Bangladesh. But that is not happening. On the contrary, Pakistani and Bangladeshi jehadists are sneaking into India and are apparently being given shelter by Indian Muslims. Admitted their number is minuscule. Admittedly the majority and a substantial majority of Muslims are totally opposed to any form of terrorism being practised against Indian targets.

The tragedy is that because of an insignificantly small number of Muslims who are giving shelter to Pakistani and Bangladeshi terrorists, not only Muslims as a community, but Islam as a religion are getting a bad name.

According to knowledgeable sources, since 2001, Uttar Pradesh alonehas seen the interdiction of at least 22 cells linked to Pakistan based Jehadi groups in operation. What happened at the Sankat Vimochan Temple in Varanasi is not a rare and isolated instance. It was merely a repetition of what happened at the Akshardham Temple in Ahmedabad in September 2002, when 37 Hindu devotees were killed and 80 injured.

Indeed, less than six weeks before the Varanasi bombings, a Kolkata police official, Prasum Mukherjee had told journalists that his force had arrested a Lashkar operative who had planned to execute strikes across urban centres in north and cast India.

Following the Varanasi bombings reports indicate that jehadis were also planning to create havoc in many Hindu religious centres.

According to a media report, in 2003 intelligence-led operations uncovered four terrorist cells of Jaish-e-Mohammad and arrests were made in Lucknow, Allahabad, Muzaffarnagar, Sikandarabad and Noida.

People may have forgotten it, but on December 6, 1993, Muslim terrorists helped set off a series of 43 explosions in Hyderabad and Mumbai and seven separate explosions on trains. By the mid-1990s jehadi cells had started developing a formidable all-India reach. What has India done to deserve all this? Muslims in India are free to practise their religion without hindrance. No VHP activists have dropped bombs on Muslim devotees kneeling at prayers.

The Government gives liberal subsidies to Muslims who want to go on a Haj pilgrimage, which is being questioned by no less a Muslim personage as the Prince of Arcot, Nawab Mohammed Abdul Ali.

Reacting to newspaper reports that the Union Government has decided to allow the Haj pilgrims to carry $ 10,000 as basic travel quota, in Addition to 2,000 Saudi Riyals, Nawab Abdul Ali is reported to have said that this move means an annual outflow of foreign exchange to the tune of $ 1,000 million for one lakh pilgrims visiting the holy mosques at Mecca and Medina.

Is attacking Hindu temples the Islamic way of repaying this extraordinary generosity? There is total freedom for Muslims to practice their religion in India, unlike as in Pakistan where Hundus such as there now are have to practice their religion under cover.

Sania Mirza is a national heroine and everybody is proud of her performance. Mohammad Kaif, Wasim Jaffer, Irfan Pathan have made their mark in ODI and Test cricket and they have been applauded. No one ever thought of them as Muslims;they were great players; if they failed no one condemned them. When they did well all Indians felt proud.

Time was when a Muslim film star had to assume a `Hindu name, as Dilip Kumar did. But who bothers to question the religious affinity of a Shah Rukh Khan or an Amir Khan? Or Shabana Azmi? We have heard of books on Kathakali, Bharatanatyam and Indian culture being confiscated and destroyed in airports of Saudi Arabia but the most orthodox Hindu would be shocked and pained should anyone dare to tear the Quran.

India is not a barbarian country. It respects all religions. It is therefore shocking to learn that a British airline has banned its staff from taking Bibles or wearing crucifixes on flights to Saudi Arabia "to avoid offending the country's Muslims'. And it is just as painful to learn that a Muslim girl in Kerala and her family are facing social ostracism because she is learning Bharatanatyam!

Kerala Muslims obviously do not know that Ramayana is played in dance form in Indonesia by Muslim artistes. In Pakistan there is a ban on 35 Indian entertainment channels. There is no Islamic country in the world where religious minorities enjoy equal economic, religious and political rights.

In India women can wear burqa and nobody cares. The burqa is banned in Turkey. But for all the freedom that Muslims in India enjoy, it has in recent years been made the target of Islamic hatred.

One of the most active Hate-India organisations is the Lashkar-e-Toiba which has been masterminding a lot of terrorist activity against India. Only a few weeks ago in January, Indian security forces in Kashmir finally were able to kill Abu Huzaifa who had masterminded the October 29, 2005 serial bomb blasts in Delhi that left more than 60 dead.

Hatred is openly propagated as did an Uttar Pradesh Muslim Minister who promised crores of rupees to anyone who would behead the Danish cartoonist who had drawn a series of cartoons derogatory of the Prophet.

And he continues to be a Minister. It is this kind of atrocious behaviour, one believes that provoked K.P.S. Gill to condemn Islamic intolerance in a powerful article in a national daily. "What dishonours Islam more: a few irreverent cartoons?

Or the acts of remorseless murder, of relentless violence against people of other faiths, of the intimidation and abuse of all other faiths and communities which the Islamists routinely engage in"? Gill asked. But who is going to answer him?

Do Jehadis think they can break up India by their acts of terrorism? Or that they can `free' Jammu & Kashmir by attacking the Indian Parliament? All that the jehadis are doing is to give both decent Muslims and Islam a bad name. The least that Muslim citizens of India can do is to give up violence. Violence gets them nowhere. It only antagonises everyone against them.

Is that bow they want to live for generations to come? As one poet put it: "jeena yahan, marna yahan, iske siva jana kahan?" Can't Muslims live in India in peace for India's sake if not for their owm?

Why can't they handle the traitors in their midst instead of constantly berating the majority community? It is peace that gives the richest social and economic dividends, not terrorism.
<img src='http://www.milligazette.com/image2003/2005/129_Woemn-muslim-take-shoot.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Muslim women take to shooting as sport, for self defence
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>After Aligarh </b>
The Pioner Edit Desk
There was a time in the 1980s when "religious riot in Aligarh" was not so much a news occurrence as a cliché. Like Kanpur and Meerut, Gorakhpur and Varanasi, it was one of the many Uttar Pradesh towns seemingly cursed by persistent social violence. This past week, the spectre of horrors past returned to the university town. It began innocuously, as such things often do, following the use of loudspeakers at a temple during Navaratri.

Soon, the temple wall was found damaged and things spiralled out of control - and half-a-dozen people lost their lives. It would be tempting to view the Aligrah fracas as the proverbial isolated incident. Unfortunately, empirical evidence suggests otherwise - it points to a disturbing pattern. Late in 2005, the Dussehra festival saw Muslim mobs attacking Hindu devotees in the eastern Uttar Pradesh town of Mau. In March, the combined protests over President George W Bush's visit and the Danish cartoons lampooning the Prophet saw Lucknow brought to a standstill, Hindu business establishments attacked. Now, shortly after the Holi-eve Varanasi terror outrage, come the incidents in Aligarh.

<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>If one includes the Diwali bomb blasts in Delhi, no major Hindu festival in the past six months has gone unmolested. It is a scary thought. </span>Having said that, it would be crucial to distinguish between terrorist attacks - which have a greater external dimension - and contrived "issues" leading to domestic attacks on a community, which was the case in Mau, Lucknow and now Aligarh. Across Uttar Pradesh, the restlessness on the "Muslim street" in the "Old City" has acquired an edge. The causes may be as far apart as anger against America or the feeling that, with the BJP in political retreat, this is the time to "strike". <b>The attackers in Aligarh were hardly concerned citizens anguished at the possible breach of sound pollution laws - never mind that mosques violate these all the time - but represented a raw, pugnacious sentiment in the minority community, one that identifies itself as Osama's local ambassador, part of a worldwide war against infidels.</b>

To be sure, the violent tendencies among sections of Muslims in Uttar Pradesh did not arrive in a day. Individual politicians - including some ruling party members in the State - encouraged and instigated this process. In Aligarh itself, the radicalisation of the student community was partly a result of assiduous, decade-long proselytisation by SIMI. Today, the built-up prejudice is simmering at the edge. Should it boil over, it would be catastrophic for Uttar Pradesh's society - and a bad, sad reminder that so many ghosts India thought it had buried are still around to stalk it. What is the way out? To call the Muslim disquiet a global phenomenon is to skirt the hard questions. In Aligarh as in Lucknow - or Kanpur or Allahabad for that matter, almost any Uttar Pradesh town - there is a small yet sizeable moderate Muslim class, academics and teachers, businessmen and ordinary labourers, even religious preachers. This group has to lead by example, keep the mohalla peace. The alternative is too dangerous to contemplate.
Muslim reporting (or fabricating things) on Aligarh riots:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Aligarh Police firing


The Milli Gazette Online

New Delhi, 6 April, 2006: The Aligarh riot, which has taken a confirmed toll of four Muslim youths and some struggling for life in A.M.U. Medical College along with twenty five injured, all Muslims, as usual, is a testimony, how a notorious communal P.A.C police force and administration of sectarian mentality reacts to a communally oriented issue. Last night tussle started in sensitive Dahi Wali Gali, where a ‘piao’ [drinking water outlet] was existing near a mosque. After partition lot of road side mandirs have mushroomed in every nook and corner in India. A new mata mandir was created besides the ‘piao’ which has became a flash point between two communities. Since every agreement is broken by mandir pujaris every year and they want to create their influence and area of activity causing insecurity among the small population of Muslims in that locality perhaps to uproot them. The whole scenario is backed financed by local bhagwa brigade with its notorious communal leadership of K.K Nawaman. But for present riot the onus is squarely lying on Aligarh district administration. The D.M and the S.P did not respond to the gravity of the situation and no timely measure was taken to tackle the crisis. If curfew had been imposed last night ,the unfortunate incident might not occurred today .But it is evident that some elements in local police establishment are responsible for this one sided Muslim killing. In fact it is a retaliatory killing of Muslim youth under a hatched conspiracy of few police officers who were furious due to injury of one of their fellow officer N.P. Singh. Details of incident are clearly leading to the conclusion that the city was completely normal till 11 A.M. and riot was created by district administration at a very distant place far away from Dahi Wali Gali to create situation to kill Muslims.

It is required that a compensation of Rs. 10 lakh be paid to those killed, Rs. 5 lakh to each seriously injured & Rs. 2.5 lakh to those who have suffered ordinary injury. The C.O. 1st N.P. Singh & S.P. City S.K. Verma be placed under suspended and booked. A time bound enquiry should be conducted by a sitting judge of a High Court to fix responsibility for selective killings & injury loss of property of innocent Muslims.

Bachchan Ali Khan
Press Secretary, Parcham Party of India
Parcham Party of India

But its okay if mosques mushroom everywhere from Saudi oil money and blare the Azan and disturb peace everyday.
The content and style of the above press release has Kaleem Kawaja written all over it.

To refresh readers' memory, Kawajaspeak in the middle of the Mau riots

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the last few days a Hindu-Muslim communal riot occurred in the town of Mau in eastern Uttar Pradesh. The riot occurred when a group of violent Hindus attacked a mosque where congregational prayers were being held after Muslims broke their day-long fast. The marauders threw missiles, trash and dirt inside the mosque and disturbed the prayer by playing loud music and making loud noises. That resulted in a scuffle between groups of Hindus and Muslims outside the mosque. Subsequently a large number of shops of Muslim residents were set on fire. The local units of the U.P. Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) used excessive force against the Muslim population resulting in injuries to many Muslims, but did not take action against the violent Hindu mob.. It is reported that as of now seven people have been killed in this communal conflagration in Mau city and district.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Note the theme of blaming Hindus and PAC for killing Muslims in both reports.
<b>Islam and us </b> - By Balbir K. Punj

I keep on getting mails and e-mails approbating, enquiring, or critical from my readers. I normally respond at an individual level. I never thought that one of these could become the theme of a column. But recently one Nazar Ahmed Khan, resident of Civil Lines, Aligarh, who apparently keeps a tab on my column in the Hindi daily Dainik Jagran, has sent me a missive running into five pages. <b>The letter is a veiled threat to refrain from propagating my "misinformed views on Islam based on isolated events and individual writings on Islamophobes." It further offers me a chance to understand "true Islam," if not embrace it as well, for the writer is confident that my "future generation" will have to accept Islam in any case.</b>

I thought it wise to share my reply in Dainik Jagran with readers of my English column. The letter offers a glimpse into a Muslim mind. It is an empirical truism that it is Islam that shapes the mind of a Muslim. Christianity doesn't shape the mind of a Christian, nor Hinduism of a Hindu, Buddhism of a Buddhist in that sense and to that extent.

Most Muslims not only have a different perception of religion, of their own and others', but also of history, law, politics, international institutions, banking, education, women's status. No other ideology or thought, viz. democracy, communism, anarchism, free thinking, can impassion the Muslim masses except for Islam. In Muslim countries, any and every decision has to pass the "Islamic or un-Islamic" test.

The letter, typical of any Muslim apologist, says, I have not understood Islam. To be precise, my forefathers for 600 years neither understood Islam nor had any inclination to understand it. In fact, Dhimmis (non-Muslims under Muslim rule), were legally barred from teaching their children the Quran. A kafir (non-Muslim) could either embrace Islam, or pay jizya (religious taxation) to preserve his identity. Not infrequently, they were given a choice between sword and Islam (Toru Singh and Veer Hakikat Rai are classic cases). Forefathers of Mr Nazar Ahmad Khan, probably chose the former, mine the latter. We did not understand Islam, but we suffered and survived Islam.

The truth is that few non-Muslims have academic fascination about Islam. They want to avoid Islam or escape Islam. It is only the persistent pressure of Islam on non-Muslim demography and world order that is compelling non-Muslims to rethink about Islam.

I don't understand Islam, but Osama bin Laden and Aiyman al Zawahari do; Aurangzeb, Shah Waliullah, Said Qutb, Maulana Maududi and Ali Mian did.

I am sure Mr Nazar Ahmed Khan will not claim better knowledge of Islam than those eminent men of religion. What do their views come down to? It is to re-establish an Islamic state and Islamic world order under the "shade of swords." This view is inherent in Islam.

Mr Nazar Khan is annoyed at me for calling Islam claustrophobic. He points out that many in the free society of the West are gravitating towards Islam for its "philosophical and religious appeal." They have no monetary, social or political gain by accepting Islam. Certainly, he has a point, I must accept. Why should Mary McLeod, daughter of a Jamaican evangelical Christian, become a Muslim and drape herself in burqa? His son Germaine Maurice Lindsay also known as Abdullah Shaheed Jamal was one of the four suicide bombers in London tube rail explosion on July 7, 2005.

But most westerners who accepted Islam never accepted the rigours of Islam. Few like John Walker Lynd, the "American Taliban," would give up comforts and the democratic system of the West to fight on the rugged terrain of Afghanistan against his compatriots.

But Nazar Khan is not correct in saying that Muslims (despite death penalty on apostasy) do not go out of Islam. He might check on websites like www.faithfreedom.org or www.mukto-mona.com run by apostate Muslims. You also have people like Ibn Warraq writing, Why I am not a Muslim and editing Leaving Islam, or Anwar Sheikh, Islam: The Arab Imperialism. Prior to leaving Islam many of them were devout, even fanatic, Muslims.

In any case, I leave Islam to them, since each one of them knows Islam better than I do.

The letter-writer mentions that there is a long list of social malpractice in Hinduism. Did Hinduism (actually Manu Smriti) not prescribe pouring molten lead into ears of Dalits if they studied the Vedas? Okay, but when did he last hear such a case actually occurring, when almost every week we hear about jihadis killing kafirs in the 21st century?

I don't know about any actual historical instance of "pouring molten lead into ears" but Dalits were doubtless subjected to many religious and social handicaps. But social reformers arose from within Hindu society in every age, reformers who opposed untouchability, casteism, sati, bar on women's education, child marriage, polygamy etc.

Who can be a greater authority on this subject than Babasaheb Ambedkar? Dr B.R. Ambedkar says, "The Hindus have their social evils. But there is a relieving feature about them, namely, that some of them are conscious of their existence and a few of them are actively agitating for their removal. The Muslims, on the other hand, do not realise that there are evils and consequently do not agitate for their removal. Indeed, they oppose any change in the existing practices. It is noteworthy that Muslims opposed the Child Marriage Bill brought in the Central Assembly in 1930, whereby the age for marriage of a girl was raised to 14 and boy to 18 on the ground that it was opposed to the Muslim canon law" (Pakistan or Partition of India, p.233).

Nor am I surprised when the writer claims that the philosophy of Islam is so perfect that neither Semitic religions like Judaism or Christianity nor "tribal religions" (sic) like Hinduism can rival it. Now, Islam revolves around the Quran, and the Prophet's Sunna (saying and acts of the Prophet that every Muslim should try to emulate to the best of his capacity).

Thus Islam is a theology not a philosophy. The Ayat (verses) of the Quran are like commands to be followed with unquestioning obedience. There is no scope for discovery, debate, discussion or consensus.

Doubt in Islam, unlike in Christianity, is equal to disbelief, which is punishable. Philosophy entered Islam through Christian writings, from Greek scholarship.

But while philosophy triumphed over Christianity, it was banished from Islam.

The cornerstone of philosophy of ancient India is self-realisation. You can be a yogi if you do yoga and push the present frontiers of human consciousness. Any scientific postulations must stand the test of experimentation. But in Islam, Allah has uttered his last word with Prophet Mohammed. There is no way to either contact Allah or doubt Mohammed's revelations. A Muslim will only have to obey. He must also engage in jihad to bring the world unto Islam. If anybody finds fault with Islam, it is at one's own peril. There is no tradition of debate and discussion in Islam. This is the source of Islam's incompatibility with the rest of humanity.
This is really nice. Why will it be a while before muslims are acceptable in hindu localities in mumbai ? It must be hindus' fault. The nut cant even learn anything from the Sikhs..

<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Apr 11 2006, 12:59 AM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Apr 11 2006, 12:59 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->This is really nice. Why will it be a while before muslims are acceptable in hindu localities in mumbai ? It must be hindus' fault. The nut cant even learn anything from the Sikhs..


This article is extremely objectionable and inflammatory <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' /><!--endemo--> Can one write an article telling why he/she wouldnt live in a predominantly muslim neighborhood - worse title it boldly "<b>Why I wont live among Muslims</b>"? <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
The whole Rediff article under reference is misconceived.

The writer should know that it is the <i>food habit</i> of a community which makes it live together.

I am prepared to live among Muslims IF they turn vegetarian!
<b>Resolve Kashmir issue, Muslim clerics urge PM</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Syed Sarwar Chisti, secretary of Ajmer's Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti shrine, and Maulana Mohammad Haroon of the All India Tanzeem Aimma-E-Masajid made the appeal in separate letters to the prime minister.

Both were clear in the quid-pro-quo they expected for supporting Gandhi's campaign in Uttar Pradesh's Rae Bareli constituency to return to the Lok Sabha after resigning her seat over the office of profit controversy.

<b>'Our support will only be given if she solves the problems of the people of Kashmir and Muslims,</b> especially the community's socio-economic backwardness,' Chisti said.

'<b>We appeal to Sonia Gandhi that if she wants the vote of the Muslim community, she should take concrete steps and measures for solving the Kashmir problem,' </b>Haroon said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here comes vote blackmail.
Dear H-Asia member,

I wanted to share with you my article, ' Between moderation and radicalization: transnational interactions of Jamaat-e-Islami of India' published in _Global Networks: A Journal of Transnation Affairs_ (vol. 5,3: 279-99). It engages with the issue of moderation of and conflict within Indian Islamists. In the midst of alarmist writings on Islamist radicalization or terrorism, the crucial phenomenon of moderation of and conflict within Islamists is often elided. From a social movement framework, this article highlights this neglect and dwells on the theoretical implications arising therefrom. Below is link to the article and its abstract.

Irfan Ahmad
Affiliated Fellow
International Institute for Asian Studies
The Netherlands

Link to the Article:



<b> Religious movements have often been studied in the context of nationstates. With scholarly attention now shifting to globalization and other world system processes, there is a growing move to go beyond the particularity of nation-states and study the general transnational dimensions of religious movements. In this article I describe the processes through which Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH), a contemporary Islamist movement in India, developed links with ideologically similar movements, institutions and networks in the Gulf countries, Iran and the West., Taking JIH as a social movement, I argue for a more nuanced conceptualization of transnational social movements, because existing theories are based on the experiences of Western democracies and, as such, are insensitive to collective actions in undemocratic polities such as the Gulf states. While making a case for taking into account the transnational dimensions of understanding JIH. I call into question the alarmist thesis that emphasizes the homogenous radicalization of the entire movement as an inevitable consequence of the transnational connections an Islamic movement develops. On the contrary, I contend that they also lead to conflict within the movement and its moderation.</b>
Irfan Ahmad
<b>A Different Jihad Dalit Muslims' Challenge to Ashraf Hegemony</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Casteism”, he goes on, “ has deeply also crept into Muslims. They do not act like a ‘millat’. We were united before, but especially after 1990 caste divisions have grown stronger among Muslims. Prior to 1990 we used to fight elections collectively. All Muslims used to vote for one Muslim candidate. But ever since the rise of casteism, we have often lost (except in the last election when a candidate belonging to the qureshi community got elected to the state assembly) and BJP has won instead. They (low-castes) are indeed ‘jahil’, ignorant”.

<b>Denial and Anxiety </b>
The upper castes comprise no more than 8 per cent of the total population. The majority of Muslims in Sheher are qureshis, ansaris, saifis, rangrez, bishtis or alvis. Before 1990, candidates were often from the so-called Ashraf classes and Muslims in general supported them. But after 1990, that is, since what Yogender Yadav has described as the ‘second democratic upsurge’ [1996:101] inaugurated by Mandal and the ascendance of the other backward classes3  (OBCs), low-caste Muslims started putting up their own candidates and asked the Ashraf to vote for them. In the narrative of the upper castes, it was then that casteism began within Muslims and the imagined millat got severely wounded
<b>Embattled Future</b>
In post-partition India, Muslim politics has predominantly been reactive. It has raised emotive rather than substantive issues. Monopolised by the traditionally privileged classes of ashraf, Muslim leadership has so far rarely looked beyond the four issues of Urdu, Aligarh Muslim University, Muslim Personal Law and Babri masjid [Ahmad 1997]. There is thus a growing feeling that such an edition of politics has failed to deliver much dividend. As a matter of fact, many observers feel that it has instead strengthened the hands of Hindutva and created boredom and alienation in Muslim society, particularly the youth. A fringe minority has thus begun to be taken over by the captivating slogan of jihad against the forces of what it calls ‘non-Islam’.

By bringing into sharp focus the plight of backward and dalit Muslims, Anwar’s book does not merely address an economic question but has the great potential to also redefine the very grammar of Muslim politics in favour of a progressive agenda. This redefinition, if successful, augurs well for India’s destiny. It is framed in a distinctively secular language and envisions a socially just, plural society. This may inaugurate a departure of some sorts from the old-style reactive politics. The need for such a departure hardly needs to be stressed in the face of two major challenges confronting Indian polity – near triumph of Hindutva on the one hand and reactive Muslim politics on the other. There is a visible propensity of a section of Muslim youth towards a revivalist jihad ignited by robust ideology of Wahabism. In obvious contrast to this, Anwar’s book calls for a radically different jihad – jihad for the social empowerment of the downtrodden Muslims and the restoration of honour to them. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>SC overrules Fatwa
SC warns: India is secular, behave</b>
Press Trust of India
New Delhi, April 21: The Supreme Court on Friday directed the Orissa government to provide police protection to a Muslim couple who were forced to separate after local clerics issued a fatwa that they were divorced even though they wanted to live together.

The husband of petitioner Nazma Biwi had pronounced triple talaq in an inebriated condition in 2004 but later realizing his mistake, he decided to live with his wife and three children.

However, local clerics at Bhadrak issued a fatwa that they were divorced and hence could not live together. Thereafter the couple was forced to live separately by the community.

<b>"No one can force them to live separately. This is a secular country. All communities---Hindus or Muslims should behave in civilised manner", a bench of Justice Ruma Pal, Justice C K Thakker and Justice Markandey Katju observed.</b>

The observation came after the petioner's counsel complained that the couple continue to be ostracised by the Muslim community at Bhadrak in Orissa.

Orissa government counsel Shibo Shanker Mishra sought two weeks to file reply to Nazma's petition and the court obliged.

<b>Earlier Nazma had approached the High Court against the fatwa and had sought police protection from her community men who were allegedly harassing the couple.</b>

The incident had created a nation-wide controversy with various women organisations and civil society groups taking up cudgels on behalf of the harassed couple.

<b>The clerics had said that if Nazma wanted to live with her husband, she must perform 'halala' (she must marry another man and the marriage must be consummated, after which she can get a divorce and then re-marry her first husband).</b>
However, Nazma refused to do so, and instead knocked at the doors of the court.
URL: www.expressindia.com/full...wsid=66459<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Apr 21 2006, 08:24 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Apr 21 2006, 08:24 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> 
<b>The clerics had said that if Nazma wanted to live with her husband, she must perform 'halala' (she must marry another man and the marriage must be consummated, after which she can get a divorce and then re-marry her first husband).</b>
However, Nazma refused to do so, and instead knocked at the doors of the court.

The couple would be better off reverting back to Hinduism and marrying under the Hindu Marriage act. That would be both legal, and would award proper justice from this harassment in the name of non-uniform civil code.
<b>  'SC has no power to intervene in talaq issue' </b>
Sunday, 23 April , 2006, 18:42
Bhubaneswar: Taking strong exception to the Supreme Court verdict directing Orissa government to provide security to a muslim couple who wanted to stay together after talaq, Orissa unit of Jamiat-ul-Ulama on Sunday threatened to ostrcise the couple if they went by the apex court decision.

“Supreme Court has no power to intervene in religious matter. The apex court should have confined itself to other litigations. It should have consulted religious institutions and clerics before taking such decision,” Aameere Shariat (president) of Jamiat-ul-Ulama Maulana S S Sajideen Quasmi told PTI from Cuttack. <b>“We will certainly drive the couple out of Muslim society if they stay together defying clerics decisions and abide by the Supreme Court verdict,” </b>Sajideen said.

He said, “had the apex court directed the state government to give the couple protection for any other reason, we would not have objected. It is purely a religious matter. The court should not have hurt sentiments of any religious community.”

The Jamiat-ul-Ulama, the highest religious body of Sunni sect in the state, said it would write to President of India, Prime Minister, Chief Minister and Law ministers of both state and union governments to look into the matter.

“We are not showing any disrespect to Supreme Court. We will continue to abide by its law. But we will certainly appeal the court to review its decision,” he said adding that it could create “distrust” in the community.

The whole issue should be discussed in the parliament. It was high time the legislative body should take a firm decision on religious independence, he said.

Najma Bibi and Seikh Sher Mohmmed of Orissa’s Bhadrak district had incurred the wrath of clerics after the husband pronounced triple talaq in a drunken state in 2003 but subsequently wanted to stay together.

However, Supreme Court on April 21, 2006 had directed Orissa government to provide security to the couple who wanted to stay together.

<b>“No one can force them to live separately. This is a secular country. All communities — Hindus or Muslims should behave in a civilised manner”,</b> a bench of Justice Ruma Pal, Justice C K Thakker and Justice Markandey Katju had observed.

Reacting to the apex court verdict, Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had said “let the state government receive the verdict. Then only needful steps will be taken.”

<b>Jamiat-ul-Ulama said it would soon convene a meeting of qazee shariat (district unit) to deliberate on the issue</b>.

“We are waiting for the Supreme Court order and all heads of district units would discuss on the subject. Future course of action would be taken according to the resolution passed in the meeting,” Sajideen said.

Meanwhile, clerics in Bhadrak district have given guarded response. Abdul Bari, president of Bhadrak Muslim Jamait, said “we will take a stand after we get the copy of Supreme Court judgement.”

He said, “we are examining response of administration on the issue.”

<b>A report from Najma’s village said some residents were opposed to Najama and Sher Mohmmed’s reunion. “we will not let anybody, who had defied fatwa, stay among us,” </b>they warned.
They should change religion.

Why Muslims are selective regarding punishment?
If Hindu organisations are smart they would take advantage of situations like these and reconvert these people but then again RSS supremo is busy urging Muslims to accept Sri Krishna as one of the prophets, wonder what VHP is doing.
In 80s, newly converted Muslim couple to Hindusim found dead in Agra Hotel, culprit were brothers. Reason for conversion was above.
Muslims are very rigid, they give damn to even blood relation.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In 80s, newly converted Muslim couple to Hindusim found dead in Agra Hotel, culprit were brothers. Reason for conversion was above.
Muslims are very rigid, they give damn to even blood relation. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know how they kill apostates but sooner or later reconversion is the only solution, its better we start it now and give protection to these apostates instead of allowing things to continue on the same path.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>And Now, Osama Targets India</b>-
<i> In the latest audio message attributed to bin Laden, he has for the first time made direct references to India and the Kashmir issue and spoken of an alleged Crusader-Zionist-Hindu conspiracy against the Muslims.</i>
I had mentioned in my past articles that while Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's No. 2, had criticised India and the Hindus, bin Laden himself had refrained from any direct criticism of India and the Hindus.

In the latest audio message attributed to bin Laden, which was broadcast by the Al Jazeera TV channel on April 23, 2006 (please see the link below) <b>he has for the first time made direct references to India and the Kashmir issue and spoken of an alleged Crusader-Zionist-Hindu conspiracy against the Muslims. He makes the first reference to "a Crusader-Zionist-Hindu war against the Muslims"</b> while talking of the alleged Western conspiracy to deprive Indonesia of East Timor.

It is not clear why he refers to India in connection with the separation of East Timor from Indonesia. He then says: <b>"Meanwhile, a UN resolution passed more than half a century ago gave Muslim Kashmir the liberty of choosing independence from India. George Bush, the leader of the Crusaders' campaign, announced a few days ago that he will order his converted agent [Pakistan President Pervez] Musharraf to shut down the Kashmir mujahidin camps, thus affirming that it is a Zionist-Hindu war against Muslims."</b>

His reference is apparently to the remarks made by President Bush during his visit to Afghanistan, India and Pakistan from March 1 to 4, 2006. Mr. Bush had stated at Delhi that he would be taking up with President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan India's complaints that the jihadist terrorist infrastructure in Pakistani territory directed against India remains intact.

bin Laden further adds: <b>"It is the duty for the Umma with all its categories, men, women and youths, to give away themselves, their money, experiences and all types of material support, enough to establish jihad particularly in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Sudan, Kashmir and Chechnya. Jihad today is an imperative for every Muslim. The Umma will commit a sin if it did not provide adequate material support for jihad."</b>

He also refers to the current fighting in the Waziristan area of Pakistan between the Pakistani Army and the local inhabitants in the following words: <b>" With respect to Pakistan, some Muslims have done a good job by assisting their fellow Muslims, God bless them, but the Pashtun tribes must be aided after the Pakistan army devastated their homes in Waziristan in order to satisfy the US."</b>

This is the second audio message by bin Laden since he broke his 13-month-long silence on January 19, 2006,with a message which was essentially directed to the American people in the context of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. That message was triggered off by reports of growing opposition to the war in Iraq from large sections of the American public. It sought to take advantage of this opposition by offering a truce to the American people if the American forces were withdrawn from the two countries. It carried an implied warning that if his offer was rejected, another terrorist strike in the US homeland would follow for which, he claimed, preparations were already under way.

The latest message, which is addressed to the Islamic world and not to the US and other Western countries, does not repeat his earlier warning of plans for another terrorist strike in the US. The message of April 23 seems to have been triggered off by a concern over the lack of any significant anger in the Islamic world over the suspension of Western assistance to the Hamas-led Government in the area under the control of the Palestinian Authority and over the developments in the Darfur region of the Sudan and the plans to send an international peace-keeping force there.

Source :rediff <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)