Jump to content

Is Mamta Banerjee's West Bengal becoming a mini Pakistan?


Austin 3:!6

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Ranvir said:

I am a realist. The Muslims wanted partition and they got it, they were responsible for the carnage since they demanded a seperate country. They killed a lot of Sikhs in places like Rawalpindi and Lahore and Sikhs retaliated and gave as good as they got otherwise East Punjab would have a large Muslim population and would be facing the same situation as West Bengal today. Pakistan is 97% Muslim and prospects for minorities are far worse than they are in India. What the creation of Pakistan showed was that when Muslims form a majority in an area they will demand independence and make life extremely difficult for minorities, we've already seen that in Kashmir.

 

But hey, you keep listening to Sufi songs from Hans Raj Hans and Gurdas Khan and think they are peaceful people.

My family is a from a village in Punjab and the Muslims who died in neighbouring villages did not die in retaliation ,they died defending their land and as a Jatt I can understand that.

And while I have immense respect for Gurdas Mann,my values are from my religion-leaving you with some verses to refresh your knowledge.

 

Awwal Allah Noor Upaya Qudrat Keh Sub Banday

Aik Noor Keh Sub Jag Upajiya Kaun Bhale Ko Mandhe

 

God created light of which all the beings were born

And from this light, the universe; so who is good and who is bad.

 

That said you are entitled to your views and apologies to others for derailing the thread.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

I like to think that I am realist...I, like everyone else, think right now Islam is a big big problem for the whole world. But I am optimistically thinking that easily available internet (through smartphones) could change it in a couple of generations (One generation = 20 years). We can say now with the advent of smartphones, 4g/broadband etc. the internet has truly become universal (maybe not even now)....So I would like a couple of generations to pass on to see the effects...A 13 yo kid would be 53 yrs in 40 years and many older Islamists would have died of old age.

 

If anything, the Internet has made Islamic extremism worse. More youngsters are being groomed online and being radicalised to go to places like Syria etc.

 

The internet has been available through smartphones for 10 years but we haven't seen a reduction in extremism from Muslims, it has increased. Having lived in an area with lots of Muslims I know how they are raised and indoctrinated since birth to believe that they follow the true religion and kuffars are going to burn in hell. They are hell bent on converting people to Islam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, kabbirann said:

My family is a from a village in Punjab and the Muslims who died in neighbouring villages did not die in retaliation ,they died defending their land and as a Jatt I can understand that.

And while I have immense respect for Gurdas Mann,my values are from my religion-leaving you with some verses to refresh your knowledge.

 

Awwal Allah Noor Upaya Qudrat Keh Sub Banday

Aik Noor Keh Sub Jag Upajiya Kaun Bhale Ko Mandhe

 

God created light of which all the beings were born

And from this light, the universe; so who is good and who is bad.

 

That said you are entitled to your views and apologies to others for derailing the thread.

 

 

 

 

Of course the Muslims in your neighbouring village died because of retaliation for what was going on in west Punjab. There were plenty of non Jatt Muslims in Punjab and they were pretty much all thrown out or killed. A Jatt has to make everything to be about land but that is not the case. 

 

The Muslims wanted their homeland and they were responsible for what happened during partition. In Pakistan muslim men routinely kidnap teenage Hindu girls and marry them, they are on another level of behaviour.

 

I've heard now that some more Muslims have come to Punjab from UP and Bihar and that they've started blasting out their prayer music from old disused mosques but if they ever start any pangas they will not be tolerated like they are in West Bengal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Ranvir said:

If anything, the Internet has made Islamic extremism worse. More youngsters are being groomed online and being radicalised to go to places like Syria etc.

 

The internet has been available through smartphones for 10 years but we haven't seen a reduction in extremism from Muslims, it has increased. Having lived in an area with lots of Muslims I know how they are raised and indoctrinated since birth to believe that they follow the true religion and kuffars are going to burn in hell. They are hell bent on converting people to Islam.

Agree. Increased penetration of the internet is not going to add more rational thinking on religious subjects. In fact, on the contrary, extremism has found a new way to propagate itself via the internet. I see religious extremism increasing over the years and eventually resulting in a huge divide in society. The problem with Islamic religious extremism is that the majority of rational thinkers within that religion are incapable of reigning in the extremists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My family is a from a village in Punjab and the Muslims who died in neighbouring villages did not die in retaliation ,they died defending their land and as a Jatt I can understand that.

And while I have immense respect for Gurdas Mann,my values are from my religion-leaving you with some verses to refresh your knowledge.

 

Awwal Allah Noor Upaya Qudrat Keh Sub Banday

Aik Noor Keh Sub Jag Upajiya Kaun Bhale Ko Mandhe

 

God created light of which all the beings were born

And from this light, the universe; so who is good and who is bad.

 

That said you are entitled to your views and apologies to others for derailing the thread.

 

   

 

Ghan..ta, you can change habits not nature, like it or not, they can't tolerate other religions, the religion of peace means submission, by words, by money or by sword the choice is yours, it's like my way or sky way, so better get ready for future, I don't want to sound like war monger, but one has to get ready for the future, I have seen all their colours, so u can trust snake for once but not them, whether one like this post or not, but one cannot change it.

Sent from my SM-N900 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question is why were so many Muslims allowed to stay back in India even after  voting ( predominantly 95 %) in favor of Pakistan and Mohammed Ali Jinnah? 

 

Things should have been handled with more simplicity. Either Hindus and Muslims live together in an Undivided India with no community gaining any favors or in the event of creation of Pakistan,  every Single Muslim should leave India over a period of time. 

 

A handful of Muslims here and there could have been Ok,  but what's the point of partition if India is still left with Millions of Muslims and growing? 

 

So, Muslims get their all Exclusive Muslim Zones Pakistan and Bangladesh. 

 

But Hindus continue to share whatever is left equally with Muslims. 

 

That's some win-win situation for the Muslims. I am baffled as to how  Gandhi and Nehru could agree over such an agreement and moreover face no opposition over it.

 

Now some stupid Indian Secularists point towards the Hindu - Muslim coexistence in India and conclude how creation of Pakistan was a sham. Why are the Hindus so desperate to prove their secular credentials and that Muslims can Co-exist together in India ? 

 

Offcourse Muslims and Hindus can Co-exist together when the Muslims are outnumbered in a ratio of 10:1. Then Muslims will be the most law abiding ideal citizens of the state. If and when the ratio reaches 4:1 or 3:1 in worse situation,  there will be more anarchy,  lawlessness,  rioting,  strikes and terrorism in the state. When the ratio reaches 1:1, the state will become unfit and too unsafe for everyone except Muslims and Hindus will start migrating to other states for safety. And in a few years time,  the state will be all set for secession. 

 

Standard Islamic takeover policy. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rageaddict said:

The question is why were so many Muslims allowed to stay back in India even after  voting ( predominantly 95 %) in favor of Pakistan and Mohammed Ali Jinnah? 

 

 

Because despite what VHP/RSS/BJP might claim, India is not  a Hindu nation. It is a secular democracy. Which means it is a nation of any/all religions. 

Your query would be valid, if India was a hindu nation, like Pakistan is a muslim nation. Since we are not, your question is invalid.

 

Quote
 
Now some stupid Indian Secularists point towards the Hindu - Muslim coexistence in India and conclude how creation of Pakistan was a sham. Why are the Hindus so desperate to prove their secular credentials and that Muslims can Co-exist together in India ? 

We are not desperate to prove our credential as secular- we *are* secular. Most hindus are hindus for festivals & personal important days (naming day, weddings, etc).  Most muslims sit around, chanting the Namaz 5 times a day. Most hindus don't sit around singing bhajans all day long. We are fundamentally more secular and India has more true secular/irreligious people than it has muslims. I identify culturally as a Hindu. I am proud of my heritage/culture. But i will be the first one to laugh when someone claims Rama was a God or Vishnu wills this or that. So people like me, we fight those who try to bring religious influence into society- be it Muslim or a right wing Hinduvta. 

 

Quote
 
Offcourse Muslims and Hindus can Co-exist together when the Muslims are outnumbered in a ratio of 10:1. Then Muslims will be the most law abiding ideal citizens of the state. If and when the ratio reaches 4:1 or 3:1 in worse situation,  there will be more anarchy,  lawlessness,  rioting,  strikes and terrorism in the state. When the ratio reaches 1:1, the state will become unfit and too unsafe for everyone except Muslims and Hindus will start migrating to other states for safety. And in a few years time,  the state will be all set for secession. 

 

Theoretically true, but practically irrelevant.


Currently, there are just over 1 billion Hindus in India.  Their average growth rate over 10 year period from 2001 -2011 is 16.76%. Which means between 2001-2011, we added 144 million Hindus to the total.


Meanwhile, there are 172 million muslims in India. Their average growth rate is 24.60%. Which means in the same period, we added 34 million muslims to the total.

 

At the current rate, it would take more than a thousand years to even begin approaching 2:1, let alone 1:1

And i don't think religion- any religion- will survive another 100-150 years. So in practice, this alarmist thought has no merit.

 

Edited by Muloghonto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, rageaddict said:

The question is why were so many Muslims allowed to stay back in India even after  voting ( predominantly 95 %) in favor of Pakistan and Mohammed Ali Jinnah? 

 

Things should have been handled with more simplicity. Either Hindus and Muslims live together in an Undivided India with no community gaining any favors or in the event of creation of Pakistan,  every Single Muslim should leave India over a period of time. 

 

A handful of Muslims here and there could have been Ok,  but what's the point of partition if India is still left with Millions of Muslims and growing? 

 

So, Muslims get their all Exclusive Muslim Zones Pakistan and Bangladesh. 

 

But Hindus continue to share whatever is left equally with Muslims. 

 

That's some win-win situation for the Muslims. I am baffled as to how  Gandhi and Nehru could agree over such an agreement and moreover face no opposition over it.

 

Now some stupid Indian Secularists point towards the Hindu - Muslim coexistence in India and conclude how creation of Pakistan was a sham. Why are the Hindus so desperate to prove their secular credentials and that Muslims can Co-exist together in India ? 

 

Offcourse Muslims and Hindus can Co-exist together when the Muslims are outnumbered in a ratio of 10:1. Then Muslims will be the most law abiding ideal citizens of the state. If and when the ratio reaches 4:1 or 3:1 in worse situation,  there will be more anarchy,  lawlessness,  rioting,  strikes and terrorism in the state. When the ratio reaches 1:1, the state will become unfit and too unsafe for everyone except Muslims and Hindus will start migrating to other states for safety. And in a few years time,  the state will be all set for secession. 

 

Standard Islamic takeover policy. 

 

You hit the nail on the head. Dharmic faiths are open minded compared to Islam. It was completely foolish to allow so many Muslims to stay behind.

 

During partition Indian Muslims had their cake and ate it. A third of their population is in Pakistan, a third in Bangladesh and a third in India.

 

Punjab being a border state meant that ethnic cleansing happened on both sides of the border. People saw violence on one side and repeated it on the other, this never happened in Uttar Pradesh and other states.

 

What happened in Bengal during partition? Was there a lot of violence and migration?

I ask because people in Punjab are apprehensive towards Muslims because of what they had done to Sikh gurus and the violence that took place during partition.

 

Gandhi and Nehru were both fools. I heard Dr Ambedkar wanted to do a full population exchange, this would have been the best solution and would've brought more peace in the subcontinent.

 

The fact is that any country that has thousands of Muslims will have some form of Islamic terrorism.

 

You can be secular when it involves Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Christians and people will in general accept each other's beliefs because people in these faiths are not obsessive about religion and generally only go to their place of worship on weekends and during special occasions. Islam is a different kettle of fish and everyone knows it.

 

The blame of allowing so many Muslims to stay behind in India belongs to the Hindu majority who tolerate them despite the fact that Muslims have treated Hindus like dirt when they are in the majority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Because despite what VHP/RSS/BJP might claim, India is not  a Hindu nation. It is a secular democracy. Which means it is a nation of any/all religions. 

Your query would be valid, if India was a hindu nation, like Pakistan is a muslim nation. Since we are not, your question is invalid.

 

We are not desperate to prove our credential as secular- we *are* secular. Most hindus are hindus for festivals & personal important days (naming day, weddings, etc).  Most muslims sit around, chanting the Namaz 5 times a day. Most hindus don't sit around singing bhajans all day long. We are fundamentally more secular and India has more true secular/irreligious people than it has muslims. I identify culturally as a Hindu. I am proud of my heritage/culture. But i will be the first one to laugh when someone claims Rama was a God or Vishnu wills this or that. So people like me, we fight those who try to bring religious influence into society- be it Muslim or a right wing Hinduvta. 

 

 

Theoretically true, but practically irrelevant.


Currently, there are just over 1 billion Hindus in India.  Their average growth rate over 10 year period from 2001 -2011 is 16.76%. Which means between 2001-2011, we added 144 million Hindus to the total.


Meanwhile, there are 172 million muslims in India. Their average growth rate is 24.60%. Which means in the same period, we added 34 million muslims to the total.

 

At the current rate, it would take more than a thousand years to even begin approaching 2:1, let alone 1:1

And i don't think religion- any religion- will survive another 100-150 years. So in practice, this alarmist thought has no merit.

 

You've got your head buried in the sand thinking that religion won't survive more than 100-150 years. Islam especially will survive, like I said, Muslims are becoming more religious today than they were 40-50 years ago, even with scientific discoveries. It doesn't matter what their literacy rates are, there are even cases of Doctors from subcontinental backgrounds going to Syria.

 

Dont bury your head in the sand and think that time will stop Islamic extremism. You have to do something about it now.

 

It is in the interests of the governments of places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan to keep Islam alive purely for power and financial reasons. 

 

Remember in these countries you cannot leave Islam without incurring the death penalty.

 

Liberalism when it comes to Islam is the same as shooting yourself in the head.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ranvir said:

You hit the nail on the head. Dharmic faiths are open minded compared to Islam. It was completely foolish to allow so many Muslims to stay behind.

 

During partition Indian Muslims had their cake and ate it. A third of their population is in Pakistan, a third in Bangladesh and a third in India.

 

Punjab being a border state meant that ethnic cleansing happened on both sides of the border. People saw violence on one side and repeated it on the other, this never happened in Uttar Pradesh and other states.

 

What happened in Bengal during partition? Was there a lot of violence and migration?

I ask because people in Punjab are apprehensive towards Muslims because of what they had done to Sikh gurus and the violence that took place during partition.

 

Gandhi and Nehru were both fools. I heard Dr Ambedkar wanted to do a full population exchange, this would have been the best solution and would've brought more peace in the subcontinent.

 

The fact is that any country that has thousands of Muslims will have some form of Islamic terrorism.

 

You can be secular when it involves Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Christians and people will in general accept each other's beliefs because people in these faiths are not obsessive about religion and generally only go to their place of worship on weekends and during special occasions. Islam is a different kettle of fish and everyone knows it.

 

The blame of allowing so many Muslims to stay behind in India belongs to the Hindu majority who tolerate them despite the fact that Muslims have treated Hindus like dirt when they are in the majority.

Actually Punjabi Muslims were third class citizens under Sikhs and peasant class under turk-afghan-mughal rule, they are absent from mughal nobility, so no they did not opress you guys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, panther said:

Actually Punjabi Muslims were third class citizens under Sikhs and peasant class under turk-afghan-mughal rule, they are absent from mughal nobility, so no they did not opress you guys. 

 

Mughals were central Asians initially and then within a couple of generations they were of predominately Indian blood just like the people they ruled over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Muloghonto said:


Currently, there are just over 1 billion Hindus in India.  Their average growth rate over 10 year period from 2001 -2011 is 16.76%. Which means between 2001-2011, we added 144 million Hindus to the total.


Meanwhile, there are 172 million muslims in India. Their average growth rate is 24.60%. Which means in the same period, we added 34 million muslims to the total.

 

At the current rate, it would take more than a thousand years to even begin approaching 2:1, let alone 1:1

And i don't think religion- any religion- will survive another 100-150 years. So in practice, this alarmist thought has no merit.

 

I agree with the rest of your post, but disagree with the conclusion based on the numbers calculation. The concern expressed here is not just about India as a whole having a lopsided population ratio between Hindus and Muslims that will make Hindus very uncomfortable, but more about certain regions within India having these.

 

The example sited is West Bengal, a border state that witnesses large scale Muslim migration from Bangladesh and where politicians in power have been extremely reluctant to address oppression by minorities in areas where they have a majority. As Muslim population keeps increasing and Hindu population keeps declining (as a % of total population), the areas where Muslims will start imposing their rule will keep widening to the point where they could have total domination across the state.

 

There are other states like Assam, Kerala where such a scenario could be applied as well. This scenario is not too far away from us (probably within the next 100 years).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ranvir said:

 

Mughals were central Asians initially and then within a couple of generations they were of predominately Indian blood just like the people they ruled over.

Doesn't change the fact that punjabies were pesants who had nothing to do with mughal rule, and Muslims only identify with paternal linage so no one cares if mughals had Indian blood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Texan said:

I agree with the rest of your post, but disagree with the conclusion based on the numbers calculation. The concern expressed here is not just about India as a whole having a lopsided population ratio between Hindus and Muslims that will make Hindus very uncomfortable, but more about certain regions within India having these.

 

The example sited is West Bengal, a border state that witnesses large scale Muslim migration from Bangladesh and where politicians in power have been extremely reluctant to address oppression by minorities in areas where they have a majority. As Muslim population keeps increasing and Hindu population keeps declining (as a % of total population), the areas where Muslims will start imposing their rule will keep widening to the point where they could have total domination across the state.

 

There are other states like Assam, Kerala where such a scenario could be applied as well. This scenario is not too far away from us (probably within the next 100 years).

Then why isn't Modi doing something about it?

 

This is why population control would have been beneficial for India, it would have kept Muslim population under control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/31/2016 at 8:18 AM, Texan said:

I agree with the rest of your post, but disagree with the conclusion based on the numbers calculation. The concern expressed here is not just about India as a whole having a lopsided population ratio between Hindus and Muslims that will make Hindus very uncomfortable, but more about certain regions within India having these.

 

The example sited is West Bengal, a border state that witnesses large scale Muslim migration from Bangladesh and where politicians in power have been extremely reluctant to address oppression by minorities in areas where they have a majority. As Muslim population keeps increasing and Hindu population keeps declining (as a % of total population), the areas where Muslims will start imposing their rule will keep widening to the point where they could have total domination across the state.

 

There are other states like Assam, Kerala where such a scenario could be applied as well. This scenario is not too far away from us (probably within the next 100 years).

 

I agree that things will get a lot worse before it gets better, especially in localized hot spots, i am going to stand by my statement that in about a 100 years, Islam will be a tiny rump of what it is today. We have record number of people leaving Islam, especially in the west & in Arabia. 20 years ago, i never thought i'd meet an arab in arabia who'd say 'i used to be muslim but now i am not' but i've met them (in arabia) over the years frequently. 

Atheism is the fastest growing idea in the world and has been over the past 20-30 years. Just like how extremism is propagated via the internet and is exploding in numbers, so is atheism.  These days, there are almost as many muslims world-wide who are leaving Islam as non-muslims converting to Islam. And that trend will only accelerate over time, as people's beliefs get challenged. 

You have to remember, before the internet, nobody had the balls to challenge Islam in Islamic nations, now thanks to internet, we can talk to muslims in super-muslim countries and challenge their belief system. Even here, when we discussed God, not a single muslim could stand up to the challenge of proving God exits or that the definition of God in their holy book is absurd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...