bharathh Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 14 hours ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: This may be true or this may be an opinion. It’s hard to say without hard data. Check out what happened in Ajmer, Rajasthan in 1992. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 22 hours ago, bharathh said: No answers? These rulers and their court appointed writers wrote with glee about how they terrorized the helpless natives of India who were Hindu and Buddhist at the time. In fact, Bhaktiyar Khilji was offended when a pandit from Nalanda was able to find a cure for his malady and was able to deliver it to him despite him refusing Kafir medicine. This led to the destruction of Nalanda and other world renowned institutes and repositories of knowledge of that time. During Sikandar's time he not only destroyed all of Kashmir's most famous temples out of hatred for the kafir, he also used to tie Kashmiri Hindus together and drown them or slaughter them enmasse. There were six mounds of janeus or sacred threads that were burnt - so many people were killed. So surely there must be some Hindu ruler as cruel as some of these minor tyrants who did immense damage to their domains. Let's have some names. Otherwise wtf are you talking about? It is not even that Muslims/Islam denounce these tyrants. Instead ppl in Pakistan name missiles after them and consider them heroes. Please name one Hindu tyrant ruler that has been glorified in India the way Timur/Mughals etc. are revered. Yes buddy. Invaders of Muslim faith were uniquely violent. Whereas, Hindus never invaded anyone. And even if they did, they were pious and well-behaved. Also, Muslims after living in Bharat for 1300 years, they are still foreigners even as they made it their home. But Aryans are not foreigners. The Aryans grew on trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 On 10/11/2023 at 9:32 PM, rollingstoned said: The fact that self defence and freedom fighter claims are made by those who (mis)use it as a pretext for nefarious and violent purposes doesn't mean that objectively self defence and freedom movements don't ever have valid justifications or that terrorist and expansionist movements also don't exist. It's a nuance that is not hard to grasp if you can apply context and are not a halfwit who tries to weasel his way out by using flawed heuristics. How extreme a movement is can be gleaned by the movement's fundamentals ,it's world view and also what it's historical patterns have generally been, which is also not that hard if one is willing to actually do it and not give in to equivocation. Saying all of them are somehow the same is just an inaccurate cop out. Yes, good luck convincing 7 billion people on your definition of “extreme violence”. And people who claim self defense that it is not actually self defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 On 10/11/2023 at 9:25 PM, rollingstoned said: Again, not indoctrination if it can easily be borne out so try again. And yes, on the balance of it despite all the shucking and jiving the Hindus were the overwhelming victims regardless of however you want to spin it or slice& dice it since they were the original inhabitants of these lands and had to leave places that they called homes for generations because of M who saw it as their religious duty to drive them out. You should address your own indoctrination which trots out the same stale pseudo-progressive, secular tropes. That is common knowledge what happened without needing to point it out. Increase in H population is minuscule compared to the overall rise in population in absolute numbers throught the country so while the percentage seems to be there or thereabouts it has a hard limit due to Islamic laws that prohibit H from marrying anyone other than other Hindus or non-M while M are allowed to convert anyone they please and are encouraged to do so by the state and so is negligible enough so as not to matter. So in that sense the fact that Hindu population as a % isn't 0 yet is not some great achievement and does nothing to gainsay the fact that genocides, cleansing and forced conversions did and do still happen which you would admit to if you had not already succumbed to Islamist propaganda yourself so sought to whitewash it with wishy washy rationalizations like you are doing here. The landmass that Hindus & Sikhs were forcefully evicted from is only a fraction of the landmass that Muslims occupied throught Independent India and so is not comparable to the Muslims who mostly 'voluntarily' undertook a Hijrat to a dar ul islam which they saw as religiously binding so it's not a valid comparison which is why they're called Mohajirs. lol. The ones who were thrown out forcefully mainly came from the border areas in jammu and East Punjab as a reaction which is quite justified. So no, just because Mohajirs were stupid enough to not think it through back then and are suffering now doesn't mean that the Hindus, SIkhs didn't overwhelmingly see the short end of the stick. All communities might have been impacted but not equally unless you're gullible enough or brainwashed enough to believe that by ignoring everything else. Ok. Hindus are victims because they were forced to leave. But 7.3 million muslims left their business and homes in India voluntarily. The irony of this Hindu nationalist indoctrination of India is unmistakable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bharathh Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: Yes buddy. Invaders of Muslim faith were uniquely violent. Whereas, Hindus never invaded anyone. And even if they did, they were pious and well-behaved. Also, Muslims after living in Bharat for 1300 years, they are still foreigners even as they made it their home. But Aryans are not foreigners. The Aryans grew on trees. Tell me which ones and pls show where have done anything similar to the minor tyrants I have named. There are many more if you want more names. Where did I say Muslims cannot live here in India or are not Indians? Edited October 13, 2023 by bharathh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bharathh Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: Ok. Hindus are victims because they were forced to leave. But 7.3 million muslims left their business and homes in India voluntarily. The irony of this Hindu nationalist indoctrination of India is unmistakable. Muslims voted for a separate homeland and so left. Noone asked them to leave before that. They were adamant that they needed a separate homeland after. Even then a large number decided to stay back. So after voting for a separate homeland - why would the 7.3 muslims stay (where do you get this number from btw?) - they better leave na? Otherwise what was the point of voting for a separate nation on the basis of religion. Edited October 13, 2023 by bharathh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 10 hours ago, bharathh said: Muslims voted for a separate homeland and so left. Noone asked them to leave before that. They were adamant that they needed a separate homeland after. Even then a large number decided to stay back. So after voting for a separate homeland - why would the 7.3 muslims stay (where do you get this number from btw?) - they better leave na? Otherwise what was the point of voting for a separate nation on the basis of religion. because not every Muslim voted for a separate homeland and many indeed wanted to stay. It was an explicit understanding established by Congress leaders that they won’t be forced to leave, but the hate mongers and Hindu mobs had other plans. Indeed, even today, Muslims are told to go to Pakistan, which is pathetic to see. As a parallel “go to India” for Hindus in Pakistan doesn’t exist. rollingstoned 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathmonger Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 8 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: because not every Muslim voted for a separate homeland and many indeed wanted to stay. It was an explicit understanding established by Congress leaders that they won’t be forced to leave, but the hate mongers and Hindu mobs had other plans. Indeed, even today, Muslims are told to go to Pakistan, which is pathetic to see. As a parallel “go to India” for Hindus in Pakistan doesn’t exist. cause there are hardly any hindus in mainstream society. they all live in rural sindh - out of sigh, out of mind. during 71, pak army attacked hindus indiscriminately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 10 hours ago, bharathh said: Tell me which ones and pls show where have done anything similar to the minor tyrants I have named. There are many more if you want more names. Where did I say Muslims cannot live here in India or are not Indians? It’s not my job to un-indoctrinate you. You need to question the history you’ve been told, specially the recently revised versions by RSS inspired Hindu nationalists, who have exaggerated Muslims as Dracula to control and manipulate Hindus and gain power. There is literally droves of literature available on invasions led by Hindu kings and their aftermaths. I have never denied the barbaric acts of Muslim invaders of those times, but one cannot judge the people of those times with today’s values, specially when behaviors were non-unique. All three religions (Hindu, Christian, and Islam) had fair amount of zeal albeit at different eras. You guys must come out of the illusion BJP/RSS is selling you that Hindus didn't spread their religion with force, but Muslims did. -Do you think it was a magic that a large chunk of South and South East Asia suddenly started worshipping Vishnu and other gods at some point? -Think of Manipur. Do you think Vaishnavism was the main religion there always? Nope. It came in the 15th century in parallel with the Islamic expansion in eastern Bengal and only a couple of centuries ahead of Christian missionary expansion in the Naga territory. -Or for that matter Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, Laos and Malaysia - at one point Hinduism was the dominant religion there - whose influence can be seen to this day in art, drama, names of people, language, national symbols etc. Do you think it happened by accident that the natives there adopted hindu religions and names there? According to your historians, cute Hindu friendly missionaries arrived there, and locals said OK we love you and we will follow Hinduism! The fact that billions+ Hindus live in India today is the biggest factual and undeniable evidence that there were insignificant efforts to convert them by previous rulers whether Muslim or otherwise. It’s living proof in plain sight. This is because Mughals were interested more in indulgence rather than Islam. They actually ruled with the help of local overlords like Rajputs and would have been stupid to change that balance. The same cannot be said of Iran for example, which was Samaritan and Zoroastrian prior to the arrival of Muslims. The Persian empire was converted almost in entirety. Ditto in Turkey and Middle East where Christianity and other religions thrived prior to the arrival of Muslim invaders. rollingstoned 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollingstoned Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 23 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: because not every Muslim voted for a separate homeland and many indeed wanted to stay. It was an explicit understanding established by Congress leaders that they won’t be forced to leave, but the hate mongers and Hindu mobs had other plans. Indeed, even today, Muslims are told to go to Pakistan, which is pathetic to see. As a parallel “go to India” for Hindus in Pakistan doesn’t exist. Not every Chuslim voted personally for an Islamic homeland but the bulk of the 'aaqas' that every Chuslim chose to represent him with his vote and representation were unequivocally in favor of a separate Islamic homeland and this is not subject to any 'explicit understanding' with the Congress as the elections leading upto 1946 indicate quite clearly nor is it a matter of any debate as history can again, quite clearly bear it out. The 'hate mongering' otoh quite clearly occured with Jinnahs direct action day with no involvement with any 'hindu groups' who otoh fought to ensure West Bengal remained with India when he feared his demands might not be met. Our agnost here needs a history lesson quite desperately while the mask keeps slipping. Lol. If Muslims today are 'told to go to Pakistan' it is with good reason since they left no stone unturned in asking for it in the face of what they themselves claim opportunistically was persecution from 'hindu mobs' who asked for their exit from lands that wre historically their own. Dunce doesn't understand that one doesn't 'ask' someone to go to a place that is 'his own' in a manner of speaking. His desire to engage in this subterfuge to further his own agenda lays bare his own ignorance and stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 18 minutes ago, deathmonger said: cause there are hardly any hindus in mainstream society. they all live in rural sindh - out of sigh, out of mind. during 71, pak army attacked hindus indiscriminately. I wish there were a cultural exchange program so Indians could come to Pakistan and see the vibrant hindu community in Karachi. They are rich, educated and well taken care off. Yes, there are rare dastardly acts, but it always gets disproportionate media (just like Hindu mob violence against muslims does). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 10 minutes ago, rollingstoned said: Not every Chuslim voted personally for an Islamic homeland but the bulk of the 'aaqas' that every Chuslim chose to represent him with his vote and representation were unequivocally in favor of a separate Islamic homeland and this is not subject to any 'explicit understanding' with the Congress as the elections leading upto 1946 indicate quite clearly nor is it a matter of any debate as history can again, quite clearly bear it out. The 'hate mongering' otoh quite clearly occured with Jinnahs direct action day with no involvement with any 'hindu groups' who otoh fought to ensure West Bengal remained with India when he feared his demands might not be met. Our agnost here needs a history lesson quite desperately while the mask keeps slipping. Lol. If Muslims today are 'told to go to Pakistan' it is with good reason since they left no stone unturned in asking for it in the face of what they themselves claim opportunistically was persecution from 'hindu mobs' who asked for their exit from lands that wre historically their own. Dunce doesn't understand that one doesn't 'ask' someone to go to a place that is 'his own' in a manner of speaking. His desire to engage in this subterfuge to further his own agenda lays bare his own ignorance and stupidity. Well, Indian founding fathers claimed India was going to be a secular state, no? If it is indeed a secular state, then why does it matter? You cannot have the cake and eat it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 37 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: because not every Muslim voted for a separate homeland and many indeed wanted to stay. It was an explicit understanding established by Congress leaders that they won’t be forced to leave, but the hate mongers and Hindu mobs had other plans. Indeed, even today, Muslims are told to go to Pakistan, which is pathetic to see. As a parallel “go to India” for Hindus in Pakistan doesn’t exist. Go to India may not exisit, but Hindus generally want to run away from your Sharia ass. Whoever is left will get converted anyway. Every Muslim vote predominantly went to ML in 1946. No seats from Muslim constituency went to Congress. What does it say? Looking at the flood of Indian muslims Liaquat begged Nehru to stop influx of Muslims into Pakistan. Not every Muslims is told to go to Pakistan, only the gaddar ones. How come the Muslim populationincreased in India from 1947 if it is that bad for Muslims here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 2 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: Well, Indian founding fathers claimed India was going to be a secular state, no? If it is indeed a secular state, then why does it matter? You cannot have the cake and eat it too. Moreover, the arrangement centered around the transfer of states, not the entire populace. There was no explicit agreement demanding the relocation of all Hindus to India and all Muslims to Pakistan. Instead, the agreement specified which states would move to their respective countries depending on majority vote. Insisting that every individual must move fueled hatred and played a significant role in the tragic bloodshed. The phrase "go to Pakistan" persists due to lingering bitterness among some Hindus regarding the partition. Individuals made their choice and India cannot be a democracy if it cannot respect individual choice. Certain groups, such as the RSS and their associates, exploit this bitterness to further divide and rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharjah-Harjah Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 8 minutes ago, coffee_rules said: Go to India may not exisit, but Hindus generally want to run away from your Sharia ass. Whoever is left will get converted anyway. Every Muslim vote predominantly went to ML in 1946. No seats from Muslim constituency went to Congress. What does it say? Looking at the flood of Indian muslims Liaquat begged Nehru to stop influx of Muslims into Pakistan. Not every Muslims is told to go to Pakistan, only the gaddar ones. How come the Muslim populationincreased in India from 1947 if it is that bad for Muslims here. If hindus wanted to escape "Sharia ass", then India would have 2.5 million pending via applications from Pakistani hindus, but they don't. In fact, many hindus travel to India and return back to their motherland. So again, the hate exists in your imagination. Who gets to define "gaddar"? It seems to be thrown around on twitter by random people. Doesn't the upcoming "superpower" India have courts to define and judge true "traitors" and punish them internally rather than ask them to go to a country that their great grandparents didn't choose to go to? What kind of hateful logic is this. So disappointing to see that there may be widespread support for this way of thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: If hindus wanted to escape "Sharia ass", then India would have 2.5 million pending via applications from Pakistani hindus, but they don't. In fact, many hindus travel to India and return back to their motherland. So again, the hate exists in your imagination. Who gets to define "gaddar"? It seems to be thrown around on twitter by random people. Doesn't the upcoming "superpower" India have courts to define and judge true "traitors" and punish them internally rather than ask them to go to a country that their great grandparents didn't choose to go to? What kind of hateful logic is this. So disappointing to see that there may be widespread support for this way of thinking. If Hundus are so thriving and happy in Pakistan, how come there is one Hindu girl being abducted in SIndh everyday and gets converted. You conveniently the fact the Muslims in India are increasing in numbers. How does that explain if everybody is asked to go. You should go to places like Aligarh, Hyderabad, Aurangabad, Mewat (Nuh) to see how scared Muslims living in those cities are. The police are scared to go to such places. Family of teenage girl Radha protesting helplessly in Sindh, Pakistan, to get back their daughter, who they fear will be converted to IslamMost Hindu refugees from Pakistan who come to India cite fear of their daughters’ abduction as prime reason they left everything behind to… pic.twitter.com/XMp8UTUsh0— Swati Goel Sharma (@swati_gs) October 13, 2023 Edited October 13, 2023 by coffee_rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollingstoned Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 45 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said: t’s not my job to un-indoctrinate you. You need to question the history you’ve been told, specially the recently revised versions by RSS inspired Hindu nationalists, who have exaggerated Muslims as Dracula to control and manipulate Hindus and gain power. There is literally droves of literature available on invasions led by Hindu kings and their aftermaths. It seems to be our job to un-indoctrinate you since relentlessly bs madarsa chaap propaganda is all you have to offer, the contrary to which is obviously going to seem to be revisionism by 'RSS inspired Hindu nationalists' who have accurately apprised the role Muslims have had in the partititon of India but nevertheless want to claim that any earnest truth discovery that in anyway contradicts this Islamist-secularist dogma is the desire to turn Muslims into a 'Dracula' because they do not turn 'Hindus' into equal 'Draculas' just so their narrative appear more palatable. there is no 'literally droves of literature' available on invasions led by 'hindu kinds and their aftermaths' other than what you want to imagine, which you have anyway demonstrated you want to overstate for your own agenda regardless of your own ignorance on the matter ignoring the treasure trove of literature that exists on Islamist and Muslim league excesses that had an effect on the subcontinent to this day. Wouldn't expect anything more from cerebrally challenged inbreds who worship an unlettered paedophile. Quote I have never denied the barbaric acts of Muslim invaders of those times, but one cannot judge the people of those times with today’s values, specially when behaviors were non-unique. All three religions (Hindu, Christian, and Islam) had fair amount of zeal albeit at different eras. You guys must come out of the illusion BJP/RSS is selling you that Hindus didn't spread their religion with force, but Muslims did. You sure you haven't? Wouldn't seem that way and isn't the case. And if you weren't intent on trying to defend them, yes we can, we can objectively compare what effect they had on the areas they invaded you utter, utter dunce. No 'all 3 religions did not have the same amount of zeal at different eras'. They were not even the same unless you were being deliberately disingenuous or woefully ignorant of the facts. You need to come out of the illusion that BJP/Rss is in anyway the same as what the church or barbarian megalomaniacs who wanted to spread the word of Islam did when there is no evidence to indicate that the former is in anyway comparable to the latter which can be historically proven if dunces with sub par IQs with agendas were not trying to prove otherwise, thereby allowing their mask of neutrality to slip most perceptibly every time they did so or that anything which doesn't sit well with you is something BJP/RSS is selling. It's quite honestly roohani cope. Quote -Do you think it was a magic that a large chunk of South and South East Asia suddenly started worshipping Vishnu and other gods at some point? -Think of Manipur. Do you think Vaishnavism was the main religion there always? Nope. It came in the 15th century in parallel with the Islamic expansion in eastern Bengal and only a couple of centuries ahead of Christian missionary expansion in the Naga territory. -Or for that matter Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, Laos and Malaysia - at one point Hinduism was the dominant religion there - whose influence can be seen to this day in art, drama, names of people, language, national symbols etc. Do you think it happened by accident that the natives there adopted hindu religions and names there? According to your historians, cute Hindu friendly missionaries arrived there, and locals said OK we love you and we will follow Hinduism! The fact that billions+ Hindus live in India today is the biggest factual and undeniable evidence that there were insignificant efforts to convert them by previous rulers whether Muslim or otherwise. It’s living proof in plain sight. This is because Mughals were interested more in indulgence rather than Islam. They actually ruled with the help of local overlords like Rajputs and would have been stupid to change that balance. The same cannot be said of Iran for example, which was Samaritan and Zoroastrian prior to the arrival of Muslims. The Persian empire was converted almost in entirety. Ditto in Turkey and Middle East where Christianity and other religions thrived prior to the arrival of Muslim invaders. Not magic, but peaceful conquest you unlettered, madarsachaap ignoramus who is incapable of understanding nuance and thinks every invasion is the same regardless of the effects it had because of his own biases and lack of IQ. Look at what % of the population speaks unfavorably of the Hindu influence in these places for an example of what a civilizing mission actually is. Something barbarian, primitive monotheistic and conflict centred ethical codes will never understand. the fact that you mention the Zoroastrians who actually civilized the Arab world amply underscores my point who have every bone to pick with Islam today. The fact that billion+ Hindus live today and that a whole country exsists just to plots for it's downfall regardless of it's own deplorable situation based on what some unlettered medieval paedophile fantasised is the biggest factual and undeniable evidence that their resistance paid off and that their ethical and philosophical codes were superior to the inferior and primitive barbarians who sought to convert them which is why they still remain in a numerical superiority in the collective subcontinent despite every effort to the contrary. It is living proof in plain sight. That you think that it is proof of the non existent tolerance of the Islamist hordes who were inspired by some pedophiliac warlord imposing his world view as divine diktats is evidence all of your ignorance, wishful thinking, fanciful imagination and complete imbecility becasue it is not borne by any historical facts. they don't see why India did not fall to the sword where others did and why their 'roohani taakat' failed in this instance but foolishly assume it was for a lack of trying, which is not surprising of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollingstoned Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 (edited) Quote I wish there were a cultural exchange program so Indians could come to Pakistan and see the vibrant hindu community in Karachi. They are rich, educated and well taken care off. Yes, there are rare dastardly acts, but it always gets disproportionate media (just like Hindu mob violence against muslims does). A cultural exchange program so that a the demonstration of a foul chimera can be witnessed based on the promises of an unscrupulous, halfwit spokesperson in a theocratic arm pit? Sounds like bs and something worth passing on. Never mind the false equivalence at the end there in brackets which is more a figment of imagination than what really is. lol Edited October 13, 2023 by rollingstoned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollingstoned Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 (edited) Quote Well, Indian founding fathers claimed India was going to be a secular state, no? If it is indeed a secular state, then why does it matter? You cannot have the cake and eat it too. there was no consensus on the formation of pakistan, never mind the formation of a 'secular state'. So the question of a cake and eating doesn't enter into it, never mind that with your midwit gymnastics it seems that that 's what the momin population wants. Secularism for thee, Islam for mee. Edited October 13, 2023 by rollingstoned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well, Indian founding fathers claimed India was going to be a secular state, no? If it is indeed a secular state, then why does it matter? You cannot have the cake and eat it too.
rollingstoned Posted October 13, 2023 Share Posted October 13, 2023 (edited) Quote Moreover, the arrangement centered around the transfer of states, not the entire populace. There was no explicit agreement demanding the relocation of all Hindus to India and all Muslims to Pakistan. Instead, the agreement specified which states would move to their respective countries depending on majority vote. Insisting that every individual must move fueled hatred and played a significant role in the tragic bloodshed. The phrase "go to Pakistan" persists due to lingering bitterness among some Hindus regarding the partition. Individuals made their choice and India cannot be a democracy if it cannot respect individual choice. Certain groups, such as the RSS and their associates, exploit this bitterness to further divide and rule. There was no such 'agreement'. If the agreement was to form 2 states based on religion then the corollary was that there had to be a full and proper population transfer which never happened even if only one nation ensured it was fully and properly Muslim in it's character. When Muslims voted for Pakistan it was not contingent on the landmass that was granted only being a factor of the total number of Muslims who had voted for it. You can glean as much from what the Muslim league leadership wanted. The landmass they got was for the entire Muslim population in undivided India, not only those who wanted to move there which was never voted for anyway but is now being disingenously claimed to conceal the hatred that was necessary from one side for the 2 nation movement because they could not imagine co existence under any circumstances with anyone who did not espouse islam. The phrase 'Go to pakistan' has it's origins in the fact that a Muslim nation was created only for Muslims carved out of the ancestral territory of Hindus who resided there for millenia. They were always native to it so the question of them being asked to go anywhere else pre supposing a home for Muslims there which never existed is an absurd notion. It is not due to bitterness but realism that is corroborated by history, especially when individuals express certain viewpoints to that effect. They (individuals) might make a choice, but if that choice is in violation of what the nation-state represents then it deserves contempt if not more, never mind whether it is a democracy or an autocracy since sedition laws exist everywhere for a reason. It cannot be that choice has to be only selectively permitted and curtailed at other times. The fact that the 'RSS' claims anything is a convenient fig leaf for Islamist apologists who pretend to be neutral and impartial to hide their own sides bitterness, hate, bigotry and agenda. A consistent pattern of subterfuge which has to be seen for what it is based on the facts available and not empty rhetoric that is easily debunked. Edited October 13, 2023 by rollingstoned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts