Desi Cartman Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 I'm not in India and Im not well informed about what is happening in the J&K. I have read few articles online and today I came across this piece of crap Striking a dramatic note, Abdullah said he would have to visit his father Sheikh Abdullah's grave and ask whether staying on in India after Partition had been the right decision. "A time has come when I could require a visa to visit Jammu," he said. Mehbooba's speech was no less high-pitched as she said the blockade resulting from the Jammu stir could result in the Valley "looking to the road to Muzzaffarabad (PoK)". I know that there is a difference of opinion about hand over of Land for Amarnath. There were riots and protests in the entire J&K. Why is it that Mehbooba didnt say anything about looking towards POK when the protests happen in Srinagar ? How come Abdullah is talking about needing a visa to visit Jammu ? Please explain that what made him say this ? For all I care , if these politicians are so unhappy in India then they should be given free tickets on a bus that takes them to POK where they can enjoy all their rights :finger: Is there enough reason to make these kind of OTT statements ?
Desi Cartman Posted August 7, 2008 Author Posted August 7, 2008 He is only telling something openly what everybody knows in his/her heart ..... A vast majority of Kashmiri Muslims simply dont consider themselves as Indians. The same will happen to Jammu in time. But million dollar question is will India learn from it ? hell no. Afterall Gandhiji gave us that assurance all those years ago right ? How could he be wrong. $#@^%$%#$!%$@^#^%^ BB, what made these politicians say these words... All I know, this is just a dispute about land .. so how come they are talking about Visa and POK ?? Im confused :hmmmm2:
MarathaPride Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 He is only telling something openly what everybody knows in his/her heart ..... A vast majority of Kashmiri Muslims simply dont consider themselves as Indians. The same will happen to Jammu in time. But million dollar question is will India learn from it ? hell no. Afterall Gandhiji gave us that assurance all those years ago right ? How could he be wrong. $#@^%$%#$!%$@^#^%^ Kashmiri Muslims are NOT Indians. I can never consider them to be Indians. To me, they are Pakistanis first, Muslims second, and Kashmiri second (no offense to any of my PP Pakistani friends out here who happen to be Kashmiri). Any community that protests against providing 40 lousy acres of land to peaceful and devout pilgrims, while demanding everything from Haj subsidies to special rights to Sharia (and more)...cannot be called Bharat-vasis.
Desi Cartman Posted August 7, 2008 Author Posted August 7, 2008 An article I found on TOI None should say Omar is not allowed in Jammu. Let him come, listen and speak. Like any other Indian should feel free to visit Kashmir or any other part of the nation. He is welcome to visit my home even if he denies me a piece of land in Kashmir. Why should a few words uttered by him make me change my Indian-ness? If he spoke in Parliament as a Muslim, asserting his Islamic identity, let denial of land to Hindus be his Islam and my Hinduness must keep my nation as a free democracy where difference of opinion is a natural phenomenon unlike Islamic countries. I had listened to Omar Abdullah when he was in Vajpayee's cabinet and felt he had great potential to be an influential Indian leader. He spoke for India and brilliantly too. Now, if he has chosen to be just a regional one, it's his choice. But he must stop to think why he can own a bungalow in Delhi or Bangalore and at the same time deny that privilege to a fellow Indian in Kashmir? Kashmiri Muslim leaders would like to enjoy the fruits and liberties of a Hindu majority democracy but vehemently deny that to Hindus in their area of influence. Why? When they are in a minority they crave and get special privileges. But once a majority, every single right to be at par is refused to other minorities. It's the same phenomenon all over the globe. A direct consequence of turning Wahabi. Wahabi intolerance and separatism is poisoning Muslim brotherhood too. A brilliant report in TOI elaborating how Wahabi elements are gaining ground in the small towns of Gujarat and the softer, humane version of Islam, the Bareilevi school, which is resisting their aggressive expansionism makes an interesting reading and gives a frightening picture of the inter-communal strife within Muslim society. Kashmir is predominantly Sunni and Wahabi. Hence the intolerance that denies even the basic features of Kashmiriyat. And see what the de-Indianised intellectuals wrote on the front pages in Delhi's newspapers: "All over a piece of land!" Really? Then why are the Indian soldiers defending a barren piece of dead snow in Siachen? Or what's that piece of cloth known as the Tricolor? Is it worth dying for? Jammu is witnessing a mass patriotic uprising, unprecedented till now. It's a Second Ayodhya enveloped in the Tricolour outshining the 1952 Praja Parishad movement, which demanded one flag, one constitution and one head of the state. Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee was martyred for this cause in the jail of Sheikh Abdullah, grandfather of Omar. The situation hasn't changed in the last 56 years. It has in fact worsened. Such a mass movement goes beyond the controls of any party or organisation. For the last 20 days, the roads are empty and markets closed. The sudden eruption of protests has seen grandfathers and grandsons and mothers and grandmothers ringing bells against Muslim separatism and shouting at the top of their voice: "Har har Mahadev". Such a protest by every single member of families who had never come out for a public demonstration can't be engineered. It's an uprising, a spontaneous expression of anger accumulated in the last five decades of misrule by people of suspect loyalties. The Doctor’s Association, Bar Association and Govt. Employees Association, Sikhs, Gujjar-Bakkarwal Muslims and Congress MLAs defying their party, the Hotel Association and every single sect of Hindu society have joined and supported the movement.
CC1981 Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 Kashmiri Muslims are NOT Indians. I can never consider them to be Indians. To me, they are Pakistanis first, Muslims second, and Kashmiri second (no offense to any of my PP Pakistani friends out here who happen to be Kashmiri). Any community that protests against providing 40 lousy acres of land to peaceful and devout pilgrims, while demanding everything from Haj subsidies to special rights to Sharia (and more)...cannot be called Bharat-vasis. I consider this very poor form and utter disgrace for an Indian to be openly questioning an entire community. Granted, there are lots of kashmiri muslims who don't want to be Indians or atleast, don't consider themselves Indian. Well, duh- what do you expect- it had a controversial union with India, has had 3 and half wars fought over it and sees regular infiltration and border-skirmishes. It is to be expected from a region with that kind of a socio-political background to have divided loyalties. There is also no doubt that there are many muslims there who are anti-hindu. But what gets my goat, is these types of outrageous comments that castigates an entire community. The 'entire' community is to take the blame ? why ? each and every member of the community came out to march ? each and every member funded the activities ? each and every member of that community took part in terror ? What kind of a ridiculous generalization is this ? And what do you seek to achieve from this generalization anyways ? All you end up doing is alienating the fence sitting muslim kashmiris and pushing away even the pro-Indian ones. And that IMO is heinous and treason-worthy behaviour, because if Kashmiris do start getting discriminated against by Indians carte blanche, Kashmir then would have EVERY RIGHT to break away and do whatever they want with their land-join Pak, go indy,join China- whatever. That would be the only option left, because then it would not make sense for a territorry to be a part of a nation when the inhabitants of the territory dont want to be part of the nation and the rest of the nation hates them. Trouble with Indians i noticed is that they are too trigger-happy to play the communal card and their worldview isnt very well developed by and large- Indians are still a century behind the Europeans, where we still see the world largely in groups- its either generalizations about all hindus,muslims,sikhs,christians etc. or nations,nationalities, etc. Rather immature and rather sad. I remember reading an article posted here where the author called India's social outlook to be that of a teenager- it keeps getting re-inforced as i keep encountering these types of irresponsible and generalizing comments.
CC1981 Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 The problem with Kashmir is simple and after 60 years, it is as much a question of terrorism and outside interference as it is of India's failure to assimilate Kashmir. We've had a huge chunk of the army stationed in Kashmir for decades now and still, kashmir is probably one of the ethnically purest areas in civillian life : You find hardly ANYONE in Kashmir who is not Kashmiri or the military. Systematic corruption and ISI brilliance has ensured Kashmir's predominantly tourism and handicraft based industry never moves into the modern era and thus Kashmir does not create much jobs which would attract non-locals. This is a region where the government has to invest money and attract settlers. Muslim majority in Kashmir valley would never change- they have 99% majority and its densely populated. But we can still make a dent at that number. A demographic dilution would FUNDAMENTALLY increase Kashmiri stability, as it would have people living in Kashmir who have strong links to the Indian hinterland. Reprisals and religion-motivated tensions, etc. will not do anything. Kashmir's long term solution is either seperation from India or an influx of Indians living in Kashmir to drop more roots. Its just that simple and no other options are available on the long term. As per the temple-ground stuff, its not that hard to find a solution: We need some land for rest houses and stopover for some temple yatras. Fine- get a KP to buy a few acres of land from the govt (very much legal, very much possible and its not like govt. of kashmir doesnt sell lands to individuals) and then this temple trust signs a 25 year lease for this land. Then we put a 20 storey soviet-style apartment building and maslaa is solved. We need more action and less chest-thumpings, snappy words and communalism.
CC1981 Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 Someone notice the irony here. Perhaps i should've clarified - i was talking from the political landscape situation, where everything in India is communalized and everything is seen as 'group traits' - dalits, muslims, SCs, OBCs, this, that....our politics is very generalized and dependent on grouping people in generalized trends.
Ram Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 What an irresponsible statement there by Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti. Here we are, investing thousands of crores into infrastructure projects in Kashmir, giving it preferential treatment over other states, amassing 100s of 1000s of troops to boost border security and this is what we get in return from the state politicians? I dont know the exact circumstances or the context of the statement, but these kind of rhetoric is exactly what the separatists need to push their agenda forward. And I find it ironic that Abudullah has talked about going to father's grave and asking if him deciding to join India was a good decision or not. Wasnt it the same Abdullah, who once, in a emotion filled speech in the Kashmir legislature, declared teary eyed that 'if you tear open the heart of every Kashmiri, you will find the name of India inscribed on it'.
Ram Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 BTW, is it Omar Abdullah or Farooq Abdullah that needs to be mentioned in the OP?
Guest dada_rocks Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 HE wonders whether he needs visa to go to Jammu.. well for rest of the indians there is no wonder they know they need some special document to travel to J/K.........welcome aboard.. We see people justiying this or that bomb oevr this or that riot and here we have 4 lakh people driven out maimed raped killed their homes overtaken and still not even one of them blew anyone.. here they start protesting and media whips up the frenzy that secualrism is at stake.. Abdullah ponders over the status of kashmir.....
Desi Cartman Posted August 8, 2008 Author Posted August 8, 2008 My question is "what has happened in the last few weeks that made him ask this question ? did anybody stop him from visiting Jammu ?"
Guest dada_rocks Posted August 8, 2008 Posted August 8, 2008 Kashmiri Pandits for the first time in history have showed gumption to fight and these kashmiri muslims from valleys have been takne by surprise hence are babbling stupidity.. All these outbursts mean " how could you be like us, protesting sulking is our right and forte "
MarathaPride Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 I consider this very poor form and utter disgrace for an Indian to be openly questioning an entire community. Granted, there are lots of kashmiri muslims who don't want to be Indians or atleast, don't consider themselves Indian. Well, duh- what do you expect- it had a controversial union with India, has had 3 and half wars fought over it and sees regular infiltration and border-skirmishes. It is to be expected from a region with that kind of a socio-political background to have divided loyalties. Should we expect that? Sure. Should we accept that? No. Never. This certainly sounds harsh, but it is practical. Dont like it in India? Well then leave. The land of Kashmir is ours, so if these people want to stay here, they play by our rules...or they can leave to whichever country they see fit. There is also no doubt that there are many muslims there who are anti-hindu. But what gets my goat, is these types of outrageous comments that castigates an entire community. The 'entire' community is to take the blame ? why ? each and every member of the community came out to march ? each and every member funded the activities ? each and every member of that community took part in terror ? What kind of a ridiculous generalization is this ? When Kashmiri Pandits were thrown out, did the Kashmiri Muslims protest? When Amarnath pilgrims faced hardships (despite being one of main income providers of these vile ingrates) did they protest? Has there been any single meaningful protest by even a small number of Kashmiri Muslims in favor of India or Hindus or to atleast show some solidarity with thePandits? And what do you seek to achieve from this generalization anyways ? All you end up doing is alienating the fence sitting muslim kashmiris and pushing away even the pro-Indian ones. And that IMO is heinous and treason-worthy behaviour, because if Kashmiris do start getting discriminated against by Indians carte blanche, Kashmir then would have EVERY RIGHT to break away and do whatever they want with their land-join Pak, go indy,join China- whatever. That would be the only option left, because then it would not make sense for a territorry to be a part of a nation when the inhabitants of the territory dont want to be part of the nation and the rest of the nation hates them. The number of Kashmiri Muslims who are actually on the fence are so miniscule (and politically so inconsequential), that we can safely ignore whatever they have to say. As for their right to break away, well sure they can leave (mass migration of all Kashmiri Muslims to Pakistan or Saudi or wherever would actually be a dream come true :--D no one wants these parasites)...but the land is India's. It has always been ours, and it will always be ours. Once again, it sounds harsh, but if they cant abide by our rules, then should leave or be forced out. Trouble with Indians i noticed is that they are too trigger-happy to play the communal card and their worldview isnt very well developed by and large- Indians are still a century behind the Europeans, where we still see the world largely in groups- its either generalizations about all hindus,muslims,sikhs,christians etc. or nations,nationalities, etc. Rather immature and rather sad. I remember reading an article posted here where the author called India's social outlook to be that of a teenager- it keeps getting re-inforced as i keep encountering these types of irresponsible and generalizing comments. Since you are the one who is trying to bucket me in one of your self-serving categories, how about I let you in on some of my other views: Pakistan - Fully support its creation. Hindus and Muslims are indeed two seperate nations, and represent two seperate ideologies and two seperate cultures. Living together as equals is IMPOSSIBLE. Thus, in one nation, one culture, tradtion, religion must be the dominant one. In Pakistan, it is Islam. In India, it must be Hinduism. Indian Muslims - They are as Indian as any of us IF they consider themselves as Indians first and Muslims second. If they discard the concepts of Shariah, Ummah etc., they acknowledge that the very ethos of India and its fundamental tenets are derived from Vedic Dharma, and that Hinduism will always be the guiding light of India, then they are most definitely INDIAN. No, nobody is asking them to convert. However, respecting our beliefs, and understanding that India at its very core will always remain Hindu is important. Several I know infact do the above and are true-patriots (my hats off to them...our differing religions will never get in between us). If, however, they have a belief system that is different from above, then they are welcome to reside elsewhere. Responses in bold above. Apologies for the incoherence (I am feeling a bit drowsy).
MarathaPride Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Nothing like a straight shooting Maratha Bindaas. :two_thumbs_up: Haha thx Bhai!! CC and his mostly indefensible points make for very easy pickings..:haha:
CC1981 Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Should we expect that? Sure. Should we accept that? No. Never. This certainly sounds harsh, but it is practical. Dont like it in India? Well then leave. The land of Kashmir is ours, so if these people want to stay here, they play by our rules...or they can leave to whichever country they see fit. Sorry boss, i disagree ENTIRELY. Land of Kashmir is Kashmiris first, then rest of India's. Lets see how well YOU like it when we tell you that the land in Mumbai is ours and if you cant find jobs or dont like the rule, leave. Oh right, we know how you like it then - then it becomes Maratha terrorism towards Biharis, Bengalis, Kannadigas, etc. So kindly hold the same standards towards the Kashmiris. India is a union of cultures and civilizations, we are NOT one predominant monolithic culture block like the Chinese(Han). If Kashmiris want to stay, they are welcome to, if they want to leave, they are welcome to and if they want to break away, they are welcome to do that too. As far as i am concerned, the average Kashmiri certainly has more rights to his land than you or I do and in our regions, the same applies. When Kashmiri Pandits were thrown out, did the Kashmiri Muslims protest? Irrelevant. Nobody protests these things publicly. When hindus unleashed their terror campaign against Christians in Orissa and burnt their churches to the ground, how many Hindus protested ? So your point about protestations is irrelevant. As for their right to break away, well sure they can leave (mass migration of all Kashmiri Muslims to Pakistan or Saudi or wherever would actually be a dream come true no one wants these parasites)...but the land is India's. It has always been ours, and it will always be ours. Once again, it sounds harsh, but if they cant abide by our rules, then should leave or be forced out. No it doesnt sound harsh, it sounds RIDICULOUS. The land is 'always india's' ? Well which Indian empire ruled over Kashmir boss and for how long ? Referendums for seperation is a LEGAL course of action and has precedence. The land that is Kashmir has been Kashmiri for thousands of years...it has been Indian for only 50. To you or me, its just a shape on a map- to the Kashmiris, its THEIR HOMELAND. Why dont we ask those idiot marathis who were evicting/terrorising biharis and southies in mumbai to leave India as well if they dont like it ? Just as India was formed by the union of various territorries who wanted to be a part of India, they have the option to leave as well. NOWHERE in the INdian constitution does it say that once you join India, you can never leave and the land that is Kashmir has certainly not been a part of Indian empires for any significant amount of time. You have no right to tell a Kashmiri to leave his/her land if they dont like being part of India, just as you cant tell that to any other Indian. Its their land first- India's land second. Thats how its been for thousands of years, thats how it will be and thats how it is right now. In India, it must be Hinduism. No, what is dominant in India and must be dominant in India is secularism. We are not a religious nutbar nation like Pakistan and we will never allow religious nutbars to govern our vital interests- be it the nutbars of the green crescant moon clan or the nutbars of the saffron trident clan. Both are equal nutters in my books. and that Hinduism will always be the guiding light of India You are a fortune-teller now, star ? HInduism will always be the guiding light ? I hope not- its high time our nation moved past the silliness of God and all those wannabe-God like characters of fantasy that dominate hindu religious texts. Besides, i got news for you - for almost a thousand years, the guiding light of India wasnt HInduism- it was Buddhism and Jainism. And that is the period we achieved our cultural and scientific zenith. Seems like India has done just fine when not guided by the light of hinduism or Islam- the two demons fighting over the prize that is India. One our own creation, one of foreign origin. and understanding that India at its very core will always remain Hindu is important I think whats more important is understanding that your religion, like all other religions, is a nice bull***** story and the quicker we move away from religion the better. I think whats more important is understanding that every man and woman are equal, has the same impulses, drives, joys and pains in life and its far more important to think about human development than obsess about this stupid thing called religion. Its also worth understanding that India at its core was once not Hindu( i define that by the fact that from 250BC till 800 AD or so, Buddhism + Jainism had the majority of Indian followers, not Hinduism) and it can always happen again. If, however, they have a belief system that is different from above, then they are welcome to reside elsewhere. Sure. They are also welcome to hold those views and reside in India where they are right now. India is a free country, not run according to the whims and wills of religious nutters or religion-obsessed ones. But you are right- i'd much rather live in a progressive, calm, well educated, cohesive and socially responsible nation like Canada over a backwards, turbulent,under-educated, fractuous and socially irresponsible nation like India. And lastly, regarding patriotism - your type doesnt even know what patriotism really is like. The type that is moved by two-bit psuedo-intellectuals like Vinayak Savarkar into thinking nationalism is pertaining to geographical borders. Sorry, that isnt nationalism, thats just a wanking contest where you compare how big your land ( penis) is with anothers'. Your nation isnt the piles of dirt or rock you live on- its the people who constitute it. And patriotism is to respect and commend the ways of your people- of which, religion is a small and insignificant part. Celebrating and propagating your music, art, literature, history, artwork etc. is far more patriotic than fighting over arbitary and ever-changing lines on a map. And on that count, i don't think there are many desis who actually does as much as i do for propagation of our culture. So keep your chest-thumping to yourself. Obsessing over borders that arnt even 100 years old and drawing ideas of nationalism on a cultural landscape thousands of years old and varied is as stupid as it gets, really. India's borders have grown and shrunk through history- it will keep on growing and shrinking at various points of history. Neither you, nor your BJP or any other force on this world can change that.
Ram Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Maratha Pride, as much as we value and appreciate your passion and enthusiam for debating, you need to know that we have a zero-tolerance policy on religion/community based slandering of any kind. Such threads are not tolerated here. If this thread continues on the current path on which its going, am afraid to say it wont last for too long.
Guest dada_rocks Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Maratha Pride, as much as we value and appreciate your passion and enthusiam for debating, you need to know that we have a zero-tolerance policy on religion/community based slandering of any kind. Such threads are not tolerated here. If this thread continues on the current path on which its going, am afraid to say it wont last for too long. here comes he with his tripe.. why don't u give people benefit of doubt or do u like to brandish ur moderator status.. mornic drivel of this kind in every post before anyone even talks about any religion is uncalled for.,...
Guest dada_rocks Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Responses in bold above. Apologies for the incoherence (I am feeling a bit drowsy). You are banging at a senseless wall
MarathaPride Posted August 13, 2008 Posted August 13, 2008 Sorry boss, i disagree ENTIRELY. Land of Kashmir is Kashmiris first, then rest of India's. Lets see how well YOU like it when we tell you that the land in Mumbai is ours and if you cant find jobs or dont like the rule, leave. Oh right, we know how you like it then - then it becomes Maratha terrorism towards Biharis, Bengalis, Kannadigas, etc. So kindly hold the same standards towards the Kashmiris. Nice try, but I wont take the bait and divert this topic. But just to humor you, Mumbai has been (for quite some time now) less than 50% Maharashtrian. We are minorities in our land and the vast majority of us dont mind one bit. The overwhelmingly vast majority of Kashmiris, on the other hand, start foaming the mouth at the very mention of providing 100, that right, a lousy 100 acres of land to Hindus. If you trying to draw a parallel between Kashmiris and Marathis, then your intelligence ought to questioned. India is a union of cultures and civilizations, we are NOT one predominant monolithic culture block like the Chinese(Han). If Kashmiris want to stay, they are welcome to, if they want to leave, they are welcome to and if they want to break away, they are welcome to do that too. As far as i am concerned, the average Kashmiri certainly has more rights to his land than you or I do and in our regions, the same applies. Wow Dead Wrong (again). I wonder if this comment even merits a response. Every little speck of dust that comprises India's geography belongs to all Indians first. As a law-abiding Indian, I have every right to go to Kashmir, Tamil Nadu, Bengal, Gujarat, Kerala or wherever. No state has the right to secede from the Union, and what you are saying is highly treasonous. No further comment. Irrelevant. Nobody protests these things publicly. When hindus unleashed their terror campaign against Christians in Orissa and burnt their churches to the ground, how many Hindus protested ? So your point about protestations is irrelevant. Granted, there weren't any Hindu demonstrations against this, but lets take it a step further..every single major newspaper, almost all Hindu-owned, had stinging op-eds (from Hindus, both liberal and rightwing alike) strongly criticizing these activities. Look at the track record of Kashmiri newspapers when discussing the plight of Pandits, and the difference is unbelievably stark. Also, the scale of Pandit slaughter and eviction easily dwarf that of both Orissa and Godhra incidents combined, yet, we barely hear a peep from these Kashmiris. On the other hand, any political seminar or political event in India (run by Hindus) generally will always have some mentioned of Godhra. The verdict - you are wrong again. No it doesnt sound harsh, it sounds RIDICULOUS. The land is 'always india's' ? Well which Indian empire ruled over Kashmir boss and for how long ? Referendums for seperation is a LEGAL course of action and has precedence. The land that is Kashmir has been Kashmiri for thousands of years...it has been Indian for only 50. To you or me, its just a shape on a map- to the Kashmiris, its THEIR HOMELAND. Why dont we ask those idiot marathis who were evicting/terrorising biharis and southies in mumbai to leave India as well if they dont like it ? Note to all: P-secs love personal attacks when they lack any substantive argument. Just as India was formed by the union of various territorries who wanted to be a part of India, they have the option to leave as well. NOWHERE in the INdian constitution does it say that once you join India, you can never leave and the land that is Kashmir has certainly not been a part of Indian empires for any significant amount of time. You have no right to tell a Kashmiri to leave his/her land if they dont like being part of India, just as you cant tell that to any other Indian. Its their land first- India's land second. Thats how its been for thousands of years, thats how it will be and thats how it is right now. Note to all: P-secs love repeating themselves over and over again. Please refer to my responses above. No, what is dominant in India and must be dominant in India is secularism. We are not a religious nutbar nation like Pakistan and we will never allow religious nutbars to govern our vital interests- be it the nutbars of the green crescant moon clan or the nutbars of the saffron trident clan. Both are equal nutters in my books. Note to all: P-secs love to believe that writing off the Hindu Dharma qualifies them to be so-called intellectuals. You are a fortune-teller now, star ? HInduism will always be the guiding light ? I hope not- its high time our nation moved past the silliness of God and all those wannabe-God like characters of fantasy that dominate hindu religious texts. Besides, i got news for you - for almost a thousand years, the guiding light of India wasnt HInduism- it was Buddhism and Jainism. And that is the period we achieved our cultural and scientific zenith. Seems like India has done just fine when not guided by the light of hinduism or Islam- the two demons fighting over the prize that is India. One our own creation, one of foreign origin. The most basic and fundamental building blocks, tenets and principles of Buddhism and Jainism are derived from the Sanatan Dharma. Sikhism, Buddhism, and Jainism are firmly and intricately rooted in Hinduism and they always will be (some weirdos might suggest otherwise, but a study of their scripture...which you obviously would never have done...would reveal how closely knit all four religions are). Therefore, Sanatan Dharma still prevailed...and you, are still wrong :haha: I think whats more important is understanding that your religion, like all other religions, is a nice bull***** story and the quicker we move away from religion the better. I think whats more important is understanding that every man and woman are equal, has the same impulses, drives, joys and pains in life and its far more important to think about human development than obsess about this stupid thing called religion. Its also worth understanding that India at its core was once not Hindu( i define that by the fact that from 250BC till 800 AD or so, Buddhism + Jainism had the majority of Indian followers, not Hinduism) and it can always happen again. Repeating yourself yet again. See above. Sure. They are also welcome to hold those views and reside in India where they are right now. India is a free country, not run according to the whims and wills of religious nutters or religion-obsessed ones. But you are right- i'd much rather live in a progressive, calm, well educated, cohesive and socially responsible nation like Canada over a backwards, turbulent,under-educated, fractuous and socially irresponsible nation like India. You dont want to live in India, you issue treasonous statements, and you despise Hinduism...yet you write about India. You seem to be a totally different species of p-secs/commies.. And lastly, regarding patriotism - your type doesnt even know what patriotism really is like. The type that is moved by two-bit psuedo-intellectuals like Vinayak Savarkar into thinking nationalism is pertaining to geographical borders. Sorry, that isnt nationalism, thats just a wanking contest where you compare how big your land ( penis) is with anothers'. Your nation isnt the piles of dirt or rock you live on- its the people who constitute it. ^ Irony of Ironies...:haha: but lets continue And patriotism is to respect and commend the ways of your people- of which, religion is a small and insignificant part. Celebrating and propagating your music, art, literature, history, artwork etc. is far more patriotic than fighting over arbitary and ever-changing lines on a map. And on that count, i don't think there are many desis who actually does as much as i do for propagation of our culture. Socially backward, irresponsible...lets see...what other words did you use to describe India..ahh yes Inept. Whatever "service" you may doing, please stop right now. So keep your chest-thumping to yourself. Obsessing over borders that arnt even 100 years old and drawing ideas of nationalism on a cultural landscape thousands of years old and varied is as stupid as it gets, really. In short, you are saying ignore our History, ignore what our rich Hindu traditions have given us (Vedas, Upanishad, Bhagvad Gita), and make our borders super-porous so that in the next 10 years, we go back to the times of Aurangzeb. India's borders have grown and shrunk through history- it will keep on growing and shrinking at various points of history. Neither you, nor your BJP or any other force on this world can change that. You are in a for a very rude surprise. PHEW! Responses in bold above. To all those who cant be bothered to read either CC's post or my replies, CC's argument basically comprises of: 1) Treason 2) Personal Attacks 3) Irrelevant facts and absurdly inaccurate comparisons 4) Extreme verbosity and 5) Hindu Bashing.
Predator_05 Posted August 13, 2008 Posted August 13, 2008 Every little speck of dust that comprises India's geography belongs to all Indians first. Loved that comment.
Recommended Posts