Ram Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 There was higher overriding rule that this site was founded on - "Free speech" When I say something critical about Islam its backed by copius amounts of research that none of you and your sickular friends have even gotten close to refuting. Shouldnt it be easy to do that if it were mere propaganda based on fabrication ? Yea right.. Some wiki links and articles by brainwashed right-wingers like yourself writing in Saffron websites is what you call 'copious amounts of research'... And you expect us to go through them? P.S; That 'copious amounts of research' made me laugh, actually. :haha:
Ram Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 The articles appearing in voiceofdharma have a bibliography and are derived from books published by likes of Oxford. It would help to read. I also gave links from a Islamic website itself. I have also given links to news articles from current events which corroborate historic events and how the Jihadis operate based on their Jihadi heroes. What were the links that you gave to support your POV ? Yea So? I can also give a gazillion links of the Indian army abuses in Kashmir, the horrendous caste system that prevails in Hinduism and how scoreless people are routinely tortured and abused, the shameless genocide of 1200 Muslims in Gujrat, the Sikh riots orchestrated in 84 blah blah blah.. All from sources who have no interest whatsoever in trying to malign any of the institutions that I am referring to. But you see, I am plainly not interested coz I HATE religion, EVERY single one of them. Again dude, I request you, I am done debating with you. I keep replying because I don’t want to seem rude.
Guest dada_rocks Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 Yea So? I can also give a gazillion links of the Indian army abuses in Kashmir, the horrendous caste system that prevails in Hinduism and how scoreless people are routinely tortured and abused, the shameless genocide of 1200 Muslims in Gujrat, the Sikh riots orchestrated in 84 blah blah blah.. All from sources who have no interest whatsoever in trying to malign any of the institutions that I am referring to. But you see, I am plainly not interested coz I HATE religion, EVERY single one of them. Again dude, I request you, I am done debating with you. I keep replying because I don’t want to seem rude. Yawninnnnng same BS again.. debate ka karoge be uske liye minimum required knowledge chahiye hota hai.. sab aira gaira natthu khaira google kar ke exper bana baitha hai
coffee_rules Posted December 17, 2008 Author Posted December 17, 2008 Majority of Indians like Kashmir being part of India, kind of like a national sentiment. I don't know about majority of kashmiris because a lot of kashmiris have been driven out of their homes. If you count all Pandits, then yes, majority of lashmiris want to be part of India. For some Indian to call the presence of it's own Military in kashmir - 'An Occupation of terroristy" it is definitely anti-national. No amount of liberalism can apologise for such short-selling of the country.
fineleg Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 WTH ..... where and when did you clearly and unambigously answer this question : " Why did Majority Muslims vote in favour of breaking the country " ? Could you kindly point me to that thread and post ? Many thanks in advance. Why? They had a poll with choice, and some of them who were upto voicing their opinion voted for a partition because of whatever insecurities or grievances they felt (I am not going to 'justify' that, since I am not for bifurcation). Now, why do you ask "me" - why they voted - my choice is to not bifurcate -...this is a choice they WERE ALLOWED to vote for, and some of them did. What question from you have I not answered ? What do you want to do with the Muslims living in India?
Ram Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 Yawninnnnng same BS again.. debate ka karoge be uske liye minimum required knowledge chahiye hota hai.. sab aira gaira natthu khaira google kar ke exper bana baitha hai Yes, absolutely.. Of course DR, you must be a Double-Doctorate on Islamic studies and Middle-eastern affairs from Harvard I am sure and I really do quack in my boots at the prospect of debating with your ‘vaaaaast knowledge’. What was your Dissertation topic btw? Could you please send me a copy of that please? Man, you guys are such a joke… :haha:
Ram Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 why not bloody freaking concentrate on refuting what the poster has to say ( i.e since it is soo bloody obviously wrong according to your highness ) instead of throwing up bile juice ? Is that soo bloody hard to understand ? @#$%@#%$#% joker :mad: You're riled up? Mission accomplished!
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 boss bhai, i feel obv MM is being sarcastic. i dont think he is aiming to rile u up. but the problem is ur singular hatred towards muslims and no amount of explaining to you is changing your outlook about that! look there are bad elements - but they EXIST in EVERY community, and we all dont like them. But dont single out some community and hate them. lets avoid that.
Ram Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 The main issue here is, she may be right, but this definitely is not the time, how it comes across is that she is justifying this terrorist act. I have read A Roy for a while, there are some attributes in her writing which are ever present. Just in the article quoted above: * Misrepresentation Quote from the article "As tension in the region builds, U.S. Senator John McCain has warned Pakistan that, if it didn't act fast to arrest the "bad guys," he had personal information that India would launch air strikes on "terrorist camps" in Pakistan and that Washington could do nothing because Mumbai was India's 9/11." Where as the Indian Government has always stated "War is not really an option at this moment. And nowhere in the original quote did Mccain said he had personal information about india launching air strikes. (http://www.hindu.com/2008/12/07/stories/2008120757500100.htm). All he stated was that India would be justified in this. I am 100% sure the Govt. of India would have atleast considered the possibility of some surgical strikes, specifically targeting terror camps in PoK ( not Pakistan mind you). They have thought about that before and sometime in the future, they will think about it again. Both McCain and then later Roy, were probably referring to that. And of course our official line will 'War is not an option'.. Whatdaya expect? Our govt ministers to go on a public war-mongering spree, sending the markets tumbling down and plummeting economic sentiment? War is ALWAYS an option, only its never publicly told as so. *Hypocrisy "My name and the name of the well-known lawyer Prashant Bhushan have come up several times. At one point, while interviewing a former police officer, Arnab Goswami turned to the camera: "Arundhati Roy and Prashant Bhushan," he said. "I hope you are watching this. We think you are disgusting." For a TV anchor to do this in an atmosphere as charged and as frenzied as the one that prevails today amounts to incitement, as well as threat, and would probably in different circumstances have cost a journalist his or her job." A Roy, the uber fighter for individual rights and freedom of speech, does not like it when a TV anchor calls her disgusting. Oh Come on. If Arnab Goswami didnt like Roy's opinions, he should engage her in a dignified manner fitting a top news anchor, not turn his face to the camera and proclaim on live T.V that someone is disgusting. You call that acceptable? Roy didnt say Goswami must agree with her. She merely ask him to be more dignified and decent. Whats wrong with that? * Jumping to conclusions "The Lashkar has denied involvement, but remains the prime accused. According to the police and intelligence agencies, the Lashkar operates in India through an organization called the "Indian Mujahideen." Two Indian nationals, Sheikh Mukhtar Ahmed, a Special Police Officer working for the Jammu and Kashmir Police, and Tausif Rehman, a resident of Kolkata in West Bengal, have been arrested in connection with the Mumbai attacks. So already the neat accusation against Pakistan is getting a little messy." She is almost stating that Pakistan is not the culprit in this, where as every other investigative organization have more or less announced that Pakistanis were involved in this. Read again. She didnt absolve Pakistan totally from all blame. She has just said 'the clear-cut link to Pakistan has become muddled because there have been some alleged local involvement. Whats so flagrant about that? And Just as an FYI, a few locals people have been arrested in Kolkata in relation to these attacks. * Justification for the act "Through the endless hours of analysis and the endless op-ed essays, in India at least, there has been very little mention of the elephants in the room: Kashmir, Gujarat, and the demolition of the Babri Masjid." She constantly tries to justify this terrorist act, each terrorist act should be viewed in its singularity, Do I agree that what happened in Gujarat is terrorism? YEs I do, and who ever started it should get the same punishments as and if we get the real lynchpins behind this mumbai tragedy. If we start justifying present acts on past, then there is no end to that cycle. We can do this all day and all our lives. Why Mumbai - Cos of Gujarat Why Gujarat - bcos of mumbai blasts why mumbai blasts - because of babri masjid and keep on going. Arundhati has few enemies, the US, the UK, Israel, Indian government, big corporations not necessarily in that order, and she is smart enough to twist any incident in a way that one of these entities are to be blamed. Yep, she does exaggerate here. Mumbai blasts would have happened irrespective of how we treat our Muslim citizens, coz, lets accept, those Islamic Mullahs in Pakistan simply do not like us. "We had the death of former Prime Minster V. P. Singh, the hero of Dalits and lower castes, and the villain of upper caste Hindus pass without a mention." This statement takes the cake, you will be hard pressed to find anybody who considers VP singh as a hero. No clue about V.P Singh, so have nothing to say about this.
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 treating a normal person badly or in a biased manner just because he belongs to a certain religion and THEREFORE 'by default' is 'accused', 'suspected' etc - Thats a shameless act. Treat the bad elements badly. But the decent people - treat them decently NO MATTER which religion they belong to. This is something the Hindutvas, Muslim extremists all need to get into their head.
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 It is NOT about islam-the-religion that i am debating here. Thats not the point here. You need to realize something important - not all Muslims follow what is said in the book word-by-word (even assuming that you and DR are the experts in what is "written in the book"). They would like to live their lives in normal way like you do, and thats what they do - study, work, relax, enjoy etc.
mainhoonna Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 She does no service to the people she claims she's speaking for.All she does is make people like me wonder when muslims will stop playing the victim card.
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 what do u mean by "blessing" - active participation or aiding the crime can be punished. if there is active participation in a crime, then they can be brought to trial and punished. just what someone "feels inside their heart" cannot be punished or proven to be guilty!
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 Do you deny that a majority of Muslims voted in favour of partitionting India ? Simply Yes/No please. I dont deny it. If there was a poll, and thats what the majority voted - then choice was presented to them... - then is the mistake on those who voted? or those who conducted the poll? or those who allowed such insecurity and divisions to exist that they voted thus? there are many such qns. Just looking at it from one angle does not give the answer. And - we cannot kick out the people who voted their choice - some even "No partition" even if they were "minority"
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 even TODAY - people vote on basis of caste, basis of religion etc. Such things existed then does not surprise me. Politicians of then and NOW - both fuel people based on Divide and Rule - be it caste based politics or communal politics. things will only improve if people rise beyond this, and see through shams of politicians.
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 well rabble rousing by Jinnah may have swayed people (not that its correct). The bottomline is Unless and Until people see through shams of politicians trying to influence them, these things happen - they need to be educated and rise beyond this.
milkman Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 Note to MM and Finey :eyedance: I am against all kinds of religions and gods so what I am saying is based on a neutral pov. I will feel like an alien in a mullah raj just like I would in chaddi raj :haha: Facts- - Islam is super crap as an ideology. - Islam is full of hatred and violence towards non-Muslims. It's an intellectual fact and nothing to do with being right wing or someone not understanding Islam. - From all the religions I have researched I would say Islam is the worst and the most violent. - The founder of the religion was an absolute nut case. I mean literally. - Are all Muslims bad? Definitely not but if they follow the religious text properly then yes they would ALL be bad. - Religions in general and Islam in particular eats the brain cells of the follower. The follower becomes a pre-programmed zombie devoid of any intellectual common sense :finger: - Islam uses intimidation and death to silence it's critics. Some of the above points can apply and do apply to other religions as well. It's just that some acids are more concentrated and lethal than others. What is the solution for India (or world)? Keep religion ABSOLUTELY PRIVATE! No religion should get softly treatment from the govt. One law for all irrespective of religion. In Europe govts are bending backwards because they are scared of Islamic thugs. Realistically speaking I think there will be a civil war in the future and there will be lot of blood shed. Religious conflicts always get resolved (temporarily or permanently) by violence .
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 What is the solution for India (or world)? Keep religion ABSOLUTELY PRIVATE! No religion should get softly treatment from the govt. One law for all irrespective of religion. Agreed :thumbs_up: Realistically speaking I think there will be a civil war in the future and there will be lot of blood shed. Religious conflicts always get resolved (temporarily or permanently) by violence . That will be real unfortunate :((
fineleg Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 ^ and that needs to be abolished. I'm not a "muslim supporter" Boss bhai - I just want people to live and let live - BOTH sides.
beetle Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 Some people will do and say anything to stand out and not be the "common view". Arundhati Roy is a publicity ***** who will do anything to get on people's nerves. This sick women never scapped a friend or family member off the road after a blast. Such people actually deserve to get shot by terrorists. This coward says this in this country knowing that she can get away with anything in the name of effing human rights. If she had the guts,she should go to our effing neighbouring country and try being contrarian there. Do din mein human rights ki hawa nikal jaegi. Seriously ,thiswoman needs to be tried for promoting breaking the country and for providing emotional ,psychological support to terrorists.
Recommended Posts