ganeshran Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 No you are wrong. Because your standards are so upside down that you dont even realize that you keep feeding the Jihadis by bendingover repeatedly. Instead of dealing with the root cause of this Hindu-Muslim nonsense you have blindly decided to peddle your mindless liberalism and decided that you are going to only declare some one as guilty when you have gone thru the due process. How the heck does one go about finding out who is guilty in a situation like Kashmir ? Do you think you have resources to try 5 million people and find out who is guilty and who is not and then punish only those ? Just because the liberal statements look cool doesnt mean they are practical. In situations like Kashmir and 1947 you have to take some broad level decisions. And absolutely nobody worth his salt will tell you that the Muslim community was by and large blameless and that it was only a few nutcases that managed to cause all the havoc. If you cannot understand such a simple thing there is simply no point in continuing this discussion. So you need to tell me what it is. Broad level decisions? Do you even know how absurd that sounds? What are you advocating here? Genocide? Mass imprisonment? It is not liberal statements that look cool, but hatred that feels powerful. In fact hating someone is a nice way of reassuring oneself of ones courage when in fact it is the indicator of cowardice. Hate is something that is not easy to relinquish - once cultivated, it continuously reinforces itsself by selecting only facts that serve to reinforce it. The adrenaline rush that one gets from subjecting another person to a barrage of hatred is extremely addictive and gives the illusion of power. I again ask you a fact about Kashmir - if the locals are the sole ones responsible for the plight of Kashmiri Pandits, then why did it have to wait for so long since freedom? Kashmir has always been under Indian control, Pandits were always there. If it was not the handiwork of the Jihadis then why didnt the locals do it much earlier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganeshran Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 ohh wow ... thats just freakin brilliant. I'am sorry but I cannot argue with someone with that sort of utterly brazen and dishonest outlook. Thanks for the debate and indeed you have told me all that I wanted to know and further re-confirm why India will continue get raped and pillaged. You actually attract rapists by broadcasting your need to get raped. No wonder the country is the way it is. Pathetic really. Use of rhetoric and smileys isnt going to divert from the fact that you have no response for the facts that Congress got 91% of the Hindu vote (including a major share of the scheduled caste vote) while Muslim League got 85% of the Muslim vote. The same muslims didnt vote for Muslim league in 1937 merely 9 years before this election. So what changed in those 9 years? It was the transition of Jinnah from a secular leader into a rabble rouser and demagogue. Jinnah exploited the fact that Muslims valued their religion deeply and used it unite them inspite of numerous class differences. The 1946 election was a communally divisive election in response to the events of the decade. The numerous communal disturbances had polarized people to vote for their religion, not for the policy of their parties. In your zeal to argue, you ignore the glaring inconsistency in your argument in criticizing the Muslims who wanted partition. They had the exact same stand as you had - that Hindus and Muslims cannot live together in peace. Opposition of the partition came from nationalists who asserted that Hindus and Muslims and all other faiths can live together in peace in a secular India. Your stand is that Muslims can neither live in peace with Hindus nor are they allowed to have their own country. I don't understand the solution that can rationalize the duplicitous stand - Forced conversion, genocide, exodus to other Muslim countries? People like you derive a kind of sado-masochistic pleasure from hatred. In subjecting another person to a barrage of hatred- it gives you an illusion of being powerful, or being a crusader for the religion, of doing your "duty". When in truth, people who spread hatred for different religions, have little difference in their methods. Only the symbols and the content of rhetoric changes - the general argument remains the same. To paint a picture of the religion being under attack from all sides, to criticize the moderates as not being true and sincere representatives of the religion, to blame innocent people on the other side of being evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachin=GOD Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganeshran Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Since when did pointing out the true colors of a ideology by citing its actions and spirit (as per its holy book ) began to count as Hatred ? Did the pseudo liberals quietly change the fundamental concepts of right and wrong while they were at it molly coddling this barbarian ideology ? You speak of Cowardice and Bahaduri are you trying to sugar coat Cowardice combined with callousness and sell it as bravery ? The real world calls it stupidity and laughs at it. Only a idiotic country can claim to be on a moral High ground when large numbers of its citizens have been driven out from their homeland which India still proudly claims to be an integral part of its territory. These poor people live as refugees right smack in the capital and the idiotic country pours billions of rupees into this said territory that they proudly claim to be theirs. The really sad thing is that there have been many iterations of the same nonsense. What sort of idiotry is this ? Just look at your own example here and the extent to which you have gone to spread the guilt or dilute the various events. You accept that trouble is invariably caused by this highly inflammable community and yet keep arguing for the rights of the very same community based on the principles of Gandhigiri? . Do you even realize how many times we have tried that method and what happened every-time ? Is there such a thing as learning from history ? What people like you do is openly validate and endorse this killer ideology by your words and actions. You act as a nice fortress for the Jihadis which is why the likes of you are more dangerous than the real Jihadis. You will only realize when the Jihadi turns his attention to you. This is EXACTLY what happened in Kashmir. Read history. Those who ignore history are condemned to re-live it. Criticizing people who indulged in violence is not ignorant but using past actions of others to blame innocent people who have not indulged in any sort of violence is perverted and filled of hatred. It is uttlerly dishonest on your part to totally ignore any violence done by Hindus during partition and totally lay the blame on Muslims for the entire violence. As I said many times any violence done by Muslims will be used as proof of their ideology by you and any violence done by Hindus will be rightful retaliation, never mind that two sets of innocent victims were at the receiving end. Your outlook of history is completely one dimensional and evident of cognitive bias which adjusts facts retrospectively to fit its own interpretation of reality. In contrast my stand is that no guilty man can be let off and no innocent man can be condemned irrespective what others belonging to his/her group have done. I can apply my logic to any situation irrespective of who the perpetrator of violence was and who the victim was. Whereas Your logic when applied to situations where the perpetrators were Hindus will sound completely absurd to you and you will seek to readjust history to blame someone else for it. What happened in Kashmir was despicable - I never condoned it - but you are the one who are ignorantly blaming the entire community of 180 million Muslims for it. It is cowardice to rationalize violence against innocent members of community because of the acts some other perpetrated. Just like you rationalized violence against Muslims of Gujrat because of Godhra which was done by others in the community, or the sikhs in 1984 because 2 of their coreligionists who killed our prime minister. Punishing the guilty is totally admissible but no sane person would blame an innocent person no matter how hard you push for it. You criticize Muslims for seeking partition of the country and also say that they cannot live in peace with Hindus. What is the solution, I ask again. Genocide, Exodus, Forced conversion? But what happened to your claim that most of them are normal wonly like you ? So what if the Jihadis incited them ? Arent they supposedly tolerant and immune to such nonsense per the claims of the pseudo liberals who were chest thumping as recently as the Kargil War in an effort to sell their hidden agendas ? And also by your logic the Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh must be living in eternal peace and tranquility over there becasue there are hardly any acts of violence in those countries. Just see how ludicrous your logic is. My claim still stands. Anyone who drove out the Pandits must be punished regardless of whether he is Jihadi or a local. But who didn't do anything and was powerless to prevent it should not be blamed. Whenever religiously motivated violence happens, the nutters take over and the moderates take a back seat due to their aversion to violence. Kashmiris havent shown the same stand all through their history. Why didnt they side with Pakistan in 1965 when rebellion was incited? Why didnt they indugle in violence against the Pandits for 42 years after independence? Because the mood in the valley has been transient. At times it has been fiercely anti India, at times it has been anti- Pakistan, at times it has favoured the status quo, at times they want Independence. The Jihadis were the one who gave a violent venting to the feeling at the time. By what logic can you blame the whole community of Muslims for what happened in 1989? If thats the case you and me are to be blamed for Gujrat and 1984. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 How many Muslims were driven out of their homes and towns after the 2002 riots? I read numbers around the 200,000-400,000 range. Can someone confirm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punjabi_khota Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 ^That can't be right. :headshake: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 What has all this got to do with MoFo Hussain going to Qatar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachin=GOD Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 What has all this got to do with MoFo Hussain going to Qatar? Nothing. There's a loooooong debate going on where in the end both persons will still believe what they believed before starting the debate :hehe: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachin=GOD Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 That is not the point ... it would be a very boring phorum if people started agreeing with each other. The intent is to present all the aspects and let the readers infer whatever they want to. I agree. But topics should be interesting like Goddy vs Bradman/Richards/Lara/Pwnting/Sobers/Kallis/every new kid on the block :--D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 ^That can't be right. :headshake: Wasn't too far off - within two weeks there were 150,000 people in refugee camps : By 27 March, nearly 100,000 displaced people moved into 101 relief camps. This swelled to over 150,000 in 104 camps the next two weeks. Probably would have gone up subsequently but can't find the link from where I got the numbers from. Ref : Paul R. Brass (2005). The Production Of Hindu-muslim Violence In Contemporary India. University of Washington Press. pp. 385–393. ISBN 0295985062. Taken from Wikipedia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaurav92 Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Guys please don't get personal here, stop all this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Got to hand to BB ' date=' his partners in crime , DR , ST etc hit the Exit button long ago , but this dude is still around posting the same things what he did 5 years ago ... somethings never change , only software does ...[/quote'] I agree with you. It pains me to see BB arguing alone against a whole horde of posters. That is just so not done and it also goes against Indian ethos. He doesn't have much support staff, and when he does they generally do his arguement more harm than good. All these discussions just cause extreme belligerence leading to excessive swearing, by posters who I'm sure are decent people in normal circumstances. To overcome this feeling of ill will and to fester the spirit of team work, I suggest a game*. Why don't we take up a random topic, and make teams and argue along the team lines. We don't have to necessarily believe what we are arguing about. We just have to argue and not let our team mates down. After a few 100 pages, when we are out of ideas and tired of repeating the same points, we switch sides. I.e if team A was arguing for a topic and team B against a topic, team A now argues against the topic. Its like playing chess against yourself team chess against your self. Your arguements have to be strong enough to last the 100 initial pages, but weak enough for you and your team to tear down when its time to shift allegiance. Ditto for the other team. Here are the teams I recommend: Team A Lurker Asterix (captain) BossBhai kumble_rocks Rett ( vice captain) The Outsider youngIndia ( don't know what happened to him, after CSK's pathetic IPL display he's not to be seen :dontknow:) Mishragreat ( special weapon) Team B Mariyam Sachin = God (captain) Gunner Ganeshran (vice captain) kabira Ram ( best debater, had to keep him in my team) DomainK Vijay Sharma ( special weapon) ---------------------------------------------------- Cheif Debate Adjudicator: Aaku Stump Umpire: Holysmoke Wicket Umpire: urbestfriend 3rd Umpire: Shane UDRS: Feed Who ever else wants to participate can join the team of their choice. The topic is: Which is more beautiful; a full moon on a starless night or a rainbow on a rainy day with an overcast sky? Since everyone ganged up on BB, he gets to pick what side of the fence he will lean towards,and start the debate. I come in peace. :icflove: (*) Its not my original idea. One of my college professors' ( retired SC judge), used to take up live cases happening in the country and ask us to pick sides and prepare for a day. Then we were asked to debate, and debate we did: fought tooth and nails against class mates and friends to get the better grade. On the day of awarding the grade, he said that he wasn't happy with how we had fared and asked us to switch sides. The initial shock held most of us back for a few minutes, then we remembered that our grades were on the line. :D And to our surprise we found ourselves arguing against the very points we had put up a few days before. The experience taught me a lot. About myself, my team mates, about law in general and human psychology. Hope it does the same here. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachinism Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 :headshake: I can't believe the way I'm seeing the mature senior posters on this board behave Some people need to look back at why this site was started and see where its heading... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakat Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 @Mariyam point well made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texy Posted July 11, 2011 Author Share Posted July 11, 2011 Stop this ganging up on BB let's keep the discussion focused on the topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 And the fact that a vast majority of Muslims voted for Jinnah still doesnt count as a crime that needs to be punished for you is because ... ? Dude. Even by your low standards that is abyssmal. How do you propose to punish "Muslims" that voted for Jinnah in 1940s or earlier? How are you going to find out who these specific voters were? How would you isolate them and persecute them? It is rather easy a question so dont spin it or try to be a meanderer. All ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 The topic is: Which is more beautiful; a full moon on a starless night or a rainbow on a rainy day with an overcast sky? In keeping with theme of this thread. [bB mode on] 1) Rainbow on a rainy day is much better. In a voting by I-am-half-drunk.com 76.327% voted for Rainbow. 2) I hate full moon because chand sitaara are signature signs of you know what religion. And let me pull out ayaat 3:16 to support it, based on the site mentioned above. [/bB mode off] By the by between the two full moon on a starless night is more pretty to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 Wasn't too far off - within two weeks there were 150,000 people in refugee camps : Probably would have gone up subsequently but can't find the link from where I got the numbers from. Ref : Paul R. Brass (2005). The Production Of Hindu-muslim Violence In Contemporary India. University of Washington Press. pp. 385–393. ISBN 0295985062. Taken from Wikipedia.Is this the number of Muslims or does it include Hindus as well who were displaced in the riots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 Is this the number of Muslims or does it include Hindus as well who were displaced in the riots? According to the Wiki reference there is no breakdown, but if we take the 2:1 ratio which was commonly seen in the riots, 100,000 Muslims plus rising - that's the number from the first 2 weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Is this the number of Muslims or does it include Hindus as well who were displaced in the riots? WB, seedhi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts