FYI - Bheem and Others

[Lurker]

Why because he is worse ?

Not really. Because as I have already suggested a few times what I am trying to show here is how Muslim gangsters are not "Muslim" per se but simply gansters who have had supports from all communities. I do not quite see how Afzal Guru qualifies as a gangster.

And reg Dawood and his support .... I already told you what my position is .... if there are 100 babus supporting him take them all down be they Hindu or Muslim .... I have no love for these haramis nor does any common Hindu.

No it is not as simple as that. Let me make it categorical for you. Q1) Do you agree/disagree that Dawood Ibrahim, India's Public Enemy No 1 benefitted a LOT from Hindu patronage? Q2) Do you agree/disagree that gangsters like D-company derive their supports from all communities and not merely one? Q3) How do you think a strongman in UP/Bihar derives his "muscle" from? xxxx

[Lurker]

In fact you bring another vital angle to this sensitive subject ... the pseudo secular Congress babus masquarading as torch bearers of Secularism and democracy ... whereas in reality they are the root cause for all this nonsense.

I would disagree with you on the Pseudo-Secular wording(it is used as a blanket statement often without sound reasons) but yes I would agree that Congress exploited the situation till it was a case of point of no-return. That being said BB, lets close this issue with quick answer to 3 questions: Q1) Do you agree/disagree that Dawood Ibrahim, India's Public Enemy No 1 benefitted a LOT from Hindu patronage? Q2) Do you agree/disagree that gangsters like D-company derive their supports from all communities and not merely one? Q3) How do you think a strongman in UP/Bihar derives his "muscle" from? xxxx

[Lurker]

From politicians with vested interests but not from the avg joe like me and you. Whereas there is a lot of support for the Muslim Gangsters from Muslim community... which was proved by the news article with video posted here a while back.

That is neither here nor there BB. We can keep doing this whole day and still not reach anywhere. My simple premise is this - D Company got most of their political clout from Hindu politicians. I hope I have showed it enough and I would appreciate if we can both agree and close this.

I do not know you tell me... and I will take your word for it.

They derive their power from Caste. While it would be almost impossible for anyone to prove Dawood gets it support due to Muslims, it is similarly very easy to show that a Pappu Yadav gets all his support due to Yadavs, blind support if I may add. This is the case in most towns unfortunately in Bihar/UP and realistically if you want to narrow down a community supporting a criminal Hindus would not come second best let me just say that.

A request to not get into technicalities .... dont you think its silly to argue on how we "classifiy" these lowlifes ? If you dont want to call him a gangster pick a terminology that suits you (and if it is a must ) but try not to skirt around the issue.

No I am not skirting. Just keeping things on track. My argument all along has been that these gangsters are not communal but criminal and that every community is responsible for it, As for Afzal Guru I have often said that anyone who supports anti-Indian activity deserves life penalty. xxxx

[Lurker]

and my point is that does not mean the Avg joe also supports these goondas especially from the Hindu community.

That does not answer my question BB. I do think we both are getting repeatative. Lets try this one last time - Do you agree/disagree that Dawood Ibrahim survived largely on political patronage of Hindu leaders? Mind you I have not even started the part where many of his lieutants are Hindu. Thats a story for a different time.

I dont think these guys are involved in Anti-National activities a la D - Company or Afzal ... but yes these elements need to be dealt with also .... regardless of their religion.

I would disagree with that. I would say the Bahubalis in Bihar have practically drawn state towards dump. The situation in UP is no different. The problem with a Bahubali vis a vis Don is this - in Bombay there is 1 Don(or atleast there is 1 Don most goondas listen to). In Bihar everyone is a Don. So Tadav community has its own Don, Rajputs their own and so on. Net result? Lawlessness. If you have 1 or 2 top guys there is a law and order(though obviously or a parallel kind). This is typically what would happen under Sicilian Mafia in USA. When you have a Don in every mohalla then every day is a warfare - like what you see in Blacks/Hispanics mafia area in US.

And what do you say about the wide spread support that he got when he was convicted ... ? What do we do about those millions who took out juloos closed down the town and engaged in pitched battles with the cops when he got convicted ?

I am not too sure of support he received in Indian cities - like Delhi & Bombay or Calcutta. If his supporters were asking for taking away death penalty we can possibly argue that(for the record I am all for death penalty but I do realize there are moral issues here). However his support in J&K does not surprise me. Like it or not India does not enjoy 100% support in Kashmir. As unfrtunate as that is, it is also true. But yes I would agree that if a Muslim in Bombay supports Guru purely on religious lines then that is wrong. xxxx

[Guest dada_rocks]

False. And i've already proven your this spiel to be false too. I've asked you before to not use words you do not know the meanings of..but you refuse to be educated in this matter too...such a hard-headed chap, you are!

Proved where in your dreams. Mujhe education dene ke liye u will have to be born again so don't bother in this life.

[Guest dada_rocks]

That is a totally dumb perspective to have- to see the world only as through personal experience and nothing more- for people's personal experiences are different and your personal experience with muslims won't be even 0.0001% of the total muslim population of India...my personal experience says that fundie muslims or muslims who can be called traitors are a small % of the total population....so your generalization about a 150 million-strong community based on personal experience is not only a flawed perspective, it is the root of ambiguity and the mask behind which your hatred hides. Anyone can have any set of personal experiences from the infinite set available...doesnt mean that your 'universe created through personal experience' is the objective reality or any more credible than my universe of personal experiences. Utterly false, rubbish and nothing more than baseless allegations constructed to justify your blind hatred. Most muslims in India are not interested in creating another partition. As far as i am concerned, you are the bigger traitor since your ideas and the ideas of your fellow hinduvta cohorts if brought to fruititon are far more damaging for India. And the only rational guage for a traitor is whether his/her action or beleif is damaging for his/her nation. In your case this holds true and thus, not only are you a racist and fundamentalist hindu nutter, you are also a traitor, albeit blissfully ignorant of it.

Tube-light which part of my post drew anthing from personal experience.. Let me remind u again regarding numvbers 86% muslims voted for pakistan in muslim majorioty region so even if one believes ur baseless fairy-tale that only muslims lived in those regions it still says 86% of them supported pakistan cause and now go check how many of them actually crossed the border from that group. Aage scrabble khlena hai to khelo I have no time for idiocy

[Lurker]

1. I dont know who supported him. But if you say they did I will take your word and in that case lets book them all. No eceptions.

*** Fair enough. So the next time anyone suggests that D-Company (which I have brought in only since he is India's Public Enemy Number 1) received supports only from Muslim I can hope you realize how wrong that statement is.

2. Patronage by Leaders does not equal Patronage by aam janta ... Do you agree to that or not ? Do you understand that difference straight answer please.

I do. But here is the thing. There is no way you would EVER be able to prove that x% of Muslims support Dawood support him simply because he is a Muslim. If you can feel free to show that to me. On the other hand it would be very simple for me to just point you towards the Bahubalis of Indian cow-belt that derive their support directly because of their caste and community.

Why does it not surprise you ? Isnt that a part of India ? Not long ago our babus sold us yarn that these were just like any Indians ... what happened to the Indian Muslim = Different theory ? Havent we been through this same non-sense time and again ? Yesterday it was ML asking for Pak today its Kashmiris .. tomorrow it will Jammu (And they are on to it as we speak) .. and you will keep shifting your goal post and yardstick after every such event ... where does this stop ?

It doesn't surprise me just as it would not surpise the majority of Indians. Do you seriously think every Jammu and Kashmiri supports India? What gives you that feeling of optimism? I am being plain realistic when I say that I would not be surprised that a bunch of them do not support India.

What will it take for you realize this inherent problem in Ummah ?

Now where did that come from? Do you see how you swing things from one extreme to other? Okay help me understand the role of Ummah in D-Company when he derived most of his support based on Hindus? In keeping in sync with this thread - What would it take for you to realize that the problems of India, historically and today, is not ONLY due to certain Muslims but also the Hindus that have been in the same bed as them? xxx

[Guest dada_rocks]

Seperate land and seperate nation are NOT the same thing !! Seperate land means recognition/autonomy etc. The native americans up north wanted a seperate land and they got it- Nunavut, that was carved out of NW Territorries & Quebec. They are still a part of Canada though and it was never an issue of seperate nation.

Mr. Idiot when u are dealing with muslims try to present examples which has anythign to do wiht them . very fact that u have to go to Nunawat tells me u cud not find any example wfrom islamic states and that proves my point.

[Guest dada_rocks]

"If it means them being sympathetic to the cause of carving India out once more for creating another dar-ul-islam in future then answer is yes more or less every one of them are traitor". Of course he will have no data to back it up but it will not stop him from calling his fellow citizens traitors. ****************** 1946 election data fought on the basis of Pakistan movement . For anyone who is not an a[ologist is good enough data. For anyone who is not an apologist existance of nto a single state where these guys are not involved in some secessioniist activiy if they have the number is good enough data. Well apoligists psecs unless the event happens won't see the light.

[Guest dada_rocks]

Stop lying. I proved to you that your idea that 90% of muslims voted for it is pure guess-work and factual inaccuracies...and i've proved to you precisely why such an extrapolation is invalid by educating you in basic electoral dynamics. You took the fact that 90% or so constituencies with muslim majority voting for ML as 90% muslims voting for ML, without slightest idea on the data of what the district-by-district voting breakdown was, whether it was a 90-10 majority or a 55-45 majority. Only data you have is what % of muslim-majority constituenies went ML and what % went Congress...not what the voting breakdown in the masses were. Threfore, as i've proved before and i am forced to do this because of your lying tendencies, your comment that 90% muslims voted for seperation is nothing but unadulterated BS. So either you are deliberately trying to cook up and misrepresent data or you are not educated enough in these matters to properly interpret the data. But then again, your education level and reasoning ability as well as your intentions towards objectivity are highly questionable to me anyways. So i don't expect much better from racist & fundamentalist slimeballs like yourself who goes and gets himself banned in half the sites around the net.

Idiocy knows no bounds Data (1) 100% muslim majority contituency went to ML (2) 86% popular vote among those constituencies went to ML Let us have three scenario (a) Muslim majority constituency defined by just simple majority ie hindu:muslim::49:51 If this was the case then seemingly at least 86-51= 31% hindus too voted for creation of pakistan. Obviously implausible provided u are cliaming that hindus were working for creation of pakistan.:haha: I know even for a moron like u this will be too much. hence option dropped (b) Muslim majority constituency defined by more than simple majority ie let us say Hindu:Muslim::10:90 Here 4% muslim will have to vote against idea of pakistan which is plausible given there were leaders liek baadshah khkan with limited presence. Point is any possible combination whihc paints muslim population less than 86% in the muslim constituency will have to support the idea hindus voted for pakistan which is idiotic to say the least. © Muslim majority constituency defined by absolute majority virtually no presence of others: Hindu:muslim:: 0:100 Here 14% muslims come of as voting against pakistan idea. Conclusion: You will have to prove me even for the just 14% of muslims support for united india , that the muslim constituenies had 100% muslim presence. Anythign less than that weakens your case and I can see you are oblivious to this simple deduction hence are parrotting like a first grader same crap again and again. If 86% popular vote was for jinnah's pakistan idea no way in hell less than 86% muslim can be shown to be supporting pakistan's idea. Because no matter how miniscule there will always be some non-muslim presence in muslim constituencies. I can see even u are parrotting this fact but have no clue that this fact doesn't strengthen ur retarded conjectue but weakens it.

[Guest dada_rocks]

I don't now why D-company episode is stretching .. It may sound sick but as long as D-company was secular crminal he had support across religious lines. yes nobody claims hinduis are not criminals. Point is here aiding and abetting treasonous activity as a principle that's what D-company started in early 90's and all his hindu criminal lieutenants deserted him.

[Guest dada_rocks]

Whats the point Dada .. kya milega ? .. Do you think people are still not aware of that numerical breakup ? But I guess you could ask that same question to me ... :lmao:

You never know this guy comes of as thick so I better not assume anything.:haha:

[Guest dada_rocks]

Abhi KR ke OP ka historical part ka response banki hi hai.. soncha tha aaj likhunga inlogon ne isi mein uljha ke rakh diya

[Lurker]

I wasnt optimistic nor were a lot of folks circa 1947 when the Kashmir craap started. But we were summararily told by no one less than Nehru and Gandhi that All Kashmiri Muslims are Indians and that Kashmir is a integral part of India ... 30-40 yrs later we are now convinced that they arent Indians afterall. Another 20 yrs later we are almost there to add Jammu to that list ... and so on and so forth ...

Now you are putting words in my mouth. I will do a BB here and use a quote that you often suggest, "It is a fact". It is a fact that J&K has been from bad to worse in my lifetime. In early 80's it was slightly bad with some undercurrent of hostility, thanks to Pakistan's interference it blew up in late 80's and early 90's and has been ever since. I am being a realist when I say there are certain segements unsympathetic to Indians and you know it. Make no mistake this does NOT mean that I have given up on Kashmir or that I am willing to make any compromise. No. We have to get back Kashmiris to India on our terms and certainly not due to force. But my point on this was that Afzal Guru will find some support in J&K and if you want to tackle that issue you should first be willing to accept it rather than suggest it does not exist.

I had explained it in that post itself ... but please dont quote things out of context and fell surprised. Kindly keep track of things. But anyhow I have explained it again above in this post. This has nothing to do with D-Company or gangsters if it wasnt obvious.

It is. When a Hindu supports Muslim it becomes for "vested interest" or as DR wrote, "for lure of money", however when a Muslim supports a Muslim it is because of religion? The whole Ummah stereotyping? That is ridiculuous. Let me summarise: 1) The Public Enemy 1 in India has enoyed its success thanks to Hindu political bigwigs. 2) Hindu caste and communities have supported their leaders, "heroes" as much, if not more, than Muslim community. xxxx

[Gaurav]

It is. When a Hindu supports Muslim it becomes for "vested interest" or as DR wrote' date= "for lure of money", however when a Muslim supports a Muslim it is because of religion? The whole Ummah stereotyping? That is ridiculuous.

It's not going to be for Islam! Is it? Hardly rocket science. :lightbulb: What I have noticed is that CC in particular (Lurker in general) has a tendency to make excuses all the time. Specialist in comparing apples with oranges. Now I can understand that you guys are not keen on Hindutva. Neither am I but surely you are not naive enough to not understand the threat of Islam? As we speak CC's favourite organization Hamas takes control of Gazza. I for one have never said that all Indian muslims are anti-Indian. Any person can be anti-Indian but being muslim adds another layer that has the potential to go against our secular framework. Simply because their religious text runs contrary to secularism and the whole world (including India) is littered with examples of Islamic thirst for blood! (ROP) Lurker you compared Indian muslims with British Asian immigrants when it comes to supporting India/Pak over England. Sorry to say but that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard! Immigrants are---> IMMIGRANTS!!!! Indian muslims are from India and always have been! Do you see the difference? :lightbulb: That said plenty of second generation British Indians do support England as well. Same can't be said about P@ki immigrants though. I wonder why? :hysterical:

[CC1981]

(2) 86% popular vote among those constituencies went to ML

And where is the data for that ? even if this number is accurate, 86% of votes != 86% consensus amongst the masses.

Let us have three scenario

All three scenarios utterly irrelevant without having any data on the % turn-out for the votes. Without any idea on whether 10 % or 90% of eligible voters voted, your postulations are meaningless and utterly hypothetical.

[CC1981]

Mujhe education dene ke liye u will have to be born again so don't bother in this life.

I know you are too hard-headed to be educated properly...which is why you come in with the same tired spiel despite being proven categorically false again and again. I understand though...typical fundie behaviour. You perfectly underline the truth that nomatter how great or learnerd the teacher is, he or she cannot teach someone who is unwilling to learn and educate themselves. So infact, you just underline your flaws even more than anyone else's.

[CC1981]

Neither am I but surely you are not naive enough to not understand the threat of Islam?

I understand the threat of Islam...but the threat of hinduvta is no less sinister in my books in the modern context.

[Guest dada_rocks]

It is. When a Hindu supports Muslim it becomes for "vested interest" or as DR wrote, "for lure of money", however when a Muslim supports a Muslim it is because of religion? The whole Ummah stereotyping? That is ridiculuous. ************************* pray tell me why else wud hindu leitenants of dawood desert him when he starts killing for the heck of it. Before that he was equal opportunity secuale crime syndicate who used to kill for money and he had hindu criminals in his gang when he turned into killer for exacting revenge on behalf of islamists his muslim lietenants still stuck to his sinister design. Is it so hard to understand..

[CC1981]

pray tell me why else wud hindu leitenants of dawood desert him when he starts killing for the heck of it

Both hindus and muslims distanced themselves from doud in fear of TADA...and some hindus & muslims still remain in his camp of supporters/affiliates.