Jump to content

Why My Father Hated India :- Aatish Taseer

ravishingravi

By ravishingravi
in Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

mishra Grand Master

mishra

Posted
Posted

Here is a good example of Gandhi trying to logic with Jinnah. "I find no parallel in history for a body of converts and their descendants claiming to be a nation apart from the parent stock. If India was one nation before the advent of Islam, it must remain one in spite of the change of faith of a very large body of her children."

ganeshran Collaborator

ganeshran

Posted
Posted
erm ... you don't get to a situation where an entire community is chucked out and is not welcome anymore in the region without grass roots level help. To pretend otherwise that only a few idiots were responsible is what is trully stupid. How many more times do I need to tell this ? Do you agree with this or not ? And in the case of 1947 they openly voted for creation of Pakistan. Pls spare me your PC nonsense that situation was such and such and hence we need to be lenient.
This is the case of you twisting my points to fit what you think I am saying. Where did I say that we need to be lenient against the perpetrators. My point was that we simply cannot punish everybody for the acts of a section - no matter how large that section is. What punishment do you propose everyone should be given to everyone in Kashmir?
So you are now going to pretend that the Banerjee committee setup by poojya Rail Mantriji did not happen ? Are you also going to pretend that the lengths that the Nanavati commission went just did not happen ? Ditto with the 84 riots ? Why dont you show me one single equivalent of these in Kashmir before you decide to hurl accusations of "changing reality" ?
So committees are now proof of action by the government. Check how many people have been convicted by these committees and see how many perpetrators of the riots have been punished? and I am talking about both Godhra and the ensuing riots in Gujarat. Jagdish Tytler who has blood on his hands still roams free.
Wonderfull. Where have I refused to acknowledge Christian violence ? Can you point me to that post before telling me that Iam parroting ? And last time I checked things like Kashmir and the countless terror attacks were during our lifetimes ... not during our forefathers.
Good that now we are limiting the discussion to our lifetimes rather than going to acts done by Mohammed in the dark and middle ages as a proof of the violence of an ideology.
that link is not just criticism of Quran it is a petition seeking the banning of that book as it violates Indian laws. In other words if you publish a book that has the same sort of contents as in the Quran you will get locked up. If you bothered to read that link you you would understand.
So you want the quran's publication to be banned? Any other broad level decisions that need to be taken? Also what about the violence mentioned in the Bible http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html Go unto thine infidels and slay their bodies and crusheth their testicles. Exodus 22:5 When you approach a city to fight against it, you shall offer it terms of peace. If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you. However, if it does not make peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it. When the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall strike all the men in it with the edge of the sword. Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you. Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes” (Deutronomy 20:10-17) “Hymenaeus and Alexander I have delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.” 1 Timothy 1:20 “This day the LORD will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down, and cut off your head; and I will give the dead bodies of the host of the Philistines this day to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, Then David ran and stood over the Philistine, and took his sword and drew it out of its sheath, and killed him, and cut off his head with it…. And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem; but he put his armor in his tent. And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, Abner took him, and brought him before Saul with the head of the Philistine in his hand.” 1 Samuel 17:46 “Then Abishai the son of Zeruiah said to the king, “Why should this dead dog curse my lord the king? Let me go over and take off his head.”... And there is also with you Shimei the son of Gera, the Benjaminite from Bahurim, who cursed me with a grievous curse on the day when I went to Mahanaim; but when he came down to meet me at the Jordan, I swore to him by the LORD, saying, I will not put you to death with the sword.’ Now therefore hold him not guiltless, for you are a wise man; you will know what you ought to do to him, and you shall bring his gray head down with blood to Sheol.” 2 Samuel 16:9, 1 Kings 2:8 ” When they came into the house, as he lay on his bed in his bedchamber, they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him. They took his head, and went by the way of the Arabah all night, and brought the head of Ishbosheth to David at Hebron. And they said to the king, “Here is the head of Ishbosheth, the son of Saul, your enemy, who sought your life; the LORD has avenged my lord the king this day on Saul and on his offspring.” 2 Samuel 4:7 “That is not true. But a man of the hill country of Ephraim, called Sheba the son of Bichri, has lifted up his hand against King David; give up him alone, and I will withdraw from the city.” And the woman said to Joab, “Behold, his head shall be thrown to you over the wall.” Then the woman went to all the people in her wisdom. And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and threw it out to Joab.” 2 Samuel 20:21
ganeshran Collaborator

ganeshran

Posted
Posted
this was said in that MF Hussain thread w.r.t Pakistan IIRC ... feel free to tell me how was the then Indian gov supposed to deal with the blatant stabbing circa 1947 ? According to your handbook of Political Correctness and "secularism" we would have had to single out ONLY those that voted for creation of pakistan ( which BTW was a majority of the then Muslim Population ) ... then charge them and try them in a court and then punish them for treason for which the punishement is a Death penality ? Is this how you wanted Justice be made ? Ditto with Kashmir ? ohh wait I forgot about the easier alternative : simply pretend that these were aberration's ignore them pack up and move out of those territories and the usual routine that has now become standard practice since nearly a Milennia.
Lets see here how you want justice to be done. First assume collective guilt (apparently that is the easier alternative because punishing only those who were responsible is not practical) then hang all of Muslims in the valley irrespective of whether they were involved in violence or not. I dont know how you are even able to rationalize to yourself this sick and bigoted stand. If this is not your stand then feel free to explain how justice should be done for the Kashmiri Pundits. Dont skirt around by invoking root cause and ideology - lets hear from you in concise words on your definition of justice in the Kashmir 1989 massacre and subsequent displacement of Pundits.
They are proof of this nonsense being acts of those who were incited by vested interests and not a Religious Agenda which is what Project Kashmir is. Infact in an attempt to prove to the Islamic votebank that our Mahan Government is "secular" Shriman Rail Mantri Ji setup that Banerjee commitee and declared that the Godhra incident was a accident. Not satisfied with that ... they setup a witch hunt on Modi which we are all well aware of. Have you ever wondered why nobody in the media cares about what happened to the culprits of the Godhra fire burning ? This is the extent to which our Babus go in a mad rush to woo the Islamic votebank and prove that they are truly secular. Few samples of such behaviour can be found right here on this forum. You are not that far away from being one such to be honest. This is why there is simply no comparison between Kashmir and any riots that have taken place elsewhere in India. Heck the 2002 incident werent even started by Hindus.
Whats your point here? Another commission by Nanavati concluded that Godhra was not an accident and a deliberate attack. In your hatred for Islam and blind jingoism you just ignore facts that do not fit in your line of thinking. My compassion is not selectively applied to victims based on their religion. Just as I condemn the massacre of Pundits in Kashmir, I will also condemn the killing of Muslims in Gujarat and the 3000 odd sikhs who were burnt alive on the roads of Delhi amidst utter lawlessness. Regardless of what faith the perpetrators follow, they deserve the harshest punishment. Them being Hindus doesnt absolve them of guilt.
I repeat again : Unless and until people refuse to realize what the root cause of all this nonsense is people will continue to die and there will be many more Kashmirs and plenty of bloodshed. History is proof. Read the damned history books. Its all very very well chronicled and not that hard to find these days.
You are avoiding the question here. Is banning the Quran enough? We would also have to ban the bible because that advocates violence against infidels and contains instructions on how looting should be done, as well. If banning the book isnt enough, then what are the broad level decisions that need to be taken?
The problem is that there are literally millions of Muslims that are hell bent upon living as per those standards of Middle Ages and swear by those barbarians from Middle ages. A great example is the Babri Masjid case. How can you pretend that those fighting tooth and nail for the BM are normal peace loving and secular people ? Your solution of " we should use the law and order machinery to go after these millions and try them in a court of law" just smacks of blissful ignorance.
Make up your mind here. Either we discuss the middle ages or stick to recent history. If we include middle ages then we also take into account christian barbarians as well and all the other violence perpetrated in the name of religion in the dark and middle ages.
Shall look into it the moment we have even anything half as remotely destructive as a Kashmir ... let alone a 1947. Point is nobody would have said anything about Islam had their track record w.r.t co-existing with other religions was good.
You are shifting the goalposts. First you say that any book with the same contents as the Quran would be banned, then when shown that the Bible contains violent passages displaying heartlessness and cruelty, you invoke track record. Lets fix the time frame of discussion and then argue about track record.
ganeshran Collaborator

ganeshran

Posted
Posted
Whether you like it or not this is how justice is done in such cases. Going by your idiotic stand the Nazis should have been dealt with in a similar manner or those in Palestine' date= or Iraq or Afghanistan or the 1971 or Bosnia and Sri Lanka and so on and so forth. A country is well within its right to use force in such situations. No country worth its salt takes the idiotic route that you suggest in situations like this. And ohh feel free to tell me how your "plan" of trying millions of people in a court of law is practical and which country has accomplished such a task. Force must be used to quell armed violence by militants and anyone who offers active support to them. Indiscriminate use of force against innocent citizens is simply unjustifiable. Merely Reactionary incidents? violence against innocent people and the murder of thousands of our own citizens are merely reactionary and thus deserve to be forgiven? Only incidents that are part of some 'global scheme' deserve justice and others dont? In this thread and others, not once I have tried to downplay any violence against any innocent human being but you are time and again trivialising violence that doesnt fit in your line of thinking. Let me ask you this - Was the violence in Gujarat justified as a reactionary measure to the Godhra burning? Was the 1984 massacre justified as a reactionary measure to Indira Gandhi's assassination? Did I ever say there is a need for you to love Islam? I have condemned any crime committed in the name of religion be it done in the name of spreading Islam or the crusades sanctioned by the pope and the numerous witch trials and inquisitions. Violence in the name of religion was pretty much a constant occurrence in the middle ages both in Islam and Christianity, How difficult is to accept a fact that only guilty people can be punished and innocent people cannot be, regardless of what religion they follow. How do you propose that Islam is banished from India? These are the only three ways that I can think of. So what according to you should be done to the 180 million Muslims in India?
  1. Genocide
  2. Forced conversion
  3. Exodus

The part where you switched from banning a book based on its contents to analyzing the track record (in India alone) when confronted with the fact that the Bible also contains equally damning verses. Last time I checked the High court had equally divided the affected land between all three parties in the BM issue with hindus benefiting and there was no violence in the country against the judgement. If the judgement had gone in favour of Muslims and the Akhada had approached the Supreme court for appeal, what would your reaction to that be?
So let me get this straight, you are advocating putting 40 lakh people to death by hanging as justice for the 1989 massacre? That is one of the most hate filled and perverted stands I recall reading here on ICF and not at all different from a Jihadi's stand who doesnt mind putting innocent people to death as long as it satisfies his thirst for revenge.
ganeshran Collaborator

ganeshran

Posted
Posted
This is just painful to argue with utterly and totally dishonest people. Before we talk about justice and such why don't you tell me what is the % of Muslim population those who actively supported the Jihadi's and those who passively supported them and those who were totally against these Jihadis ? What is the breakup in YOUR opinion and how did you arrive at these percentages ?
And its far more painful to argue with a keyboard warrior who brazenly calls for the state to murder 40 lakh people (The entire muslim population in the valley) to satisfy his own warped sense of justice. Care to explain what scientific methods you used to arrive at the guilt percentage of 100 except YOUR opinion? Once that is done, you can also explain the logistics of mass murder that you are advocating. Dont skirt this question now by launching into a tirade on the holiness of Islam. If you call for a punishment for the whole Kashmir Valley which according to you is death, then I am pretty sure you would have worked out the details as well.
  • Obviously there are not enough gallows to hang these people, what method should be used? Electric Chambers? Gassing?
  • Should people who are born after 1989 be spared of death
  • If children are spared, then who takes care of them of their parents are killed?
Then why are you crying hoarse and shouting things like : " In my hatred for Islam and blind jingoism I just ignore facts" ? What bloody fact has been ignored ? If anyone that is blinded by love of Islam it is you because you are quite cleverly refusing to acknowledge the looooong track record of this ideology and trying to club Gujrat and 1984 along with Kashmir in order to spread the guilt.
There is a huge difference between loving the religion and staying objective about something in order to judge. Your blind hatred makes you deny and interpret facts that are suited to your own interpretation of reality. Why should I ignore Gujarat and 1984 in a discussion about religiously motivated violence? Were the people who died there not deserving of justice, or because the perpetrators were Hindus. You evaded my questions here. 1) Was Gujrat justified as merely reactionary violence to Godhra? 750 muslims were killed there and 61000 were displaced from their homes. What is the breakup of people who actively and passively supported 2) Was 1984 justified as merely reactionary violence to Indira Gandhi's assassination? The official death toll was 2700, unofficial was around 10000. 50000 were displaced from the city never to return again Regarding track record, please define the exact period you want to discuss. If you want to discuss the middle ages, then say so, if 1947 and 1989, then lets discuss that alone. If middle ages are included then violence by Chrisitans is just as relevant there. Lets also remember that Christians were just as violent in India in the 200 years pre independence. It is a different fact that this violence was carried out not in the name of religion but in the name of trade by the east india company. Conversions were just as rampant, under the garb of money and rewards if not by force
And how exactly are you going to punish people in a situation like 1947 and 1989 which involves millions and millions of people? I see that you quite conveniently evaded that question. Merely regurgitating PC statements like only the actual culprits must be punished can be said by anybody. Why don't you tell me the ways and means to actually put that into practice and which country has done such a thing before ? Afterall we arent the first country to have encountered this situation. And according to your logic countries like Israel, USA and SriLanka are bigoted and genocidal nations. Just look at the extent to which you are prepared to go to defend a bloody thirsty ideology that has been responsible for deaths of literally millions of Indians. And you have the cheek to call me bigoted ? Feel free to tell me how your defense of such an ideology and its followers is a very honorable act.
Lets discuss 1947 - which is the exact act you are advocating punishment for? Voting for Jinnah in the 1946 elections or the violence during the partition itself. If its the partition of the country, then according to YOUR opinion, could Hindus and Muslims lived peacefully in a united India? Regarding 1989, I already defined your terms of justice in the first paragraph. Please clarify exactly how you want justice to be done. All of the nations you mentioned have engaged in gross human rights violations which I dont agree with. The USA is right in hunting down the jihadis but not right in killing people who have nothing to do with the violence. Israel is well within its rights to forcibly deal with the likes of Hamas but not to harass innocent civilians. Ditto with Sri Lanka. Terrorists who kill innocent people deserve absolutely no sympathy at all. But its absolutely perverted to ask for innocent people to be punished for the crimes of their co-religionists which is what you are doing.
What has the SC verdict got to do with what I asked ? I asked you why the morons from BMAC and their hoardes of supporters need to be treated in a civilized manner keeping in mind that anybody with even a rudimentary understanding of Islamic history in India will tell you that the "mosque" stood for everything that is Barbaric and unholy ? Why are we putting up with this nonsense spending crores of public money which is a simple case of Islamic barbarity still being supported by supposedly learned and "moderate" Muslim leaders ? And according to you who is a Bigot between LK Advani ( who called for the demolition) and those that are fighting tooth and nail for the rights of a structure that everybody knows stood for all that was barbaric and medieval - i.e your original point in this sub discussion ?
I dont agree for a religious place to be at the site itself. It should be used for some non-religious activity. So lets get to the bottom of the issue. Do you think the original temple demolition by Babur's general was right? Do you think the 1992 demolition of Babri masjid by RSS was right? Do you think the subsequent riots in which 2000 people died was right?
They need to be converted back to the Dharmic faiths and the government needs to take up this task. But if you and your types continue to fight pitched battles using petty technicalities and PC statements it will kill you by the time you realize the mistake. As I said before read the damned history books. Even today the same old medieval nonsense is still happily going around killing people and idiots in India have made it fashionable (sick) to protect the "honor" of this ideology.
So according to you 180 million people - the entire Muslim population needs to be forcibly converted to Hinduism or other Dharmic faiths. What about the ones who dont agree to be converted? What should be the punishment?
  • Death?
  • Exodus? If so, then where should they be sent?

Mariyam Grand Master

Mariyam

Posted
Posted

BossBhai, Why did you quote me in post 31 of this thread? Wasn't it obvious, that me and Lurker were discussing poetry and not religion? Since then you've added nothing on topic and hijacked the thread. Can a moderator please transfer the necessary posts to the MF Hussain thread, where we already have such a discussion going between BB and Ganeshran. I think thats a fair request. Addendum: BB, I know the following maybe hard for you to digest, but there are more things to life ( and ICF) than religion bashing. Movies, music, excessively stupid football followers, cricket, flamy, relationships, literature etc all make good topics of discussion. :icflove:

Andrew Peter Newbie

Andrew Peter

Posted
Posted
  • Do you think the original temple demolition by Babur's general was right Do you think the 1992 demolition of Babri masjid by RSS was right?
    • Sorry to Bump in. But Yes it was right move and a great occasion . Just because we have some fake non-existent Nationalities imposed upon us by drawing invisible borders on the World Map doesnt erase the fact that we are Hindus too . And before equating Generals of Mughal Empire to RSS , ever wondered why these Fanatical Hindu Religious groups ( Who are being accused of hating anything thats Non-Hindu ) never targeted Sikhs , Jains , Buddhists , Parsis , Jews and there places of Worship unlike the Great Mughal Empire whose armies only raped ,murdered and massacred our civilization in there lifetime and even to this date there leftover converts are still hurting the very basic identity of this land while dreaming about painting it Green some day in the future . Hindu religious Groups exist only to tackle the Zombies who are following these destructive evil ideologies under disguise of a Religion . I dont support the state sponsored killing of innocents in 1992 and 2002 ( A so called trend which was started by the Ultra-Secular Government in 1984) but Demolition in 1992 was a task well done. Sometimes people need to be reminded that they are not living in Pakistan , Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia but in India.
ganeshran Collaborator

ganeshran

Posted
Posted
Sorry to Bump in. But Yes it was right move and a great occasion . Just because we have some fake non-existent Nationalities imposed upon us by drawing invisible borders on the World Map doesnt erase the fact that we are Hindus too .
so If I understand you correctly you are saying that the Babri demolition was justified because the mosque was built after destroying a Hindu temple in the first place. Point taken. Now what about my third point, was the killing of thousands in the ensuing riots justified? If so on what basis?
And before equating Generals of Mughal Empire to RSS , ever wondered why these Fanatical Hindu Religious groups ( Who are being accused of hating anything thats Non-Hindu ) never targeted Sikhs , Jains , Buddhists , Parsis , Jews and there places of Worship unlike the Great Mughal Empire whose armies only raped ,murdered and massacred our civilization in there lifetime and even to this date there leftover converts are still hurting the very basic identity of this land while dreaming about painting it Green some day in the future . Hindu religious Groups exist only to tackle the Zombies who are following these destructive evil ideologies under disguise of a Religion .
You are confusing the Mughal empire with the likes of Ghauri, Ghaznavi, Abdali and other invaders. The Mughals did have their a part of religious intolerance in the early stages during the Babar era and the latter stages when Aurangzeb ruled. But the middle period of 120 odd years from Humayun's reign to the time when Shahjahan's rule ended, was a much better period in Indian history than the following British rule. The Mughal emperors who ruled during that time left a mark on India by patronizing arts and culture and understood the need to respect the religious beliefs of the local populace.
surajmal Newbie

surajmal

Posted
Posted
You are confusing the Mughal empire with the likes of Ghauri, Ghaznavi, Abdali and other invaders. The Mughals did have their a part of religious intolerance in the early stages during the Babar era and the latter stages when Aurangzeb ruled. But the middle period of 120 odd years from Humayun's reign to the time when Shahjahan's rule ended, was a much better period in Indian history than the following British rule. The Mughal emperors who ruled during that time left a mark on India by patronizing arts and culture and understood the need to respect the religious beliefs of the local populace.
Next you will tell us that Tipu Sultan was a great Indian Warrior who fought for the Indian cause against the the British, right? Stop embarrasing yourself. Those who forget their history are bound to repeat the same mistakes. Unfortunately, the PC leftist dhongis like yourself don't understand that. Islamic Ideology is a zero sum game. From their viewpoint, there can be no coexistence: You are either a muslim or an infidel.
ganeshran Collaborator

ganeshran

Posted
Posted
Next you will tell us that Tipu Sultan was a great Indian Warrior who fought for the Indian cause against the the British, right? Stop embarrasing yourself. Those who forget their history are bound to repeat the same mistakes. Unfortunately, the PC leftist dhongis like yourself don't understand that. Islamic Ideology is a zero sum game. From their viewpoint, there can be no coexistence: You are either a muslim or an infidel.
Look dude, if you want to have a civil and sensible discussion you are welcome to do so. If you just want to vent pent up rage on anonymous internet forums to compensate for other shortcomings, then you can always start your own thread. Mention the points that you disagree with in my earlier post.
Rajiv Collaborator

Rajiv

Posted
Posted

Deleted posts, Lurks and BB - kindly deal with in pvt..and I request not to invite ppl to open threads with what we saw in chit chat Hurts to see that you guys take this place for granted, its like you think its free license to abuse it

akshayxyz Newbie

akshayxyz

Posted
Posted
Rift with her father
Dina's relationship with her father became strained when Dina expressed her desire to marry a Parsi-born Indian Neville Wadia. Jinnah, a Muslim, tried to dissuade her, but failed. Mahommedali Currim Chagla, who was Jinnah's assistant at the time, recalls: "Jinnah, in his usual imperious manner, told her that there were millions of Muslim boys in India, and she could have anyone she chose. Reminding her father that his wife (Dina's mother Rattanbai), had also been a non-Muslim, the young lady replied: 'Father, there were millions of Muslim girls in India. Why did you not marry one of them?' And he replied that, 'she became a Muslim'".
And there are many more examples of "one-way-traffic". I am not extremist, but stuff like ^that makes me think, there are some fundamental problems with what certain people learn/interpret in Islam.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...