The AIMIM thread

[gslv]

He should read ambedkar's opinion of Islam and xtianity.

[Texan]

AIMIM to go it alone in Hyderabad civic polls http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/aimim-to-go-it-alone-in-hyderabad-civic-polls-115071200592_1.html New strategy by AIMIM - Have been noticing how frequently Owaisi is clubbing Muslims + Dalits/OBCs in every statement and speech he is making.

Not just MIM, even AIMPLB tried that tactic to divide the upper castes from the Dalits. This is the new larger votebank that some predominantly Muslim bodies are trying to appropriate. Reality check for Dalits - see how they are treated in Pakistan.

[G_B_]

AIMIM to go it alone in Hyderabad civic polls http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/aimim-to-go-it-alone-in-hyderabad-civic-polls-115071200592_1.html New strategy by AIMIM - Have been noticing how frequently Owaisi is clubbing Muslims + Dalits/OBCs in every statement and speech he is making.

this bodes well for the BJP.... Would have been a problem has TRS and AIMIM been in alliance...

[Gollum]

Yakub Memon being executed because he is a Muslim: Owaisi How this guy is allowed to go scot free in our country is a mystery !!!! Anti national, communal minded,hate monger, Razakar..... and am MP in Lok Sabha. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/aimim-president-asaduddin-owaisi-sparks-row-over-capital-punishment-to-yakub-memon/articleshow/48201684.cms http://www.ibnlive.com/news/politics/yakub-memon-being-executed-because-he-is-a-muslim-owaisi-1024841.html

[Kalia_Test]

It is his vote bank. He will do it. Many do it. Mayawati always cries that she is targeted because she is Dalit woman. http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/politics/maya-cries-foul-mayawati-sot-on-search-605745.html http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-mayawati-plays-dalit-card-against-govt-1559179 Unfortunaely, making such statements and playing victim card is allowed in the country.

[Gollum]

AIMIM supporters on social media crying for jihad against Hindus and India. Why isn't FB taking action against these hate mongers? Browse through the comments and the hate/lies/mentality is shocking. Forget Pakistan or Hafiz Saeed, this is our biggest threat.

[Shivaji bhonsle]

AIMIM supporters on social media crying for jihad against Hindus and India. Why isn't FB taking action against these hate mongers? Browse through the comments and the hate/lies/mentality is shocking. Forget Pakistan or Hafiz Saeed' date=' this is our biggest threat.[/quote'] link?

[Gollum]

https://www.facebook.com/AUOYI?fref=ts https://www.facebook.com/pages/AIMIM-INDIA/486748411483351?fref=ts https://www.facebook.com/groups/436948546423804/ https://www.facebook.com/groups/AkbaruddinOwaisiAsaduddinOwaisi/

[Yoda-esque]

And you have supporters for these jokers... Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[Kalia_Test]

Shiv Sena backs Asaduddin Owaisi; punishment should be given irrespective of religion, writes Saamana http://www.india.com/news/india/shiv-sena-backs-asaduddin-owaisi-punishment-should-be-given-irrespective-of-religion-writes-saamana-484828/

Mumbai, July 31: In a shocking move, Shiv Sena backed its political rival and All India Majlis-e-Itttehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi on his demand for punishment for the killers of Rajiv Gandhi and Beant Singh. Shiv Sena in its mouthpiece Saamana said that the issue of punishment for the culprits of Rajiv Gandhi and Beant Singh murder raised by Asaduddin Owaisi must be considered. “The capital punishment of Rajiv Gandhi’s killers have turned into life imprisonment. Punjab government passed the resolution against the hanging of killer of former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh. These issue must be addressed. Punishment should be given irrespective of religion,” Shiv Sena wrote in Saamana while expressing its view on Yakub Memon’s hanging.

[mishra]

First page of this thread is scary. Rest is BAU

[Precambrian]

Shiv Sena backs Asaduddin Owaisi; punishment should be given irrespective of religion, writes Saamana http://www.india.com/news/india/shiv-sena-backs-asaduddin-owaisi-punishment-should-be-given-irrespective-of-religion-writes-saamana-484828/

:hysterical: That Ramesh Suresh moment

[Kalia_Test]

First page of this thread is scary. Rest is BAU

I had not read the long posts in page 1 in detail earlier but now I did. There are lot of things incorrect in that ( even the wiki articles state clearly that most material is unverified ). If anyone is really interested ( I don't want my effort of typing long posts go waste ), I can pick up some major points and clarify. I have read many books by reputed authors on Hyderabad history and integration and a lot of stuff that Gollum posted ( great effort BTW :hatsoff: ) is incorrect ( atleast an equally compelling alternate narration is there ). Gollum - Interested in knowing more about MIM ? Few points at top of my head. I am not quoting any wiki ( pls dont go to wiki - sensitive topics are always manipulated ) 1. Qasim Razvi was as Evil as portrayed. No doubt. 2. After Operation Polo, Qasim Razvi was jailed for about a decade and then released to go to Pakistan ( where he expected to succeed Jinnah but died in penury. Very interesting stories there ). Anyway, he was given 48 hrs to go to Pakistan. Before moving, he wanted to pass on MIM mantle to anyone interested. He called for a party meet of about 140 members out of which only 35 or 40 attended. No one was interested and Abdul Wahed Owaisi ( en eminent lawyer who had nothing to do with earlier MIM ) offered to take the job. 3. Why was no one interested? There were very strong anti-muslim feelings even after Operation Polo in Hyderabad due to Qasim Razvi and his Razakars. No one wanted to be associated with muslims/Razakars but Abdul Wahed Owaisi volunteered as he saw the reality of India and wanted someone to represent Hyd muslims. 4. Abdul Wahed Owaisi was sent to prison also I think for about 11 months. Our secular Nehru even offered him a Cabinet position as per some sources but Abdul Wahed Owaisi refused and stayed with the cause. 5. Nizam himself had become a victim. Qasim Razvi was calling the shots. So much for now. Will type more if people are interested.

[Gollum]

Thanks Kalia. You seem to know a lot about this topic, please do share your information/opinions. Your effort of typing long posts won't go waste :winky: as I am sure many will be interested including me. But your sources, are they reliable? Many of our historians are hardcore leftists and our history books don't always portray the true picture. Some loyalists of the Nizam may have manipulated the facts to show him and his ilk in better light. Also remember that after the Razakar movement Muslims of the Nizam state were hated by one and all, so may be to soothe the tension some secular historians may have made an attempt to take some liberty with their claims. I remember going to Chowmahalla Palace once and there were many posters/seminar sessions going on about the rulers of Hyderabad. The facts they claimed there seemed highly exaggerated to me, especially the way they talked about communal unity and generosity of the rulers w.r.t Hindus and Hindu temples etc.

[Kalia_Test]

Thanks Kalia. You seem to know a lot about this topic, please do share your information/opinions. Your effort of typing long posts won't go waste :winky: as I am sure many will be interested including me. But your sources, are they reliable? Many of our historians are hardcore leftists and our history books don't always portray the true picture. Some loyalists of the Nizam may have manipulated the facts to show him and his ilk in better light. Also remember that after the Razakar movement Muslims of the Nizam state were hated by one and all, so may be to soothe the tension some secular historians may have made an attempt to take some liberty with their claims. I remember going to Chowmahalla Palace once and there were many posters/seminar sessions going on about the rulers of Hyderabad. The facts they claimed there seemed highly exaggerated to me, especially the way they talked about communal unity and generosity of the rulers w.r.t Hindus and Hindu temples etc.

:two_thumbs_up: My sources are the then newspaper clippings and books written on Hyderabad integration ( if there is widespread conflict - I will distrust but most of what I am quoting is unanimous opinion - even from so-called leftists ). I might be able to quote some if I find online. There was British library/State Central library and City central library where all the old newspaper clips were/are available. Go here - http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/95692446 This is digitized newspaper from Australia quoting Nizam's radio speech Hyderabad's Surrender

NIZAM GIVES REASONS London, Sept. 23. — The British United Press correspondent in Hyderabad says that the Nizam, who is a Moslem, in a broadcast speech- over the State radio, alleged that before the Indian invasion his State was taken over by a Moslem clique with Hitl' methods, that the campaign of terror, arson and looting waged in rxvutrifciuHU y* uvukku tiie jlu dian invasion and his Premier and other influential Moslems vanish ed when the Indian army w- - marching on Hyderabad city 'This left me to save the situa tion as best I. could.' The Nizam said that last Novem ber a small group under Kasim the existing Ministers to resign and took possession of thp- State .by terrorism. This clique made Mir Laik All the Premier and 'they vanished when the Indian army was about 40 miles from Hyderabad city.' Complaint Withdrawn From U.N.O. Paris. Sept. 23. — The Nizam of Hyderabad has cabled U.N.O. withdrawing his country's com plaint against India. The Nizam said that tvhe Hyderabad delega tion to U.N.O. 'has now ceased to have any authority to 'epresent me or my estate '

All we hear is the loot of Razakars but do you know about the massive violence that Indian Army ( no sir - it was not just a 'Police Action' ) did on muslims, encouraging Hindus to loot muslims? Have you heard about Sunderlal Report? Sunderlal investigated the post 'Police Action' scenario and created his report. Nehru never let it be published. After decades of pressure, it was recently de-classified http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24159594

The Sunderlal team visited dozens of villages throughout the state. At a number of places members of the armed forces brought out Muslim adult males... and massacred them Sunderlal report At each one they carefully chronicled the accounts of Muslims who had survived the appalling violence: "We had absolutely unimpeachable evidence to the effect that there were instances in which men belonging to the Indian Army and also to the local police took part in looting and even other crimes. "During our tour we gathered, at not a few places, that soldiers encouraged, persuaded and in a few cases even compelled the Hindu mob to loot Muslim shops and houses." The team reported that while Muslim villagers were disarmed by the Indian Army, Hindus were often left with their weapons. The mob violence that ensued was often led by Hindu paramilitary groups. In other cases, it said, Indian soldiers themselves took an active hand in the butchery: "At a number of places members of the armed forces brought out Muslim adult males from villages and towns and massacred them in cold blood.

A few other things need to be clarified or contextualized before I add other stuff in subsequent posts. 1. The then Hyderabad State was under muslim rule for Seven centuries - digest it. For 700+ years there was no hindu rule in a hindu majority state. First Delhi Sultanate, then Bahmani Sultanate,then Turkish Qutub Shahi Dynasty, then 30 odd years directly under Mughal and then Nizam Dynasty for 200+ years. 2. Hyderabad was part of British Empire - yes but not part of 'British Raj'. The Nizam was a regent. He paid money and let Britishers take care of external policy of Hyderabad thats it. Hyderabad had its own Army, railways, currency, postal system, telephone system, radio - everything was different in Hyderabad. 3. Nizam wanted to be independent ( as was the right of a Princely State ). Qasim Razvi wanted Hyderabad to be part of Pakistan and tried to pressurize Nizam. 4. Nizam had gifted away some Andhra districts to British East India on the request of Rothschilds ( owners of British East India Company ). Nizam was close to British leadership. Sardar Patel waited till Mountbatten left for England before initiating action. When asked about the Standstill Agreement between Union of India and Nizam, Sardar Patel famously quoted " Agreement left with him" pointing to Mountbatten's departure to England. 5. Nizam had hopes on Rothschilds for support on independent Hyderabad ( as was the right of a princely state ) but Rothschilds were already under pressure to defend their just created State of Israel that they left Nizam alone. Some homework and food for thought :winky: Communists were supposed to be anti-razaakar but was it so black and white? From the book 'Slender Was the thread' by Lt.Gen. L.P. Sen Page 13

"Although the Nizam had banned the Communist Party in his State in 1943, he lifted the ban at the insistence of Kasim Razvi. The latter was now able to supply the Communists openly with arms and ammunition and to co-ordinate their activities with those of the Razakars"

Try and google Advani's remarks on Communists for their role in Razakaar movement and you will have fun

[Kalia_Test]

Also, think about this. 1. There is no significance of August 15th for people in Hyderabad State. No one in Hyderabad would have celebrated it in 1947. The then people would not even have known if 'Rest of country' was celebrating or 'another country' was celebrating. Yes we celebrate now but it is weird. 2. September 17th or so is called Liberation Day ( and there are so many views on this even today ). 'Liberation' from whom? Was it not just a merger and in many respects a forced one ? 3. If Nizam's rule was oppressive, then why couldn't India pressurize UN or British to replace just Nizam's rule with some local elected leadership while retaining the right of Hyderabad State to remain independent? There are many such unanswered questions. There is no Black or White

[Precambrian]

Letting Hyd function as an independent state within India would've meant Balkanisation of our country. Not to mention Nizam's links with Pakistan?

[Kalia_Test]

Letting Hyd function as an independent state within India would've meant Balkanisation of our country. Not to mention Nizam's links with Pakistan?

I am not complaining that Hyd acceded to India ( or was made to). I feel it is best that it turned out this way. We are just discussing some historical incidents which played a part in moulding the characters/opinions of certain people ( leading to MIM and its support ). Nizam wanted independence not join Pakistan. If Hyd remained independent but friendly with Pakistan, it would have been a big headache for India. Hence the military attack on Hyd state. However, this is from the perspective of Union of India. Not Hyderabad State. It would pretty much have been like Kashmir if Hyderabad was near to Pakistan i.e India invades Hyd, Nizam signs accession to Pakistan under compulsion, Pak Army comes in, each party tries to occupy as much land as it can until some ceasefire by UN or some other country intervention and then dispute forever.

[Gollum]

Very informative posts Kalia :two_thumbs_up: Communists allying with Razakars is messing up my brain real hard. All these years I respected the communists because I thought they really stood up to the Razakars. But after you indicated otherwise, I checked many sources and yes indeed, things aren't that clear. Did Rothschild have anything to do with this? And man, I personally don't think Nizam wanted independence, he wanted to join Pakistan. I guess there will be different angles to that just like we can't say whether Kashmir wants to be an independent country or join Pakistan( I think majority Kashmiris want to merge with Pakistan but all Kashmiris I have met in person say they want independence, may be they don't want to antagonize me :P). Some sources indicate he wanted independence, others say he wanted to join Pakistan. May be at an earlier stage itself he realized the stupidity of being separated from Pakistan by the huge Indian landmass and dropped the idea and tried to play the independent state card. Qasim Razvi was the main force behind the Razkar movement and was fiercely pro Pakistan but difficult to imagine that all this didn't have the Nizam's moral support/blessing. Having to rule over a Muslim majority population would have been ideal for the Nizam and for that he needed to get rid off the pesky Hindus. It is like saying MMS(Nizam) didn't have control over the UPA II ministers(Razakars). I am one of those who think that the Nizam simply chose to look the other way when Qasim Razvi was carrying out the genocide. I knew about the Sunderlal report and I agree both sides suffered. But what the Indian Army and Hindus did was on expected lines. Hindus had suffered greatly under the tyranny of Razvi and India was going through turbulent times due to partition violence. they needed an outlet and for once they got the window to retaliate. No wonder Nehru wanted to keep these things classified. Imagine if both India and Pakistan investigate the killings during those 2-3 years !!!!

[Kalia_Test]

Very informative posts Kalia :two_thumbs_up: Communists allying with Razakars is messing up my brain real hard. All these years I respected the communists because I thought they really stood up to the Razakars. But after you indicated otherwise, I checked many sources and yes indeed, things aren't that clear. Did Rothschild have anything to do with this? And man, I personally don't think Nizam wanted independence, he wanted to join Pakistan. I guess there will be different angles to that just like we can't say whether Kashmir wants to be an independent country or join Pakistan( I think majority Kashmiris want to merge with Pakistan but all Kashmiris I have met in person say they want independence, may be they don't want to antagonize me :P). Some sources indicate he wanted independence, others say he wanted to join Pakistan. May be at an earlier stage itself he realized the stupidity of being separated from Pakistan by the huge Indian landmass and dropped the idea and tried to play the independent state card. Qasim Razvi was the main force behind the Razkar movement and was fiercely pro Pakistan but difficult to imagine that all this didn't have the Nizam's moral support/blessing. Having to rule over a Muslim majority population would have been ideal for the Nizam and for that he needed to get rid off the pesky Hindus. It is like saying MMS(Nizam) didn't have control over the UPA II ministers(Razakars). I am one of those who think that the Nizam simply chose to look the other way when Qasim Razvi was carrying out the genocide. I knew about the Sunderlal report and I agree both sides suffered. But what the Indian Army and Hindus did was on expected lines. Hindus had suffered greatly under the tyranny of Razvi and India was going through turbulent times due to partition violence. they needed an outlet and for once they got the window to retaliate. No wonder Nehru wanted to keep these things classified. Imagine if both India and Pakistan investigate the killings during those 2-3 years !!!!

On Nizam, yes you will find 2 views - independence and Pakistan when you google but you need to put yourself in Nizam's shoes. He is close to British, Rothschilds - there was an option to remain independent for princely state - their dynasty ruled Hyderabad State for 200+ years. What would Nizam ( richest person in the world then) gain by joining a Punjabi/Pathan muslim nation? Why would he want to join Pakistan and what would his position be? He would have roughly 1/3 of Pakistan population ( East,West and Hyd ) but with his region having no majority of muslims. He would be marginalized. For Qasim Razvi ( who was not the ruler ), the equation is different. He would be viewed as slayer of Hindus,etc and would get a good role in Pakistan. This is my opinion only. Nizam himself admitted on State radio ( post military operation by India) that Qasim had taken over control.His statements on merger might be ambivalent earlier. On Nizam getting rid of Hindus - come on man - Nizam dynasty was ruling the Hyderabad State for 200+ years ( with 85% hindus ). Why would he suddenly want to 'get rid' of hindus and do you really think it was possible to kill so many? On outlet against Razakars and your 'expected' lines. no comment. Do realize that Razakars were not just muslims. There were many hindu razakars including dalits. There were Congress Razakars, Communist Razakars too. One interesting point - PV Narasimha Rao was a Congress Razakar and looted Bank of Umri. There were many links a few years ago in google but systematically eradicated. You will find very few links now ( if at all ) but many books have this documented. Communists were turncoats. They were with Razakars most times ( with splits as you would expect ) and when they saw that tide was changing, they turned anti-razakaar and claimed benefits. You need to check Indira Gandhi's proposal for pensions or something to freedom fighters in early 70s and how Communists came and claimed that they were freedom fighters citing examples of anti-razakar,etc when all they did was women using chilli powder, some sticks and then loot in anti-razakar movement. I need to clarify that Communists were also divided. Some were indeed anti-razakaar from beginning. Next I will try and recollect/research and post about the Prime Minister of Hyderabad. If you can do it and look at it impartially ( why his book is banned in India ) - pls do so. Good discussion :two_thumbs_up: P.S. If you see my broad points, I am in favor of AIMIM as a political party that does its stuff under Indian Constitution. And Asaduddin will make some provocative statements to keep his votebank alive, like many do in BJP,etc. However, he will not openly refuse Constitution of India or anything like that. Imagine if all the disgruntled muslims here don't even have representation. What will they do?