HAVE YOUR SAY
>> If Muslims can indeed change and become liberal, come back to us when that incredible event has happened.
Well, all human beings, at a basic level are fundamentally the same, regardless of race, religion, caste etc. There are conditions/circumstances, individual initiatives, personal moral decisions/choices etc that are different. I believe that any person regardless of race/religion/caste/class etc can be good, develop themselves, become competent/intelligent etc.
>> Anyone can be excused on the basis of your principle that they can change in the future....Even Hitler could have, given enough time. We are not interested in that. What matters is dealing with the Muslim goondas and Hitlers of today.
I never said that Muslim goondas should not be dealt with. All I said is that no person of any religion/caste/race/class etc can be assume to be a Goonda solely on the grounds of religion/caste/race/class etc. A very simple point. I do not know why some people are jumping up and down on this.
>> If a fellow breaks into your house and comes to kill you you won't defend yourself. You will just say: "I am sure you will become a decent chap in the future. You can change."
No. I will do all I can to discharge my duty of defending my family and myself, even if it needs use of force.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 11:53 PM
179
Lalit:
I concur with your conjectures on R, VC3, K and faruqi.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 04, 2009 11:45 PM
178
dr s
i suspect reddy, chutterjee of being faruki clones.
they are not hindus, despite haveing hindu names.
both are fanatic muslims.
i doubt that they live in india.
faruki is a mysterious character- kumar, chutterjee
and kumar are working togather with him.
some may be based in usa- use a safe indian forum for their feelings of hate.their strident defence of pakistan is a bit strange.perhaps thats natural for
some indian muslims.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 11:36 PM
177
STORM:>>"But perhaps Gandhi was fortunate that he had a opponent like British"
right. the brits broke down the islamic suppression on the hindus, especially the intellectual B-types. english schools, started for producing more clerks for their empire, ended up producing lawyers and philosophers of the same competance as the britts themselves, bec english is only gr-grand-kid of sans! new hindu india talked the brits out of india, after britts' own weakening after the world-war strains. urdu-ite moslems could only watch the process. non-partition might have brought moslems also into the engl-educ mode, but the departing brits wreaked vengeance on india by separating the moslems into separate state. preferred absorption of moslems into england has worsened their own situation!.
post-bangla war, there could have been convergence, in the subcontinent, but oil-price rise made pak-ISI an agent of saudi-caliphate only. the rise of china in association with the catho-papacy has strengthened the conversionist forces of the mao-naxals on the east, also.
Sonia being forced to choose man-mohan as her man has only been a god-forced blessing-favour for india's good. We have only to count on God for further progress on the right lines, also, in spite of the bad sort of polits that are getting elected each time.
grandmas praying in temples is really running india ahead!.
>>"Had he been fought against a enemy like increasingly assertive and authoritarian state like China or stone age, tribal forces like Taliban or Saudi Arabia, I seriously doubt he could have achieved the same goal with his non-violence weapon".
yes, satyaaagraha was satya-naarayaNa-aagraha with Gandhi. circumstances and God-bless brought success for him and freedom for india. perhaps, india has been paying the price for not forcing the leadership on gandhi himself, of undivided india, instead of the division between nehru and jinnah. painful hindsight, I suppose.
while europe and americas are developing under truely entreprenuerial capitalism, correcting some marketing mistakes also, as they occur, the princely-family-capitalism of the saudis mainly oil-based, the communist-party-capitalism of the chinese riding on the poverty of excluded/exploited three-fourth of the country and the military-ISI-terrorist-capitalism of pakisthan based on saudi money, routed thro usa, and chinese back-up for them, all three, will all find themselves weakening slowly, in the next decade, with the world going seriously for urgent eco-economics, given the warnings by the increasing frequency of storms and quakes.
In modern 'system theory', the 'state eqn' of a system, elec, mech, or economic, really defines the rate of change of state as a linear or nonlinear fn of the state-vector and the time. the 'being' and the 'becoming' are both important variables determining the future state-trajectory. a moderate upward rate of growth on sound savings and widespread wealth-disposals are good points on which india can count for steady and stable progress, despite swirling waters. the saudi-pak-chinese oppo are flying high over shaky grounds. their hopes for destroying india may be only day-dreams. They may end up seeking india's help in the end. Americans are right in making the nucl-power deal with india.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 04, 2009 11:24 PM
176
reddy
the pope is not a sanghi or a nazi- his opinion counts.
1 pakistani,s complain bitterly about not getting a visa-
2 neither are they welcome in other countries.
3 saudi arabia cuts of their heads for crimes of all kinds
read the dawn of today and read what pakistani writers
think of their country- its down hill-
himachal, uttarkhand,ladakh,sikkim, are the most peaceful states in india, because the people are mostly
hindus.
m.j.akbar writes that muslims are a sick limb in india.
cowasjee a famous pakistani journalist writes.
95 percent are ignorant, violent and bigoted. there is no chance of a democracy here.
exmuslims in america are frequently on tv criticiseing
islam and muslims.
read any western paper and read the news about india and pakistan- india has some good news. all
news from pakistan is bad news.
some muslims in india will be suspect because of their own behaviour and also that of the pakitanis.you caN
read mfr,s views.
muslims have expelled hindus from kashmir, it is legit if hindus did the same to them in an another state.
this is fair-
your asking for me to be tried for treason is hillarious. if any thing you are more liable to be
picked up, and shot,lieing flat on your back, stareing at the sky. you just dont know your position in society, here or else where.
despite all india is a largely hindu country, and has
a ancient history. you better learn to respect this or head for pakistan- this type of bragging under a assumed name will not last for ever.
terrorists and fanatics like you get picked up all over the world. dont push your luck.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 10:48 PM
175
the dalit sikhs were never part of the khalistan movement and the recent fights among dera and conservative sikhs show how the latest religion is also unable to contain/control divisions based on birth
ganapathi
chennai, India
Oct 04, 2009 10:46 PM
174
gayathri---"the pope himself has stated that islam was a intolerant religion,"
Yup ... that should seal the fate of Islam. Your
simplistic views and even more simplistic conclusions
are worth examining from an academic point of view.
The human brain in some individuals dont evolve after a point.
--"pakistani,s now at the highest level now find it
nearly impossible to get a visa for britain.. "
And this fact is enough to prove what a dastardly
nation Pakistan has become.
--"despite problems they are a unified nation, not troubled as the devided nation of hindusthan. "
But isnt this what you wanted all along ? A divided
Hindustan with Hindu majority States (mostly in the
North) having their own country ? These are your
views and ofcourse you will deny it. You are an
anti-national. You should be arrested and tried for
treason. So why do you insist on hounding Indian
Muslims who love India enough to live here, despite ll the hatred spewed by bigotted Hindu fuckheads ?
--"we keep on debateing with the likes of faruki and
kumar. it matters little how sensible and realistic
our comments are."
If you had half the erudition, education and articulation of Kumar or Anwar
this forum would be a far more interesting place to inhabit. Instead, its fun
to drop by here and skewer fundamentalist dickwads.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 10:42 PM
173
there r thousand differences between a tamilian muslim and a kashmiri muslim and even a moplah muslim.the same with hindus where in south u marry ur uncle/uncles daughter while in north its blasphemy. rice eating makes a person weak according to a jat but the thambi thinks the opposite.its very rare for a bohra muslim to marry a tamilian muslim and the same with hindus.i have moved with kashmiri muslims and casteism is rampant among them. my friend was from a family of barbers and he says that his family is looked down upon by the rajput and syed muslims.the tribal gujjars (the girl who shot a militant few days back belongs to them)are never considered muslims by the pak establishment and muslims.the muslims in leh ladakh are very different(physically and ideologically) and are not part of any militant group.since dausa was declared a tribal seat the gujjars put up a kashmiri gujjar muslim as candidate and he secured almost 3 lakh votes after a meena independent candidate and bjp/congress pushed to 3rd and fourth.
ganapathi
chennai, India
Oct 04, 2009 10:29 PM
172
sanjay khan is the father in law of hrithik.
no group is monolithic.most of the kurds genuinely hate iraqi sunni and shias of iran too hate the sunnis.the mohajirs are illtreated in pakistan and their leader openly says that partition was a mistake(reply to people who say that no one in pak feels partition is bad).most of the marathis hate biharis and the same with kannadigas and tamilians.very few kannadigas feel tamilnadu deserves cauvery water and viceversa with tamils.its comical to paint hindus as aggreived and muslims aggressors.jats care two hoots for laws and dont hesitate to kill their own daughters and sisters if they fall in love with fellow hindus and the same with many hindu communities.what is the feeling of a rajput about a paswan/kurmi/mahar.the hatred a garhwali as for nepali(though gorkhas have stayed in dehradun for centuries)has to be seen to be beleived.the hatred for yadav and obcs led to the birth of new state uttarkhand.people in vidharbha resent maratha domination and want separate statehood.the hatred between devar dalits,vanniar dalits etc in tamilnadu r well known.
ganapathi
chennai, India
Oct 04, 2009 09:46 PM
171
muslim for reform
yours is a masterly account of the situation of india.
gandhi as the father of the nation tried his very best to keep the joint hindu muslim nation togather. after
all the muslims were hindu converts, and he believed
that their religion should not effect their liveing togather.
nehru too tried to wipe out the differences, but he
was a master at decieveing himself.
he was wrong about the reality of islam which was in resurgance in india, and later on all over the world
" they are like us only" is the childish and naive response of people like rajinder puri, vinod mehta, and kuldip nayar". they are not.they keep on saying so and we will not believe them.
muslim communities all over the world have devided the
countries they shared with others. serbia, lebenon,
cyprus have separated after bloody conflicts- muslims
have mishandled ,brutalised their minorities, and finally expelled them.
the indian media has decieved the people of their country . they never ever shows such bloody events on tv screens, or writes about them in newspapers. the bloody genocide in darfur was ignored and hidden from indian viewers even though the head of the united nations mission was a indian.they ignored it even after american blacks like condoleeza rice, jesse jackson drew attention to this
tragedy.
when i wrote about this ,faruki accused me of writeing this solely for the purpose of discredeting muslims,
and not because i was moved by the pitiable situation
of the poor,blacks in darfur.ssema mustafa, naqvi both indian muslims travelled to khartoum and dismissed the whole situation as a minor misunderstanding- 300,000
people killed, and 2.5 million driven away from their homes, and that was their reaction.
no one can build a multireligious society with people who are so biased and bigoted. the amazeing is that whilst they regard themselves as a foreign nation,
tied by blood bonds to the arab ummah, they feel that
the hindu majority should turn a blind eye to all this and help them in all possible ways.
even protests by hindus at this situation are unacceptable.they who are themselves the most bigoted
and fanatics accuse the others of this.this is true not only of india but across the globe.
the fight today world wide ,is between resurgent and
agressive islam and the others. the west is well aware of this and is takeing action to counter this.
they may give aid and speak in honeyed tones to the muslims,but only a fool will fail to understand their anger and frustrations.
people like me do not want confrontation with muslims
or anyone at all. the world is faceing serious problems
and it is not just stupid but criminal for people
on both sides to spend huge amounts on arms.
in fact i am dead against india spending money on fighter aircraft and submarines. i would much rather
spend this on good roads and buses, for cycle paths,
and pavements in cities.
why is pakistan forceing india to do so. why have they
armed themselves to the teeth with money borrowed
and begged from the hated americans.
this if anything shows a total lack of commonsense,
and honour. with regret i note that this has given
a free chit for corrupt govts in india to buy arms,
when it should be provideing welfare to its peoples.
i would like an answer to mfr,s mail and mine from the secularists.. they lack both commonsense ,decency
and honour.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 09:42 PM
170
"" Jinnah ate pork, and married a non-Muslim. So what? ""
And interestingly when his own daughter expressed her desire to marry a non-Muslim a Parsi Jinnah opposed and disowned her before telling her that there are millions of Muslim boys in India and she could choose any one of them.
Storm
Jaipur, India
Oct 04, 2009 09:26 PM
169
GHAI, GANAPATHY:
Spare us this sentimental hogwash about how Muslims are marrying Hindus and all the same etc.
It is NOT true that Muslims are the same.
Some of them may chew pork or marry non-Muslims, but the inflexible orthodoxy of the majority, their fanatical contempt for Hindus and adulation of arabs, remains.
Jinnah ate pork, and married a non-Muslim. So what?
Muslims are Indian in appearance but Arabs in spirit.
Simple.
I respect them. Their arabism is not an excuse for hating them. I know they are dangerously intolerant, but the answer is to keep a creful watch on them and be ready for trouble, not to attack them without excuse as the Hindu goondas of Gujarat did.
But above all, no illusions about Muslims. They are what they are: Arabs in India, with a huge grievance against Hindus.
We must be just to them and take good care of ourselves.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 04, 2009 09:08 PM
168
Ganapathy Babu, good remark.
Shubho Bijoya to you and Boudi and Eid Mubarak.
dip
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Oct 04, 2009 08:55 PM
167
Ganpathy
Sanjay Khan an actor and the maker of Serials Tippu Sultan,Jai Hanuman etc has got a Doctorate in Hindu Philosphy from the Banaras Hindu University .
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 08:49 PM
166
PS to first post:
Old timers like Vinod Mehta,PURI,Kuldip Nayar and other media barons very well know the role played by Indira and Congress in spreading communal divide and using Muslims as an asset in Elections but they all either ignore it or downplay it and only blame right wing hardliner Hindus.Their partisian treatment of Gujrat and Modi is an example .The credit to create the Modi's image larger than life goes to these media Mughals.
It may be Ishrat or Sabrudin or Best Bakery ladies the media blitz unleashed and readily lapped by the Seculars always end up strengthening Modi's position.
With enmies like these who needs friends.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 08:45 PM
165
mr ghai
we keep on debateing with the likes of faruki and
kumar. it matters little how sensible and realistic
our comments are. they will always raise an objection.
thanks for the comedy gayathri devi
i have relatives/friends from muslims,christians,hindus of many castes and can answer u. there is not much of a difference when it comes to basic human qualities of selfishness/possesiveness/caste religion supremacy etc.whether he is son of a poor seller(irfan pathan) or nawab of pataudi they fall in love with people of other religions.most of the muslim actresses marry hindus and salman khan sister is married to agnihotri brother married to christian and the list goes on. most of the airhostesses from muslim community marry nonmuslims and in co ed colleges like madras christian college,medical colleges,govt engg colleges the number of muslims marrying nonmuslims is no way different from hindus.the philanthropic nature of people is irrespective of religions and there is no increased number in hindus compared to others.
ganapathi
chennai, India
Oct 04, 2009 08:35 PM
164
Kumar:
"Gandhi had human and Indian interests in mind."
That is a good joke. EVer read what Gandhi had to say about blacks?
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 04, 2009 08:32 PM
163
MFR
You have raised many important issues .Your post deserves detailed and considered response.
I will submit in detail on the following :
1.Gandhi did what he could to cool passions of 1946-47 .But his role was over.Time was not on his side.India was entering a new era where Gandhian philosophy had become outdated.World was rapidly changing . Not Gandhian Charkha but the Industrialisation was the need of the hour.Devasted World after the War was rebuilding itself and it was great chance for India to join them.
Nehru understood it but did the basic mistake of antagonising West and tied India to NAM and Communist Block.He should have also tried to carry along West.
India at that time needed wealth and technology form the West also.
Another mistake Nehru did was to support Arabs in their fight with West and Israel.As a good politiician he should have tried to be nonpartisian and friend of all.This would have hastenend the development and rapid industralisation of India.Unfortunately Nehru and Menon policies' kept India weded to poverty for another four and half decades after the Independence.
India was compelled to mortgage its Gold finally.
2. But Nehru had a great christma and was held in awe by the Indians .He was able to subdue Hindu Muslim communalism.Had Lal Bhadur Shashtri lived longer I feel he could have carried forward on communal problem.
2. But Indira was different .She had her own compulsions imposed by the Congress oldies.To retain her power she played every card available to her including communal one .If you were then old enough during her regime you will know what I say.It is during her rule that Communalism reared up again .India was again plunged into Hindu Muslim riots.
The role of Congress itself was and is still quite dubious on this count.It was during her rule that hardliner Hinduism surfaced with no efforts by he rto control it.
Poverty tightened its grip on us .I think first time after Independence deaths due to poverty and hunger re-apperared in India.
(continued Part Two}
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 08:28 PM
162
Puri's article on Gandhi seems to be ignited a fiery debate here.
Despite with all his shortcomings, undoubtedly Gandhi was one of great leader who achieved a great goal for his people.
But perhaps Gandhi was fortunate that he had a opponent like British. Had he been fought against a enemy like increasingly assertive and authoritarian state like China or stone age, tribal forces like Taliban or Saudi Arabia, I seriously doubt he could have achieved the same goal with his non-violence weapon.
In another sense Indians were lucky that British replaced the Islamic dominance in sub continent.
By the way why a Gandhi, Martin Luther or Nelson Mandela did not born in Islam in its 1400 years history, is a interesting thing to notice.
Storm
Jaipur, India
Oct 04, 2009 06:48 PM
161
I_Z:>>"let India develop her Hindu identity"
very difficult, bec hindusthan only operates as many casti-sthans and lingui-sthans, nowadays. besides, there is a virulent pakisthan inside india itself, bigger than pakisthan and bangla-sthan, also. besides, there is a church-isthan growing very rapidly in india under sonia and her crypto-chr raj-ministers and CMs, 'raj'-named-polits in other parties also!, raj thackeray the latest!..
Kailasapati and Guruvayurappan have their hands full really, if they really want to restore hindusthaana as the old 'aarya-varta sapta-sindhu in jambo-dveepa'. it might only happen only if people, in general, here and elsewhere in the world, realize that all devout religs are only aspects of sanaatana-dharma, at the spiritual level. paapist conv, mullaist terror should come down. excessive traditionalism, superioritism among high-caste-minded hindus should also come down.
Time-lord Siva = allah will surely enforce it, I think , in due course of time. if alaka ice-cone lands down as araba-deSa, araabia, r->l [hara = alla]. k-> b, p? partly the alps also? then, kuran = puran, Siva-purana only, perhaps misheard by ravan-nabhi from narada-Gabriel, further muddied by bakaasura [abu baker] types, may be. God alone knows the truth, and also the eventual solution mode, for the problem. may His will be done!
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 04, 2009 06:46 PM
160
Rajinder Puri nurses a long standing fantasy for the re-unification of the nations of our subcontinent. He has written about the same in his earlier postings. Whatever his intentions may be for promoting this idea, there is alas no basis for the same.
The issue of the irreconciliable nationalities of Hindus and Muslims obtaining in India were amply clear to BR Ambedkar even before the Partition who has prophetically described the same in his seminal work 'Pakistan, or the Partition of India'. His clear understanding of the Hindu-Muslim issue is amply vindicated by the events which have happened since then and all the doubts and misgivings are mostly cleared. Puri has only to read this book to clear his understanding of the matter.
The role and positions of Gandhi and Nehru in India’s partition are another story. BR Ambedkar has written his treatise from an academic or a social scientist’s point of view without any vested interest. A social scientist or academic tries to explain the nature of things as he is not charged with any other social or political responsibility in the matter. In contrast, Gandhi and Nehru were political leaders who had a vested interest in the outcome and were in charge of giving birth and presiding over a newly freed (mostly Hindu) nation. Even if they understood the situation fully well, they could not be expected to acknowledge it openly as they were aware of the explosiveness of the matter and the enduring damage to the social fabric and the much needed peace and harmony that such an action would cause. Gandhi tried to do his bit by ignoring and to some extent even condoning the excesses of the communalist Muslims. Nehru, on his part proceeded to whitewash the historical accounts of our ancient land by rewriting history in his ‘Discovery of India’ wherein he reinterpreted the bitter truths of the communal interaction of Hindus and Muslims to make them seem less severe and tolerable and thereby attempting to forge an honourable and a face saving basis for Hindu-Muslim coexistence. The difference between Gandhi on one hand and Nehru/ Patel on the other as evaluated by Puri in the article is superlative, that of a mere degree. Politics is defined as the art of the possible. A greater politician is that whose attempts for greater and more improbable possibilities. Nehru and Patel felt that they reached the limits of possibility in the matter of partition earlier and they accepted fait-accompli of Partition. Gandhi, being the greater politician and social leader, felt it was still possible for the two communities to coexist somehow and did not give up the idea till his death. It is just like the case of the sons of a joint family quarreling to be separated. The sons and others of the family understand the inevitability of separation much earlier, while the parents (or in this case, the father of the nation) tries until the last to maintain the unity of the family.
Thus there is no point for the author to dream of such fantasies. The issue of separate Muslim nationhood is not an event caused by the relatively small time political wrangling between Nehru and Jinnah or the Muslim League and the Congress but is rooted in the centuries old history of Islam and the Muslim ummah and it will remain that way as long as the rigidity and unalterability of the present Islamic dogma remain in place.
Muslim for Reform
Nashik, India
Oct 04, 2009 06:46 PM
159
Rajinder Puri nurses a long standing fantasy for the re-unification of the nations of our subcontinent. He has written about the same in his earlier postings. Whatever his intentions may be for promoting this idea, there is alas no basis for the same.
The issue of the irreconciliable nationalities of Hindus and Muslims obtaining in India were amply clear to BR Ambedkar even before the Partition who has prophetically described the same in his seminal work 'Pakistan, or the Partition of India'. His clear understanding of the Hindu-Muslim issue is amply vindicated by the events which have happened since then and all the doubts and misgivings are mostly cleared. Puri has only to read this book to clear his understanding of the matter.
The role and positions of Gandhi and Nehru in India’s partition are another story. BR Ambedkar has written his treatise from an academic or a social scientist’s point of view without any vested interest. A social scientist or academic tries to explain the nature of things as he is not charged with any other social or political responsibility in the matter. In contrast, Gandhi and Nehru were political leaders who had a vested interest in the outcome and were in charge of giving birth and presiding over a newly freed (mostly Hindu) nation. Even if they understood the situation fully well, they could not be expected to acknowledge it openly as they were aware of the explosiveness of the matter and the enduring damage to the social fabric and the much needed peace and harmony that such an action would cause. Gandhi tried to do his bit by ignoring and to some extent even condoning the excesses of the communalist Muslims. Nehru, on his part proceeded to whitewash the historical accounts of our ancient land by rewriting history in his ‘Discovery of India’ wherein he reinterpreted the bitter truths of the communal interaction of Hindus and Muslims to make them seem less severe and tolerable and thereby attempting to forge an honourable and a face saving basis for Hindu-Muslim coexistence. The difference between Gandhi on one hand and Nehru/ Patel on the other as evaluated by Puri in the article is superlative, that of a mere degree. Politics is defined as the art of the possible. A greater politician is that whose attempts for greater and more improbable possibilities. Nehru and Patel felt that they reached the limits of possibility in the matter of partition earlier and they accepted fait-accompli of Partition. Gandhi, being the greater politician and social leader, felt it was still possible for the two communities to coexist somehow and did not give up the idea till his death. It is just like the case of the sons of a joint family quarreling to be separated. The sons and others of the family understand the inevitability of separation much earlier, while the parents (or in this case, the father of the nation) tries until the last to maintain the unity of the family.
Thus there is no point for the author to dream of such fantasies. The issue of separate Muslim nationhood is not an event caused by the relatively small time political wrangling between Nehru and Jinnah or the Muslim League and the Congress but is rooted in the centuries old history of Islam and the Muslim ummah and it will remain that way as long as the rigidity and unalterability of the present Islamic dogma remain in place.
Muslim for Reform
Nashik, India
Oct 04, 2009 06:37 PM
158
iqbal z
you are absolutely right.
i read pakistani new papers, and never have i read
any one who regrets the partition,
bangladeshis despite the genocide in 1971 are more
friendly towards pakistan then india.
i remember on the ali brothers saying to gandhi-
mr gandhi i know you are a nice person, but i still
prefer a muslim thief to you. i am obliged to do so
because of my religion.
i can not fathom why nonmuslims are so facinated by
muslims, despite being rejected by them.
these fake secularists should visit pakistan for say
a few months- maybe this will cure them of their
fascination.
this said many pakistani,s can be very hospitable to
visitors, but this does not change the over all picture. it is a pity but its true.i stand for friendly relations with pakistan, trade and tourism.
i think the indian govt is ready for this, but it has
not happened-the pakistani,s are not keen on this.
i do not read pakistani,s suggesting such friendly
relations with india or the west.
i am willing to be friendly with pakistani,s as well.
and sincere if they are nice people, but i would not
have many expectations from the country at large.
we have had 60 years of bad relations- we have fought several wars,faced terrorism, faced lies and denials.
this shows how futile it is to have any illusions
about pakistani,s.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 06:16 PM
157
kumar
no european secular democratic country is in agreement with you. i live in europe and most danes have a very
negative views of islam and muslims.
so do britts. after the july 2005 bombings tony blair
said- the rules of the game have changed.even the elite pakistani,s can not get a visa to visit britain.
british readers express their anger in books,papers
and tv- you are fast asleep with your eyes,and ears
closed.
and stop your lies. i support equal rights for all
includeing muslims. it is muslims who do not give equal
rights to nonmuslims.christians are getting killed
in pakistan. you maintain a calm silence.
dawn has a article about the pope asking zardari to respect christians-
you need a mental check-so obsessed are you that you can not understand what your opponents think.
you could read "aatish taseers book stranger in history. you seem to be simply ignorant of the world
outside.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 05:17 PM
156
Gayatri:
The simple truth is, when Islam invaded India, it formed a new nationality. That eventually became the Muslim nations of Pakistan and Bangladesh. India remained a Hindu nation.
In the future, Pakistan and Bangladesh will become even more alienated from Hinduism and India will emphasise Hinduism ever more.
I have met many Pakistanis and Bangladeshis and discussed the Partition. Not one of them had even the remotest desire to have their countries reunite with India. They would have considered that a truly mad idea. They are happy to celebrate their strictly Islamic identity and to identify themselves with the Arabs and Iranians.
The fact that many of them like Hindi movies is nothing to the point: so do many Arabs, and even Russians.
Some extremist Pakistanis do want to reunite with India - but these are the guys who want to make the whole Subcontinent a Califate of Islam. The desire has nothing in the least friendly to Hindus about it.
So please put an end to this stale, outdated fantasy. The Pakistanis and the Bangladeshis havbe gone from the Hindus, and are NEVER comong back.
Let them develop their Islamic identity in peace, and let India develop her Hindu identity.
Everybody happy now?
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 04, 2009 05:15 PM
155
KUMAR
'criticism/condemnation of violent extremists' who are they ?
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 05:06 PM
154
KUMAR
If a fellow breaks into your house and comes to kill you you won't defend yourself. You will just say: "I am sure you will become a decent chap in the future. You can change."
Good luck.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 04, 2009 05:03 PM
153
KUMAR
If Muslims can indeed change and become liberal, come back to us when that incredible event has happened.
Until then we shall treat them as what they demonstrably are today: utterly bigotted and intolerant and violent.
Anyone can be excused on the basis of your principle that they can change in the future....Even Hitler could have, given enough time. We are not interested in that. What matters is dealing with the Muslim goondas and Hitlers of today.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 04, 2009 04:58 PM
152
Gayatri Devi,
>> i note that you do nothing useful- a real loser. whine whine whine-
You are the one whining at the criticism/condemnation of violent extremists The question is, why are you so scared about the idea of human rights/justice/freedom? If not, what exactly is the problem you have? Why dont you quote one line from me and tell what you disagree with?
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 04:49 PM
151
Gayatri Devi,
>> when facts are against them …
The disagreement is not so much on the facts, but on the view and vision for future of humanity/world.
>> however these same people make no such demands from other muslim countries like saudi arabia or the gulf states
Saudi Arabia is not the context of the discussion. But you are free to raise your objections on Saudi Arabia.
>> you are liveing in your own bubble, and i wonder whether its because you are house bound, or just have a closed mind
You should ask the question to all the secular democratic constitutions/countries of the world (including India), as they are all in agreement with me, in letter and spirit.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 04:46 PM
150
kumar
i have never opposed equal rights for all inhabitants
of a country-i am especially a supporter of womens
right. i do not have a religion, caste or class.
i am just a ordinary danish citizen liveing with very nice danish neighbours.
once years ago i invited a muslim activist to bring some of his friends for lunch,and i would share my
experiences with them .
he did not accept. he spent all his ime writeing critical letters about danish society. he was widely
despised,and left the country. everyone who knew him were happy.
i think you are completely thick headed.you remind me of him. constant whineing in bangalore, which i understand is a fun city.
i note that you do nothing useful- a real loser.
whine whine whine-
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 04:25 PM
149
kumar
i dont dream of ghettoes-
i note their existence-you also wrote about a muslim
locality close to you- do you visit them- do you have
many muslim,hindu friends.
start reading dawn- its journalists have doubts about islamic societies and their own.
you are liveing in your own bubble, and i wonder whether its because you are house bound, or just have
a closed mind.
you may have dreams of the society you want. it is not
shared by most westerners.dont presume to tell them
how to arrange their societies-
you need to make a trip to some other countries, meet
your dream friends- get a check on reality.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 04:25 PM
148
"As if money is required only for war purposes! "
Like Pakistanies are taking Billions from USA as Aid for developement and utilise it to purchase Arms to fight on Indian Front.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 04:18 PM
147
AK Ghai,
>> Indian intersts were served by financing Pakistan's Kashmir War !!!
As if money is required only for war purposes! But I was referring to is pre-partition India. Gandhi lived almost all his life in that India
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 04:13 PM
146
Gayatri Devi,
>> why do people insist on multicultural societies in liberal countries.what good does it to society in general. nothing at all.
That depends on your view of humanity and the future destiny for humanity/world that you like to see. I like to see a future of humanity where various races, castes, religions etc live in dignity with their rights/justice/freedom asserted and with people socially-educationally-economically empowered and developed. You dream of a world of ghettos, divided by race, religion, caste, class etc. That’s the basic difference.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 04:03 PM
145
Lalit ji
Thanks .
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 03:59 PM
144
"Gandhi had human and Indian interests in mind. "
Indian intersts were served by financing Pakistan's Kashmir War !!!
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 03:57 PM
143
Gayatri Devi,
>> these moral exhortations by kumar appear absolutely hypocritical- what is his purpose other then place blame on sanghis-as a proxy for the hindu community.
Thats like saying that the war on terror is a war on Muslims/Islam.
>> i detest such people
You detest the idea of asserting the right/justice/freedom of people. If not, you will have no problem with anything that I say.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 03:49 PM
142
mr ghai
we keep on debateing with the likes of faruki and
kumar. it matters little how sensible and realistic
our comments are. they will always raise an objection.
when facts are against them, they turn to moral
exhortations- allways to hindus,never to the other side. this is followed by abuse,insults.
moreover they reject the views of exmuslims who at great danger to themselves have taken a stand against islam. anyone however respected in society is instantly damned if he or she raise views against these brain dead fake secularists. when he pope said something critical,faruki immediately branded him as a ex nazi.
this is what nehru and patel must have realised.there
was no percentage in pursueing the dream of an indian
nation when 90 percent of muslims supported the 2 nation theory, and fought for a separate state useing
enormous violence and killings.
people like faruki thrive or survive in forums like
this. they also submit their views in the international
media as well. their views are totally opposed to the britts, for eg in papers like the "independent" or the "telegraph" - their mindset is absolutely opposed
to the views of the host nations-
such a situation is not good. why do people insist on multicultural societies in liberal countries.what
good does it to society in general. nothing at all.
however it does provide a fig leaf for muslim immigrants, in that it provides a near god like
reason for their presence in other societies.
the host nations must accept these people, or face charges of racism,bigotry.
however these same people make no such demands from other muslim countries like saudi arabia or the gulf states-you can read about this yourself.
best regards
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 03:12 PM
141
faruki
you have chosen to live your political life in the protected environment of this forum, despite the difference you have with all except -
kumar,reddy and chatterjee.
birds of the same feather flock togather.
do you write in any other forum. i would like to know,
because i am through corresponding with you.
we have different views, but you have always got some
fake moral values which you want your adverseries to accept. very wisely you do not demand these from
muslims who think otherwise-
i have come to the conclusion that islam and muslims
are in a cul de sac. you should discuss issues
which concern you,by yourselves. as you admit muslims
are sagging behind by a hundred years-
a sick limb as m.j.akbar says and you accept this view
as being true..
you can relate to the modern world,exchange views with
it only after you progressed from your present status.
it will take decades. obama has accepted this just
after a few months of his presidency. coexistence with
muslim countries, but no desire of being close to them.
obama had a muslim father.
it would be pointless for saudis, sudanese, libyans,
pakistani,s to sit and debate with people from american, western or eastern societies. your values
are far removed. all discources will be pointless.
the debates in this forum have proved this. we do not
share common values- dr s positively hates some of you.
people like mr ghai,sandy and myself feel that we are better off liveing apart as pakistan and india.
jinnah was right. pakistani,s are now free of debateing
issues like liberalism and secularism. they have a firm
anchor in islam, the koran, hadiths . despite problems
they are a unified nation, not troubled as the devided
nation of hindusthan.
we in india are in a state like that of hamlet the
prince of denmark- allways faceing problems of a very
confused,disturbed multireligious society, where each
community wants to emphasis its own culture.
frankly i have realised that when push come to shove
most minority community have their own religious
and civil interests to defend. i do not feel that they
are fellow indians in a real sense.
the same goes for most muslim immigrants- after several generations they still remain
pakistani,s or bangladeshi,s in britain,or in denmark.
you reject reality because it is the inconvenient truth. you are obsessed with promoteing a multireligious society in india-not in pakistan-
because it serves the interests of muslims. i do not
read you sincerely advanceing the well fare of nonmuslims in pakistan,or even that of muslim women
in india.
conclusion- ours is a futile debate-like the myth
of sysiphus.
at times when i am in delhi i have thought of opening a feeding centre where poor people could get a really good lunch a few times a month- a centre where children of all communities could take a bath, wind down, watch tv or do some thing they like.
these moral exhortations by kumar appear absolutely hypocritical- what is his purpose other then place
blame on sanghis-as a proxy for the hindu community.
what good have people like him done for any one,except
for this absurd moral lectureing.
i detest such people- and to hell if you call me a bigot.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 02:31 PM
140
"Putting it as "Muslims interests" and "Hindu interests" reflects your mindset and not of Gandhi"
Start reading recent History of India .There are n- numbers of books available .Ganhi had many many qualities and some weaknesses too.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 02:30 PM
139
Gayatri Devi,
>> unwillingness to accept essential difference between various communities
It is you who have to accept that while there are differences among various nations, races, castes etc as the 'current situation', it need to be permanent state of affairs in the future (or the past for that matter - the church in medieval times felt that it is ok to kill people for opposing religion, but they changed, didn’t they. Others can change and have changed likewise).
>> muslims in pakistan are convinced that the 2 nation theory is right
So did many Hindus, including many in this forum. But that was a solution for a certain prevailing situation. But the fact remains that both Indians and Pakistanis are human beings. Even two brothers born of the same mother may separate, due to some circumstances etc.
>> that is why they have rejected their hindu past
The fact that a person is a Muslim and chose to be a Muslim means that they do not believe in some hindu beliefs. What is your point?
>> the pope himself has stated that islam was a intolerant religion, and entirely faith based and irrational.
Just as many people consider Christianity likewise. That is a different issue/topic altogether. I may say that Christianity is irrational and yet assert the human rights/justice/freedom of all people including Christians.
>> people like me accept the way things are. that is my starting point.
I also see the things the way they are, but see what needs to be corrected/improved
>> i believe very firmly that people may not be good or bad, but that they are different.
I believe that many people are good and some fall short more than others. But everyone can change/improve/develop etc.
>> jinnah and gandhi presented two views, and muslims chose those made by jinnah. now i ask you- is this reality or bigotry to say so.
It is a reality to say that most Muslims chose Jinnah. But it is bigotry to say that Muslims (or for that matter people of any race, caste etc) cannot change and will for ever remain backward, bad etc. It would be even worse to violate the rights/justice/dignity etc of innocents based on a theory that people of a particular religion, race etc are different/inferior etc.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 02:15 PM
138
Gatatri/Lalit,
>> unwillingness to accept essential difference between various communities.
If such difference is the only ware you have to peddle, you may as well fold and spend your time doing something more useful. You have become a repetitious bore.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 04, 2009 02:06 PM
137
reddy
i agree with you on prostitution.
regarding killing of gandhi- he was killed by a hindu under very troubled times. i think he had come to the end of his role. his dream of one india,and one nation
was shattered,
regarding killings of leaders,note the numbers of
pakistani who had a bad ending-
liaqat ali khan- killed
iskander mirza exiled
ayub khan- dismissed in a coup
mujib ur rehman imprisoned
butto hanged
zia ul haq ??
nawaz sharif imprisoned for years
benazir bhutto killed in a terror attack
musharff faceing impeachment
zardari ???
its a fine record.
that of afghanistan is not better.
sadamm hussain used to shoot people in meetings.
he killed both soninlaws--
is that enough.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 01:59 PM
136
AK Ghai,
>> Watching Muslims interests was the single point agenda of Gandhi .He had no sympathies for Hindu refugees
Gandhi had human and Indian interests in mind. Putting it as "Muslims interests" and "Hindu interests" reflects your mindset and not of Gandhi. He appealed to all people to renounce communal violence/hatred etc and to show love/respect to fellow human beings. No where did he say that it is ok for one side to kill the other side etc (as is made to be by some people, including you)
>> If not Godse some other angred person would have done the deed.
True, there is no shortage of communal and religious violent extremists, for whom the word ‘humanity’ means nothing and the word is not there in their dictionary.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 01:49 PM
135
faruki and kumar
smart retorts are just smart retorts, refecting an
unwillingness to accept essential difference between
various communities.
that is what v.s.naipaul and the young writer aatish
taseer have said in their books, and what mr mohammed
ali jinnah said, as justification for the partition
of india. muslims in pakistan are convinced that the
2 nation theory is right, and that is why they have
rejected their hindu past, and dream of being a central
asian nation. on the other hand it is secular hindu,s , who despite knowing this view, and after being hated and attacked by pakistani terrorists keep on dreaming of one people and one nation.
i have the views of some pakistani journalists and they affirm my views to be correct. what more can one present as evidence.
talking of bigotry ,you are the bigots,who have chosen a convenient stand ,and are now denying this inconvenient truth. the pope himself has stated that islam was a intolerant religion, and entirely
faith based and irrational. we see this in the affairs
of pakistan and afghanistan etc.
india can not change its situation- its various communities even if they dislike each other can not
find alternatives. however the truth being that those muslims in india who want to live by different laws would be better off liveing on their own.
the essentials of a good working multicultural society
is that most people have common values which unite,and few which devide. european nations after decades of
liveing togather with foreigners have decided. they
find big differences between themselves and muslim immigrants.
haveing realised this most countries have ministeries
of integration with a special task of educateing
muslim immigrants. however they have now also made laws
to stop further muslim immigration.
pakistani,s now at the highest level now find it nearly
impossible to get a visa for britain.. the visa office for pakistani,s has been moved to dubai-
i believe very firmly that people may not be good or bad, but that they are different. this is the way muslim countries feel. most of them have from algeria
to bangladesh expelled nonmuslims, and made life very
difficult for the others.to deny this essential truth
is bigotry.
after all nehru and gandhi accepted this in 1947.however they decided to keep pretending that muslims and hindus were one people. this was not true in 1947, and its not true for pakistani,s today.
to deny truth and reality is not being liberal ,but just stupid. people like me accept the way things are.
that is my starting point.
accept the world as it is, and not what you want it to be.
europeans being educated and rational have accepted the reality on the ground. they experimented with
multiculturalism, but are now shocked at the way things
have gone wrong. the liberal politicians are getting voted out of power, and societies are becomeing more devided, with all communities getting to be more intolerant.
instead of demanding me to change my mind by all kinds
of moral blackmail, exchange your views with pakistani,s.
ask them what they think of secular societies,and changeing of pakistan from a islamic state to a secular
state. muslims want secular states when in a minority.
they want islamic state when they are a majority.
that was naipauls message, which the people in the
nobel prize committee acknowledged and gave him a nobel prize for literature.since then he was knighted, and so was salman rushdie.
lets cool it- jinnah and gandhi never agreed. jinnah
won and was named qaid e azam. gandhi was shot by a
angry hindu for not standing up for his community.
this is the simple truth. jinnah and gandhi presented
two views, and muslims chose those made by jinnah.
now i ask you- is this reality or bigotry to say so.
anyway i am out of this debate. one can not convince
peoples whose mind is made up, and who have no intention of changeing it. the two sopranos should now
ask pakistani,s what they think of multicultural
societies, and are they now prepared to take back the millions of nonmuslims they have mishandled and
expelled.
the records of all bjp states is far better then that of pakistan and afghanistan.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 12:54 PM
134
Gayatri Devi,
>> you pretend that pakistani,s and indians are similr in character
I believe that all people in the world regardless of race, nationality, caste etc have similar basic human character, but the current conditions are different groups, based on various conditions/circumstances are different. Those who are backward or on the wrong side etc can be corrected and their conditions improved.
>> i dont suppose you have read v.s.naipauls "anongst the believers" aatish taseer "stranger to history", books by ayan hirsi ali,views of Tasleema Nasreen, Salman Rushdie.
I am familiar with their views. None of them would support violation of rights/justice of innocent people merely based on race, caste, religion etc. In fact they are speaking out against it, as see it happening in Islamic society, much of which I agree.
>> You have gone around in your usual way, by not answering a direct question. I asked you to name one country you admire, and there was no answer.
I told you what kind of society I admire. Such societies exist in many countries. It is true that the societies I mentioned are more in some countries than other, but that is just the 'current condition' and those lagging behind can improve as well. I admire almost all secular democratic nations for their repeated assertion of human rights/justice/freedom in principle (even though they sometimes fail in actual implementation etc).
>> you are scared to comment on the mindset of many muslims
Tell which mindset I am scared to comment on. In reply to Mr. Badhukwala’s article, I asked him to look at issues beyond 2002 riots and to contemplate on why it is so easy to provoke a "muslim mob" into violence.
>> what exactly is your motive in hideing from ground realities.
I am not hiding from any realities. The reality that you are ignorant of is that all human beings have rights and are entitled for justice/freedom etc. And all people of all races, castes, nationalities can develop, improve etc. And your problem is also that you cannot stand the rightful condemnation of religious violence, if that is directed towards hindu extremist violence.
>> i end my exchange of views with you
You are free to do so anytime.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 12:41 PM
133
gayathri-devi aka benito to Kumar---"I noted this from the people you admire and the books you read. "
Kumar ... i suggest you read frederick forsythe and mario puzo, and make attempts to admire benito mussolini and hitler. This will level the playing field and you will finally arrive on the high intellectual plateau inhabited by the resident sex-change guru.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 12:33 PM
132
--"If not Godse some other angred person would have done the deed."
I agree ... judging by the deranged hindutva fundamentalists who infest these forums, it was only a question of time before Hindu fundamentalism would have 'done the deed'. And these very fundamentalist fuckheads have the gall to use the concept of Hindu tolerance as a protective sheath ... like a condom.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 11:01 AM
131
Gayatri,
>> are muslims in india liberal...
Some are liberal, some conservative, and some are as bigotted as you.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 04, 2009 10:46 AM
130
Seshadri,
>>>>"Your glee could hardly be hidden"
>> please stop posting retort replies.
These are the truths, not retorts. You did write several post applauding the deaths of YSR and Karkare. Now perhaps you do not want that mentioned!
>> perhaps, the mk-rajesh-types might ask for caste-cum-ethnicity-based reservations, on nobel awards also.
then the Bs of south india may be kept out for another century.
The question was whether generations of enriched environments and higher expectations conduce to achievements, or is it due to inherited genes.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 04, 2009 10:40 AM
129
"et Godse was not apprehended. Was he manipulated as, "
Gandhi had angered many Hindus specially Refugees from the West Pakistan and East Pakistan . Watching Muslims interests was the single point agenda of Gandhi .He had no sympathies for Hindu refugees who had lost their livelihood,homes,property,businesses and their near and dear ones were butchered by the Paki hordes.
If not Godse some other angred person would have done the deed.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 04, 2009 10:23 AM
128
The first and foremost attribute of leadership is clarity of vision, followed by a roadmap and execution plan to make that vision reality.The angry protests of gandhi fans aside,the fact is that gandhi's vision or lack of it was based on an utopian thought - so far fetched from reality and impractical that it is not worth the paper it was written on.gandhi worshippers would do well to set aside some time to read his ramblings - boggles the mind that such a chap is actually venerated.Present day India is far from perfect and can even be called a functional anarchy - however we are certainly better off compared to what might have been had m.k.gandhi perchance taken over the leadership reins of India.
Shiv Adiseshan
Chennai, India
Oct 04, 2009 10:18 AM
127
>>>>Either you are completely ignorant or pretend to be one . I noted this from the people you admire and the books you read>>>
>>>>Hinduism is flexible and dynamic. Hinduism is not under trial or under watch, or a global ideological threat>>>>
The Brahmin-Baniya temples were not only far from us, but the Gods sitting and sleeping in those temples were basically set against us. There were Brahmin-Baniya houses within our villages, but the very same houses built up a culture inimical to ours. The Brahmin-Baniyas walked over the corpses of our culture. They were the gluttons while our parents were the poor starving people - producing everything for the others comfort. Their children were the most unskilled gluttons, whereas our children were the contributors to the national economy itself. Their notion of life was unworthy of life itself, but they repeatedly told our parents that we were the most useless people. Having gone through all these stages of life, having acquired the education that enabled us to see a wider world, when we reflect upon our childhood and its processes it is nothing but anger and anguish which keeps burning in our hearts.
( the above are excerpts from the bestseller book, translated in many languages ' Why I Am Not A Hindu ' by Dr kancha Ilaiah. His latest article on ' Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen and his book ' The Idea Of Justice ' has appeared in to-day's ' Asian Age ' http://www.asianage....-art-of-justice.aspx
B Prabhu
Mangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 10:11 AM
126
Many of the postings I see are plain drivel. Somebody is accusing faruki and someone Gayatri devi. By this bullshit are they contributing to the discussion other than wasting precious space of Outlook?
Siddharth postings do hit the nail on the head and make us think what has gone wrong with our nation subjected to disinformation. The Congress in pursuit of political hegemony has stabbed the people of all religious denomination in the back and nobody seems wiser. The same herd mentality prevails even today when mass voting for Congress takes place even though many of the Congressmen are traitors.
Mahatma Gandhi scored a self-goal by bowing to Jinnah’s demands. Some argue that Partition was inevitable. Even if a partition had come later it would not have been so gory as to leave millions dead on both sides. Gandhi is fully responsible for this macabre event as he happened to be the towering personality during the crucial period and using his charismatic hold on the masses could have stood firm against the British fifth columnists who were instigating Jinnah. When Partition became inevitable quick-to-fasting Gandhi should have truthfully fasted till he died. This was the only way he could have redeemed himself. Yet he chose to live and witness the holocaust. There is something weird about Gandhi when it comes to preserving unity and integrity of India.
shakeel
hyderabad, India
Oct 04, 2009 08:36 AM
125
Gayatri/Lalit,
>> i live as a liberal, or try and do so.
A hate pracharak cannot be a liberal. Someone exhibiting open religious intolerance cannot be a liberal.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 04, 2009 06:43 AM
124
KUMAR(to Gayatri Devi),
Its a well known fact that what ever you call a Muslim as whether a liberal or secular all that glory vanishes when it comes to their religion where he gets instantly transformed into a fanatic or a jihadi sympathiser.Islam even otherwise forbids the concepts of Democracy,secularism,religious tolerance and liberalism considering these as tools used by the Christian west or non Muslim world against it.I agree with you that irrespective of one's religion a common man strives to earn his daily bread in the first place.One can be religious but there is no need to be a fanatic.To look at every one as equal then every one has to look at others as equal.But in our country the political system runs on caste and religious divide.
Pakistan for another ten thousand years will have bitter relationship with India.A country born on a 'anti India' hate plank can never be a true and honest friend.Its the arrogant Pakistan that waged three unsuccessful wars on India and is now engaged in a proxy war.If the Pakistanis were at all friendly you would not have found the entire country getting tense during a India Pakistan cricket match.The whole world is now aware what Pakistanis are up to.A rogue,undemocratic and a country that lies to the world community.Its appropriately branded as a jihadi factory.There are enough people in this country enjoying the fruits of democracy here but having their souls in a an enemy country like Pakistan.Have you included these people too in your friendly lot.
you seems to enjoy living in utopia.The world has been made a unsafe place to live by Pakistanis who are engaged in gathering crude nukes and even selling them to notorious countries.Every society has its own plusses and minuses.Your purpose of living is understood and one has to live with such noble deeds but not necessarily alone on internet forums but in actual life.
Your list of those role models gives me a simple hint that you are a communist minded or a left oriented person.No big deal.Its your democratic right to choose.
Show me one Muslim country which is truly and honestly democratic,secular and liberal.some were on the path like Iraq and Turkey but your jihadi brothers would not want that to happen.The Muslim countries are definitely protecting the rights /justice/welfare but of their own or the Muslims alone.why Saudi Arabia is so religiously intolerant to the non Muslims.The Muslim countries will never go the way how the west has gone.Islam fears more the freedom means lesser its hold will be on its followers.
vijay
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 03:20 AM
123
Gayatri:
I am beginning to realise who you are.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 04, 2009 02:54 AM
122
kumar
you have not a clue about the real world, where there
are ongoing conflicts leading to violence,hate and killings. there is hardly one european or other
country where muslims live peacefully with nonmuslims.
you pretend that pakistani,s and indians are similr in
character and this exposes your complete ignorance.
i dont suppose you have read v.s.naipauls "anongst the
believers" aatish taseer "stranger to history",
books by ayan hirsi ali,views of Tasleema Nasreen,
Salman Rushdie.
Either you are completely ignorant or pretend to be
one . I noted this from the people you admire and the books you read.
Your sanctimnious pretensions are meant to ignore,or
deny reality.
You have gone around in your usual way, by not answering a direct question. I asked you to name one country you admire, and there was no answer.just
your usual sermoneising.this is the usual hypocracy
of people like you.
you are scared to comment on the mindset of many muslims. if they were just hard working people,they
would not be killing or burning your fellow christians.
there would be no taliban, laskar e toiba.there would
not be terror attacks all over the world, and subsequent denials by the pakistani govt.
i end my exchange of views with you. you are dishonest, naive and stupid.what exactly is your motive
in hideing from ground realities.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 01:51 AM
121
Gayatri Devi,
>> are muslims in india liberal-in which way
Most people of all religions just go on with lives in a normal way - working for a living, marrying, having children, trying to improve their standard of living, trying to get better conditions for their children than what they themselves had etc and abide the law of the land. There would be many people in all religions who don’t know much about religion or care to know deeply. There would be many who may or may not have a deep personal faith, but look at people at a human level and work for rights/dignity of all people etc. Thus applies to people of all religions including the Muslims in India.
>> are pakistani,s liberal- are they friendlt towards india- i mean the large majority.
The 'friendliness' of Pakistanis to India would be probably more or less a mirror image of 'friendliness' of Indians towards Pakistan. You will find all kinds of people. There will be people who are more bitter than others and some more friendly than others etc.
>> which are the societies yoú admire across the world,and where you would like to live.
The society that I admire the most are the ones that respect the rights/justice/freedom of people regardless of race, religion, caste etc. Many parts of secular democratic nations fall in that category (some more than others, but they should at least be open and make progress). The question of where I like to live is different question. I like to live where my presence would bring maximum benefit to the society. That is where I derive my sense of purpose etc.
>> who are your favourite writers, thinkers,
There are many, like Abraham Lincoln, Ambedkar, Gandhi, Nehru, Martin Luther King, Desmond Tutu, Raja Rammohan Roy, Nelson Mandela etc
>> is the world more open to open cultural societies now then before- if not why not.
>> is the world becomeing more tolerant-
Some people are, some people are not. The more important question is, which is the right way to go.
>> will muslim countries be more like western countries some time in the future.
The Muslim countries need not be 'like western countries' as you put it. As long as they can assert and protect the rights/justice/freedom/progress/welfare of all citizens regardless of race/religion etc, they are fine. I think they will and they have to - they don’t have a choice.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 01:22 AM
120
Gayatri Devi,
>> dont believe that all peoples,races,nations are equal in intellect-if they were then the world would expeience uniform development.
That is not the question. The question is not whether all races/castes/nations etc are equally intelligent/developed etc as things stand today. Everyone agrees that there are reasons/circumstances/conditions etc due to which some races/castes/nations etc have had more development or have a larger percentage of people showing greater intellect etc. But the point is that people of races/castes can be intellectually, philosophically, morally meritorious and given the right conditions and time, any race/caste can catch up. And as human beings, we should desire/strive for that.
>> societies need people who have more values which unify, and few which devide
The issue could be in your mind and backward thinking. That is like saying that caste is a unifying faction and so inter-caste marriage has to be opposed. That is a backward thinking. Diversity in culture, arts, diverse personal religious faiths etc - I do not see why that is a problem. It should be celebrated.
>> you should not decide whether europe should accept immigrants if they do not want to.
I am not 'deciding' anything. But if someone says that a person is necessarily incompetent due to his/her nationality/race/caste etc, I will counter that argument (just as I would counter similar arguments made about inter-caste marriages etc)
>> your pontificateing as if you were the messiah, hovering over humanity flying with angel wings … you are a real weirdo
Everything that I am saying is pretty basic and agreed by billions of people all over the world. That you have a problem with it is the weird part. The Constitution of India (and of all secular democracies of the world) agrees 100% with me.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 01:13 AM
119
Perhaps, if mountbatton had proposed an independant undivided india, with m k gandhi as pm or president, all, including jinnah might have accepted, like washington as the first president of usa. perhaps, india bled in partition, as price paid in not giving the real dues, to the leader who got it the freedom!
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 04, 2009 01:11 AM
118
faruki and kumar
a few direct questions, which need direct answers
aaa are muslims in india liberal-in which way
bbb are pakistani,s liberal- are they friendlt towards
india- i mean the large majority.
ccc which are the societies yoú admire across the world,and where you would like to live.
ddd who are your favourite writers, thinkers,
eee is the world more open to open cultural societies
now then before- if not why not.
fff is the world becomeing more tolerant-
wrt muslim countries
and nonmuslim countries.
ggg will muslim countries be more like western countries some time in the future.
now the ball is in your court.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 01:05 AM
117
R_P:>>"Gandhi had earlier said that India could be partitioned only over his dead body. The Partition occurred but Gandhi remained alive. When sceptics taunted Gandhi about this his former secretary and biographer, Peareylal, recorded that Gandhi would angrily lash out at his critics and say should he kill himself just to satisfy others?" ..."Writing his last will and testament by which he sought the dissolution of the Congress as a political party on the very day of his assassination was a striking coincidence".
there is probably one possibility, that seems being ignored. despite being called mahatma, gandhi was also only human. perhaps, he expected that he may be made the prime minister or president of undivided india. no one even suggested it, bec people assumed he was a spiritual type, who did not want political office, altho excercised a lot of political power. perhaps, many of his Sakuni kind of operations leading to the partition of the country were out of frustration that he was not being offered the positions, others took, treating him only as senior advisor. He never got even the presidentship of the congress.
gandhi was only 78 at the time of india's independance. he was saying he will live beyond hundred. look at vajpayi, advani, joshi, karunaanidhi, all aged politicians, well beyond 80, none feeling too old for office!. if vajpayi had quit for advani in 2004, giving enough time for elec-prep, bjp might have won. only the illness of vajpay has brought LKA to the top!
perhaps gandhi paid the painful price of personal disappointment, for not getting the top office, for the perception of a spiritual halo, and consequent confusions, also. even nehru did not quit till death. rajaji started swatantra party when out of power! had renunciation gone out of the indic genes?
God only knows the truth. But, then, all the good souls do deserve the rest in peace with God.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 04, 2009 12:57 AM
116
kumar
aaa i dont believe that all peoples,races,nations are
equal in intellect-if they were then the world would
expeience uniform development. however in all nations there are people with exceptional intellect
bbb liberal societies need certain conditions in which
they can thrive.
the experience of european countries is that some kinds
of immigrants do not fit in their societies.
societies need people who have more values which unify,
and few which devide. muslims especially fall in the
camp where they have more things which devide and few
which unify.
you should not decide whether europe should accept immigrants if they do not want to. your lectures on
what constitutes a good society is laughable-are you
going to order european countries around- you are
plain round the bend.
even chinese, japanese, arabs decide whom they will accept and who they will reject.
i note your pontificateing as if you were the messiah,
hovering over humanity flying with angel wings, a pink
frock, whilst the others sing hallelujah.
i think you are a real weirdo-
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 04, 2009 12:37 AM
115
Gayatri Devi,
>> i live as a liberal, or try and do so.
>> i have eaten togather with dalits, muslims-and as well with my family. i believe in rights for all especially for women- the right to dress well, engage in song and dance, and with all opportunities to do well. i believe in freedom of thought and expression ..
You should assert and fight for the rights/justice/freedom of all citizens/human beings regardless of race, religion, caste, class etc (and that the state should necessarily do so). You should also assert that people of any race/caste etc can be intellectually, philosophically/morally meritorious given the circumstances, social conditions etc.
Instead, you talk of dividing nations multiple times on communal lines (instead of secular democracy where everyone is free to have their personal beliefs) and support ghettoized living (instead of accepting human diversity and freedom are part of life). You also seem to be inclined to believe that some races/castes etc have an inherent problem of being inferior etc for racist reasons. You have serious problems with freedom of religion. You have serious troubles, resentment and restlessness if someone criticizes violent extremists (and conveniently play a cheap trick of advising the critics to go to other places where problems are more). All these things go seriously against your claim of being a liberal and in fact places you in the exact opposite camp.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 04, 2009 12:16 AM
114
VARUN:
I am sorry if one remark in my last message to you may have been misunderstood by you.
When I asked "How stupid do you have to be...." I did not mean you personally. It would have been better put: "How stupid does one have to be...." I was speaking about people in general.
But going back to the subject, it is amazing how tenaciously many Hindus hold on to illusions about Muslims.
The blunt FACT is, for reasons both GOOD and bad, Muslims utterly despise and loathe Hindus.
Their emotional committment is to the Middle East and Arabia. The feel nothing but alienated contempt for anything in Indian history apart from the things brought by Islamic invaders.
This can never change.
Muslims are Indian in appearance but Arabs at heart, and fanatical ones at that.
The appalling fellow called Anwaar is a good example. He is rabidly enthusiatic about Muslim throat-slitters in Afghanistan or Iraq, but never shows the slightest concern for any cause connected with Hinduism.
Nehru took a great, beneficial, decision when he decided to accept Pakistan. It saved Hindus. Going for the delusion of a united India at that point would have been deadly: like deciding to marry a partner who fopr decades had declared her hatred for one.
Nehru had plenty of appeasing illusions about Muslims prior to this incredibly important decsion - the most important in Indian history - and afterwards, too. But in 1946 and 1947 he was at his most clear-headed and best.
His daughter Indira too had this pattern: entertaining deadly illusions about Muslim amiability, but realising the truth about them when it really counted, as in 1971 in the Bangladesh War.
A typical example
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 04, 2009 12:00 AM
113
VIJAY AGGARWAL:
I suggest you get a rusted wheelbarrow for your wife. That is your level.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 03, 2009 09:02 PM
112
A:>>"Many Nobel laureates are not related to any laureates"
chandra-sekhar was the nephew of c. v. raman.
perhaps, the mk-rajesh-types might ask for caste-cum-ethnicity-based reservations, on nobel awards also.
then the Bs of south india may be kept out for another century.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 03, 2009 08:56 PM
111
A:>>"Your glee could hardly be hidden"
please stop posting retort replies, reading only the first line of any statement. not eager for your replies, anyway.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 03, 2009 08:49 PM
110
V_C3:
you have the excellent potential for writing a book titled 'why I converted away from hinduism'. it will sell a lot of copies, like ilaya's book, being quoted by prabhu. all your fellow-pastors will enjoy reading it, can use it for further conversion of more hindus. good luck to you. but, I think you will be more convincing, if you honestly call yourself pastorji, instead of having the dirty hindu brahmin name of chatterji.
devout hindus know the spiritual significances, inner meanings, of all their puranas, itihaasas, temples and temple architectural details. they cannot be diverted by your misleading propaganda, waste of time and effort only.
you should probably concentrate on saving your churchdom from the disgrace it is getting from stories of the clergy misusing the sisters in your convents and the kids in your orphanages. It will help you reduce the number of millions in dollars, your church has to pay in damages. the amount can be better utilized for converting more credulous tribals. May jesus christ bless you with wisdom on your projects.
But, then, very soon, all devout christians and dveout moslems, also, will start seeing themselves as some more sanaatanists worshipping skanda in the name of jesus and Siva in the name of Allah. You ugly conversionist clergy are likely to be exterminated by the cross in jesus' hand turned into manoo-velan's spear. All the terrorist-islamists are likely to be burnt off by the fire-eye of Siva = allah only. It is already happening. every day, a good number of islamist terrorists are getting self-blasted and burnt out.
the only unfortunate aspect is that, while those killed by krishna's cakra or skanda's spear will get spiritual salvation, those burnt by Allah = Siva's fire-eye-fury will have their very souls extinguished. But God must have His reasons for such things happening. May His will be done.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 03, 2009 08:36 PM
109
" Hinduism is flexible and dynamic. "
'
Varun Shekhar
That is the root cause all the problems India is facing now .It was known even in 1947 .But you people were being led by Gandhi-Nehru with eyes closed.Nathu Ram Godse is being abused for killing Gandhi though he was hanged for his act .But what about Gandhi-Nehru and their betrayal of our Motherland ? They sent Rs. 55 crores as gift to Jinnah who had ordered sending of hordes in Kashmir .
Read the Offical War History :
"Official History of the Jammu & Kashmir Operations
Why did Pakistan invade Kashmir in the first place? First, Kashmir being a Muslim-dominant state was considered a natural part of Pakistan, which had made Islam the basis of its modern nationality. Second, Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan's Pathanistan Movement was gaining momentum and Kashmir was held out as a bait for luring the poor tribals away. The internal conditions of Jammu & Kashmir with religious passions aflame, lawlessness rampant and authority paralysed offered the right mix for the raiders to strike"
http://www.bharat-ra...fending-Kashmir.html
Still Gandhi forced GOI to finance Pakistan's War against India .
And you people call him Father of the Nation !!!
happy ram ambalvi
Ambala Cantt, India
Oct 03, 2009 08:34 PM
108
faruki
i live as a liberal, or try and do so.
i have eaten togather with dalits, muslims-and as well
with my family.
i believe in rights for all especially for women-
the right to dress well, engage in song and dance,
and with all opportunities to do well.
i believe in freedom of thought and expression( you
dont care for this)
i dont have any hang ups on what to eat or drink-
when i am not a liberal
------------------------
i am against religious orthodoxy or religious or idealogical bigotry.
against the skull caps, burqas, turbans, ghungats,
and like wise
i guess i am as liberal as those in the main stream
in europe.
who are the philosophers i respect
-----------------------------
amongst philiosophers-schopenhaur, hegel, voltair,david hume-
amongst statemen
-------------------------------
abraham lincoln, martin luther king, winston churchill,
de gaulle, nehru, patel, nelson mandela,
writers
----------------------------------
alexander sol----, tolstoy, sholakov, steinbeck,
j.d.salinger, harper lee, margaret mitchell,
dickens, shakespeare, galsworthy, naipaul, bronte
sisters, -------------
by the way i dont read mein kamf as you probably suspect for bed time reading.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 08:12 PM
107
Hinduism is not under trial or under watch, or a global ideological threat, Vivek Chatterjee. Islamism is. You can recount a number of bizarre ideas or practices under the rubric of Hinduism, with your crypto-Moslem or crypto-Christian lens. To what end? Hinduism is flexible and dynamic.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 03, 2009 07:59 PM
106
I wonder when Islamic monsters do namaaz what exactly they pray for. There is actually nothing in Koran to pray for except Prophet’s instigation to kill the kafirs.>>Siddharth of Chennai
Apparently, you are a Southie scum who is a proud of his religion. It goes without saying that you are one of those cattle worshippers.It is a known fact that Sita had sex with the monkey, Hanuman. She was later raped by Ravan. Ravan ki jai ho. MF Hussain painted a reality, the lewd nature of Sita and Saraswathi. Find below some facts about your holy religion:
Jagannath is the god enshrined in the famous Hindu temple at Puri. Sankarachariya, the spiritual head of the present Hindus of India, is the devotee of Jagannath of Puri. Hundreds of measures of rice and dal are cooked here daily to feed the thousands of worshippers.
At the Jaya-Vijiya gate of this temple various type of sexual orgies of the god Jagannath can be seen sculptured on granite stones. On the outer walls of this temple are life-size sculptures of the 64 types of sexual mating of men and women as described in the Kamasutra of Vatsyayana.
The dance Bhajan in this temple begins after 10 p.m each day behind closed doors. It is performed by one of the 120 dancing girls in the service of the temple. Each night a new dancing girl will have to come to the temple to dance before god Jaganath. This dance is witnessed only by the lifeless statue of Jagnnath and the Brahmin priest who plays on the musical instrument.
As the dance heightens to a crescendo, the girl discards her dress and dances stark naked. She then throws herself to the statue of Jagannath in an ecstasy shouting “O Lord, I am thy bride, please make love with me”.
Whether it is the lifeless idol of Jagannath or the living Brahmin priest who makes love with her is not known (It is strictly forbidden for Non-Hindus to enter the Jagannatha temple).
Dancing girls who have retired form the service of god Jagannath are now making both ends meet by leading a life of prostitution in the streets of holy Puri. Their patrons are the worshippers who come in their thousands to the sacred city.
Sabarimalai Sastha – Hindu God # 6
Sabarimalai Sastha or Ayyapa is a sylvan god worshipped by the credulous Hindus of Kerala and Tamil Nadu in India. He is the son born to Siva and Vishnu as a result of a homosexual act.
To escape from the curse of the powerful demon Durwasa, all the gods joined together and churned the milky ocean to gather “Amrut”-a butter-like ambrosia. They collected the “Amrut” in a pot, and kept it to be served at a heavenly feast. An Asura (demon) from the nether world stole the pot of ” Amrut from Develoka. When the loss of the ambrosia was detected, the omniscient Vishnu was able to know where it was. He went to the nether world in the guise of Mohini, a woman of exquisite beauty, and brought and back the “Amrut” and served it to the gods. When Mohini was serving the Amrut, Shiva got intoxicated with her beauty and had sexual intercourse with her, who was in reality Vishnu. Vishnu became pregnant as a result of the homosexual act, and gave birth to Sastha from his thigh. Both Shiva and Vishnu discarded this un-naturally born illegitimate child in the forests of Sabarimalai in Kerala.
Sri Rama – Hindu God # 5
Sri Rama was another incarnation of Mahavishnu. He and his three brothers Lakshmanan, Bharatha and Shatrugna were born to three wives of King Dasharatha. Like Jesus, Ram and his brothers were not through a human father although Dasharatha was the husband of their mothers. They were conceived in their mothers’ wombs as a result of the three women eating portions of a sacred porridge.
Krishna – Hindu God # 4
Krishna is the 9th incarnation of Mahavishnu. Like Jesus Christ, Krishna was born as the “son of man” at Ambadi among cowherds. Although he had sixteen thousand and eight wives, Krishna did not let other women go free. Once, when he saw some Gopi women bathing in the river Kalindi, Krishna carried away their clothes from the bank of the river, and got on a nearby tree to feast his eyes on the Gopi women bathing in the nude. He returned their dresses only after each of them came out of the water and worshipped him so that he could see their nude bodies in full. It is claimed that Krishna was so potent that he could satisfy all his 16008 wives at the same time.
Indra – Hindu Gods # 3
Indra is the head of all gods. Amarawati was his celestial residence. Arjun was born to Indra as a result of his clandestine adultery with Pandu’s wife, he had no hesitation in committing adultery with the wives of other men. One day when Indra saw Ruchi, the beautiful wife of Devasarma, he became extremely passionate and wanted to seduce her. But Ruchi chased Indra out ,and he had to go away disappointed.
On another occasion Indra could not control his sexual passion when he saw Goutama’s wife Ahalya. He committed adultery with Ahalya when her husband was away. On his return home Goutama saw Indra in sexual interlock with his wife. Goutama cursed both of them.
Once Aruna visited Devaloka in the disguise of a woman. When Indra saw this woman in disguise he could not control his passion. He had sexual intercourse with this imitation woman. Bali was born as the result of this un-natural homosexual cohabitation
Vivek Chatterjee
CALCUTTA, India
Oct 03, 2009 07:58 PM
105
test
Vivek Chatterjee
CALCUTTA, India
Oct 03, 2009 07:47 PM
104
"In 1946, the Interim government to prepare Independence headed by Nehru was utterly stalled by pig-headed Muslim determination to obstruct each and every measure.
Even Nehru, inclined to make endless excuses for Muslims, was completely exhausted and disillusioned. As he said, even Partition was better than this descent into governmental paralysis and social mass killing."
Yes, Iqbal. Nehru himself was so disgusted and repelled by the behaviour of the Moslem representatives, that he wondered whether he didn't belong to a different nation than they did. It was sayonara at that point. My "whining" is not so much about the partition per se, brutal as it was. It's about the nature of the people who made it inevitable. Demagogic, violent, gangsterish... a disaster.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 03, 2009 07:41 PM
103
"The barbarism has been continuous down the ages and yet Gandhi ignored it trying to mix oil and water by saying "Ishwar Allah tero naam!". If stupidty should get"
Good observation. The initiative for such ideas always comes from Hindus; Moslems reject the above slogan unreservedly. Try openly uttering the passage in Pakistan or among the Taliban.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 03, 2009 07:35 PM
102
Siddarth, those passages from the Koran targeting Hindus/idolaters are absolutely blood curdling. One hopes this is not the view of Hindus throughout Moslem majority countries.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 03, 2009 06:55 PM
101
Gayatri/Lalit,
>> these are the qualifications of being a liberal in india....
Your idea of being a liberal is to be an agnostic and to hate the community that it is currently fashinable to hate! If you were living in Europe seventy years ago you would have been in the forefront of the anti-semitic brigade! We do have a good liberal tradition in India, but you are the exact opposite of a liberal. I must add that our liberal tradition is under-represented in this forum.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Showing posts with label Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Show all posts
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Has Gandhi's Agenda Been Defeated?.......Public Platform 1 !
Rajinder Puri
Mahatma Gandhi had earlier said that India could be partitioned only over his dead body. The Partition occurred but Gandhi remained alive. He was not afraid of death. Then why did he not redeem his pledge?
This is my personal interpretation of Mahatma Gandhi’s response to the Partition based on the consideration of his words and deeds at different times.
Gandhi had earlier said that India could be partitioned only over his dead body. The Partition occurred but Gandhi remained alive. When sceptics taunted Gandhi about this his former secretary and biographer, Peareylal, recorded that Gandhi would angrily lash out at his critics and say should he kill himself just to satisfy others? Even Gandhi’s most trenchant critics cannot deny his courage. He was not afraid of death. Then why did he not redeem his pledge?
My interpretation: For Gandhi the fight to keep India and Pakistan united was not ended. He was still struggling for his goal. He was following that old adage: Those who fight and run away, live to fight another day!
This view is reinforced by earlier events. When the Congress Working Committee (CWC) was to pass its formal resolution to accept Partition on June 3, 1947 Gandhi observed his day of silence. Why?
My interpretation: Gandhi had realized that he had been outsmarted by the British. They had successfully isolated him from Nehru and Patel. Only young firebrands Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia supported Gandhi’s view in the CWC. To retain the option of opposing the CWC resolution later Gandhi refrained from any personal endorsement of the resolution. He did this by observing a day of silence.
On June 2, one day before the Partition resolution was to be passed by the CWC, Lord Mountbatten visited Gandhi to seek reassurance that Gandhi would not create hurdles. “Mr Gandhi,” Lord Mountbatten asked. “I hope you will not oppose my (Mountbatten Plan to partition India ) plan?” Gandhi on his day of silence wrote on a scrap of paper: “Have I ever opposed you?”
My interpretation: As a lawyer Gandhi chose his words with care. He did not write that he would not oppose Mountbatten. He put the counter question whether he had ever opposed Mountbatten.
After the Partition Gandhi’s actions revealed his resolve to keep trying for total Indo-Pakistan reconciliation. He went on a fast to compel the Indian government to pay Pakistan adequate compensation. This strengthened his credibility with Pakistan . It pleased Mountbatten. But Gandhi’s subsequent actions could not have pleased British authorities.
Gandhi wrote to Jinnah seeking permission to settle down in Pakistan in order to work for Indo-Pakistan unity. Jinnah concurred. He invited Gandhi to Karachi . Gandhi sought permission to settle down in Lahore with 50 Punjabi refugee families then settled in Delhi ’s Purana Quila camp. One member of the Punjabi families that had volunteered to accompany Gandhi in his march to Lahore was historian KK Khullar, then 16 years old. The plan to start the march on February 14, 1948 was finalized. On January 30th Nathuram Godse killed Gandhi.
There are several unanswered questions about Gandhi’s murder. Godse travelled from Bombay to Delhi to kill Gandhi. In Bombay he stayed in a house under strict surveillance of the Intelligence Bureau because its occupant was known to possess illegal firearms. There had been five attempts on Gandhi’s life before Godse killed him. Yet Godse was not apprehended. Was he manipulated as, some theorists claim, was President Kennedy’s assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, decades later? That aspect deserves a separate article. But suffice to say that after Gandhi’s murder Jayaprakash Narain accused the Home Ministry of criminal negligence, hinting at complicity, in the murder of Gandhi.
Did Gandhi have premonition of his death? Writing his last will and testament by which he sought the dissolution of the Congress as a political party on the very day of his assassination was a striking coincidence.,
It may be seen that Gandhi might have erred in his tactics. His realization about Mountbatten’s intentions came too late. Mountbatten arrived in February 1947. By March tension had been created in the Punjab by riots that killed 1000 people. That was seized by the CWC to partition the Punjab assembly between West and East Punjab in March itself. This was even before the Congress had consented in June to Partition the country! It should have alerted Gandhi to what was about to happen.
Gandhi’s judgment may be questioned. His integrity was unimpeachable. He never wavered in his commitment to the agenda of uniting Hindus and Muslims even after Pakistan had been formed. In the end he was defeated. The forces arraigned against him were too powerful. But has his agenda been defeated? This scribe believes that history’s final verdict on that is still not out.
Oct 03, 2009 06:44 PM
100
Seshadri,
>> I have not celebrated the death of any individuals.....
Your glee could hardly be hidden upon the deaths of YSR and Kakare.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 06:39 PM
99
Sandilya,
>> Envy, they say is like evil eye and strikes.
You are mostly a rational man, but it seems some traces of superstitiousness remain!
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 06:34 PM
98
Sandilya,
>> But in general people tend to accept that the basic core got to be right. That core is surely related to lineage. It explains why there are more accomplished people and Nobel Laureates among close blood relatives than compared to general populace.
Many Nobel laureates are not related to any laureates. The few who are prove the environmental theory as much as the genetic one.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 05:32 PM
97
"his commitment to the agenda of uniting Hindus and Muslims even after Pakistan had been formed "
Let us shift the goal posts and examine this postulate :
1.Hindus in India could have never united with the West Pakistani Muslims who had cleanised them from West Pakistan even all the efforts of Gandhi.
2.Hindus in the East Pakistan and now Bangladesh though not treated well but are still able to live there.Bangali Muslims and Hindus paid dearly in 1970-71 being soft targets of Punjabi Muslims.
Even if Gandhi lived longer he could have preached only but could have never made any dent in the feelings of Hindus against Pakistani Muslims and vice versa.
3.About unity among Indian Muslims and Hindus. Was there really any need for Gandhi to try to bring them together ? Could the Muslims in India have stayed on during pre and post 1947 period if Hindus were adamnet to send them to Pakistan ? If we talk of constitutional rights of Muslims- Yes they had and have full rights .But these rights were mercilessly crushed for a year or so from August 1946 to 5 th February 1948(the cut off date to migrate) .
Gandhi could have hardly done anything if the Hindus insited to follow the Pakistani Muslims' path.
Can we deny today that Indian Muslims are much much better than the Bangladeshi and Pakistani Muslims.Rather they are even better than Muslims in many Islamic Countries. Could this have happened without Hindus'co-operation and their affinity with Muslims ??
Indian Muslims are prospering even 62 yrs after Mahatma was killed.It will be a debatable point after some time whether Mahatma and Congress has harmed Muslims with patronisation.I am of the firm view Muslims could have done better but for Congress and Seculars who are interested in Minority Votes only .
Still Hindus are the most misunderstood ,abused and villified race in India itself.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 03, 2009 05:00 PM
96
gayatri/banito/lalit
Agree to disagree again that:
"all the young or old indians who have made it have done so on the basis of western thinking. india has produced religious gurus - nothing in the area of philosophy. if you feel india can match britain, or the west"
why not? If China can we can too ... all we need is will to do it ...
I did publish my email address for you here in these columns before but heard nothing from you ...
Have a nice week-end. Got to go now ... to look for a new car for the wife ... she wants an Audi again ... any suggestions ?
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 03, 2009 04:58 PM
95
gayatri/banito/lalit
Agree to disagree again that:
"all the young or old indians who have made it have done so on the basis of western thinking.
india has produced religious gurus - nothing in the
area of philosophy.
if you feel india can match britain, or the west"
why not? If China we can too ... all we need is will to do it ...
I did publish my email address for you here in these columns before but heard nothing from you ...
Have a nice week-end. Got to go now ... to look for a new car for the wife ... she wants an Audi again ... any suggestions ?
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 03, 2009 04:20 PM
94
vijay aggarwal
i think on the lines of v.s.naipaul-
nirad chaudri was also a great admirer of britain
as well. completely eccentric, but a admirable chap,
in many ways.
india is emulateing the west in most things-even the
bad ones. the west is for change, new thinking.
india is for tradition, status quo.
all the young or old indians who have made it have
done so on the basis os western thinking.
india has produced religious gurus- nothing in the
area of philosophy.
if you feel india can match britain,or the west i have nothing more to say.
you still deserve my compliment of being a good old egg.
can you send me your mail adress.
best gayatri, bajrangbbhai,banito,lalit, ganpat ram,
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 04:08 PM
93
sandy
these are the qualifications of being a liberal in india-as defined by the secularists in this forum
aaa you must love pakistan more then you love india.
bbb you must reject the white imperialist nations.
they have done nothing for india. they ill treat the
poor coloured immigrants who out of pure good will
wish to live in their countries.
ccc you must never never say a word against the prophet,the koran- this is blasphemy.
ddd you must single out for abuse the bjp, sangh, neo nazists who refuse further muslim immigration.
eee you must support all muslim causes- palestine arabs, muslims in kashmir.
fff you must hate modi for the gujerat massacre,advani
for demolishing the magnificent babri masjid, and love and respect justice banerjee for his very fair judgement regarding the godhra incident.
after you qualify you will be embraced by the
mullahs,padres of the secular community.
perish the thought-nothing for people of good taste-
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 04:07 PM
92
Gayatri/Lalit/banito
Yes, I agree to disagree with you that "India would have been like Nepal or Afghanistan" had the British not come to India ... no disrespect but one wonders from your posts what did you learn from your studies ...
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 03, 2009 03:42 PM
91
L:>>"there is a saying in german:" those whom the gods wish to destroy ,they first make them mad".
I did not come across that during my yrs of syay in germany.
there is an equivalent saying in sanskrit: 'vinaaSa-kaale vipareeta-buddhih', individuals or civilizns get wrong ideas when their downfall becomes due.
>>" i hope that their death wish is full filled".
do not worry, a hundred osamas or a thousand musharreffs cannot destroy the eternal civilizn of mother india. evils get maximally devish only when their termination is imminent.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 03, 2009 03:30 PM
90
A:>>"Seshadri celebrating the deaths of YSR and Karkare?"
I have not celebrated the death of any individuals. nothing important, all born must die one day, any way. sentimentalism does not synchronize with spirituality.
I have only been celebrating the timely intervention of lord keSava = naaraayaNa = venkaTeSa to save mother india from serious problems.
if kasab had died and karkare survived, sonia-antulay raj and the crypto-chr patels shivraj, RR, would have framed the whole mumbai event as only a hindutva-driven terror-act, blaming the hindus of india for the death of jews and americans in taj hotel. sonia could have dis-enfrachised all hindus in india, declaring an indira-type emergency, supported by the chinese people's army!. western countries would have agreed.
Lord kesava saved india.
In ysr's case, if he had continued another term as CM, he would have converted the major part of AP to the church, as he probably promised jesus, in pilgrimmage to jerusalem. but then he did not know that jesus Himself had 'returned' into hinduism, as skanda, to be with his uncle naarayan in tirumala. No wonder, then, that the tail hill of the seven-hills of tirupathi itself terminated him. sonia has not agreed for his son to succeed him!.
now, even the self-idolizing film-stars in india's politics will all realize that there is a really powerful God above all them, also. I am only celebrating the SaaSwata-dharma-goptaa protecting sanaatana-dharma-samsthaa in sapta-sindhu-bharata-kanDa. not the death of any individuals, really.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 03, 2009 02:46 PM
89
i have studied international history, european history,
and political philosopy for three years-
this was before i started on engineering studies.
i learnt a lot of history reading winston churchills
war memoirs- 5 big volumes. this covered the rise and fall of the third reich.
the french revolution and napolean were my favourites
period in history.i can still recall some of the characters- legendre the butcher- madam defarge, robespierre, danton and many other colourful characters.
i have studied marx and lenin, and quite a bit about
the evolution of democracy and the industrial revolution.
ofcource i am not so well read as some of the posters,
and islamic scholars, who have a king sized inferiority
complex-
i believe that all matters are uo for debate in liberal
societies.
aaa religions and idealogy
bbb race and nations
ccc population, climate and environment
i just read a article written by irfan hussain in dawn-
" whereas we tend to get emotional about muslim causes
in far off countries, we tend to forget problems of
ignorance, hunger,disease in pakistan"
pakistani,s are disdainful about the 1.5 billion usd
aid they will get for 5 years. it is peanuts some of
them say.
well no one is forceing them to take this aid. it
defys reason that people can think like this.
it is a failure of reason and commonsense-
why are some posters so full of hate against western
countries, who have helped india for so many years.
why are they so fond of pakistan when we have been attacked so many times by them-
there is a saying in german
" those whom the gods wish to destroy ,they first make them mad" i hope that their death wish is full filled.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 02:00 PM
88
sexchanged-gayathri--"you are one of the unread
mindless zombies who does not know the difference
between chalk and cheese, "
True but i can spot a moron a mile away. There is
only that much knowledge you can gather from
Frederick Forsythes voluminous 'history of the World' !
By your own admission a cheap, dime store, trashy
novelist is your intellectual frame of reference.
Your posts should be discarded immediately on arrival.
"starting the debate i made a remark about negroes,
and said it is possible that in view of their
performance they could be less intellectually endowed
then the whites and asians."
You are a racist with incredibly low self-esteem. Get some help.
"i can understand why people buy skin whiteners-
now this is meant as a joke. i dont want the usual
suspects to get a fit, and start attacking me."
This is pathetic !
"you are a cowardly scum bag who is scared of the real
bigots like mullah omar, but play safe by attacking
western liberals like me.under a pseudo name. "
This is utter non-sense. Despite your courageous attempts at changing your gender you are no liberal !! You are not a Westerner either. You are about as far from being a liberal as Himmler was ! You are a good slave though who defends the rights of his master. Admirable.
"Gayatri Devi
Hats off to you.
As far as I know, you are the only woman regularly posting on this website."
As far as i know the sex-change operation was successful. All thats left now is
a lobotomy.
siddharth--"There is hardly a single spiritual advice in the whorish, dog-eared Koran. "
Unlike the virtous wisdom sprouting from the lips of
slutty nypmhs running circles around Ram ... or is it
Krishna ... same shit.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 01:42 PM
87
>> why has there been so little comment on Seshadri celebrating the deaths of YSR and Karkare?
Anwaar
You mean from me?
My beliefs border on agnostism and I practice very little religion but I do have some beliefs like one should be extremely cautious when the going is too good.
At the time of his death YSR was at the height of his political and economic power and looked God like to many. But he earned lots of envy also. Envy, they say is like evil eye and strikes. And as if to lend credence to that belief he met an untimely death. I learnt a lesson in that when going is good keep a close tab on what is going on around.
Somewhat shocked, I rather remained oblivious to any correspondence on his death. It was quite tragic and no comments on a departed soul.
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 01:25 PM
86
>> if black and white children grow up in equally enriched environments, the I.Q. differences narrow until they disappear.
Anwaar
Even today no one is really sure about the play of intelligence. But surely both nature and nurture play a role. But in general people tend to accept that the basic core got to be right. That core is surely related to lineage. It explains why there are more accomplished people and Nobel Laureates among close blood relatives than compared to general populace.
If the core is right even an under educated will do well than a highly educated. Don't we have some dumb Phds and extraordinary gifted entrepreneurs with little education? So it is nature which is supreme.
Nurturing is simply like a goldsmith shaping a jewel. If both Gold and the gold smith are of right quality a beautiful piece emerges.
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 12:19 PM
85
After celebrating and singing Vaishnava Janato..on Gandhi Jayanti day and changing the name of NREGA the Quota Congress whores are very happy. Not one quota whore has really bothered about the massive floods in Andhra and Karnataka. When a CM died the quota beggars were rushing planes and helicopters and had even asked NASA for help. But lakhs are marooned and crying for basic necessities and not one Quota politician seems to relent. I am sure these Congress monstrous goondas will ask for increase in quotas for the flood affected soon after the tragedy. The Congress goondas will be banking upon the quota titillation to fool the people. But a day is soon to come when these ruling quota goondas will be stamped to death by the very people they fooled.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 11:59 AM
84
Sandilya,
While some difference in opinion exists, the majority opinion holds that I.Q. differences are not genetic but environmental, which means that if black and white children grow up in equally enriched environments, the I.Q. differences narrow until they disappear.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 11:50 AM
83
>> Arun Shourie records in his book that the muslims had a serious dilemma on whether or not to pray for Gandhi after his death since as a non muslim he was not entitled to it.
Shourie can be expected to make hay from such tidbits, but why has there been so little comment on Seshadri celebrating the deaths of YSR and Karkare?
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 11:49 AM
82
and the conclusion is that if all factors are controlled and accounted for, no racial differences in intellectual capability can be substantiated.
Anwaar
This is quite true in respect of athletics,sports and music.
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 11:32 AM
81
But saying that Muslims liked or praised Gandhi is hogwash.
vijay
You are right. Arun Shourie records in his book that the muslims had a serious dilemma on whether or not to pray for Gandhi after his death since as a non muslim he was not entitled to it. Finally the move to pray in Masjids was dropped.
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 11:29 AM
80
Gayatri/Lalit,
>> it is possible that in view of their performance they could be less intellectually endowed then the whites and asians.
The subject has been very contentious among psychologists and other social scietists for the past 60 years, has been researched copiously by several groups, and the conclusion is that if all factors are controlled and accounted for, no racial differences in intellectual capability can be substantiated. Many racists however still continue to maintain their old prejudices.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 11:18 AM
79
Ghai,
>> Godse's accusations of Gandhi's Muslims' appeasement policies.
What Gandhi thought was fairness, Godse considered appeasement.
>> Majority of the North Indians and Bangalies specially refugees believe that Godse's was right.
Majority of posters in this forum maybe, but in the real world things are different.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 10:12 AM
78
>> it is possible that in view of their performance they could be less intellectually endowed then the whites and asians.
We think alike (post @ 3:04:49 PM)
Lalit
Yeah, I agree. I have views similar to you. Very often I see your replies as something I wanted to reply myself. Your posts are unpretentious and pepped with sense of humour.
Your reply posted @ 2:19:22 PM (IST) is more or less similar in content to that I had posted earlier when I questioned the double standards of media which had gone overboard to celebrate Castro’s dictatorship of> 50 years as though it were a genuinely mandated legitimate rule.
Freedom of speech has allowed us to say what we want to say but unfortunately often we are carried away too much by political correctness. Of course you could say the above statement unafraid of. I appreciate that. Time people talked sense even if it is politically incorrect and separate chalk from cheese rather than nod the head to say both are same. That is the beginning of decadence.
How many can say what you have said though in private they would surely accept it as a fact as the current state of African countries reflect . Many of these countries got independence long ago and so long ago that they have had enough time to build their countries as they envisioned before demanding freedom.
After WWII total destruction, Europe and Japan were rebuilt in fifteen years flat. But sad reality is that except South Africa none of the African nations are doing well. I want to hear what our anti imperialist intellectuals have to say on Mugabe’s misrule. Are the Zimbabwians happier now than then?
Note that later a country got independence the better it is!!!
Hong Kong is the last to become free in the series and it is at the far end of the spectrum of better states than the one on the other end of the spectrum like Afghanistan which remained elusive to imperial rule. We stand in between; where as Malaysia and Singapore which got freedom later than us are better off in many respects.
At the time of our independence Madras city was said to be far better than Singapore. Now any comparison? Inference? It takes time for modern but alien systems and methods to take roots, and we got freedom before the latter got consolidated. Our courts and health are examples of poor copying of western methods. They are caricature of Western systems. Justice Dinakaran is an example of all that has gone wrong.
You might have heard of John Locke of eighteenth century whose ideas influenced western liberal thinking. He is the one who said man is born with certain natural rights- such as the right to liberty- that existed in a state of nature. I do not know if Tilak borrowed this when he said “Freedom is my birth right,.”
This John Locke belived that Africans were inferior to Europeans. Another contemporary of him David Hume also suspected negroes to be inferior to whites. His Quote: “There scarcely ever was a civilised nation of that complexion nor even any individual eminent in action or speculation”. If anyone said this now he would be called insane. But Hume was a respected philosopher and intellect.
I do not know how many care to recognize that the cruel apartheid was practiced in Africa but not in India. Thanks to the earlier achievements of Indians in literature, architecture and astronomy and maths we were seen merely as orientals with different approach than unaccomplished nation of hermits.
I have noted the rich acknowledgement of our intellectual abilities by the British as published by Royal commission on Public Services in India. The commission argues for parity of pay for Indian officers with the Europeans on this basis! And that was in 1880s before Congress was born!
So the Britts practiced different strokes for different folks!!
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 09:28 AM
77
Many Indians have not yet realized the horrendous implications of a cult called Islam thanks to the Congress quota whores’ sustained propaganda that Islam means “peace.” Gandhi by hobnobbing with this evil created confusion in the minds of average Indians. The evil was made to look smaller in size and unthreatening. So effective has been the Congress propaganda over the years that even educated Indians are surprised when told about the detailed instructions in the monstrous Koran against Kafirs and especially the Hindus.
Early man at the dawn of civilization had deduced that there has to be one God as there is one water, one air or one fire. Likewise there is one blood. A Muslim does not have green (Allah’s colour) blood or Chinese with yellow blood or American with blue blood. Despite his place of origin or his upbringing a human being is the same everywhere. A heart surgeon who can operate a Muslim can operate a Christian or an aborigine with the same tools, techniques and knowledge. But how come the Prophet attacks Hindus with so much hatred and venom that he creates through the bogus Allah a special, brutal Hell for Hindus? He calls Hindus as not simply kafirs, but kafirs of the worst kind, as they are idol worshipers (or mushriks). As a punishment for this fault as well as for the most serious fault of creating partners to Allah by way of worshiping other gods, Hindus, he says, would be thrown into Havia, the most tormenting Hell, where the flames of hell-fire would reach one’s scalp.
Mohammad’s Hell is 70 times more intense than the ordinary fire. Allah has created seven categories of Hell for different kinds of kafirs and the intensity of fire and height of the flames will be different in these Hells. In some Hell, fire will reach the ankles, somewhere it will reach the knees, somewhere to the waist and somewhere to the collar-bone (Sahih Muslim: 6815, 6816). He targets Hindus with such extraordinary venom that he terms them as worst kind of kafirs or mushriks. While the Jews and Christians, for their merit of not being idolatrous, would be thrown into less tormenting Hells.
Allah schedule in Hell is busy. In this eternal Hell-fire, this monstrous Allah would roast the kafirs again and again and again, and every time He will replace their skins with new ones, so that they could suffer this inhuman torture without any pause” (Koran- 4:56). There will be no death for the inmates of the Paradise and no death for the inmates of the Hell (SM: 6827, 6829), AND THIS ANNOUNCEMENT WILL INCREASE THE DELIGHT OF THE DWELLERS OF THE PARADISE, while it would increase the grief of the inmates of the Hell (SM: 6830). Furthermore, the kafirs in Hell would have very strange appearances. For example, the molar teeth or the canine teeth of an unbeliever in Hell would be like Uhud (a hill in the neighbourhood of Mecca) and the thickness of his skin would be three night’s journey (SM: 6831) and the distance between his two shoulders would also be three night’s journey for a swift rider (SM: 6832). Muhammad has seen Amr bin Luhayy bin Qama, brother of Bani Ka’b, dragging his intestines in Hell fire (SM:6838), for the sin of introducing idolatry in Arabia.
While the unbelievers will perish in Hell, the believers, though fallen and evil doers, will joyfully enter Allah’s Paradise where rivers of pure water, milk, pure honey and divine wine are flowing and the Koran says: “Allah will do away with their foulest deeds” (39:35).
It is too laborious to describe in detail Allah’s paradise as mentioned in Koran. Allah himself says, “The righteous shall surely dwell in bliss. Reclining upon soft couches they will gaze around them; and in their faces you shall mark the glow of joy. To dark-eyes houris, We shall wed them. Fruits we shall give them, and such meats as they desire. They will pass from hand to hand a cup inspiring no idle talk, and there shall wait on them YOUNG BOYS of their own as Fair as virgin pearls” (52:17-24). Allah’s brothel has extra enjoyment other than houris to satisfy the unsatiated lust of its mad followers with young boys to sodomize. It is not clear why mullahs are screaming against Delhi HC judgment decriminalizing gays? If Allah approves homosexuality are not the mullahs defaming Islam by opposing the judgment?
The chief attractions of Allah’s Paradise are houris. With so much houris and young boys to be had Allah has also appointed an announcer to avoid any discomfort to the reclining Islamic murderers. “There would be an announcer in Paradise who would make this announcement: Verily, there is in store for you (everlasting) health and that you should never fall ill and that you live (for ever) and do not die at all. And that you would remain young and never grow old. …This is Paradise. You have been made to inherit it for what you used to do” (Sahih Muslim: 6803).
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 08:48 AM
76
"So you want Godse to be elevated to sainthood ?"
Faruki
He was hanged as per Law for his act of killing Gandhi .But History has yet to give its judgement on Gandhi and History has also to give its verdict on Godse's accusations of Gandhi's Muslims' appeasement policies and forcing the Constitunational Govt of India to heed to his whims .
It may be a question of morality for some to give Rs 55 Crores to Pakistan when Kabayali Hordes were looting ,raping ,burning Kashmir .India was at War with Pakistan and Gandhi forced Nehru to finance Pakistani War against India.
From National point of view it is plain treason GADDARI on part of Gandhi and Nehru .
"All assassins have justifications based on their hate dogmas, and some of them do build up a small following of like minded bigots."
Small following ?? Majority of the North Indians and Bangalies specially refugees believe that Godse's was right.Their tribe is increasing .Thanks to Islamic Terrorism .
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 03, 2009 08:17 AM
75
Gandhi was a worldly wise leader. Wasn’t he aware that Prophet Mohammad engineered his Islam to rest on a tripod of treachery, butchery and debauchery? Or should we assume naively that Gandhi did not read history of Muslim treachery and butchery? The prophet of doom had told his followers to spread Islam using the tripod and the best way was to butcher kafirs and satisfy blood thirsty Allah.
Many of us are not aware that we owe our Hindu existence to the sacrifices made by the Sikh gurus and the Sikhs. Had not Sikhs (and Marathas) fought the evil Islam many of us today would have been reading namaaz in a asthma-filled cavernous mosque. India would have been booming with 80 per cent Muslims.
Early in 1675, a group of Kashmiri brahmins visited Anandpur to seek Guru Tegh Bahadur's(father of last guru Guru Gobind Singh) advice. Aurangzeb had ordered the forced conversion of all Hindus and thought that if the respected Kashmiri brahmins accepted Islam, others in the country would be easily converted. They had been given six months to decide or suffer the consequences. Time was running out! Tegh Bahadur advised the brahmins to return to their village and tell the authorities that they would accept Islam if “Guru Tegh Bahadur could first be persuaded to do so.” The guru was called to Delhi and put to death by the rapacious Islamic monster Aurangzeb who has been glorified in NCERT textbooks by Indira Gandhi’s goons. Shortly afterwards Tegh Bahadur’s son Gobind Rai became the 10th and last guru. There was no respite from Islamic monsters. The Moghals captured Guru Gobind's mother and his youngest two sons, aged 9 and 7, and bricked them alive. After the two kids died of suffocation the Islamic monsters beheaded the children and delivered their heads to their grandmother who died of shock at the sight.
I wonder when Islamic monsters do namaaz rocking back and forth what exactly they pray for. There is actually nothing in Koran to pray for except Prophet’s instigation to kill the kafirs and be rewarded with a chance of going to Allah’s brothel where the killers will be copulating with billions of heavenly damsels or houris round the clock. But what would be the nature of ejaculation of such copulations? When a companion of the Prophet asked him to enlighten him on this matter the Prophet said that, ejaculation of semen in Allah’s brothel would be entirely different from an ejaculation in this world:
• Firstly, the semen on an inmate of Allah’s brothel would be a puff of fragrant air and an ejaculation of this peculiar semen would give the inmates a million times more pleasure than and worldly ejaculation.
• Secondly, the worldly ejaculation diminishes the vigour and energy of the man. But it would be entirely opposite in Allah’s brothel. An ejaculation in Allah’s brothel would increase the vigour of the inmate by million times.
There is hardly a single spiritual advice in the whorish, dog-eared Koran. Islam is perversely called a religion giving a new twist to the word "religion." Koran has brought nothing but death, destruction and viral disease to mankind. Yet this strange religion’s blood thirst has not yet been satiated despite ocean of blood having flowed on this unfortunate earth. I am sure Gandhi knew Islam's unquenched thirst for blood and gore as one would know the properties of fire. The barbarism has been continuous down the ages and yet Gandhi ignored it trying to mix oil and water by saying "Ishwar Allah tero naam!". If stupidty should get Oscar this would be it. Today Congress quota whores too have embraced Islam some on the sly some openly. Congress whores manipulate depraved Islamic monsters to win every elections be it assembly of the Lok Sabha. I hope Islam soon goes the way the communist went in Mother Russia. But the scars inflicted by the gory and utterly evil Casanova Prophet Mohammad on this earth will remain for ages to come.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 07:18 AM
74
>> Gandhi appealed to bring sanity to the situation. At some level, as a Hindu, he might have seen himself as a representative of hindus, to reach out to the Muslims.
Whatever he may have perceived himself, and whatever might be the motivation for his appeal, if he made one sided demands, as pointed out by Ganesan via Godse's statement, he was wrong.
Al Bundy
San Francisco, United States
Oct 03, 2009 06:21 AM
73
KUMAR(to Gayatri Devi),
There is a wrong thinking that the moment one digs at the Sangha Parivar he becomes an upright secular.Thats bullshit.
Indians have always condemned terrorism of any hue starting with the Muslims terrorism,christian missionaries terrorism,The Naxalism,The Maoism,ULFA,LTTE etc. But pseudo secular's would keep their ugly and stinking mouth off when we hear the atrocities and violence perpetrated by those fringes and lumpen elements said earlier while they will stand on their toes if they get anything to dig at the Sangha Parivar.There is no discrimination however by majority of Indians when extremism is concerned.How many of the people like you are consistent and have condemned what is happening and what has so far happened in Kashmir.You better learn to practice what you preach and stop searching for the worms in some one else's wounds.
Gandhi is no doubt a unique person through his time tested Gandhigiri,swarajya and sathyagraha.Every great person has blundered once in a while.So is one Gandhi and so are several other Gandhis after him who paid heavily.Gandhi used to say that the partition of the country will only take place over his dead body but he ultimately succumbed to false secular notions and the web sewn by the likes of Nehru and his legacy that led him to blunder in finally agreeing for the partition against wishes of the large section of the Indians.The man who kept such a close and down to earth contact and relationships with the people was hiding the story of agreeing to partition in the background which led to his assassination.But saying that Muslims liked or praised Gandhi is hogwash.The Muslims are known to have conspired with the British for the creation of Pakistan and back stabbing the Indian freedom movement.You better appreciate this fact.
vijay
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 05:34 AM
72
Gayatri/Lalit,
>> i decided that i would not go down on my knees and pray to god for help.
Your right not to pray is as sacred to me as someone else's right to pray.
>> can you honestly believe that i would suck up to anyone at all.
Getting along is not the same thing as sucking up. Insulting Bengalis or UP-ites or Sikhs or Muslims shows neither courage nor character.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 05:30 AM
71
Pretty interesting analysis. Well, there'e been number of critical analysis of Gandhi, from 'sublime failure' to 'miserable failure', mostly in political sense, and in some sense even Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed failed. Partition of India was a failure in the decades long political career of Gandhi. Columnists like Rajinder Puri may make stupid statements that Gandhi's words did not match with his action, since he didn't kill himself after the partition after having declared that the proposed partition of India can only take place over his dead body. But, the words of Einstein about Gandhi really sums up his character,"Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this, ever in flesh and blood, walked upon this earth”, and that is what we need to cherish. It's not for nothing great thinkers and world leaders have taken inspiration and praised Gandhi for his teachings and ideals of nonviolence, which had led Martin Luther King Jr. on his 1959 pilgrimage to India, transformed American society through civil rights movement.
Shyamal Barua
kolkata, India
Oct 03, 2009 04:25 AM
70
kumar
i am no friend of sanghis- they are much too backward
for my tastes.
however they are not like the ss or the gestapo.
if they were then they would have made life miserable for minorities- they are more like sheep in sheeps clothings.
maybe they would be respected more if they wore boots,
black uniforms with the swastik emblem.
the constant demoniseing of the sangh borders on insanity. meanwhile you go around ignoreing the real enemies, who have bombed indian cities,
last time it was in mumbai- get your brain cells checked for memory and just a bit of commonsense.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 04:15 AM
69
faruki
for some time now i have had huge problems-banks,
lawyers, and so forth.
however i decided that i would not go down on my knees
and pray to god for help. if i met god, i would sock him on the chin.
can you honestly believe that i would suck up to anyone
at all. hell never. i leave it to creeps ,who are fanatics, pray several times a day,light candles
or give donations to temples.
yes i think poorly of bongos. they are a maddening
crowd, and with not one guy in bengal with any sense.
all right i think that sikhs should enter the 21 century, and not force their children to wear turbans,
knives etc and be mobbed by their school mates.
i think muslim men should stop wearing skull caps,
and the burqas should be burnt in a bonfire on
guy fawkes day.
does all of this make me a bigot,or a fanatic.
furthermore it is the right of europeans to decide
whom they want to accept, and whom to reject.
it is a fact that pakistani,s are unwelcome and a
burden on britain. they are a constant problem,.
what you are demanding is a welcome for muslims to
enter and be allowed to settle down.
do you make such demands from the arabs. hell no.
strange is it not,that you demand so much from people
of another race,another culture and religion, and
so little from fellow muslims. you are the fanatic,
who can not see this as being thoroughly unreasoneable.
it makes me sick to read your bias against white people, your constant moaning and whineing and claims that they have a devine ordained duty to admit all kinds of weirdos.
hell mr jinnah would agree with me. kamal attaturk would be on my side.
only the real mullahs , missionary choir boys would call me a fanatic.
the prisiness, hypocracy , prejudice, and false saintliness of some posters make me puke.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 03:41 AM
68
Gayatri Devi,
>> you and kumar share a passion of demoniseing the sanghi,s
Why should there be a discrimination while condemning violent religious extremists? Your passionate support for such elements is for you to worry about. Be consistent in condemning of violent extremists and be consistent in assertion of rights/justice of people and much of your troubles in this forum will disappear.
>> i can understand why most muslims praise gandhi
Most people of all religions, nationalities praise Gandhi. That’s because most people can comprehend and appreciate the greatness in ideas like reaching out to people, desiring justice even for people of other community/race etc. If most Muslims do praise Gandhi, I appreciate that.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 03:16 AM
67
Gayatri/Lalit,
>> on islam i agree with the speeches i have heard ...
Religion was not being discussed. Whenever you and other hate-pracharaks like Seshadri lose an argument, you attack religion or the "mullahs". I called you a neo-Nazi nutcase because you have applauded extreme right wing European politicians who are against "colored" immigration, expressed your hatred of Indians in genreral and of "Bongos", UP-ites and Sikhs in particular, and have even boasted that you are white-skinned! In any case it is idiotic to bring in religion when discussing political creeds such as the RSS, the Congress, the Muslim League, the neo-Nazis or the neocons.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 03:04 AM
66
Gayatri Devi
Hats off to you.
As far as I know, you are the only woman regularly posting on this website.
Your postings are full of blunt commonsense. They show more sense than that of nearly all the men here !
Some of your language is a bit over the top for a lady.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 03, 2009 03:01 AM
65
ANWAAR berates assassins, yet on this very website he has repeatedly adulated as "freedom fighters" the Afghan mojahedin - some of the worst throat-slitters the world has ever seen, mercilessly cruel to Hindus, Sikhs and ther own women.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 03, 2009 02:48 AM
64
VARUN
I find this whining about Partition by Hindus utterly ridiculous.
It was of course accompanied by great and tragic human losses.
But why don't these miracles of brainlessness ask what was the alternative?
An India with 25 per cent Muslim population was by 1946 in fearsome danger of being reduced to total shambles by Musim-Hindu riots and massacres. Do they suppose an India united with the Pakis and the Bangladeshis, about 35 per cent Muslim and increasingly so all the time - with as prospective Muslim majority in a cfew decades - would be peaceful?
How stupid do you have to be to believe that?
Don't we KNOW what Muslims are like, by now? How stubborn, how ferociously communal? How contemptuous of a free, critical culture?
In 1946, the Interim government to prepare Independence headed by Nehru was utterly stalled by pig-headed Muslim determination to obstruct each and every measure.
Even Nehru, inclined to make endless excuses for Muslims, was completely exhausted and disillusioned. As he said, even Partition was better than this descent into governmental paralysis and social mass killing.
He saw that the choice was either a smaller India with a strong government, or the bigger India without any semblance of unity and with the Muslims able to veto everything they chose. Either be the hostages of Muslim blackmailers and mass murderers, or accept Pakistan. That was Nehru's choice.
Nehru chose Pakistan.
How can we blame him now?
Gandhi led Hindus to the edge of doom with his naive policies toward Muslims.
As good fortune would have it, Nehru pulled us back at the last moment.
Hats off to him !!!!
Put this antiquated donkey Puri out to grass.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 03, 2009 02:33 AM
63
Gayatri Devi,
>> on islam i agree with the speeches i have heard along with many others from exmuslims.
You are welcome to join them in criticism of Islam (or any religion that you chose to criticize).
>> there is absolutely no hate for you or muslims ...
And you should assert the rights/justice of all innocent citizens and human beings. That’s when you can take the first step to call yourself a liberal.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 01:01 AM
62
faruki
we agree on climate change, population growth,and
perhaps on choice of wines and music.
we disagree when you call me a fascist nut,and when i point out what i believe is right.
on islam i agree with the speeches i have heard along
with many others from exmuslims. these are by very respected people
you claim that i have misunderstood them.
my critique against islam is not based on hate.
it is simply saying what is seen,read or heard on a
daily basis in the european media.
i wish we could attend a q and a session with say
ayan hirsi ali- dr wafa sultan would be too much.
there is absolutely no hate for you or muslims. i think
muslims are a troubled community. you should reform
or modernise them.
that is a huge task for any one- but maybe you can
do it with the blessing of allah.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 12:45 AM
61
Gayatri/Lalit,
Your hate mail is too offensive to reply. You have reached the depth that you do every few months.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 12:38 AM
60
Varun,
>>>> "So you want Godse to be elevated to sainthood?"
>> Why don't you instead elevate your hero Jinnah to sainthood?
We were talking of assassins. But if you want to worship Godse, you of course are free to do so.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 12:33 AM
59
Varun Shekhar,
>> Gandhi went out of his way to help Moslems, even to the extent of causing discomfort to Hindu refugees. Appeasement and one-sided assistance ...
The conflict that was going on is a communal one, with both sides not caring about finer aspects like right/justice of innocent citizens etc. It is just about dominance, mistrust, plain communal hatred etc. Gandhi appealed to bring sanity to the situation. At some level, as a Hindu, he might have seen himself as a representative of hindus, to reach out to the Muslims. Reaching out is possibly the only sensible thing to do for anyone. Things like aggressive rhetoric etc only further worsens the behavior of both hindus and Muslims. It needs some greatness to think of reaching out. Just like there is a section that felt that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was too lenient and compromising, there are those like Godse to whom it is really beyond the spiritual/moral/philosophical comprehension to even understand what it is all about. Communalism, violence, aggression, bloodshed etc is the only philosophy they ever understand. It is a pity.
>> As to your Mullah Omar remark
Well, that’s an exaggerated remark, but the point is that there are enough of things almost at any part of the world where there is a need to fight for rights/justice etc, and one doesnt have to go Pakistan/Afganistan etc in search of issues. That silly to suggest (But Gayatri thinks he is making a great point)
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 12:33 AM
58
"Gandhi's portrait did adorn Obama's Senate office."
My question was did he write anything in his book. Any ways thanks for the info.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 03, 2009 12:16 AM
57
vijay aggarwal
i mentioned my sister in england who prefers to
cook ,shop herself rather then live in new delhi,
with the usual upper class life style.
same goes for me. i prefer to cook, wash up then live
in my sisters absoltely beautiful home with all manners
of comfort.
it is not to brag- just that the luxurios life style
is not so great, when i see poor people struggleing
the whole day. its the puritan in me.
i hate eating in expensive 5 stars, knowing that the
price of my meal is not much smaller then the pay of
the domestic staff.
we disagree on many points- i am not perturbed and
neither should you be.
if the britts had not come to india, we would hve been like nepal, afghanistan or pakistan.
india respected its british heritage and built on
this foundation.
pakistan decided to build an islamic fortress instead.
the differences can be seen.
i dont expect to convince you.
let us agree to disagree.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 12:05 AM
56
Gayatri Devi,
>> your main objective is to attack hindus.
Why don’t you quote a line from me proving your contention. You don’t even try to make a sensible argument or even try to substantiate etc. That’s the reason you never quote anyone – you just go about shooting aimlessly.
>> cowardly scum bag ..not surpriseing.a pail needs shit.
You can’t substantiate a single thing that you throw at others. You just want to pick up whatever words come to your mind and throw it on others, hoping that that it will drive away people. You are very mistaken. That you are so troubled for nothing tells a story of its own. It proves that one does not have to go to pakistan or afganistan etc. There's enough of good, bad, ugly every part of the world.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:54 PM
55
faruki
regarding nazism, it is exceeded any day in viciousness
and extremism by islam.
we see this in the speeches by muslim clerics, in the
education given in marassahs, in the words in the
koran, the harsh laws of blasphemy and apostasy.
it is seen in the governance of muslim countries,
and how they behave in the international community.
i will not go into details, because they are known to
all who wish to know them.
i have friends in norway, denmark, sweden ,england
and i correspond with some muslim journalists. they
eccho my views. i have written about their views
several times.
you pretend that i dont understand speeches by exmuslims in usa, england.these are easily understandable, and proof of this is that they are
hated by some members of the muslim community, some
of whom are willing to kill them.
false pretence, denials, out right lies are the weapons of cowards and losers.
i have said that liberals should support liberals
liveing in muslim countries. i certainly do.india should invite them for visits, and support them in every possible way.
however this does not mean that i will refuse to see the reality of islam,or that of any other religion.
you have chosen to defend islam and muslims regardless
of what is seen on the ground.by doing so you have let down the liberals in pakistan and amongst muslims in
india.i support all of these people who fight for
their rights .
this means little to you. you and kumar share a passion
of demoniseing the sanghi,s, none of whom have i ever
met. none can be seen or heard in new delhi, ot there
abouts. you have a grouse against bjp, even when they are relatively honest and provide good government.
for both of you hate and grouses against your enemies are far more important then the reform of your own
communities.
your attacks are solely directed against sanghis,
when the real devils who plague muslims, are bigoted
muslims themselves. there is general agreement about this in all forums.
i can understand why most muslims praise gandhi.
he did what they wanted, in the futile hope that
they would listen to him. it did not work.
i think its fair to say that those who have an obsessional hate against parivar , and want to work selectively for their own communities will be paid back in kind.
my motto is-
fairness all ways.
appeasement- never-
that is the mindset of europeans now. after july 2005
train bombings,tony blair announced- the rules of the
game have changed. pakistani,s know this.
dont play smart misuseing words like fascists or nazi,s
for people like me. if you are looking for such people,you will find many much closer in your own
community.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:42 PM
54
"So you want Godse to be elevated to sainthood?"
Why don't you instead elevate your hero Jinnah to sainthood? After all, you could argue, and many people do, that he delivered the heroic and hard-done-by Moslems from the evil clutches of the colonial, communal, polytheistic Hindu majority. He had to get 500,000 people killed in the process, but what matter?
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 02, 2009 11:35 PM
53
Ganesan,
>> His great contribution to India would be on the issue of untouchability.
First time you have something good to say about Gandhi. Thank you.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 11:32 PM
52
Ganesan,
>> Or it is just another one of those things which people do each year-a ritual?
Gandhi's portrait did adorn Obama's Senate office. Since both Gandhi and Obama are your big heros (wink wink!), I can understand your wanting to know.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 11:19 PM
51
Ghai,
>> Gandhi has been painted a saint and Godse a devil.
So you want Godse to be elevated to sainthood? All assassins have justifications based on their hate dogmas, and some of them do build up a small following of like minded bigots.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 11:08 PM
50
Let's also remember that Nathuram Godse, who committed a crime and had to be punished, was once an ardent Congress supporter, in fact less than a decade before his infamous action. He and many like him must have been disgusted at how the Congress made concession after concession to the Moslem League goons, and that too without getting any assurances from them of equitable behaviour.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 02, 2009 11:07 PM
49
""Social Conservatives and other such distasteful vermin are typically considered right wing."
Saints like Stalin and Mao are considered left wing. I guess it is better to be a vermin than to be a Stalinist.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 10:58 PM
48
"Gandhi could see humans as humans and not merely by religious identity, which you cannot stand nor comprehend. That is your problem. "
If Gandhi was able to see that, he would have not seen muslims who should be constantly appeased for unity. He would have acted neutral in hindu-muslim disputes. Instead, he always found a justification for muslim violence but scolded hindus for their violence.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 10:49 PM
47
"Social Conservatives and other such distasteful vermin are typically considered right wing."
Tsk tsk, such fanatical intolerance for legitimate thinking. There are left-liberals who can see that there is a much bigger danger from Islamic terrorism and Islamist ideology, than from mercurial Hindu aggressiveness in the shape of the VHP, or Christian bible thumpers, bad as they are. For one, the Islamic threat is global, relentless, gratuitously violent and totalitarian. The same can hardly be said of the VHP's programme. Incidentally, Christopher Hitchens is one intellectual on the Left, who correctly sees the big danger from Islamism, and the necessity of combating/countering it, without in any way drawing an equivalence to any 'right wing' tendencies in Hinduism, Judaism or Animism. He's not the only one.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 02, 2009 10:37 PM
46
"Gandhi could see humans as humans and not merely by religious identity, which you cannot stand nor comprehend. That is your problem."
But that's just the problem. Gandhi went out of his way to help Moslems, even to the extent of causing discomfort to Hindu refugees. Appeasement and one-sided assistance is not sufficient for 'seeing people as human beings'. As to your Mullah Omar remark, you don't realise who or what Mullah Omar is. Do you think you can have the kind of discussions with a character like that, that you can with Indians on this message board. You could have it with the VHP and RSS, without a doubt. Not with the Taliban or Al-Qaeda or the Lashkar.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 02, 2009 10:36 PM
45
Gayatri/Lalit (to Kumar),
>> scared of the real bigots like mullah omar...
Do you want Kumar to go to Afghanistan and fight Mullah Omar? How stupid can you be?
>> attacking western liberals like me.
Your calling yourself a Western liberal is a joke. You are the exact opposite of a Western liberal or an Indian liberal. You are a right wing, sanghi, racist, communalist, neo-Nazi nut!
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 10:30 PM
44
Godse's final speech in the court:
http://ngodse.tripod.com/defense.htm
prometheus
kolkata, India
Oct 02, 2009 10:22 PM
43
Gayatri aka banito aka lalit
Thanks for the compliment ... I am glad I am not an old rotten egg.
However, I must say it is rather unfortunate that you have not fully comprehended the gist of my post. I don't dream of "old india" and I am not blaming the British people. But, yes, I am justified in exposing their colonial, geo-strategic and economic policies that caused the exploitation and division of India. Even today, their foreign policies in collusion with USA have a lot to answer for the ethnic and political problems that world faces today ... in Palestine, South Asia, Africa, Middle East etc.
Besides, the argument that Britain modernised India is a cantakerous one. The spread of modern science and technology is not restricted or facilitated by borders or rulers for it would have come to India any way with or without the British like, the tremendous advances India has made today after the British left, even surpassed them, in IT, Nuclear Energy, Satellite comms/navigation, Ship building and Rocketry etc. Yes, they brought Railways and Telegraph, built roads and bridges, established big ports and cities to consolidate and secure their empire basically, not to help the agrarian rural economy of India. The Indian village system was robbed of its inherent traditional wealth by an unscrupulous tax regime which made the farmers landless and forced them to migrate to cities - a trend that has still not been reversed ...
I am sorry but it is the British policies preceding the independence largely that caused the mistrust between the Hindus and Muslims, for if they really wanted they could have easily prevented the bloodshed and eased a peaceful transfer of power. After all they controlled the police and the military but did nothing to prevent communal riots in Bengal and Punjab. For the fact is that they let it happen ... why did they not put Jinnah and Muslim League leaders in jail when they threatened the "Direct Action" to get Pakistan ?
Your point about English is a bit vacuous and dull too. For English was "given" to "little brown Indians" only to "civilise" and "educate" them to serve the Raj as clerks and despise their own history and culture. No, we must take the full credit ourselves for educating us with the means available under the British rule.
Then, its our own excellence and scholarship that surfaced and we produced brilliant scholars in all fields, law, science, arts and medicine etc. that enabled us to set up our own institutions of higher studies, IITs and IIMs that are now the envy of the world.
How can be this be relegated to just the British rule and English language only ... of course it was and is most easily accessible medium of modern education available to us and we have chosen it and mastered it ...
I don't mean to upset you, but there is hardly any need here to mention your opulent family in UK/USA with 2/3 cars, or that Lakshmi Mittal is your personal friend in order to make your point ...
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 02, 2009 10:20 PM
42
kumar
so like faruki you are fighting bigots like mullah omar in this forum.
this says everything about you.
you are a cowardly scum bag who is scared of the real
bigots like mullah omar, but play safe by attacking western liberals like me.under a pseudo name.
i dislike people like you with moral pretensions, when your main objective is to attack hindus.
you deserve to be kicked out of india. join your islamic brothers in pakistan.
i have said several times, that some members of the minorities in india have ganged up against the hindus.
it is a safe pass time.it shows basically their hatred
for their past heritage.
it surprises me that you have chosen pakistanis as
partners. not surpriseing.a pail needs shit.
if the rss is against traitors like you, then it is
understandable.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 09:27 PM
41
Gayatri Devi,
>> nathuram godse killed gandhi because he thought that he was immune to the sufferings of hindu refugees, who came to india after experienceing real horror.
Gandhi could see humans as humans and not merely by religious identity, which you cannot stand nor comprehend. That is your problem.
>> do you wonder that some people despise you in this form .. any one can see that you are a thick skinned guy
Yes, the supporters of violent religious extremists. I am not surpised the least. In fact, thats the whole point why I visit this forum.
>> go become a missionary in pakistan
There are enough of Mullah Omars here as well. Don't have to go anywhere.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 09:22 PM
40
Godse committed a very foolish act by murdering Gandhi and deserved to be hanged. Nevertheless, his statement in court is one of the best indictments against Gandhi.
"'About Kashmir, Gandhiji again and again declared that Sheikh Abdullah should be entrusted the charge of the State and that the Maharaja of Kashmir should retire to Benares for no particular reason than that the Muslims formed the bulk of the Kashmiri population. This stands out in contrast with his attitude on Hyderabad where although the bulk of the population is Hindu, Gandhiji never called upon the Nizam to retire to Mecca.
'About this very time he resorted to his fast unto death. Every condition given by him for giving up that fast is in favour of Muslims and against the Hindus. One of the seven conditions was to the effect that all the mosques in Delhi which were occupied by the refugees should be vacated… and be made over to the Muslims. Gandhiji got this condition accepted by the Government… Those were the days of bitter or extreme cold and on the day Gandhiji broke his fast, it was also raining. Families after families of refugees who had come to Delhi for shelter were driven out and while doing so no provision was made for their shelter and stay.
'The decision to withhold the payment of Rs 55 crores to Pakistan was taken by our government which claims to be the people's government. But this decision of the people's Government was reversed to suit the tune of Gandhiji's fast.
'All his fasts were to coerce Hindus. "
He was spot on about how Gandhi treated hindus and muslims. Gandhi was a classic appeaser-he thought by giving into every muslim demand, he could unite hindus and muslims. In the end, the country was partitioned.
Gandhi never took a moral stand. He was prepared to lecture hindus but never muslims. He demanded certain things from hindus but never from muslims. How will this unite two groups? One group will feel it can get more concessions while the other will feel getting screwed.
Had he acted as a Judge between hindus and muslims-instead of being a lawyer pleading muslim's case to hindus, history might have been different.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 09:21 PM
39
"His great contribution to India would be on the issue of untouchability. "
That is true sir.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 09:11 PM
38
kumar
nathuram godse killed gandhi because he thought that
he was immune to the sufferings of hindu refugees,
who came to india after experienceing real horror.
instead of helping them he kept on trying to please muslims, and muslims alone.
you are not bothered about the killings of christians
in pakistan.
where are your morals, your conscience.you have none.
you are one of the miserable missionary christians,
who has no love for india, or its people.
instead you keep babbling about morals, which your
opponents should follow.
do you wonder that some people despise you in this form. any one can see that you are a thick skinned guy with little intelligence, and a pain in the butt.
stop your miserable pontificateing to us.- go become a missionary in pakistan, and let us know how you get on.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 09:00 PM
37
Since I have been critical of Gandhi on multiple issues, I think I should also state where he was right and where he achieved success.
His great contribution to India would be on the issue of untouchability. Many people before him(like Narayana Guru) have fought against it but it was Gandhi who made the issue national. And given his stature, he had more impact on the issue than anyone else. For that, he deserves the gratitude of all Indians-especially hindus.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 08:41 PM
36
Have a peep in Indian History of those times !
http://search1.redif...aval%20mutiny%201946
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 08:37 PM
35
Baggai ji
Congress ruled for decades after Independence .It perpetuated one sided History.All the credit for Independence was given to Gandhi,Nehru and Congress.Contributions of Bose and others are hardly mentioned.Gandhi was elevated to the prime position .
True the contribution of Congress are great.But to claim that India got independence solely due to Gandhi -Nehru is great falsification of the History.
England had been very badly mauled in WW-2.Financially it had become broke.German Air Force had turned it into a Nation of rubble.England had no strenght left or will to control its Empire .Sri Lanka got freedom,Burma got freedom,Far Eastern Nations got independence,African countries became free .
There was no Gandhi with them .
The Indian Naval Mutiny 18th February 1946 had shaken the very foundations of British Empire . Britishers realised they could no more control India .Royal Air Force too simultaneously faced unrest .Nearly one Million Defence ranks were demobbed after World War Two .There was restlessness among them .India itself was emptied of its wealth .Agriculture was in doldrums .Food stocks had crashed.
India was ready to throw the yoke of slavery !
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 08:23 PM
34
The usual homilies have been said about Gandhi. The one new feature this year was that the Messiah Obama decided to weigh in as well-calling him his real hero( I guess Saul ALinsky is a distant second).
That aside, the Messiah has written two books. The last time I checked, one book did not have any index. The second book had an index but no mention of Gandhi. Does anyone know if he has written about Gandhi in any one of his books? Or it is just another one of those things which people do each year-a ritual?
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 08:08 PM
33
"Gandhi wrote to Jinnah seeking permission to settle down in Pakistan in order to work for Indo-Pakistan unity. Jinnah concurred"
Why wouldnt he? A Gandhi sitting in Pakistan sending instructions to the Indian govt would have been the perfect embarrassment to the Indian govt and Indians. Jinnah would have to be a total fool to let go this wonderful opportunity.
Yet again, it shows the naivette of Gandhi. After all his failures, all his strategies and tactics going up in flames, he did not learn one lesson from his 30+ year career in India.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 07:41 PM
32
Gayatri Devi,
>> think nathu ram godse was a true indian patriot. he proved this by dieing for his convictions.
If dying for convictions is your "proof" for being a great man, then the suicide bombers should be high on that list.
>> predictability few have the courage and moral fibre to say so in india
The problem is not with the people, but with your faulty idea of what constitutes moral fibre/courage.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 07:18 PM
31
mr ghai
thank you sir.
i was awed by gandhi in my school days .
however this awe turned to sceptipism and even a bit
of contempt as i saw his actions . he took sides
against the britts and for the islamists, even going
to the extent of supporting the ali brothers regarding the caliphate issue.
his antimodernism, quaint eccentricities , and odd
moral choices put me off.
i will not say he was a hypocrite. just lacking in
good commonsense.
his falling out with the britts could also be due to
his eccentric and illogical mindset.
in the end everyone mourned over him in india. he
was named the father of the nation- and his name
is allways mentioned when there is occasion for it.
i think nathu ram godse was a true indian patriot.
he proved this by dieing for his convictions.
predictability few have the courage and moral fibre
to say so in india.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 06:26 PM
30
kumar
scandinavian countries have reduced their aid to africa, knowing that it was being siphoned off by
corrupt leaders.
they made this choice after years of dismal experience.
thank god that people can make judgements on people
whether they are deserveing or not.fools like you are
against this.
i doubt that you will do anything for anyone. all your
writeing express your hate for sanghis.
you have no morals when it comes to pakistani,s
killing christians. in this case you distance yourself
and take a swipe at the sanghis.
buddy you are pure dumb. you would not know truth if it hit you as a truck.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 05:36 PM
29
I think Patel and Nehru knew about the Hindu refugees' anger against Gandhi and were lax in security. Maybe they preferred a dead Gandhi than a living Gandhi who has become senile by that time.
I can agree with Nehru and Patel, partition is the best thing to have happened to India in recent history.
Selvan
Boston, United States
Oct 02, 2009 05:28 PM
28
Nathuram Godse in his defence had said that he was not against Muslims .He was against Partition and represented forces which wanted reunification .Gandhi was forcing Nehru to adopt measures during war which were pro Pakistan and were harmfull to Inida .Hence Gose decided to kill Gandhi as per Godse.
That was 62 yrs back .In these years Gose's version and his Defence submissions in the Gandhi murder case are not being allowed to be published.We only know one sided version .Where Gandhi has been painted a saint and Godse a devil .
To honestly understand the reasons behind Godse's actions Govt should should release Godse's version too?
Inidans are mature enough to judge themselves
(corrected, Sorry )
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 05:21 PM
27
Muslims .He was against Partition and repesented forces which wanted reunification .Gandhi was forcing Nehru to adopt measures during war which were pro Pakistan and were harmfull to Inida .Hence Gose decided to kill GanNathuram Godse in his defence had said that he was not against dhi.
That was 62 yrs back .In these years Gose's version and his Defence submissions in the Gandhi murder case are not being allowed to be published.We only know one sided version .Where Gandhi has been painted a saint and Godse a devil .
To honestly understand the reasons behind Godse's actions Govt should should release Godse's version too?
Inidans are mature enough to judge themselves .
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 05:02 PM
26
Gandhi was a worldly wise leader. Wasn’t he aware that Prophet Mohammad engineered his Islam to rest on a tripod of treachery, butchery and debauchery? Or should we assume naively that Gandhi did not read history of Muslim treachery and butchery? The prophet of doom had told his followers to spread Islam using the tripod and the best way was to butcher kafirs and satisfy blood thirsty Allah.
Many of us are not aware that we owe our Hindu existence to the sacrifices made by the Sikh gurus and the Sikhs. Had not Sikhs (and Marathas) fought the evil Islam many of us today would have been reading namaaz in a asthma-filled cavernous mosque. India would have been filled with 80 per cent Muslims.
Early in 1675, a group of Kashmiri brahmins visited Anandpur to seek Guru Tegh Bahadur's(father of last guru Guru Gobind Singh) advice. Aurangzeb had ordered the forced conversion of all Hindus and thought that if the respected Kashmiri brahmins accepted Islam, others in the country would be easily converted. They had been given six months to decide or suffer the consequences. Time was running out! Tegh Bahadur advised the brahmins to return to their village and tell the authorities that they would accept Islam if “Guru Tegh Bahadur could first be persuaded to do so.” The guru was called to Delhi and put to death by the rapacious Islamic monster Aurangzeb who has been glorified in NCERT textbooks by Indira Gandhi’s goons. Shortly afterwards Tegh Bahadur’s son Gobind Rai became the 10th and last guru. There was no respite from Islamic monsters. The Moghals captured Guru Gobind's mother and his youngest two sons, aged 9 and 7, and bricked them alive. After the two kids died of suffocation the Islamic monsters beheaded the children and delivered their heads to their grandmother who died of shock at the sight.
I wonder when Islamic monsters do namaaz what exactly they pray for. There is actually nothing in Koran to pray for except Prophet’s instigation to kill the kafirs. There is hardly a spiritual advice in the evil book. Islam is called religion which has given a new twist to the word "religion." Koran has brought nothing but death, destruction and disease to mankind. Yet this strange religion’s blood thirst has not yet been satiated despite ocean of blood having flowed on this unfortunate earth. I am sure Gandhi knew Islam's unquenched thirst for blood and gore as one would know the properties of fire. The barbarism has been continuous down the ages and yet Gandhi ignored it. I hope Islam soon goes the way the communist went in Mother Russia. But the scars inflicted by the gory and utterly evil Prophet Mohammad on this earth will remain for ages to come.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 02, 2009 04:52 PM
25
Rajinder Puri is very kind in his assessment about Gandhi - a kindness brought about no doubt, by his absolute lack of desire to taint, what is, by way of populist perspective, the holiest of holy cows!
Shiv Adiseshan
Chennai, India
Oct 02, 2009 04:28 PM
24
kumar
what explanation do you have for the mantle of saint
hood that you flaunt- something like karzais.
i have spent a lot of time and money in doing what is possible for the underprivileged in india. i have worked for save the children organisation, and am now
doing work as an ngo in climate change.
i resent your hectoreing moral tone, when i know exactly what i am doing,and suspect that you are doing damn all.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 04:15 PM
23
vijay aggarwal
old indians ,especially from the north keeps dreaming
of old india,despite many rude shocks from pakistani,s
they keep on blameing britain, depite the fact that
this country has modernised india, and even given you
a language which provides you with professional
opportunities, and to express yourself.
no one expected the massacres which followed partition.
in no way was britain responsible for the partition.
putting the blame for the civilisational devide on the
britts is a denial of reality.
britain is not responsible for all the miseries of
india or pakistan. in fact what has britain gained from
its erstwhile colonies.
the country is flooded by pakistani,s who are an economic burden, and a paralell society which has devided the nation.
indians are doing well, or at least some of them are.
lakshmi mittal is the richesti in all england.
i know that my sister despite owning a house in south
delhi, with 2 cars, chauffer, 2 in house maids, much prefers her modest life style in reading as a retired gp.
all my relations in usa are happy and content. were it
not for their aged parents,they would seldom visit the
old country. for that matter neither would i, though
i stay in new delhi with my opulent sister on my
yearly visits.
indians are amazeingly fond of the pakistani,s and
think badly of western countries, where they are very
comfortably off.
this is not meant to annoy you vijay. i think you are
a decent old egg-to use p.g.woodhouse language.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 04:06 PM
22
Gayatri Devi,
>> people are entitled to express their opinions on any subject, without the proviso that they must first take affirmative action before doing so.
I did not say that you are not entitled to your express their opinions. Nor did I say that one must first take affirmative action before doing so. I only remarked about the whole approach/attitude towards the issue of some people/group's current social-educational-economic standards being less. What desire does that provoke in you? That’s the question. And I am not surprised that your family members are appalled.
>> you have been told off by manypeople ...
They are supporters of violent extremists etc, that’s why they are uncomfortable, and that is exactly the point.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 03:54 PM
21
kumar
people are entitled to express their opinions on any subject, without the proviso that they must first
take affirmative action before doing so.
india ,and especially me have little opportunity of
helping africans.
sarkosy the french president remarked about africa-
in essence,he said that africans did not have the
desire or wish to join the mainstream.
as a consequence france would discontinue its close
relationship with africa. now write and come up with
a rebuke to him.
stop thinking like a village pastor-
by the way what exactly do you do to serve suffering
humanity, besides your endless pontifaceteing.
you have been told off by manypeople about this.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 03:41 PM
20
Gayatri Devi,
>> starting the debate i made a remark about negroes, and said it is possible that in view of their performance they could be less intellectually endowed then the whites and asians.
>> this ended the peace and bon homie that had prevailed til then.
Being "less intellectually endowed" might be a current 'apparent' condition of a proportionately larger percentage among some sections/races/castes etc for various reasons. But I think the larger question is this: When you see a people whose social-economic-educational standards seem less, what does it provoke you? Does it provoke you to merely make a callous remark that the race is not intellectually endowed? Or does it provoke a desire to reach out and educate and empower them etc. I think your family members are appalled not so much by the observation that many black african nations are not doing very well (which everyone knows anyway, you don’t have to educate them on that), but the whole approach you are taking and where you are getting at, in reaction to the issue.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 03:04 PM
19
sandy
we think alike- it is good to know this.
years ago i was holidaying with my family in portugal.
one afternoon we debated the subject of race,sure to
inflame all indians.
participants- my sister and brotherinlaw-both prosperous doctors in britain.
another sister and brotherin law . he a retired ias
guy working as consultant for the world bank. my sister -person i admire immensely- is an artist, social worker , astrologer, excellent house wife,mother,sister, aunt and so forth.
starting the debate i made a remark about negroes, and said it is possible that in view of their performance they could be less intellectually endowed then the whites and asians.
this ended the peace and bon homie that had prevailed
til then. i underlined that i was not saying that negroes were inferior but that this could be debated.
i realised at once that no one would have objected if
i had said that we asians, and especially indians were
more intelligent then the whites.
i believe that for what ever reason the white nations are generally doing much better then the others,save
for a few asian exceptions.
there is no white nation which is down and out as one finds in africa, latin america or asia.
there are no whites liveing in huts with children not
getting a chance to go to school. the poorest european countries are doing notably better then india.
the only non white nations doing well are the arabs,
who are blessed with giant oil incomes.however remarkably even the poor arab countries are better off
then the poor african countries like sudan, ethiopia,
congo and so forth.
conclusion- indians are beset with strange complexes which prevents them from thinking rationally.
the few who were rational and canny were leaders
like rajajee-founder of swatantara party- patel,
j.r.d.tata and one or two more.
nehru was rational but had a great weakness for
socialist dogma. he did a lot of good,but also quite
a bit of harm.never bothered about the population
explosion.
india badly needs clear headed thinkers- if there are
any then i can not see or hear them.
the communist leaders are from another age. the congress is devoid of leadership,though there are several young ones,but then who are scared to say anything new.tharoor said something meant to be funny,and was given a talking to as a naughty school boy by marm.
the bjp is antimodernist.
the less said of mayawati, mulayam singh and lalloo the
better.
if india is in such dire straits,then imagine the state
of african countries. zimbabwe is ruled by mugabe.
south africa by zuma. there was the emperor bokassa who
was accused of cannibalism.libya is ruled by gaddafi.
i can understand why people buy skin whiteners-
now this is meant as a joke. i dont want the usual suspects to get a fit, and start attacking me.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 02:30 PM
18
In my opinion there is not much to be gained from hypothesizing and splitting hair over whether Partition of India was an historical certainty and could not possibly have been avoided without a great deal of bloodshed. For the bloodshed did happen and we are now a divided people in the sub-continent not only by geographical borders but also by civilisational ethos and intellect.
For British historians it must really be a poignant exercise in order to exonerate their country totally from the holocaust that followed while leaving India after feting it for over 300 years in just six "Mountbatten" months ...
For they must now be witnessing like penitent monkeys with more than just a pinch of salt that their "strategic" creation straddled between oil rich Middle East, Central Asia and India, has become the hot-bed of Islamic fundamentalism and a terrorist incubator that has turned on themselves, instead of being an instrument of serving their interests in the region.
It indeed must be history's biggest joke and West's biggest strategic loss that this brutal creation in the name of Islam is now being used by China to weaken India ... who now clearly see themselves as new Britons in Asia and Indian Ocean ...
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 02, 2009 02:26 PM
17
In my opinion there is not much to be gained from hypothesizing and splitting hair over whether Partition of India was an historical certainty and could not possibly have been avoided without a great deal of bloodshed. For the bloodshed did happen and we are now a divided people in the sub-continent not only by geographical borders but also by civilisational ethos and intellect.
For British historians it must really be a poignant exercise in order to exonerate their country totally from the holocaust that followed while leaving India after feting it for over 300 years in just six "Mountbatten" months ... for they must now be witnessing like penitent monkeys with more than just a pinch of salt that their "strategic" creation straddled between oil rich Middle East, Central Asia and India, has become the hot-bed of Islamic fundamentalism and a terrorist incubator that has turned on themselves, instead of being an instrument of serving their interests in the region. It indeed must be history's biggest joke and West's biggest strategic loss that this brutal creation in the name of Islam is now being used by China to weaken India ... who now clearly see themselves as new Britons in Asia and Indian Ocean ...
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 02, 2009 02:19 PM
16
reddy
islam works on the fuhrer principle, as in fascism.
both have one leader-
in islam it is mohammed, and he has even more claims
on his followers then either mussolini or hitler even
dreamt of.
mohammed asked of his followes-
you must love me more then your own parents
anyone who blasphems should be killed
anyone who is an apostate should be killed.
my word is law,with the sanctity of god.
even mussolini and hitler did not make such claims.
has any leader of rss make such claims-
islamists and left wing people use words like fascist, nazi as insults, ignoreing the facts that their own
idealogies are closer to giveing all power to their
own leaders.
communists use such insults against the democratic
free capitalist countries. despite the fact that mao
and stalin had absolute power, not equalled by any one
in the west.
for example winston churchill was booted out by the
british people after victory against hitler in 1946.
nixon was close to impeachment after water gate.
who are the nazis or the fascists.they are dead and gone.
islam and communism remain. in neither place will you
find liberty or freedom of speech. in afghanistan
women were beaten should they dared to laugh. a
muslim who converted to christianity was sentenced to death by the supreme court, and had to be hurriedly
evacuated by the italian govt.
you are one of the unread mindless zombies who does not
know the difference between chalk and cheese, beset
with a huge inferiority complex.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 02:03 PM
15
I would like India and Pakistan to be one nation. There is nothing that separates an Indian from a Pakistani, because I do not believe that religion should be a divisive factor, among those who believe in God. I admire some Muslims, like Maulana Azad very ardently. Hindu's and Muslim's should have the freedom to be helpful to each other, and should prosper equally. I am sure Gandhiji would have also wanted this for India. India is home for a variety of religious identities, like Jew's and very old Christian congregation's, such as in Kerala. It would be a matter of pride, if all of India would advance and prosper, and Pakistan would be a part of our prosperity.
Aditya Mookerjee
Belgaum, India
Oct 02, 2009 12:37 PM
14
Partition of India would have happened later if not in 1947, Gandhi or no Gandhi or any other great or not so great leader!Who can stop the flow of History? And Partitition may happen again, may be in 50 years and a re-unification in another 100 years.Who can stop the flow of History?
K.C.Sharma
Delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:41 AM
13
>> Anybody can google a friggin definition
Except, it seems, the bina chaddhi wallah crowd.
Al Bundy
San Francisco, United States
Oct 02, 2009 11:35 AM
12
"You are confusing between definition and example."
Here are some more examples and a definition will eventually happen on its own.
Nazis, Fascists, Conservative Capitalists, Conservatives, Xenophobes, Religious Conservatives, Social Conservatives and other such distasteful vermin are typically considered right wing. The Parivar and its chaddies are considered ultra-rightwing. Anybody can google a friggin definition, but examples are more fun.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:28 AM
11
"It is difficult to blame only Muslim thugs when these two top leaders were India's Number 1 enemies. "
This has got to be one of the more bizarre revelations in all of these forums ! I suppose by this logic chaddies are considered true heroes who saved the Nation. Even chaddies will have a hard time believing that but hey, throw it out there and see if it sticks !!
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:04 AM
10
>>>> What is the definition of being a right winger?
>> You!
You are confusing between definition and example.
Al Bundy
San Francisco, United States
Oct 02, 2009 10:37 AM
9
Gandhi’s judgment may be questioned. His integrity was unimpeachable? says Puri. If so in what way? Gandhi cut the Indian baby into two to satisfy the quarrelling Muslim mother. If Gandhi was sincere his actions should have spoken otherwise. He had a queer form of integrity which led to Islamic evil grow in strength and overpower us. Was Gandhi not a lawyer trained to detect lies and half-truths? THen why did he fall hook, line and sinker to Muslim thugs who were bent raping this nation? To put it euphemistically Gandhi was a successful charlatan and with his womaniser comrade-in-arms made India bereft of peace and tranquillity. It is difficult to blame only Muslim thugs when these two top leaders were India's Number 1 enemies. The evil they sowed now has borne nuclear fruits on Pakistani tree. What is worse Gandhi's legacy of ahimsa is still haunting us as it continues to perpetuate the dark ages of 1947 by its mindless political practitioners.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 02, 2009 10:35 AM
8
Gandhi’s judgment may be questioned. His integrity was unimpeachable? says Puri. If so in what way? Gandhi cut the Indian baby into two to satisfy the quarrelling Muslim mother? If Gandhi was sincere his actions should have spoken otherwise. He had a queer form of integrity which led to Islamic evil grow in strength. Was Gandhi not a lawyer trained to detect lies and half-truths? THen why did he fall hook, line and sinker to Muslim thugs who were bent upon raping this nation? To put it euphemistically Gandhi was a successful charlatan who with his womaniser comrade-in-arms made India bereft of peace and tranquillity. It is difficult to blame only Muslim thugs when these two top leaders were India's Number 1 enemies. The evil they sowed now has borne nuclear fruits in Pakistani tree. What is worse Gandhi's legacy of ahimsa is still haunting us as it continues to perpetuate the dark ages of 1947 by its mindless political practitioners.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 02, 2009 10:22 AM
7
The partition happened over Gandhi's dead body. He was killed by the power seekers. He was alive physically, but he knew he had lost out, in spirit.
Dinesh Kumar
Chandigarh, India
Oct 02, 2009 05:20 AM
6
Ganesan,
>> What is the definition of being a right winger?
You!
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 05:12 AM
5
--"He promised a lot during the "fingerprinting" campaign and delivered zilch."
Instead he delivered an Independent India, but in the fuzzy fog that clouds a right-wingers head, such earthshaking historical facts dont compute.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 03:26 AM
4
DC
"Nathuram Godse may be portrayed as a right wing lunatic, but in the context of the communal tension and turbulent times following the Partition..."
How exactly is Godse a right winger? What is the definition of being a right winger?
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 02:05 AM
3
Gandhi was a complex personality. But he was also a politician. And politicians seek and enjoy power. Gandhi, until made irrelevant by events since mid 1940s, was always the king maker in the Congress. Remember how his political drama involving his favored candidate Sitarammaiah finally put pressure on the victorious candidate Netaji Subhash Bose to quit Congress?
Partition of India was a failure in the decades long political career of Gandhi.
For Rajindar Puri it is important to remember that all famous politicians are great speakers and they often offer tall promises. So he should not try to interprete why Gandhi's words did not match with his action? Many Bengalees especially erstwhile refugees from East Bengal are staunch critics of Gandhi, because they relied on his words that the partition would never happen.
Nathuram Godse may be portrayed as a right wing lunatic, but in the context of the communal tension and turbulent times following the Partition, Gandhi as a champion of Indo-Pak unity post-partition may have attrated all the frustrations of the assassin caused by the Partition.
DC
NEW YORK, United States
Oct 02, 2009 01:34 AM
2
"Peareylal, recorded that Gandhi would angrily lash out at his critics and say should he kill himself just to satisfy others? "
No. It simply means that a politician, especially like Gandhi who's stature towered over everyone else should not make statements he cannot back up with action.
But then, that was the problem Gandhi had right from his days in South Africa. He promised a lot during the "fingerprinting" campaign and delivered zilch. The campaign was a complete disaster. Ram Sandara Pandit, the man Gandhi hailed as a hero, ran away from the place.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 12:32 AM
1
The insinuation seems to be that the Home Ministry had a hand in the assassination of Gandhi in order to prevent him from settling in Lahore to promote Indo-Pak unity. I think that is far-fetched. But Mr.Puri may be right in hoping that some day Gandhi's message of unity may have a resurgence in the subcontinent. But not in the foreseeable future.
Mahatma Gandhi had earlier said that India could be partitioned only over his dead body. The Partition occurred but Gandhi remained alive. He was not afraid of death. Then why did he not redeem his pledge?
This is my personal interpretation of Mahatma Gandhi’s response to the Partition based on the consideration of his words and deeds at different times.
Gandhi had earlier said that India could be partitioned only over his dead body. The Partition occurred but Gandhi remained alive. When sceptics taunted Gandhi about this his former secretary and biographer, Peareylal, recorded that Gandhi would angrily lash out at his critics and say should he kill himself just to satisfy others? Even Gandhi’s most trenchant critics cannot deny his courage. He was not afraid of death. Then why did he not redeem his pledge?
My interpretation: For Gandhi the fight to keep India and Pakistan united was not ended. He was still struggling for his goal. He was following that old adage: Those who fight and run away, live to fight another day!
This view is reinforced by earlier events. When the Congress Working Committee (CWC) was to pass its formal resolution to accept Partition on June 3, 1947 Gandhi observed his day of silence. Why?
My interpretation: Gandhi had realized that he had been outsmarted by the British. They had successfully isolated him from Nehru and Patel. Only young firebrands Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia supported Gandhi’s view in the CWC. To retain the option of opposing the CWC resolution later Gandhi refrained from any personal endorsement of the resolution. He did this by observing a day of silence.
On June 2, one day before the Partition resolution was to be passed by the CWC, Lord Mountbatten visited Gandhi to seek reassurance that Gandhi would not create hurdles. “Mr Gandhi,” Lord Mountbatten asked. “I hope you will not oppose my (Mountbatten Plan to partition India ) plan?” Gandhi on his day of silence wrote on a scrap of paper: “Have I ever opposed you?”
My interpretation: As a lawyer Gandhi chose his words with care. He did not write that he would not oppose Mountbatten. He put the counter question whether he had ever opposed Mountbatten.
After the Partition Gandhi’s actions revealed his resolve to keep trying for total Indo-Pakistan reconciliation. He went on a fast to compel the Indian government to pay Pakistan adequate compensation. This strengthened his credibility with Pakistan . It pleased Mountbatten. But Gandhi’s subsequent actions could not have pleased British authorities.
Gandhi wrote to Jinnah seeking permission to settle down in Pakistan in order to work for Indo-Pakistan unity. Jinnah concurred. He invited Gandhi to Karachi . Gandhi sought permission to settle down in Lahore with 50 Punjabi refugee families then settled in Delhi ’s Purana Quila camp. One member of the Punjabi families that had volunteered to accompany Gandhi in his march to Lahore was historian KK Khullar, then 16 years old. The plan to start the march on February 14, 1948 was finalized. On January 30th Nathuram Godse killed Gandhi.
There are several unanswered questions about Gandhi’s murder. Godse travelled from Bombay to Delhi to kill Gandhi. In Bombay he stayed in a house under strict surveillance of the Intelligence Bureau because its occupant was known to possess illegal firearms. There had been five attempts on Gandhi’s life before Godse killed him. Yet Godse was not apprehended. Was he manipulated as, some theorists claim, was President Kennedy’s assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, decades later? That aspect deserves a separate article. But suffice to say that after Gandhi’s murder Jayaprakash Narain accused the Home Ministry of criminal negligence, hinting at complicity, in the murder of Gandhi.
Did Gandhi have premonition of his death? Writing his last will and testament by which he sought the dissolution of the Congress as a political party on the very day of his assassination was a striking coincidence.,
It may be seen that Gandhi might have erred in his tactics. His realization about Mountbatten’s intentions came too late. Mountbatten arrived in February 1947. By March tension had been created in the Punjab by riots that killed 1000 people. That was seized by the CWC to partition the Punjab assembly between West and East Punjab in March itself. This was even before the Congress had consented in June to Partition the country! It should have alerted Gandhi to what was about to happen.
Gandhi’s judgment may be questioned. His integrity was unimpeachable. He never wavered in his commitment to the agenda of uniting Hindus and Muslims even after Pakistan had been formed. In the end he was defeated. The forces arraigned against him were too powerful. But has his agenda been defeated? This scribe believes that history’s final verdict on that is still not out.
Oct 03, 2009 06:44 PM
100
Seshadri,
>> I have not celebrated the death of any individuals.....
Your glee could hardly be hidden upon the deaths of YSR and Kakare.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 06:39 PM
99
Sandilya,
>> Envy, they say is like evil eye and strikes.
You are mostly a rational man, but it seems some traces of superstitiousness remain!
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 06:34 PM
98
Sandilya,
>> But in general people tend to accept that the basic core got to be right. That core is surely related to lineage. It explains why there are more accomplished people and Nobel Laureates among close blood relatives than compared to general populace.
Many Nobel laureates are not related to any laureates. The few who are prove the environmental theory as much as the genetic one.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 05:32 PM
97
"his commitment to the agenda of uniting Hindus and Muslims even after Pakistan had been formed "
Let us shift the goal posts and examine this postulate :
1.Hindus in India could have never united with the West Pakistani Muslims who had cleanised them from West Pakistan even all the efforts of Gandhi.
2.Hindus in the East Pakistan and now Bangladesh though not treated well but are still able to live there.Bangali Muslims and Hindus paid dearly in 1970-71 being soft targets of Punjabi Muslims.
Even if Gandhi lived longer he could have preached only but could have never made any dent in the feelings of Hindus against Pakistani Muslims and vice versa.
3.About unity among Indian Muslims and Hindus. Was there really any need for Gandhi to try to bring them together ? Could the Muslims in India have stayed on during pre and post 1947 period if Hindus were adamnet to send them to Pakistan ? If we talk of constitutional rights of Muslims- Yes they had and have full rights .But these rights were mercilessly crushed for a year or so from August 1946 to 5 th February 1948(the cut off date to migrate) .
Gandhi could have hardly done anything if the Hindus insited to follow the Pakistani Muslims' path.
Can we deny today that Indian Muslims are much much better than the Bangladeshi and Pakistani Muslims.Rather they are even better than Muslims in many Islamic Countries. Could this have happened without Hindus'co-operation and their affinity with Muslims ??
Indian Muslims are prospering even 62 yrs after Mahatma was killed.It will be a debatable point after some time whether Mahatma and Congress has harmed Muslims with patronisation.I am of the firm view Muslims could have done better but for Congress and Seculars who are interested in Minority Votes only .
Still Hindus are the most misunderstood ,abused and villified race in India itself.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 03, 2009 05:00 PM
96
gayatri/banito/lalit
Agree to disagree again that:
"all the young or old indians who have made it have done so on the basis of western thinking. india has produced religious gurus - nothing in the area of philosophy. if you feel india can match britain, or the west"
why not? If China can we can too ... all we need is will to do it ...
I did publish my email address for you here in these columns before but heard nothing from you ...
Have a nice week-end. Got to go now ... to look for a new car for the wife ... she wants an Audi again ... any suggestions ?
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 03, 2009 04:58 PM
95
gayatri/banito/lalit
Agree to disagree again that:
"all the young or old indians who have made it have done so on the basis of western thinking.
india has produced religious gurus - nothing in the
area of philosophy.
if you feel india can match britain, or the west"
why not? If China we can too ... all we need is will to do it ...
I did publish my email address for you here in these columns before but heard nothing from you ...
Have a nice week-end. Got to go now ... to look for a new car for the wife ... she wants an Audi again ... any suggestions ?
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 03, 2009 04:20 PM
94
vijay aggarwal
i think on the lines of v.s.naipaul-
nirad chaudri was also a great admirer of britain
as well. completely eccentric, but a admirable chap,
in many ways.
india is emulateing the west in most things-even the
bad ones. the west is for change, new thinking.
india is for tradition, status quo.
all the young or old indians who have made it have
done so on the basis os western thinking.
india has produced religious gurus- nothing in the
area of philosophy.
if you feel india can match britain,or the west i have nothing more to say.
you still deserve my compliment of being a good old egg.
can you send me your mail adress.
best gayatri, bajrangbbhai,banito,lalit, ganpat ram,
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 04:08 PM
93
sandy
these are the qualifications of being a liberal in india-as defined by the secularists in this forum
aaa you must love pakistan more then you love india.
bbb you must reject the white imperialist nations.
they have done nothing for india. they ill treat the
poor coloured immigrants who out of pure good will
wish to live in their countries.
ccc you must never never say a word against the prophet,the koran- this is blasphemy.
ddd you must single out for abuse the bjp, sangh, neo nazists who refuse further muslim immigration.
eee you must support all muslim causes- palestine arabs, muslims in kashmir.
fff you must hate modi for the gujerat massacre,advani
for demolishing the magnificent babri masjid, and love and respect justice banerjee for his very fair judgement regarding the godhra incident.
after you qualify you will be embraced by the
mullahs,padres of the secular community.
perish the thought-nothing for people of good taste-
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 04:07 PM
92
Gayatri/Lalit/banito
Yes, I agree to disagree with you that "India would have been like Nepal or Afghanistan" had the British not come to India ... no disrespect but one wonders from your posts what did you learn from your studies ...
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 03, 2009 03:42 PM
91
L:>>"there is a saying in german:" those whom the gods wish to destroy ,they first make them mad".
I did not come across that during my yrs of syay in germany.
there is an equivalent saying in sanskrit: 'vinaaSa-kaale vipareeta-buddhih', individuals or civilizns get wrong ideas when their downfall becomes due.
>>" i hope that their death wish is full filled".
do not worry, a hundred osamas or a thousand musharreffs cannot destroy the eternal civilizn of mother india. evils get maximally devish only when their termination is imminent.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 03, 2009 03:30 PM
90
A:>>"Seshadri celebrating the deaths of YSR and Karkare?"
I have not celebrated the death of any individuals. nothing important, all born must die one day, any way. sentimentalism does not synchronize with spirituality.
I have only been celebrating the timely intervention of lord keSava = naaraayaNa = venkaTeSa to save mother india from serious problems.
if kasab had died and karkare survived, sonia-antulay raj and the crypto-chr patels shivraj, RR, would have framed the whole mumbai event as only a hindutva-driven terror-act, blaming the hindus of india for the death of jews and americans in taj hotel. sonia could have dis-enfrachised all hindus in india, declaring an indira-type emergency, supported by the chinese people's army!. western countries would have agreed.
Lord kesava saved india.
In ysr's case, if he had continued another term as CM, he would have converted the major part of AP to the church, as he probably promised jesus, in pilgrimmage to jerusalem. but then he did not know that jesus Himself had 'returned' into hinduism, as skanda, to be with his uncle naarayan in tirumala. No wonder, then, that the tail hill of the seven-hills of tirupathi itself terminated him. sonia has not agreed for his son to succeed him!.
now, even the self-idolizing film-stars in india's politics will all realize that there is a really powerful God above all them, also. I am only celebrating the SaaSwata-dharma-goptaa protecting sanaatana-dharma-samsthaa in sapta-sindhu-bharata-kanDa. not the death of any individuals, really.
v.seshadri
chennai, india
Oct 03, 2009 02:46 PM
89
i have studied international history, european history,
and political philosopy for three years-
this was before i started on engineering studies.
i learnt a lot of history reading winston churchills
war memoirs- 5 big volumes. this covered the rise and fall of the third reich.
the french revolution and napolean were my favourites
period in history.i can still recall some of the characters- legendre the butcher- madam defarge, robespierre, danton and many other colourful characters.
i have studied marx and lenin, and quite a bit about
the evolution of democracy and the industrial revolution.
ofcource i am not so well read as some of the posters,
and islamic scholars, who have a king sized inferiority
complex-
i believe that all matters are uo for debate in liberal
societies.
aaa religions and idealogy
bbb race and nations
ccc population, climate and environment
i just read a article written by irfan hussain in dawn-
" whereas we tend to get emotional about muslim causes
in far off countries, we tend to forget problems of
ignorance, hunger,disease in pakistan"
pakistani,s are disdainful about the 1.5 billion usd
aid they will get for 5 years. it is peanuts some of
them say.
well no one is forceing them to take this aid. it
defys reason that people can think like this.
it is a failure of reason and commonsense-
why are some posters so full of hate against western
countries, who have helped india for so many years.
why are they so fond of pakistan when we have been attacked so many times by them-
there is a saying in german
" those whom the gods wish to destroy ,they first make them mad" i hope that their death wish is full filled.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 02:00 PM
88
sexchanged-gayathri--"you are one of the unread
mindless zombies who does not know the difference
between chalk and cheese, "
True but i can spot a moron a mile away. There is
only that much knowledge you can gather from
Frederick Forsythes voluminous 'history of the World' !
By your own admission a cheap, dime store, trashy
novelist is your intellectual frame of reference.
Your posts should be discarded immediately on arrival.
"starting the debate i made a remark about negroes,
and said it is possible that in view of their
performance they could be less intellectually endowed
then the whites and asians."
You are a racist with incredibly low self-esteem. Get some help.
"i can understand why people buy skin whiteners-
now this is meant as a joke. i dont want the usual
suspects to get a fit, and start attacking me."
This is pathetic !
"you are a cowardly scum bag who is scared of the real
bigots like mullah omar, but play safe by attacking
western liberals like me.under a pseudo name. "
This is utter non-sense. Despite your courageous attempts at changing your gender you are no liberal !! You are not a Westerner either. You are about as far from being a liberal as Himmler was ! You are a good slave though who defends the rights of his master. Admirable.
"Gayatri Devi
Hats off to you.
As far as I know, you are the only woman regularly posting on this website."
As far as i know the sex-change operation was successful. All thats left now is
a lobotomy.
siddharth--"There is hardly a single spiritual advice in the whorish, dog-eared Koran. "
Unlike the virtous wisdom sprouting from the lips of
slutty nypmhs running circles around Ram ... or is it
Krishna ... same shit.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 01:42 PM
87
>> why has there been so little comment on Seshadri celebrating the deaths of YSR and Karkare?
Anwaar
You mean from me?
My beliefs border on agnostism and I practice very little religion but I do have some beliefs like one should be extremely cautious when the going is too good.
At the time of his death YSR was at the height of his political and economic power and looked God like to many. But he earned lots of envy also. Envy, they say is like evil eye and strikes. And as if to lend credence to that belief he met an untimely death. I learnt a lesson in that when going is good keep a close tab on what is going on around.
Somewhat shocked, I rather remained oblivious to any correspondence on his death. It was quite tragic and no comments on a departed soul.
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 01:25 PM
86
>> if black and white children grow up in equally enriched environments, the I.Q. differences narrow until they disappear.
Anwaar
Even today no one is really sure about the play of intelligence. But surely both nature and nurture play a role. But in general people tend to accept that the basic core got to be right. That core is surely related to lineage. It explains why there are more accomplished people and Nobel Laureates among close blood relatives than compared to general populace.
If the core is right even an under educated will do well than a highly educated. Don't we have some dumb Phds and extraordinary gifted entrepreneurs with little education? So it is nature which is supreme.
Nurturing is simply like a goldsmith shaping a jewel. If both Gold and the gold smith are of right quality a beautiful piece emerges.
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 12:19 PM
85
After celebrating and singing Vaishnava Janato..on Gandhi Jayanti day and changing the name of NREGA the Quota Congress whores are very happy. Not one quota whore has really bothered about the massive floods in Andhra and Karnataka. When a CM died the quota beggars were rushing planes and helicopters and had even asked NASA for help. But lakhs are marooned and crying for basic necessities and not one Quota politician seems to relent. I am sure these Congress monstrous goondas will ask for increase in quotas for the flood affected soon after the tragedy. The Congress goondas will be banking upon the quota titillation to fool the people. But a day is soon to come when these ruling quota goondas will be stamped to death by the very people they fooled.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 11:59 AM
84
Sandilya,
While some difference in opinion exists, the majority opinion holds that I.Q. differences are not genetic but environmental, which means that if black and white children grow up in equally enriched environments, the I.Q. differences narrow until they disappear.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 11:50 AM
83
>> Arun Shourie records in his book that the muslims had a serious dilemma on whether or not to pray for Gandhi after his death since as a non muslim he was not entitled to it.
Shourie can be expected to make hay from such tidbits, but why has there been so little comment on Seshadri celebrating the deaths of YSR and Karkare?
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 11:49 AM
82
and the conclusion is that if all factors are controlled and accounted for, no racial differences in intellectual capability can be substantiated.
Anwaar
This is quite true in respect of athletics,sports and music.
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 11:32 AM
81
But saying that Muslims liked or praised Gandhi is hogwash.
vijay
You are right. Arun Shourie records in his book that the muslims had a serious dilemma on whether or not to pray for Gandhi after his death since as a non muslim he was not entitled to it. Finally the move to pray in Masjids was dropped.
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 11:29 AM
80
Gayatri/Lalit,
>> it is possible that in view of their performance they could be less intellectually endowed then the whites and asians.
The subject has been very contentious among psychologists and other social scietists for the past 60 years, has been researched copiously by several groups, and the conclusion is that if all factors are controlled and accounted for, no racial differences in intellectual capability can be substantiated. Many racists however still continue to maintain their old prejudices.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 11:18 AM
79
Ghai,
>> Godse's accusations of Gandhi's Muslims' appeasement policies.
What Gandhi thought was fairness, Godse considered appeasement.
>> Majority of the North Indians and Bangalies specially refugees believe that Godse's was right.
Majority of posters in this forum maybe, but in the real world things are different.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 10:12 AM
78
>> it is possible that in view of their performance they could be less intellectually endowed then the whites and asians.
We think alike (post @ 3:04:49 PM)
Lalit
Yeah, I agree. I have views similar to you. Very often I see your replies as something I wanted to reply myself. Your posts are unpretentious and pepped with sense of humour.
Your reply posted @ 2:19:22 PM (IST) is more or less similar in content to that I had posted earlier when I questioned the double standards of media which had gone overboard to celebrate Castro’s dictatorship of> 50 years as though it were a genuinely mandated legitimate rule.
Freedom of speech has allowed us to say what we want to say but unfortunately often we are carried away too much by political correctness. Of course you could say the above statement unafraid of. I appreciate that. Time people talked sense even if it is politically incorrect and separate chalk from cheese rather than nod the head to say both are same. That is the beginning of decadence.
How many can say what you have said though in private they would surely accept it as a fact as the current state of African countries reflect . Many of these countries got independence long ago and so long ago that they have had enough time to build their countries as they envisioned before demanding freedom.
After WWII total destruction, Europe and Japan were rebuilt in fifteen years flat. But sad reality is that except South Africa none of the African nations are doing well. I want to hear what our anti imperialist intellectuals have to say on Mugabe’s misrule. Are the Zimbabwians happier now than then?
Note that later a country got independence the better it is!!!
Hong Kong is the last to become free in the series and it is at the far end of the spectrum of better states than the one on the other end of the spectrum like Afghanistan which remained elusive to imperial rule. We stand in between; where as Malaysia and Singapore which got freedom later than us are better off in many respects.
At the time of our independence Madras city was said to be far better than Singapore. Now any comparison? Inference? It takes time for modern but alien systems and methods to take roots, and we got freedom before the latter got consolidated. Our courts and health are examples of poor copying of western methods. They are caricature of Western systems. Justice Dinakaran is an example of all that has gone wrong.
You might have heard of John Locke of eighteenth century whose ideas influenced western liberal thinking. He is the one who said man is born with certain natural rights- such as the right to liberty- that existed in a state of nature. I do not know if Tilak borrowed this when he said “Freedom is my birth right,.”
This John Locke belived that Africans were inferior to Europeans. Another contemporary of him David Hume also suspected negroes to be inferior to whites. His Quote: “There scarcely ever was a civilised nation of that complexion nor even any individual eminent in action or speculation”. If anyone said this now he would be called insane. But Hume was a respected philosopher and intellect.
I do not know how many care to recognize that the cruel apartheid was practiced in Africa but not in India. Thanks to the earlier achievements of Indians in literature, architecture and astronomy and maths we were seen merely as orientals with different approach than unaccomplished nation of hermits.
I have noted the rich acknowledgement of our intellectual abilities by the British as published by Royal commission on Public Services in India. The commission argues for parity of pay for Indian officers with the Europeans on this basis! And that was in 1880s before Congress was born!
So the Britts practiced different strokes for different folks!!
sandilya
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 09:28 AM
77
Many Indians have not yet realized the horrendous implications of a cult called Islam thanks to the Congress quota whores’ sustained propaganda that Islam means “peace.” Gandhi by hobnobbing with this evil created confusion in the minds of average Indians. The evil was made to look smaller in size and unthreatening. So effective has been the Congress propaganda over the years that even educated Indians are surprised when told about the detailed instructions in the monstrous Koran against Kafirs and especially the Hindus.
Early man at the dawn of civilization had deduced that there has to be one God as there is one water, one air or one fire. Likewise there is one blood. A Muslim does not have green (Allah’s colour) blood or Chinese with yellow blood or American with blue blood. Despite his place of origin or his upbringing a human being is the same everywhere. A heart surgeon who can operate a Muslim can operate a Christian or an aborigine with the same tools, techniques and knowledge. But how come the Prophet attacks Hindus with so much hatred and venom that he creates through the bogus Allah a special, brutal Hell for Hindus? He calls Hindus as not simply kafirs, but kafirs of the worst kind, as they are idol worshipers (or mushriks). As a punishment for this fault as well as for the most serious fault of creating partners to Allah by way of worshiping other gods, Hindus, he says, would be thrown into Havia, the most tormenting Hell, where the flames of hell-fire would reach one’s scalp.
Mohammad’s Hell is 70 times more intense than the ordinary fire. Allah has created seven categories of Hell for different kinds of kafirs and the intensity of fire and height of the flames will be different in these Hells. In some Hell, fire will reach the ankles, somewhere it will reach the knees, somewhere to the waist and somewhere to the collar-bone (Sahih Muslim: 6815, 6816). He targets Hindus with such extraordinary venom that he terms them as worst kind of kafirs or mushriks. While the Jews and Christians, for their merit of not being idolatrous, would be thrown into less tormenting Hells.
Allah schedule in Hell is busy. In this eternal Hell-fire, this monstrous Allah would roast the kafirs again and again and again, and every time He will replace their skins with new ones, so that they could suffer this inhuman torture without any pause” (Koran- 4:56). There will be no death for the inmates of the Paradise and no death for the inmates of the Hell (SM: 6827, 6829), AND THIS ANNOUNCEMENT WILL INCREASE THE DELIGHT OF THE DWELLERS OF THE PARADISE, while it would increase the grief of the inmates of the Hell (SM: 6830). Furthermore, the kafirs in Hell would have very strange appearances. For example, the molar teeth or the canine teeth of an unbeliever in Hell would be like Uhud (a hill in the neighbourhood of Mecca) and the thickness of his skin would be three night’s journey (SM: 6831) and the distance between his two shoulders would also be three night’s journey for a swift rider (SM: 6832). Muhammad has seen Amr bin Luhayy bin Qama, brother of Bani Ka’b, dragging his intestines in Hell fire (SM:6838), for the sin of introducing idolatry in Arabia.
While the unbelievers will perish in Hell, the believers, though fallen and evil doers, will joyfully enter Allah’s Paradise where rivers of pure water, milk, pure honey and divine wine are flowing and the Koran says: “Allah will do away with their foulest deeds” (39:35).
It is too laborious to describe in detail Allah’s paradise as mentioned in Koran. Allah himself says, “The righteous shall surely dwell in bliss. Reclining upon soft couches they will gaze around them; and in their faces you shall mark the glow of joy. To dark-eyes houris, We shall wed them. Fruits we shall give them, and such meats as they desire. They will pass from hand to hand a cup inspiring no idle talk, and there shall wait on them YOUNG BOYS of their own as Fair as virgin pearls” (52:17-24). Allah’s brothel has extra enjoyment other than houris to satisfy the unsatiated lust of its mad followers with young boys to sodomize. It is not clear why mullahs are screaming against Delhi HC judgment decriminalizing gays? If Allah approves homosexuality are not the mullahs defaming Islam by opposing the judgment?
The chief attractions of Allah’s Paradise are houris. With so much houris and young boys to be had Allah has also appointed an announcer to avoid any discomfort to the reclining Islamic murderers. “There would be an announcer in Paradise who would make this announcement: Verily, there is in store for you (everlasting) health and that you should never fall ill and that you live (for ever) and do not die at all. And that you would remain young and never grow old. …This is Paradise. You have been made to inherit it for what you used to do” (Sahih Muslim: 6803).
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 08:48 AM
76
"So you want Godse to be elevated to sainthood ?"
Faruki
He was hanged as per Law for his act of killing Gandhi .But History has yet to give its judgement on Gandhi and History has also to give its verdict on Godse's accusations of Gandhi's Muslims' appeasement policies and forcing the Constitunational Govt of India to heed to his whims .
It may be a question of morality for some to give Rs 55 Crores to Pakistan when Kabayali Hordes were looting ,raping ,burning Kashmir .India was at War with Pakistan and Gandhi forced Nehru to finance Pakistani War against India.
From National point of view it is plain treason GADDARI on part of Gandhi and Nehru .
"All assassins have justifications based on their hate dogmas, and some of them do build up a small following of like minded bigots."
Small following ?? Majority of the North Indians and Bangalies specially refugees believe that Godse's was right.Their tribe is increasing .Thanks to Islamic Terrorism .
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 03, 2009 08:17 AM
75
Gandhi was a worldly wise leader. Wasn’t he aware that Prophet Mohammad engineered his Islam to rest on a tripod of treachery, butchery and debauchery? Or should we assume naively that Gandhi did not read history of Muslim treachery and butchery? The prophet of doom had told his followers to spread Islam using the tripod and the best way was to butcher kafirs and satisfy blood thirsty Allah.
Many of us are not aware that we owe our Hindu existence to the sacrifices made by the Sikh gurus and the Sikhs. Had not Sikhs (and Marathas) fought the evil Islam many of us today would have been reading namaaz in a asthma-filled cavernous mosque. India would have been booming with 80 per cent Muslims.
Early in 1675, a group of Kashmiri brahmins visited Anandpur to seek Guru Tegh Bahadur's(father of last guru Guru Gobind Singh) advice. Aurangzeb had ordered the forced conversion of all Hindus and thought that if the respected Kashmiri brahmins accepted Islam, others in the country would be easily converted. They had been given six months to decide or suffer the consequences. Time was running out! Tegh Bahadur advised the brahmins to return to their village and tell the authorities that they would accept Islam if “Guru Tegh Bahadur could first be persuaded to do so.” The guru was called to Delhi and put to death by the rapacious Islamic monster Aurangzeb who has been glorified in NCERT textbooks by Indira Gandhi’s goons. Shortly afterwards Tegh Bahadur’s son Gobind Rai became the 10th and last guru. There was no respite from Islamic monsters. The Moghals captured Guru Gobind's mother and his youngest two sons, aged 9 and 7, and bricked them alive. After the two kids died of suffocation the Islamic monsters beheaded the children and delivered their heads to their grandmother who died of shock at the sight.
I wonder when Islamic monsters do namaaz rocking back and forth what exactly they pray for. There is actually nothing in Koran to pray for except Prophet’s instigation to kill the kafirs and be rewarded with a chance of going to Allah’s brothel where the killers will be copulating with billions of heavenly damsels or houris round the clock. But what would be the nature of ejaculation of such copulations? When a companion of the Prophet asked him to enlighten him on this matter the Prophet said that, ejaculation of semen in Allah’s brothel would be entirely different from an ejaculation in this world:
• Firstly, the semen on an inmate of Allah’s brothel would be a puff of fragrant air and an ejaculation of this peculiar semen would give the inmates a million times more pleasure than and worldly ejaculation.
• Secondly, the worldly ejaculation diminishes the vigour and energy of the man. But it would be entirely opposite in Allah’s brothel. An ejaculation in Allah’s brothel would increase the vigour of the inmate by million times.
There is hardly a single spiritual advice in the whorish, dog-eared Koran. Islam is perversely called a religion giving a new twist to the word "religion." Koran has brought nothing but death, destruction and viral disease to mankind. Yet this strange religion’s blood thirst has not yet been satiated despite ocean of blood having flowed on this unfortunate earth. I am sure Gandhi knew Islam's unquenched thirst for blood and gore as one would know the properties of fire. The barbarism has been continuous down the ages and yet Gandhi ignored it trying to mix oil and water by saying "Ishwar Allah tero naam!". If stupidty should get Oscar this would be it. Today Congress quota whores too have embraced Islam some on the sly some openly. Congress whores manipulate depraved Islamic monsters to win every elections be it assembly of the Lok Sabha. I hope Islam soon goes the way the communist went in Mother Russia. But the scars inflicted by the gory and utterly evil Casanova Prophet Mohammad on this earth will remain for ages to come.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 03, 2009 07:18 AM
74
>> Gandhi appealed to bring sanity to the situation. At some level, as a Hindu, he might have seen himself as a representative of hindus, to reach out to the Muslims.
Whatever he may have perceived himself, and whatever might be the motivation for his appeal, if he made one sided demands, as pointed out by Ganesan via Godse's statement, he was wrong.
Al Bundy
San Francisco, United States
Oct 03, 2009 06:21 AM
73
KUMAR(to Gayatri Devi),
There is a wrong thinking that the moment one digs at the Sangha Parivar he becomes an upright secular.Thats bullshit.
Indians have always condemned terrorism of any hue starting with the Muslims terrorism,christian missionaries terrorism,The Naxalism,The Maoism,ULFA,LTTE etc. But pseudo secular's would keep their ugly and stinking mouth off when we hear the atrocities and violence perpetrated by those fringes and lumpen elements said earlier while they will stand on their toes if they get anything to dig at the Sangha Parivar.There is no discrimination however by majority of Indians when extremism is concerned.How many of the people like you are consistent and have condemned what is happening and what has so far happened in Kashmir.You better learn to practice what you preach and stop searching for the worms in some one else's wounds.
Gandhi is no doubt a unique person through his time tested Gandhigiri,swarajya and sathyagraha.Every great person has blundered once in a while.So is one Gandhi and so are several other Gandhis after him who paid heavily.Gandhi used to say that the partition of the country will only take place over his dead body but he ultimately succumbed to false secular notions and the web sewn by the likes of Nehru and his legacy that led him to blunder in finally agreeing for the partition against wishes of the large section of the Indians.The man who kept such a close and down to earth contact and relationships with the people was hiding the story of agreeing to partition in the background which led to his assassination.But saying that Muslims liked or praised Gandhi is hogwash.The Muslims are known to have conspired with the British for the creation of Pakistan and back stabbing the Indian freedom movement.You better appreciate this fact.
vijay
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 05:34 AM
72
Gayatri/Lalit,
>> i decided that i would not go down on my knees and pray to god for help.
Your right not to pray is as sacred to me as someone else's right to pray.
>> can you honestly believe that i would suck up to anyone at all.
Getting along is not the same thing as sucking up. Insulting Bengalis or UP-ites or Sikhs or Muslims shows neither courage nor character.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 05:30 AM
71
Pretty interesting analysis. Well, there'e been number of critical analysis of Gandhi, from 'sublime failure' to 'miserable failure', mostly in political sense, and in some sense even Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed failed. Partition of India was a failure in the decades long political career of Gandhi. Columnists like Rajinder Puri may make stupid statements that Gandhi's words did not match with his action, since he didn't kill himself after the partition after having declared that the proposed partition of India can only take place over his dead body. But, the words of Einstein about Gandhi really sums up his character,"Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this, ever in flesh and blood, walked upon this earth”, and that is what we need to cherish. It's not for nothing great thinkers and world leaders have taken inspiration and praised Gandhi for his teachings and ideals of nonviolence, which had led Martin Luther King Jr. on his 1959 pilgrimage to India, transformed American society through civil rights movement.
Shyamal Barua
kolkata, India
Oct 03, 2009 04:25 AM
70
kumar
i am no friend of sanghis- they are much too backward
for my tastes.
however they are not like the ss or the gestapo.
if they were then they would have made life miserable for minorities- they are more like sheep in sheeps clothings.
maybe they would be respected more if they wore boots,
black uniforms with the swastik emblem.
the constant demoniseing of the sangh borders on insanity. meanwhile you go around ignoreing the real enemies, who have bombed indian cities,
last time it was in mumbai- get your brain cells checked for memory and just a bit of commonsense.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 04:15 AM
69
faruki
for some time now i have had huge problems-banks,
lawyers, and so forth.
however i decided that i would not go down on my knees
and pray to god for help. if i met god, i would sock him on the chin.
can you honestly believe that i would suck up to anyone
at all. hell never. i leave it to creeps ,who are fanatics, pray several times a day,light candles
or give donations to temples.
yes i think poorly of bongos. they are a maddening
crowd, and with not one guy in bengal with any sense.
all right i think that sikhs should enter the 21 century, and not force their children to wear turbans,
knives etc and be mobbed by their school mates.
i think muslim men should stop wearing skull caps,
and the burqas should be burnt in a bonfire on
guy fawkes day.
does all of this make me a bigot,or a fanatic.
furthermore it is the right of europeans to decide
whom they want to accept, and whom to reject.
it is a fact that pakistani,s are unwelcome and a
burden on britain. they are a constant problem,.
what you are demanding is a welcome for muslims to
enter and be allowed to settle down.
do you make such demands from the arabs. hell no.
strange is it not,that you demand so much from people
of another race,another culture and religion, and
so little from fellow muslims. you are the fanatic,
who can not see this as being thoroughly unreasoneable.
it makes me sick to read your bias against white people, your constant moaning and whineing and claims that they have a devine ordained duty to admit all kinds of weirdos.
hell mr jinnah would agree with me. kamal attaturk would be on my side.
only the real mullahs , missionary choir boys would call me a fanatic.
the prisiness, hypocracy , prejudice, and false saintliness of some posters make me puke.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 03:41 AM
68
Gayatri Devi,
>> you and kumar share a passion of demoniseing the sanghi,s
Why should there be a discrimination while condemning violent religious extremists? Your passionate support for such elements is for you to worry about. Be consistent in condemning of violent extremists and be consistent in assertion of rights/justice of people and much of your troubles in this forum will disappear.
>> i can understand why most muslims praise gandhi
Most people of all religions, nationalities praise Gandhi. That’s because most people can comprehend and appreciate the greatness in ideas like reaching out to people, desiring justice even for people of other community/race etc. If most Muslims do praise Gandhi, I appreciate that.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 03:16 AM
67
Gayatri/Lalit,
>> on islam i agree with the speeches i have heard ...
Religion was not being discussed. Whenever you and other hate-pracharaks like Seshadri lose an argument, you attack religion or the "mullahs". I called you a neo-Nazi nutcase because you have applauded extreme right wing European politicians who are against "colored" immigration, expressed your hatred of Indians in genreral and of "Bongos", UP-ites and Sikhs in particular, and have even boasted that you are white-skinned! In any case it is idiotic to bring in religion when discussing political creeds such as the RSS, the Congress, the Muslim League, the neo-Nazis or the neocons.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 03:04 AM
66
Gayatri Devi
Hats off to you.
As far as I know, you are the only woman regularly posting on this website.
Your postings are full of blunt commonsense. They show more sense than that of nearly all the men here !
Some of your language is a bit over the top for a lady.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 03, 2009 03:01 AM
65
ANWAAR berates assassins, yet on this very website he has repeatedly adulated as "freedom fighters" the Afghan mojahedin - some of the worst throat-slitters the world has ever seen, mercilessly cruel to Hindus, Sikhs and ther own women.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 03, 2009 02:48 AM
64
VARUN
I find this whining about Partition by Hindus utterly ridiculous.
It was of course accompanied by great and tragic human losses.
But why don't these miracles of brainlessness ask what was the alternative?
An India with 25 per cent Muslim population was by 1946 in fearsome danger of being reduced to total shambles by Musim-Hindu riots and massacres. Do they suppose an India united with the Pakis and the Bangladeshis, about 35 per cent Muslim and increasingly so all the time - with as prospective Muslim majority in a cfew decades - would be peaceful?
How stupid do you have to be to believe that?
Don't we KNOW what Muslims are like, by now? How stubborn, how ferociously communal? How contemptuous of a free, critical culture?
In 1946, the Interim government to prepare Independence headed by Nehru was utterly stalled by pig-headed Muslim determination to obstruct each and every measure.
Even Nehru, inclined to make endless excuses for Muslims, was completely exhausted and disillusioned. As he said, even Partition was better than this descent into governmental paralysis and social mass killing.
He saw that the choice was either a smaller India with a strong government, or the bigger India without any semblance of unity and with the Muslims able to veto everything they chose. Either be the hostages of Muslim blackmailers and mass murderers, or accept Pakistan. That was Nehru's choice.
Nehru chose Pakistan.
How can we blame him now?
Gandhi led Hindus to the edge of doom with his naive policies toward Muslims.
As good fortune would have it, Nehru pulled us back at the last moment.
Hats off to him !!!!
Put this antiquated donkey Puri out to grass.
Iqbal Z
Pune, India
Oct 03, 2009 02:33 AM
63
Gayatri Devi,
>> on islam i agree with the speeches i have heard along with many others from exmuslims.
You are welcome to join them in criticism of Islam (or any religion that you chose to criticize).
>> there is absolutely no hate for you or muslims ...
And you should assert the rights/justice of all innocent citizens and human beings. That’s when you can take the first step to call yourself a liberal.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 01:01 AM
62
faruki
we agree on climate change, population growth,and
perhaps on choice of wines and music.
we disagree when you call me a fascist nut,and when i point out what i believe is right.
on islam i agree with the speeches i have heard along
with many others from exmuslims. these are by very respected people
you claim that i have misunderstood them.
my critique against islam is not based on hate.
it is simply saying what is seen,read or heard on a
daily basis in the european media.
i wish we could attend a q and a session with say
ayan hirsi ali- dr wafa sultan would be too much.
there is absolutely no hate for you or muslims. i think
muslims are a troubled community. you should reform
or modernise them.
that is a huge task for any one- but maybe you can
do it with the blessing of allah.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 12:45 AM
61
Gayatri/Lalit,
Your hate mail is too offensive to reply. You have reached the depth that you do every few months.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 12:38 AM
60
Varun,
>>>> "So you want Godse to be elevated to sainthood?"
>> Why don't you instead elevate your hero Jinnah to sainthood?
We were talking of assassins. But if you want to worship Godse, you of course are free to do so.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 03, 2009 12:33 AM
59
Varun Shekhar,
>> Gandhi went out of his way to help Moslems, even to the extent of causing discomfort to Hindu refugees. Appeasement and one-sided assistance ...
The conflict that was going on is a communal one, with both sides not caring about finer aspects like right/justice of innocent citizens etc. It is just about dominance, mistrust, plain communal hatred etc. Gandhi appealed to bring sanity to the situation. At some level, as a Hindu, he might have seen himself as a representative of hindus, to reach out to the Muslims. Reaching out is possibly the only sensible thing to do for anyone. Things like aggressive rhetoric etc only further worsens the behavior of both hindus and Muslims. It needs some greatness to think of reaching out. Just like there is a section that felt that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was too lenient and compromising, there are those like Godse to whom it is really beyond the spiritual/moral/philosophical comprehension to even understand what it is all about. Communalism, violence, aggression, bloodshed etc is the only philosophy they ever understand. It is a pity.
>> As to your Mullah Omar remark
Well, that’s an exaggerated remark, but the point is that there are enough of things almost at any part of the world where there is a need to fight for rights/justice etc, and one doesnt have to go Pakistan/Afganistan etc in search of issues. That silly to suggest (But Gayatri thinks he is making a great point)
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 03, 2009 12:33 AM
58
"Gandhi's portrait did adorn Obama's Senate office."
My question was did he write anything in his book. Any ways thanks for the info.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 03, 2009 12:16 AM
57
vijay aggarwal
i mentioned my sister in england who prefers to
cook ,shop herself rather then live in new delhi,
with the usual upper class life style.
same goes for me. i prefer to cook, wash up then live
in my sisters absoltely beautiful home with all manners
of comfort.
it is not to brag- just that the luxurios life style
is not so great, when i see poor people struggleing
the whole day. its the puritan in me.
i hate eating in expensive 5 stars, knowing that the
price of my meal is not much smaller then the pay of
the domestic staff.
we disagree on many points- i am not perturbed and
neither should you be.
if the britts had not come to india, we would hve been like nepal, afghanistan or pakistan.
india respected its british heritage and built on
this foundation.
pakistan decided to build an islamic fortress instead.
the differences can be seen.
i dont expect to convince you.
let us agree to disagree.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 03, 2009 12:05 AM
56
Gayatri Devi,
>> your main objective is to attack hindus.
Why don’t you quote a line from me proving your contention. You don’t even try to make a sensible argument or even try to substantiate etc. That’s the reason you never quote anyone – you just go about shooting aimlessly.
>> cowardly scum bag ..not surpriseing.a pail needs shit.
You can’t substantiate a single thing that you throw at others. You just want to pick up whatever words come to your mind and throw it on others, hoping that that it will drive away people. You are very mistaken. That you are so troubled for nothing tells a story of its own. It proves that one does not have to go to pakistan or afganistan etc. There's enough of good, bad, ugly every part of the world.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:54 PM
55
faruki
regarding nazism, it is exceeded any day in viciousness
and extremism by islam.
we see this in the speeches by muslim clerics, in the
education given in marassahs, in the words in the
koran, the harsh laws of blasphemy and apostasy.
it is seen in the governance of muslim countries,
and how they behave in the international community.
i will not go into details, because they are known to
all who wish to know them.
i have friends in norway, denmark, sweden ,england
and i correspond with some muslim journalists. they
eccho my views. i have written about their views
several times.
you pretend that i dont understand speeches by exmuslims in usa, england.these are easily understandable, and proof of this is that they are
hated by some members of the muslim community, some
of whom are willing to kill them.
false pretence, denials, out right lies are the weapons of cowards and losers.
i have said that liberals should support liberals
liveing in muslim countries. i certainly do.india should invite them for visits, and support them in every possible way.
however this does not mean that i will refuse to see the reality of islam,or that of any other religion.
you have chosen to defend islam and muslims regardless
of what is seen on the ground.by doing so you have let down the liberals in pakistan and amongst muslims in
india.i support all of these people who fight for
their rights .
this means little to you. you and kumar share a passion
of demoniseing the sanghi,s, none of whom have i ever
met. none can be seen or heard in new delhi, ot there
abouts. you have a grouse against bjp, even when they are relatively honest and provide good government.
for both of you hate and grouses against your enemies are far more important then the reform of your own
communities.
your attacks are solely directed against sanghis,
when the real devils who plague muslims, are bigoted
muslims themselves. there is general agreement about this in all forums.
i can understand why most muslims praise gandhi.
he did what they wanted, in the futile hope that
they would listen to him. it did not work.
i think its fair to say that those who have an obsessional hate against parivar , and want to work selectively for their own communities will be paid back in kind.
my motto is-
fairness all ways.
appeasement- never-
that is the mindset of europeans now. after july 2005
train bombings,tony blair announced- the rules of the
game have changed. pakistani,s know this.
dont play smart misuseing words like fascists or nazi,s
for people like me. if you are looking for such people,you will find many much closer in your own
community.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:42 PM
54
"So you want Godse to be elevated to sainthood?"
Why don't you instead elevate your hero Jinnah to sainthood? After all, you could argue, and many people do, that he delivered the heroic and hard-done-by Moslems from the evil clutches of the colonial, communal, polytheistic Hindu majority. He had to get 500,000 people killed in the process, but what matter?
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 02, 2009 11:35 PM
53
Ganesan,
>> His great contribution to India would be on the issue of untouchability.
First time you have something good to say about Gandhi. Thank you.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 11:32 PM
52
Ganesan,
>> Or it is just another one of those things which people do each year-a ritual?
Gandhi's portrait did adorn Obama's Senate office. Since both Gandhi and Obama are your big heros (wink wink!), I can understand your wanting to know.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 11:19 PM
51
Ghai,
>> Gandhi has been painted a saint and Godse a devil.
So you want Godse to be elevated to sainthood? All assassins have justifications based on their hate dogmas, and some of them do build up a small following of like minded bigots.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 11:08 PM
50
Let's also remember that Nathuram Godse, who committed a crime and had to be punished, was once an ardent Congress supporter, in fact less than a decade before his infamous action. He and many like him must have been disgusted at how the Congress made concession after concession to the Moslem League goons, and that too without getting any assurances from them of equitable behaviour.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 02, 2009 11:07 PM
49
""Social Conservatives and other such distasteful vermin are typically considered right wing."
Saints like Stalin and Mao are considered left wing. I guess it is better to be a vermin than to be a Stalinist.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 10:58 PM
48
"Gandhi could see humans as humans and not merely by religious identity, which you cannot stand nor comprehend. That is your problem. "
If Gandhi was able to see that, he would have not seen muslims who should be constantly appeased for unity. He would have acted neutral in hindu-muslim disputes. Instead, he always found a justification for muslim violence but scolded hindus for their violence.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 10:49 PM
47
"Social Conservatives and other such distasteful vermin are typically considered right wing."
Tsk tsk, such fanatical intolerance for legitimate thinking. There are left-liberals who can see that there is a much bigger danger from Islamic terrorism and Islamist ideology, than from mercurial Hindu aggressiveness in the shape of the VHP, or Christian bible thumpers, bad as they are. For one, the Islamic threat is global, relentless, gratuitously violent and totalitarian. The same can hardly be said of the VHP's programme. Incidentally, Christopher Hitchens is one intellectual on the Left, who correctly sees the big danger from Islamism, and the necessity of combating/countering it, without in any way drawing an equivalence to any 'right wing' tendencies in Hinduism, Judaism or Animism. He's not the only one.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 02, 2009 10:37 PM
46
"Gandhi could see humans as humans and not merely by religious identity, which you cannot stand nor comprehend. That is your problem."
But that's just the problem. Gandhi went out of his way to help Moslems, even to the extent of causing discomfort to Hindu refugees. Appeasement and one-sided assistance is not sufficient for 'seeing people as human beings'. As to your Mullah Omar remark, you don't realise who or what Mullah Omar is. Do you think you can have the kind of discussions with a character like that, that you can with Indians on this message board. You could have it with the VHP and RSS, without a doubt. Not with the Taliban or Al-Qaeda or the Lashkar.
Varun Shekhar
Toronto, CANADA
Oct 02, 2009 10:36 PM
45
Gayatri/Lalit (to Kumar),
>> scared of the real bigots like mullah omar...
Do you want Kumar to go to Afghanistan and fight Mullah Omar? How stupid can you be?
>> attacking western liberals like me.
Your calling yourself a Western liberal is a joke. You are the exact opposite of a Western liberal or an Indian liberal. You are a right wing, sanghi, racist, communalist, neo-Nazi nut!
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 10:30 PM
44
Godse's final speech in the court:
http://ngodse.tripod.com/defense.htm
prometheus
kolkata, India
Oct 02, 2009 10:22 PM
43
Gayatri aka banito aka lalit
Thanks for the compliment ... I am glad I am not an old rotten egg.
However, I must say it is rather unfortunate that you have not fully comprehended the gist of my post. I don't dream of "old india" and I am not blaming the British people. But, yes, I am justified in exposing their colonial, geo-strategic and economic policies that caused the exploitation and division of India. Even today, their foreign policies in collusion with USA have a lot to answer for the ethnic and political problems that world faces today ... in Palestine, South Asia, Africa, Middle East etc.
Besides, the argument that Britain modernised India is a cantakerous one. The spread of modern science and technology is not restricted or facilitated by borders or rulers for it would have come to India any way with or without the British like, the tremendous advances India has made today after the British left, even surpassed them, in IT, Nuclear Energy, Satellite comms/navigation, Ship building and Rocketry etc. Yes, they brought Railways and Telegraph, built roads and bridges, established big ports and cities to consolidate and secure their empire basically, not to help the agrarian rural economy of India. The Indian village system was robbed of its inherent traditional wealth by an unscrupulous tax regime which made the farmers landless and forced them to migrate to cities - a trend that has still not been reversed ...
I am sorry but it is the British policies preceding the independence largely that caused the mistrust between the Hindus and Muslims, for if they really wanted they could have easily prevented the bloodshed and eased a peaceful transfer of power. After all they controlled the police and the military but did nothing to prevent communal riots in Bengal and Punjab. For the fact is that they let it happen ... why did they not put Jinnah and Muslim League leaders in jail when they threatened the "Direct Action" to get Pakistan ?
Your point about English is a bit vacuous and dull too. For English was "given" to "little brown Indians" only to "civilise" and "educate" them to serve the Raj as clerks and despise their own history and culture. No, we must take the full credit ourselves for educating us with the means available under the British rule.
Then, its our own excellence and scholarship that surfaced and we produced brilliant scholars in all fields, law, science, arts and medicine etc. that enabled us to set up our own institutions of higher studies, IITs and IIMs that are now the envy of the world.
How can be this be relegated to just the British rule and English language only ... of course it was and is most easily accessible medium of modern education available to us and we have chosen it and mastered it ...
I don't mean to upset you, but there is hardly any need here to mention your opulent family in UK/USA with 2/3 cars, or that Lakshmi Mittal is your personal friend in order to make your point ...
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 02, 2009 10:20 PM
42
kumar
so like faruki you are fighting bigots like mullah omar in this forum.
this says everything about you.
you are a cowardly scum bag who is scared of the real
bigots like mullah omar, but play safe by attacking western liberals like me.under a pseudo name.
i dislike people like you with moral pretensions, when your main objective is to attack hindus.
you deserve to be kicked out of india. join your islamic brothers in pakistan.
i have said several times, that some members of the minorities in india have ganged up against the hindus.
it is a safe pass time.it shows basically their hatred
for their past heritage.
it surprises me that you have chosen pakistanis as
partners. not surpriseing.a pail needs shit.
if the rss is against traitors like you, then it is
understandable.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 09:27 PM
41
Gayatri Devi,
>> nathuram godse killed gandhi because he thought that he was immune to the sufferings of hindu refugees, who came to india after experienceing real horror.
Gandhi could see humans as humans and not merely by religious identity, which you cannot stand nor comprehend. That is your problem.
>> do you wonder that some people despise you in this form .. any one can see that you are a thick skinned guy
Yes, the supporters of violent religious extremists. I am not surpised the least. In fact, thats the whole point why I visit this forum.
>> go become a missionary in pakistan
There are enough of Mullah Omars here as well. Don't have to go anywhere.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 09:22 PM
40
Godse committed a very foolish act by murdering Gandhi and deserved to be hanged. Nevertheless, his statement in court is one of the best indictments against Gandhi.
"'About Kashmir, Gandhiji again and again declared that Sheikh Abdullah should be entrusted the charge of the State and that the Maharaja of Kashmir should retire to Benares for no particular reason than that the Muslims formed the bulk of the Kashmiri population. This stands out in contrast with his attitude on Hyderabad where although the bulk of the population is Hindu, Gandhiji never called upon the Nizam to retire to Mecca.
'About this very time he resorted to his fast unto death. Every condition given by him for giving up that fast is in favour of Muslims and against the Hindus. One of the seven conditions was to the effect that all the mosques in Delhi which were occupied by the refugees should be vacated… and be made over to the Muslims. Gandhiji got this condition accepted by the Government… Those were the days of bitter or extreme cold and on the day Gandhiji broke his fast, it was also raining. Families after families of refugees who had come to Delhi for shelter were driven out and while doing so no provision was made for their shelter and stay.
'The decision to withhold the payment of Rs 55 crores to Pakistan was taken by our government which claims to be the people's government. But this decision of the people's Government was reversed to suit the tune of Gandhiji's fast.
'All his fasts were to coerce Hindus. "
He was spot on about how Gandhi treated hindus and muslims. Gandhi was a classic appeaser-he thought by giving into every muslim demand, he could unite hindus and muslims. In the end, the country was partitioned.
Gandhi never took a moral stand. He was prepared to lecture hindus but never muslims. He demanded certain things from hindus but never from muslims. How will this unite two groups? One group will feel it can get more concessions while the other will feel getting screwed.
Had he acted as a Judge between hindus and muslims-instead of being a lawyer pleading muslim's case to hindus, history might have been different.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 09:21 PM
39
"His great contribution to India would be on the issue of untouchability. "
That is true sir.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 09:11 PM
38
kumar
nathuram godse killed gandhi because he thought that
he was immune to the sufferings of hindu refugees,
who came to india after experienceing real horror.
instead of helping them he kept on trying to please muslims, and muslims alone.
you are not bothered about the killings of christians
in pakistan.
where are your morals, your conscience.you have none.
you are one of the miserable missionary christians,
who has no love for india, or its people.
instead you keep babbling about morals, which your
opponents should follow.
do you wonder that some people despise you in this form. any one can see that you are a thick skinned guy with little intelligence, and a pain in the butt.
stop your miserable pontificateing to us.- go become a missionary in pakistan, and let us know how you get on.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 09:00 PM
37
Since I have been critical of Gandhi on multiple issues, I think I should also state where he was right and where he achieved success.
His great contribution to India would be on the issue of untouchability. Many people before him(like Narayana Guru) have fought against it but it was Gandhi who made the issue national. And given his stature, he had more impact on the issue than anyone else. For that, he deserves the gratitude of all Indians-especially hindus.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 08:41 PM
36
Have a peep in Indian History of those times !
http://search1.redif...aval%20mutiny%201946
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 08:37 PM
35
Baggai ji
Congress ruled for decades after Independence .It perpetuated one sided History.All the credit for Independence was given to Gandhi,Nehru and Congress.Contributions of Bose and others are hardly mentioned.Gandhi was elevated to the prime position .
True the contribution of Congress are great.But to claim that India got independence solely due to Gandhi -Nehru is great falsification of the History.
England had been very badly mauled in WW-2.Financially it had become broke.German Air Force had turned it into a Nation of rubble.England had no strenght left or will to control its Empire .Sri Lanka got freedom,Burma got freedom,Far Eastern Nations got independence,African countries became free .
There was no Gandhi with them .
The Indian Naval Mutiny 18th February 1946 had shaken the very foundations of British Empire . Britishers realised they could no more control India .Royal Air Force too simultaneously faced unrest .Nearly one Million Defence ranks were demobbed after World War Two .There was restlessness among them .India itself was emptied of its wealth .Agriculture was in doldrums .Food stocks had crashed.
India was ready to throw the yoke of slavery !
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 08:23 PM
34
The usual homilies have been said about Gandhi. The one new feature this year was that the Messiah Obama decided to weigh in as well-calling him his real hero( I guess Saul ALinsky is a distant second).
That aside, the Messiah has written two books. The last time I checked, one book did not have any index. The second book had an index but no mention of Gandhi. Does anyone know if he has written about Gandhi in any one of his books? Or it is just another one of those things which people do each year-a ritual?
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 08:08 PM
33
"Gandhi wrote to Jinnah seeking permission to settle down in Pakistan in order to work for Indo-Pakistan unity. Jinnah concurred"
Why wouldnt he? A Gandhi sitting in Pakistan sending instructions to the Indian govt would have been the perfect embarrassment to the Indian govt and Indians. Jinnah would have to be a total fool to let go this wonderful opportunity.
Yet again, it shows the naivette of Gandhi. After all his failures, all his strategies and tactics going up in flames, he did not learn one lesson from his 30+ year career in India.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 07:41 PM
32
Gayatri Devi,
>> think nathu ram godse was a true indian patriot. he proved this by dieing for his convictions.
If dying for convictions is your "proof" for being a great man, then the suicide bombers should be high on that list.
>> predictability few have the courage and moral fibre to say so in india
The problem is not with the people, but with your faulty idea of what constitutes moral fibre/courage.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 07:18 PM
31
mr ghai
thank you sir.
i was awed by gandhi in my school days .
however this awe turned to sceptipism and even a bit
of contempt as i saw his actions . he took sides
against the britts and for the islamists, even going
to the extent of supporting the ali brothers regarding the caliphate issue.
his antimodernism, quaint eccentricities , and odd
moral choices put me off.
i will not say he was a hypocrite. just lacking in
good commonsense.
his falling out with the britts could also be due to
his eccentric and illogical mindset.
in the end everyone mourned over him in india. he
was named the father of the nation- and his name
is allways mentioned when there is occasion for it.
i think nathu ram godse was a true indian patriot.
he proved this by dieing for his convictions.
predictability few have the courage and moral fibre
to say so in india.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 06:26 PM
30
kumar
scandinavian countries have reduced their aid to africa, knowing that it was being siphoned off by
corrupt leaders.
they made this choice after years of dismal experience.
thank god that people can make judgements on people
whether they are deserveing or not.fools like you are
against this.
i doubt that you will do anything for anyone. all your
writeing express your hate for sanghis.
you have no morals when it comes to pakistani,s
killing christians. in this case you distance yourself
and take a swipe at the sanghis.
buddy you are pure dumb. you would not know truth if it hit you as a truck.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 05:36 PM
29
I think Patel and Nehru knew about the Hindu refugees' anger against Gandhi and were lax in security. Maybe they preferred a dead Gandhi than a living Gandhi who has become senile by that time.
I can agree with Nehru and Patel, partition is the best thing to have happened to India in recent history.
Selvan
Boston, United States
Oct 02, 2009 05:28 PM
28
Nathuram Godse in his defence had said that he was not against Muslims .He was against Partition and represented forces which wanted reunification .Gandhi was forcing Nehru to adopt measures during war which were pro Pakistan and were harmfull to Inida .Hence Gose decided to kill Gandhi as per Godse.
That was 62 yrs back .In these years Gose's version and his Defence submissions in the Gandhi murder case are not being allowed to be published.We only know one sided version .Where Gandhi has been painted a saint and Godse a devil .
To honestly understand the reasons behind Godse's actions Govt should should release Godse's version too?
Inidans are mature enough to judge themselves
(corrected, Sorry )
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 05:21 PM
27
Muslims .He was against Partition and repesented forces which wanted reunification .Gandhi was forcing Nehru to adopt measures during war which were pro Pakistan and were harmfull to Inida .Hence Gose decided to kill GanNathuram Godse in his defence had said that he was not against dhi.
That was 62 yrs back .In these years Gose's version and his Defence submissions in the Gandhi murder case are not being allowed to be published.We only know one sided version .Where Gandhi has been painted a saint and Godse a devil .
To honestly understand the reasons behind Godse's actions Govt should should release Godse's version too?
Inidans are mature enough to judge themselves .
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Oct 02, 2009 05:02 PM
26
Gandhi was a worldly wise leader. Wasn’t he aware that Prophet Mohammad engineered his Islam to rest on a tripod of treachery, butchery and debauchery? Or should we assume naively that Gandhi did not read history of Muslim treachery and butchery? The prophet of doom had told his followers to spread Islam using the tripod and the best way was to butcher kafirs and satisfy blood thirsty Allah.
Many of us are not aware that we owe our Hindu existence to the sacrifices made by the Sikh gurus and the Sikhs. Had not Sikhs (and Marathas) fought the evil Islam many of us today would have been reading namaaz in a asthma-filled cavernous mosque. India would have been filled with 80 per cent Muslims.
Early in 1675, a group of Kashmiri brahmins visited Anandpur to seek Guru Tegh Bahadur's(father of last guru Guru Gobind Singh) advice. Aurangzeb had ordered the forced conversion of all Hindus and thought that if the respected Kashmiri brahmins accepted Islam, others in the country would be easily converted. They had been given six months to decide or suffer the consequences. Time was running out! Tegh Bahadur advised the brahmins to return to their village and tell the authorities that they would accept Islam if “Guru Tegh Bahadur could first be persuaded to do so.” The guru was called to Delhi and put to death by the rapacious Islamic monster Aurangzeb who has been glorified in NCERT textbooks by Indira Gandhi’s goons. Shortly afterwards Tegh Bahadur’s son Gobind Rai became the 10th and last guru. There was no respite from Islamic monsters. The Moghals captured Guru Gobind's mother and his youngest two sons, aged 9 and 7, and bricked them alive. After the two kids died of suffocation the Islamic monsters beheaded the children and delivered their heads to their grandmother who died of shock at the sight.
I wonder when Islamic monsters do namaaz what exactly they pray for. There is actually nothing in Koran to pray for except Prophet’s instigation to kill the kafirs. There is hardly a spiritual advice in the evil book. Islam is called religion which has given a new twist to the word "religion." Koran has brought nothing but death, destruction and disease to mankind. Yet this strange religion’s blood thirst has not yet been satiated despite ocean of blood having flowed on this unfortunate earth. I am sure Gandhi knew Islam's unquenched thirst for blood and gore as one would know the properties of fire. The barbarism has been continuous down the ages and yet Gandhi ignored it. I hope Islam soon goes the way the communist went in Mother Russia. But the scars inflicted by the gory and utterly evil Prophet Mohammad on this earth will remain for ages to come.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 02, 2009 04:52 PM
25
Rajinder Puri is very kind in his assessment about Gandhi - a kindness brought about no doubt, by his absolute lack of desire to taint, what is, by way of populist perspective, the holiest of holy cows!
Shiv Adiseshan
Chennai, India
Oct 02, 2009 04:28 PM
24
kumar
what explanation do you have for the mantle of saint
hood that you flaunt- something like karzais.
i have spent a lot of time and money in doing what is possible for the underprivileged in india. i have worked for save the children organisation, and am now
doing work as an ngo in climate change.
i resent your hectoreing moral tone, when i know exactly what i am doing,and suspect that you are doing damn all.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 04:15 PM
23
vijay aggarwal
old indians ,especially from the north keeps dreaming
of old india,despite many rude shocks from pakistani,s
they keep on blameing britain, depite the fact that
this country has modernised india, and even given you
a language which provides you with professional
opportunities, and to express yourself.
no one expected the massacres which followed partition.
in no way was britain responsible for the partition.
putting the blame for the civilisational devide on the
britts is a denial of reality.
britain is not responsible for all the miseries of
india or pakistan. in fact what has britain gained from
its erstwhile colonies.
the country is flooded by pakistani,s who are an economic burden, and a paralell society which has devided the nation.
indians are doing well, or at least some of them are.
lakshmi mittal is the richesti in all england.
i know that my sister despite owning a house in south
delhi, with 2 cars, chauffer, 2 in house maids, much prefers her modest life style in reading as a retired gp.
all my relations in usa are happy and content. were it
not for their aged parents,they would seldom visit the
old country. for that matter neither would i, though
i stay in new delhi with my opulent sister on my
yearly visits.
indians are amazeingly fond of the pakistani,s and
think badly of western countries, where they are very
comfortably off.
this is not meant to annoy you vijay. i think you are
a decent old egg-to use p.g.woodhouse language.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 04:06 PM
22
Gayatri Devi,
>> people are entitled to express their opinions on any subject, without the proviso that they must first take affirmative action before doing so.
I did not say that you are not entitled to your express their opinions. Nor did I say that one must first take affirmative action before doing so. I only remarked about the whole approach/attitude towards the issue of some people/group's current social-educational-economic standards being less. What desire does that provoke in you? That’s the question. And I am not surprised that your family members are appalled.
>> you have been told off by manypeople ...
They are supporters of violent extremists etc, that’s why they are uncomfortable, and that is exactly the point.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 03:54 PM
21
kumar
people are entitled to express their opinions on any subject, without the proviso that they must first
take affirmative action before doing so.
india ,and especially me have little opportunity of
helping africans.
sarkosy the french president remarked about africa-
in essence,he said that africans did not have the
desire or wish to join the mainstream.
as a consequence france would discontinue its close
relationship with africa. now write and come up with
a rebuke to him.
stop thinking like a village pastor-
by the way what exactly do you do to serve suffering
humanity, besides your endless pontifaceteing.
you have been told off by manypeople about this.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 03:41 PM
20
Gayatri Devi,
>> starting the debate i made a remark about negroes, and said it is possible that in view of their performance they could be less intellectually endowed then the whites and asians.
>> this ended the peace and bon homie that had prevailed til then.
Being "less intellectually endowed" might be a current 'apparent' condition of a proportionately larger percentage among some sections/races/castes etc for various reasons. But I think the larger question is this: When you see a people whose social-economic-educational standards seem less, what does it provoke you? Does it provoke you to merely make a callous remark that the race is not intellectually endowed? Or does it provoke a desire to reach out and educate and empower them etc. I think your family members are appalled not so much by the observation that many black african nations are not doing very well (which everyone knows anyway, you don’t have to educate them on that), but the whole approach you are taking and where you are getting at, in reaction to the issue.
Kumar
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 03:04 PM
19
sandy
we think alike- it is good to know this.
years ago i was holidaying with my family in portugal.
one afternoon we debated the subject of race,sure to
inflame all indians.
participants- my sister and brotherinlaw-both prosperous doctors in britain.
another sister and brotherin law . he a retired ias
guy working as consultant for the world bank. my sister -person i admire immensely- is an artist, social worker , astrologer, excellent house wife,mother,sister, aunt and so forth.
starting the debate i made a remark about negroes, and said it is possible that in view of their performance they could be less intellectually endowed then the whites and asians.
this ended the peace and bon homie that had prevailed
til then. i underlined that i was not saying that negroes were inferior but that this could be debated.
i realised at once that no one would have objected if
i had said that we asians, and especially indians were
more intelligent then the whites.
i believe that for what ever reason the white nations are generally doing much better then the others,save
for a few asian exceptions.
there is no white nation which is down and out as one finds in africa, latin america or asia.
there are no whites liveing in huts with children not
getting a chance to go to school. the poorest european countries are doing notably better then india.
the only non white nations doing well are the arabs,
who are blessed with giant oil incomes.however remarkably even the poor arab countries are better off
then the poor african countries like sudan, ethiopia,
congo and so forth.
conclusion- indians are beset with strange complexes which prevents them from thinking rationally.
the few who were rational and canny were leaders
like rajajee-founder of swatantara party- patel,
j.r.d.tata and one or two more.
nehru was rational but had a great weakness for
socialist dogma. he did a lot of good,but also quite
a bit of harm.never bothered about the population
explosion.
india badly needs clear headed thinkers- if there are
any then i can not see or hear them.
the communist leaders are from another age. the congress is devoid of leadership,though there are several young ones,but then who are scared to say anything new.tharoor said something meant to be funny,and was given a talking to as a naughty school boy by marm.
the bjp is antimodernist.
the less said of mayawati, mulayam singh and lalloo the
better.
if india is in such dire straits,then imagine the state
of african countries. zimbabwe is ruled by mugabe.
south africa by zuma. there was the emperor bokassa who
was accused of cannibalism.libya is ruled by gaddafi.
i can understand why people buy skin whiteners-
now this is meant as a joke. i dont want the usual suspects to get a fit, and start attacking me.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 02:30 PM
18
In my opinion there is not much to be gained from hypothesizing and splitting hair over whether Partition of India was an historical certainty and could not possibly have been avoided without a great deal of bloodshed. For the bloodshed did happen and we are now a divided people in the sub-continent not only by geographical borders but also by civilisational ethos and intellect.
For British historians it must really be a poignant exercise in order to exonerate their country totally from the holocaust that followed while leaving India after feting it for over 300 years in just six "Mountbatten" months ...
For they must now be witnessing like penitent monkeys with more than just a pinch of salt that their "strategic" creation straddled between oil rich Middle East, Central Asia and India, has become the hot-bed of Islamic fundamentalism and a terrorist incubator that has turned on themselves, instead of being an instrument of serving their interests in the region.
It indeed must be history's biggest joke and West's biggest strategic loss that this brutal creation in the name of Islam is now being used by China to weaken India ... who now clearly see themselves as new Britons in Asia and Indian Ocean ...
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 02, 2009 02:26 PM
17
In my opinion there is not much to be gained from hypothesizing and splitting hair over whether Partition of India was an historical certainty and could not possibly have been avoided without a great deal of bloodshed. For the bloodshed did happen and we are now a divided people in the sub-continent not only by geographical borders but also by civilisational ethos and intellect.
For British historians it must really be a poignant exercise in order to exonerate their country totally from the holocaust that followed while leaving India after feting it for over 300 years in just six "Mountbatten" months ... for they must now be witnessing like penitent monkeys with more than just a pinch of salt that their "strategic" creation straddled between oil rich Middle East, Central Asia and India, has become the hot-bed of Islamic fundamentalism and a terrorist incubator that has turned on themselves, instead of being an instrument of serving their interests in the region. It indeed must be history's biggest joke and West's biggest strategic loss that this brutal creation in the name of Islam is now being used by China to weaken India ... who now clearly see themselves as new Britons in Asia and Indian Ocean ...
Vijay Agarwal
Northampton, United Kingdom
Oct 02, 2009 02:19 PM
16
reddy
islam works on the fuhrer principle, as in fascism.
both have one leader-
in islam it is mohammed, and he has even more claims
on his followers then either mussolini or hitler even
dreamt of.
mohammed asked of his followes-
you must love me more then your own parents
anyone who blasphems should be killed
anyone who is an apostate should be killed.
my word is law,with the sanctity of god.
even mussolini and hitler did not make such claims.
has any leader of rss make such claims-
islamists and left wing people use words like fascist, nazi as insults, ignoreing the facts that their own
idealogies are closer to giveing all power to their
own leaders.
communists use such insults against the democratic
free capitalist countries. despite the fact that mao
and stalin had absolute power, not equalled by any one
in the west.
for example winston churchill was booted out by the
british people after victory against hitler in 1946.
nixon was close to impeachment after water gate.
who are the nazis or the fascists.they are dead and gone.
islam and communism remain. in neither place will you
find liberty or freedom of speech. in afghanistan
women were beaten should they dared to laugh. a
muslim who converted to christianity was sentenced to death by the supreme court, and had to be hurriedly
evacuated by the italian govt.
you are one of the unread mindless zombies who does not
know the difference between chalk and cheese, beset
with a huge inferiority complex.
gayatri devi
delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 02:03 PM
15
I would like India and Pakistan to be one nation. There is nothing that separates an Indian from a Pakistani, because I do not believe that religion should be a divisive factor, among those who believe in God. I admire some Muslims, like Maulana Azad very ardently. Hindu's and Muslim's should have the freedom to be helpful to each other, and should prosper equally. I am sure Gandhiji would have also wanted this for India. India is home for a variety of religious identities, like Jew's and very old Christian congregation's, such as in Kerala. It would be a matter of pride, if all of India would advance and prosper, and Pakistan would be a part of our prosperity.
Aditya Mookerjee
Belgaum, India
Oct 02, 2009 12:37 PM
14
Partition of India would have happened later if not in 1947, Gandhi or no Gandhi or any other great or not so great leader!Who can stop the flow of History? And Partitition may happen again, may be in 50 years and a re-unification in another 100 years.Who can stop the flow of History?
K.C.Sharma
Delhi, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:41 AM
13
>> Anybody can google a friggin definition
Except, it seems, the bina chaddhi wallah crowd.
Al Bundy
San Francisco, United States
Oct 02, 2009 11:35 AM
12
"You are confusing between definition and example."
Here are some more examples and a definition will eventually happen on its own.
Nazis, Fascists, Conservative Capitalists, Conservatives, Xenophobes, Religious Conservatives, Social Conservatives and other such distasteful vermin are typically considered right wing. The Parivar and its chaddies are considered ultra-rightwing. Anybody can google a friggin definition, but examples are more fun.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:28 AM
11
"It is difficult to blame only Muslim thugs when these two top leaders were India's Number 1 enemies. "
This has got to be one of the more bizarre revelations in all of these forums ! I suppose by this logic chaddies are considered true heroes who saved the Nation. Even chaddies will have a hard time believing that but hey, throw it out there and see if it sticks !!
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 11:04 AM
10
>>>> What is the definition of being a right winger?
>> You!
You are confusing between definition and example.
Al Bundy
San Francisco, United States
Oct 02, 2009 10:37 AM
9
Gandhi’s judgment may be questioned. His integrity was unimpeachable? says Puri. If so in what way? Gandhi cut the Indian baby into two to satisfy the quarrelling Muslim mother. If Gandhi was sincere his actions should have spoken otherwise. He had a queer form of integrity which led to Islamic evil grow in strength and overpower us. Was Gandhi not a lawyer trained to detect lies and half-truths? THen why did he fall hook, line and sinker to Muslim thugs who were bent raping this nation? To put it euphemistically Gandhi was a successful charlatan and with his womaniser comrade-in-arms made India bereft of peace and tranquillity. It is difficult to blame only Muslim thugs when these two top leaders were India's Number 1 enemies. The evil they sowed now has borne nuclear fruits on Pakistani tree. What is worse Gandhi's legacy of ahimsa is still haunting us as it continues to perpetuate the dark ages of 1947 by its mindless political practitioners.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 02, 2009 10:35 AM
8
Gandhi’s judgment may be questioned. His integrity was unimpeachable? says Puri. If so in what way? Gandhi cut the Indian baby into two to satisfy the quarrelling Muslim mother? If Gandhi was sincere his actions should have spoken otherwise. He had a queer form of integrity which led to Islamic evil grow in strength. Was Gandhi not a lawyer trained to detect lies and half-truths? THen why did he fall hook, line and sinker to Muslim thugs who were bent upon raping this nation? To put it euphemistically Gandhi was a successful charlatan who with his womaniser comrade-in-arms made India bereft of peace and tranquillity. It is difficult to blame only Muslim thugs when these two top leaders were India's Number 1 enemies. The evil they sowed now has borne nuclear fruits in Pakistani tree. What is worse Gandhi's legacy of ahimsa is still haunting us as it continues to perpetuate the dark ages of 1947 by its mindless political practitioners.
siddharth
Chennai, India
Oct 02, 2009 10:22 AM
7
The partition happened over Gandhi's dead body. He was killed by the power seekers. He was alive physically, but he knew he had lost out, in spirit.
Dinesh Kumar
Chandigarh, India
Oct 02, 2009 05:20 AM
6
Ganesan,
>> What is the definition of being a right winger?
You!
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Oct 02, 2009 05:12 AM
5
--"He promised a lot during the "fingerprinting" campaign and delivered zilch."
Instead he delivered an Independent India, but in the fuzzy fog that clouds a right-wingers head, such earthshaking historical facts dont compute.
Reddy
Bangalore, India
Oct 02, 2009 03:26 AM
4
DC
"Nathuram Godse may be portrayed as a right wing lunatic, but in the context of the communal tension and turbulent times following the Partition..."
How exactly is Godse a right winger? What is the definition of being a right winger?
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 02:05 AM
3
Gandhi was a complex personality. But he was also a politician. And politicians seek and enjoy power. Gandhi, until made irrelevant by events since mid 1940s, was always the king maker in the Congress. Remember how his political drama involving his favored candidate Sitarammaiah finally put pressure on the victorious candidate Netaji Subhash Bose to quit Congress?
Partition of India was a failure in the decades long political career of Gandhi.
For Rajindar Puri it is important to remember that all famous politicians are great speakers and they often offer tall promises. So he should not try to interprete why Gandhi's words did not match with his action? Many Bengalees especially erstwhile refugees from East Bengal are staunch critics of Gandhi, because they relied on his words that the partition would never happen.
Nathuram Godse may be portrayed as a right wing lunatic, but in the context of the communal tension and turbulent times following the Partition, Gandhi as a champion of Indo-Pak unity post-partition may have attrated all the frustrations of the assassin caused by the Partition.
DC
NEW YORK, United States
Oct 02, 2009 01:34 AM
2
"Peareylal, recorded that Gandhi would angrily lash out at his critics and say should he kill himself just to satisfy others? "
No. It simply means that a politician, especially like Gandhi who's stature towered over everyone else should not make statements he cannot back up with action.
But then, that was the problem Gandhi had right from his days in South Africa. He promised a lot during the "fingerprinting" campaign and delivered zilch. The campaign was a complete disaster. Ram Sandara Pandit, the man Gandhi hailed as a hero, ran away from the place.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Oct 02, 2009 12:32 AM
1
The insinuation seems to be that the Home Ministry had a hand in the assassination of Gandhi in order to prevent him from settling in Lahore to promote Indo-Pak unity. I think that is far-fetched. But Mr.Puri may be right in hoping that some day Gandhi's message of unity may have a resurgence in the subcontinent. But not in the foreseeable future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
