Tuesday, March 07, 2006

babu suseelan: ISLAMIC TERRORISM

march 7th

apropos of the bombs in benares.

the chatterati are already asking, i am sure, how one knows these bombs were set by mohammedan terrorists. no, let's get UC Banerjee to certify that the bombs were set by hindus eager to create a sympathy wave for themselves.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Babu

                                 ISLAMIC TERRORISM

                                    Dr. Babu Suseelan

>
>The word "terrorism" traces its roots in the era of prophet
>
>Muhammad. He was an illiterate with no proper upbringing and
>
>education. He grew up as a street thug who used to rob nomadic
>travelers. Mohamed was the man who perfected the art of terrorism
>including beheading and looting. By terrorizing innocent tribal Arabs,
>he was able to enlarge his criminal gang. With his terror techniques and
>propaganda, he was successful in converting several nomads in to his
>criminal philosophy.  By terrorism and intimidation Mohamed was
>successful in liberating several innocent people and enslaving them with
>his false, rigid, closed dogma. Countries like Persia, Egypt, Iraq,
>Syria, Algeria, Tunisia, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Turkey and Libya might
>not have become Islamic if it was not for terrorism.
>
>
>
>According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, "terrorism is the
>unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to
>intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any
>segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." The
>objective of terrorism may be to gain publicity for some cause, or the
>desire to obtain concessions or bring about social change. Several
>experts on terrorism have pointed out; however, there is no universally
>accepted definition of terrorism.
>
>
>
>"Terrorism" is a vexing term. According to Title 22 of the US Code
>
>Section 2656 (D): "The term 'terrorism" means premeditated, politically
>motivated violence perpetrated by sub national or clandestine agents,
>usually intended to influence an audience." It is also as old as Islamic
>history. "State-sponsorship" of "terrorism" is even more imprecise and
>debatable. For example, to many people, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria,
>Libya and Sudan are, almost by definition, a "state sponsor" of
>"terrorism". Terrorist actions by its armed forces against civilians,
>and non-believers can be designated as act of terrorism. . While to the
>current Saudi Arabia, Iranian and Pakistani government and many Jihadis,
>most if not all actions of non-believers- from praying to read non
>Islamic religious books are blasphemous acts and Islam justifies Jihad
>war against Kafirs (non-believers).
>
>
>
>WHY ONLY MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS?
>
>
>
>The media is replete with reports of Islamic Terrorism or Jihad war.
>When ask them why? They say the perpetrators are all MUSLIM Jihadis.
>Experts on terrorism agree with this formula. Take for example the
>bloody conflicts in Pakistan, Lebanon, Sudan, and Iraq.  It is a clear
>fight between either Sunnis or Shias or between Jihadis against Kaafirs
>(non-believers). Do we ever read any news in International media on
>Terrorism other than Jihadis?
>
>
>
>The Independent media rightly reports: Muslims are known for violence
>and terrorism. The term "terrorism" simply means "violence committed by
>Jihadis in the name of Islam". In the adult world, each individual act
>of violence committed by Jihadis needs to be discussed on the context of
>Islam. Some of the people who howl terrorists as freedom fighters  most
>loudly do not admit that terrorism, violence and mass agitation by
>Muslims is an attempt to shut down debate.
>
>
>
>USE OF TERRORISM BY MUSLIMS
>
>
>
>Today many several Islamic Jihad groups use terrorism for their vested
>political motives. In Chechnya, Kashmir, Lebanon, Iraq, Algeria,
>Georgia, Israel, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Egypt and in Sudan Muslims
>frequently engage in terrorism to wipe out people with different
>political views. There is no peace and tranquility in these regions.
>Several innocent Jewish, Hindu, and Buddhist people were murdered by
>Jihadis in the last few years. Homicide bombing, suicide bombing,
>beheading, arson and violence perpetuated by Jihadis are a daily
>occurrence. All of the perpetrators were Muslims and they were never
>captured by Islamic police. There is considerable evidence that Jihadis
>destroyed the region's fragile peace - for their political and strategic
>ends. Who are the "terrorists" in this scenario? Why Jihadis are busy
>with bombing and murdering innocent people in the name of Islam? There
>is a consensus among historians that the Koranic dictates have
>contributed to the rise of Jihadi terrorism. Are all these historians
>pro-Jihad? The term "terrorism" - as used by the Islamic press and
>politicians today - informs us their strange and willful ignorance of
>cause and effect of Jihadi terrorism. How can terror and violence ever
>be a serious response to our problems? When there are violent attacks,
>we need to understand why they are happening. If we do not, we are left
>failing in a historical void - and powerless to prevent further attacks.
>It is imperative that phony liberals, left wing intellectuals and
>historians study in depth the link between Islam and terrorism.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>WHO BROUGHT THE CONCEPT OF SUICIDE AND HOMICIDE BOMBINGS?
>
>
>
>The common denominator among perpetrators of acts deemed "terrorist" may
>be that in today's world, "terrorists" are groups of individuals, or
>even state actors, who may feel militarily unable or unwilling to
>confront their perceived enemies directly and who accordingly use
>violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve
>their political aims. Such tactics date back the era of Mohamed, to the
>sword wielding "zealots". Terrorism is also a contemporary variant of
>what has been described as Jihad war against infidels.
>
>
>
>Suicide attack is an ancient practice with Persian Muslim assassins. The
>concept of terror as systematic use of violence to attain political ends
>was first codified by Muslim Mullahs in Egypt, Iran and Lebanon. Similar
>justification for state sponsored terror was common in all Islamic
>states.
>
>
>
>Whether sub national (Muslim anarchists) or state supported (e.g.
>
>Iraq, Iran, Pakistan) suicide attack as a weapon of terror is usually
>chosen by Muslims against non-believers or against different Muslim
>groups.
>
>
>
>According to Jane's Intelligence Review, all the suicide terrorist
>
>groups have support infrastructures in Islamic countries. Does Islam or
>Muslims the pioneer of Suicide Terrorism? Several groups in different
>countries have resorted to suicide terrorism for political reasons. They
>were isolated incidents. Muslims have
>
>perfected suicide bombing and use even young children and women to carry
>bombs under their veil. Recently Jihadis have perfected the art of
>suicide bombing under the leadership of their top most Jihadi terrorist
>Bin Laden. It is reported that Islamic countries such as Pakistan,
>Syria, Iraq, Iran and Sudan are assisting Jihadi bombers to carry out
>suicide bombing.
>
>
>
>
>
>BLOODY HISTORY OF ISLAM
>
>
>
>History unfortunately recognizes and accords visibility to power and not
>to weakness. Therefore, visibility has been accorded historically to
>dominant Islamic terrorist groups. Terrorism as a tool began with
>Mohamed and his conquest of several tribal lands. Islamic warriors have
>forcefully converted thousands of people into their rigid, closed dogma
>called Islam through sword.  Great civilizations have been wiped out by
>Islamic Jihadi warriors. The Egyptian, Persian, pre-Islamic Arabic
>culture, Babylonian, Mesopotamian, and Zoroastrian civilizations were
>wiped out.  Their voices have not been heard, even to this day fully.
>Now they are beginning to be heard, but not fully. They are heard, yes,
>but only in Museums. Muslims conquered different parts of Europe and
>forcefully converted thousands by terrorism and intimidation. This
>period was recognized for intolerance, looting, killing, special
>taxation for non-believers, rape and mass murder. The Christian
>Europeans launched their crusade against Muslims and eliminated Islam
>and Muslims from different parts of Europe. This they did through forced
>conversion of Muslims to Christianity, expulsion or liquidation.
>
>
>
>The history of Islamic conquest and occupation of the lands of others is
>also littered with the corpses of thousands of people. There are no
>reliable figures for the violence unleashed upon the world by Jihadi
>Muslims. Violence has been associated with all Muslim rulers, but what
>is unique about the Islamic rulers were the genocides they inflicted on
>civilian populations they conquered; and how they systematically
>destroyed the culture, religion, identity and way of life of people.
>
>
>
>Two examples illustrate the violent and brutal mentality of these
>Islamic invaders. The peace loving Zoroastrian population who were
>
>the original inhabitants of Persia  numbered some 40 million. By the
>time the Muslims finished with them there were less than one million,
>and their lands had been stolen. The Zoroastrians being peace-loving
>people could not fight the Islamic invaders. Several of them escaped to
>India.
>
>
>
>Hindus had inhabited Afghanistan, Punjab, Kashmir, Sindh, Baluchistan,
>North East of India for around 40,000 years. There were 40 million of
>them when the Islamic invaders arrived (likely to be a gross
>underestimate). By the time the Muslims finished massacring them, there
>were 60,000 left. When they stopped killing them physically, they
>adopted a new policy, of stealing Hindu children from their parents and
>giving them to Muslims to bring up, so that they could eradicate their
>Hindu culture and language. Will Durant, the great cultural historian
>have stated that the Hindu Holocaust by Muslim invaders was the most
>brutal in the history of the world.
>
>
>
>The legal principle adopted by Muslim rulers to steal land and
>
>wealth from these innocent peace loving people was "Jessiya". This
>Islamic unjust law was used to forcefully collect money from infidels
>and loot their land and other belongings. Muslims now think they are
>qualified to teach non-Muslims how to deal justly with others!
>
>
>
>Bloodshed was not confined to occupation of lands. True to form, when
>the Muslim invaders were forced to leave occupied lands, they killed
>mercilessly too. Those that resisted their theft and occupation were
>always known as kaafirs regardless of whether they were Jews, Buddhists,
>Zoroastrians or Hindus.
>
>
>
>Violence and killing extended to within their own boundaries too. The
>Middle East Muslims have invented ethnic cleansing to purify Islam. They
>were not content with border war or sectarian warfare. More than 10
>million people were dead or missing due to military intervention by
>Muslims, and 22 million wounded (no figures are available for civilians
>Casualties) because of war between different sects of Muslims. During
>the Lebanon crisis, Kuwait occupation, Iran-Iraq war there were 6
>million military and civilian deaths alone, with no figures available
>for wounded.
>
>
>
>They even massacred their own Sunnis and shias. With such a history of
>mass murder, now they needed nuclear weapons to liquidate people
>efficiently and quickly. And that is the reason Pakistan and Iran are
>busy making nuclear bombs. And they are likely to use them again,
>against infidels.
>
>
>
>The Jihadis are also seems particularly adept at manufacturing
>
>ideologies that are anti-human that leads to mass slaughter. The
>
>World's most evil and exploitative ideologies have all emanated from
>Islam. The assassination, beheading, suicide bombing, stoning,
>amputating, arson, violence, car bombing, plane hijacking and mass
>agitation are in daily vocabulary of jihadis. Estimates for the number
>of people killed just under Islamic invasion of other countries are put
>at 75 million.
>
>
>
>Islamic history is littered with violence, bloodshed and Warmongering.
>In particular, Mohammedans have never tolerated anyone who has a
>different culture, race or religion. Nowhere in Islamic societies do we
>find communities of other cultures surviving.
>
>
>
>THE REAL IDEOLOGICAL ROOT OF TERRORISM IS ISLAM
>
>
>
>Koran is the source of inspiration for jihadi terrorists. In short,
>according to the brutal claim of Koran and Hadith, kaafir people have to
>die for Islam. Existence of Islam came to mean 'permanent Jihad war.'
>Muslim clergy and Islamic leaders and military in particular support
>these cruel ideas.
>
>
>
>In the beginning of Islamic invasion after the death of Mohamed,
>
>members of the ruling Islamic classes gathered to discuss the newly
>conquered "Population problem" and to devise ways of implementing the
>Kormanic dictates. As a result of this cruel policy, the weak, and those
>who refuse to convert to Islam would be eliminated, and millions of
>non-believers were killed.
>
>This so-called 'oppression of the kaafirs' policy was actually carried
>out throughout Islamic conquest. A special order was set up in which
>children of eight and nine and kaffir men and women were made to work
>sixteen hours a day for Muslims with no pay. In the Muslim occupied
>countries, thousands died from the terrible conditions. The total
>submission to Allah demanded by Islamic dogma led to millions of
>infidels leading lives full of suffering in Muslim occupied lands.
>
>
>
>Influenced by Koranic ideas, invading Muslim military leaders applied
>this concept of Jihad war, oppression and jessiya in all occupied
>countries. Moreover, they claimed that the so-called jihad war was
>justified and it is an unchangeable law of Islam. Islamic military
>leaders forced people to abandon their religious beliefs by denying
>political rights and death threat.
>
>
>
>The implementation of false, untrue, irrational ideas of the Koran that
>led Mohammedans to ruthlessness and cruelty, and it cost humanity a
>heavy price. As Islamic culture was forcefully introduced in conquered
>lands, educational, cultural institutions and civilization vanished.
>
>
>
>THE BLOODY ALLIANCE: ISLAM AND COMMUNISM
>
>
>
>While Muslims are found on the fundamentalist side, the left wing is
>occupied by communists. Communists have always been among the
>
>fiercest defenders of fundamentalist Islam in India, Europe and
>
>America. Islam and Communism are closed paradigms where followers
>
>have no freedom of expression. Both as closed systems use violence and
>terrorism as change agents.
>
>
>
>This relationship between Islam and communism goes right back to the
>founders of both these 'isms.'Islam influenced Marx and Engel, the
>founders of communism, not for its religious value, but they were amazed
>at its 'dialectical-dualistic' attitude. Islam divides people between
>believers and non-believers.  Marx and Engel showed that people can be
>divided between bourgeois and proletariat. Both Islam and Communism
>contain the basis for perpetual conflict and war between two opposing
>groups namely believers and non-believers, bourgeois and proletariat.
>Russian Communists who followed in the footsteps of Marx and Engel, such
>as Plekhanov, Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, all agreed with the class
>conflict. Plekhanov, who is considered as the founder of Russian
>communism, regarded Marxism as 'a tool to wipe out opposing class.'
>
>
>
>Mao, who established communist rule in China, killed millions of
>
>people. Mao openly stated that non believers of communism should be
>wiped out. Both Islam and Communism are control systems. These rigid,
>control paradigms require them to blame non-believers, intimidate and
>punish them in order to keep their rigid ideological system.  They have
>many slogans and techniques but the overall pattern has to do with
>control. Both Islam and communism are afraid of dissenters and free
>thinkers. Islamic and Communist countries have built in control system
>to wipe out non-believers.
>
>According to these control paradigms, the public should be Controlled
>and brainwashed constantly with their rigid dogma. They have a fixed
>pattern and plan to eliminate those who do not confirm. Communists and
>their unholy alliance with Islamic fundamentalists is the root of modern
>day crisis in several part of the world.
>
>
>
>This unholy alliance is at the genesis of various ideologies of
>terrorism and violence that Spelled disaster to mankind for the last
>several years. They have distorted world views. The fundamental concepts
>of Communism and Islam are behind this method of 'fighting those who are
>not one of us.'
>
>
>
>In spite of all bloodshed in their history, still the Communist and
>Islamic states are oppressing the non-believers in various others means.
>The following list will give an idea of who are to be blamed.
>
>
>
>Several thousand innocent people died in Kashmir, Lebanon, Afghanistan,
>Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Sudan, Algeria, and Israel due to Jihadi
>wars, massacres, slaughters and oppressions and suicide bombing. There
>were 6 million "military casualties" during the war between Iraq and
>Iran. Hundreds of thousands were murdered by Jihadis in Afghanistan,
>Kashmir, Sudan Algeria and Lebanon. Thousands were murdered by Jihadi
>terrorists in Israel, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Nigeria
>and Kuwait. Hundreds were killed by Muslim fanatics in "internal
>conflict and sectarian war. Communists were also not far behind in
>killing innocent people to keep their control system intact.
>
>
>
>DOES ISLAMIC TERRORISM POSE A THREAT TO WORLD PEACE?
>
>
>
>Yes. The September 11 attacks, the biggest and deadliest terrorist
>
>plot ever executed in the United States were carried out by Jihadi
>
>Muslims. Muslims are responsible for ninety five percent of the 835
>violent incidents between 1980 and 2000 that the police have
>
>classified as suspected or confirmed terrorism.
>
>
>
>All over the world, there are Jihadi terrorist sleeper cells that
>
>operate like hibernating bears, ready to kill their enemies based
>
>upon the sacred sanction that comes to them from the Koran.
>
>
>
>
>
>     ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM
>
>
>
>Well, Islamic fundamentalism is something we come across daily in our
>media. Today, most of the phony liberals have the misconception that
>people need not worry about Islamic fundamentalism. The term
>fundamentalism refers to the addictive thinking of the fundamentals of a
>faith or dogma.  Its essential distinguishing feature is an insistence
>on a literal, rigid interpretation of the dogmatic, blind belief system.
>Muslims are fundamentalists to the core. Any interpretation, reform or
>elucidation is considered blasphemous and punishable. Fundamentalists
>tended to be in sympathy with, and frequently indeed associated with
>Jihadis. Islamic fundamentalism, in both its theological aspects and in
>its interaction with right-wing politics, continues to be considerably
>stronger in Islamic countries. Islamic states and Islamic religious
>organizations employ all available instruments for preserving the
>closed, fundamentalist dogma.
>
>
>
>ISLAMIC STATE SUPPORT TO FUNDAMENTALISM
>
>
>
>Although much is being written about the problems in Islamic
>
>fundamentalism, it's about time something be said about the danger of
>fundamentalism. Instead of dwelling on what is right in Islamic
>
>fundamentalism, think about what is wrong in Islamic fundamentalism.
>
>
>
>Fundamentalists, those who interpret Islamic religious texts literally
>and impose many daily regulations on members, are far more dangerous
>than followers of Islam. Fundamentalism produces ghostly dualism,
>violence, terrorism and retard progressive, scientific thinking.
>
>
>
>The State and ISLAM
>
>
>
>When applied to Islam the term refers virtually always to political and
>religion since Islamic countries does not separate Islam and the state.
>There is a tacit assumption in that the use of terror by Jihadis or
>repressive Islamic states is sanctioned or even encouraged by the Quran.
>
>
>
>When we analyze the history of Islam, who brought bloodshed into the
>World, we could find that they were the pioneers of all possible means
>of terror. They are the Gods of all killing maneuvers witnessed by the
>world today. Islam approves Jihad war against infidels and dissidents.
>Instead of developing problem solving strategies, Muslims resort to
>violence and street unrest and chaos and killing innocent infidels as a
>problem solving strategy. Muslims have chosen Islam as their only way of
>life because they are convinced the truth about it and no matter what
>rational theories and concepts available.  They will not deter from the
>rigid, blind, irrational, outdated teachings of Islam, nor will Muslims
>stop Jihad war since Muslims are obligated to wage Jihad war against
>infidels.
>
>
>
>In Islam, there is no freedom of thought. Muslims shun all free
>
>Thinking on spiritual matters and transcendental philosophy.  Muslim
>clergy preach to oppress the infidels, Shun all other religions, and
>discriminate women and infidels.
>
>
>
>Muslims are indeed Biggest Terrorists!!
>
>Muslims shout: "O people of the Book! Come to common terms as
>
>between us and you: that we worship none but Allah; that we associate no
>partners with Him; that we erect not from among ourselves Lords and
>patrons other than Allah." If then they turn back and say: "Bear witness
>that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's will)."
>
>3-64
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


4 comments:

daisies said...

I think these Varanasi blasts
were all only because of the
UC Banerjee report.

He made it look like the Hindus
had reacted to a "spontaneous
combustion" of the train, as you
call it.

So now Muslims think they ought be
mad and lash back.

This is all thanks to Sonia's
appeasement policies.

And also thanks to her calling
Muslims her "natural allies". It
emboldens Muslims and makes them
more anti-Hindu. And by using
such words, Sonia is herself
being anti-Hindu. Openly.

She thinks of India as a business
at the top of which she/congress
has to remain, as CEO, rich and
powerful CEO, by hook or by crook.

Down with vote-bank politics. Down
with greedy, unprincipled,
power-hungry hawks.

Down with Sonia and Congress.

-

Kalyani said...

To add to it,posting Prafull Goradia's writeup from The Pioneer:-

"Islamic double standards


Instead of publishing the caricatures of Prophet Mohammad, would it not have been more appropriate to depict him in the fullness of life, which he believed in and propagated? He was strongly opposed to celibacy and exhorted even holy men to lead a life of marital bliss.




According to Hadith 3238 (page 849), Sahi Muslim Vol-II, by Imam Muslim (translated into English by Abdul Hamid Siddiqi), Mohammad went to the extent of asking men who sought permission to remain celibate to get themselves castrated. He himself set an example by marrying 11-times, beginning with Khadija and ending with Maimunah, according to the Dictionary of Islam by Patrick Hughes (London, 1885, pages 380 and 671).



Mahatma Gandhi sang Ishwar Allah tero naam. He also asserted that Ram and Rahim were the same. However, a momin (or a pious Muslim) would feel offended and protest against these assertions because for him Allah is the only god and there can be no possible alternative. For the momin, humanity is divided into Muslims and kafirs, into believers and infidels. Kafirs are not allowed to set foot on the soil of Mecca and Medina.



The world was divided between dar-ul Islam and dar-ul Harb. History, too, has two clear compartments: Pre-Islamic times were dismissed as yom-e-jahilya (days of ignorance), and thereafter yom-e-roshni (times of enlightenment). The refusal to consider any divine other than Allah enjoined the momin to destroy any alternative object of worship. This explains why Buddha's statues in Bamiyan were blown up a few years ago. Because of their exceptional fame, this act of iconoclasm attracted worldwide attention. Other desecrations take place without publicity.



Over 400 temples have been destroyed across the Indian subcontinent during the past five decades. The score in Bangladesh has been 232, in Jammu & Kashmir 116 and Pakistan 57. A detailed list is available in a volume called Hindu Masjids, published by Contemporary Targett, 2003.



Medieval iconoclasm in India has been recorded in considerable detail by Muslim chroniclers. Based on these, the best known compilation is by the late Sita Ram Goel . In medieval times, it was customary to bury the splintered idols below the entrance of a masjid. According to Vincent A Smith, the author of The Oxford History of India, 1919: "The richly jewelled idols taken from the pagan temples (Mathura) were transferred to Agra and there placed beneath the steps leading to the Nawab Begum Sahib's mosque, in order that they might ever be pressed under foot by the true believers."



The controversy that has recently acquired public attention is with regard to the paintings by Mr MF Husain. The popular painter has painted Hindu deities in a disgraceful and perverse light. The example that stands out is that of Goddess Durga copulating with her lion. Another one shows Sita masturbating on the tail of Hanuman. Yet another painting shows Parvati in sexual union with the Nandi bull. Unfortunately, Mr Husain makes his message clear by painting Muslim women, whether Fatima, his mother or daughter, fully clad.



Seen in this background, the protests by Muslims - stretching from Denmark in the West to Lebanon, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and going on to Indonesia in the east - appear to be extraordinarily contradictory. The protests smack of double standards. Respect for sentiments must be mutual and not unilateral.



I began my adult life with the information by several elders that Islam was essentially a religion of peace. This benign portrayal led me to learn conversational Urdu for eight years, until the teacher became my guide. In my understanding, the first precondition of peace is the will to co-exist. Whereas Bamiyan on the one hand, the protest over the Danish cartoons on the other and temple desecrations on yet another, not to speak of the Husain paintings, do not tell a tale of wishing to co-exist.



About a month before he died, my teacher, Agha Iqbal Mirza, did admit that when a Muslim talks about peace, he means harmony amongst the followers of Prophet Mohammad. The implicit aspiration was that a great many of the kafirs would go over to Islam, whereafter the promised peace would be universal. There is no doubt that Islam has taken enormous demographic strides and, today, over 20 per cent of humanity is Muslim.



However, there is still a long way to go before the admirers of Osama bin Laden would be ready to promote peace on earth. Until then, the world must remain divided between momins and kafirs and double standards would be the order of the day. Jihad will continue so long as the lamp of piety that inspires Islam continues to burn.



The greater pity is that the double standards are not confined to ulemas and their followers, but extend to a number of others. The Hindu elite is gifted with such crypto-Muslims who justify virtually anything that ulemas say and begin to condemn no sooner than the word Hindu is spoken. Eminent historian Romila Thapar wrote: "Mahmud of Ghazni is primarily associated as the despoiler of temples and the breaker of idols. Little attempt is made to search for further explanations regarding Mahmud's behaviour. Other reasons can be found when one turns to the tradition of Hindu kings." She has alleged that king Harsh Vardhan also used to desecrate temples in order to appropriate wealth.



In Prof Gargi Chakravartty, there is another historian who justified Temur Lang's barbarism by claiming that he was more cruel in Central Asia on its Muslim population than what he did in India. At a later period, she goes on, plunderers like Nadir Shah and Ahmed Shah Abdali massacred Muslims as well. According to Prof Bipan Chandra, Rana Pratap, Shivaji and Guru Gobind Singh have done as much to undermine secularism and national integration as any other ideological factor. These hero-myths proved the case for the two nation theory.



The ultimate in hypocrisy was the UPA Government's protest last October to Denmark against the publication of the Prophet's caricatures. The thrust of the protest was that "actions that cause hurt to the sentiments of any part of our people are not acceptable" (The Hindu, February 12). Did this mean that the Hindus are not our people? Mr MF Husain reprinted his perverse paintings of Hindu deities way back in 1988. What more can be said for the double standards of even the Indian Government"?

Ananthoo said...

hey Rajeev? tongue in cheek did u observe if the muslims did not say the hindus themselves blasted these bombs?
ha..haa..and did u think its just a joke and shall remain that way so??
NO..our muslim leaders are greater than what we can envisage..
pl check out what the AIMPLB leader has said! he has said the BJP and SP have done this to create riots and then garner votes in UP..real great fantasising guys aint they?

Kalyani said...

hadvani and his yesmen are predictably and deplorably trying to capitalise on this carnage, as a launching pad to capture power.

I find not much of a difference between kaangress and bjp as far as appeasement of muslims is concerned.When VHP people were lathicharged brutally during their visit to Ayodhya,bjp was at the centre.Forked tongued hadvani periodically hangs his bipolar head in shame while recalling babri masjid demolition.

One upright police officer called Bapat of Mumbai had to face a lot of witchhunting.Which hadvanihajpayee took up cudgels or at best *lambasted*??

Sane Hindus should not let themselves be exploited by hadvanihajpayee clones.

I am YEARNING to see a completely spunky ,spirited,vibrant and resurgent Bharatham!

And let the right to recall (LokPal)remain with us.To hell with this opprobrium of putting up with any irresponsible,callous government that cannot be held accountable too!