Tuesday, March 11, 2008
B.Raman on the Aurangzebs of today
Good article which states the raison d'etre of the Paki Terrorist State. The Pakis always think of themselves as the successors and heirs to the Mughal Empire, especially of the 'Alamgir' Aurangzeb who demolished the Kashi Vishwanath temple and Lord Krishna's birthplace temple at Mathura among countless others...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Thanks for posting the article. I had no idea that Pakis are at this Aurangzeb phenomena. Everybody would be wondering what is happening here...the Times of India wouldn't say its readers what is all this about some Paki propaganda.. they don't have headlines of assault by Dravidian racists...
One a different note, The TOI chairWoman indu jain learned meditation, and was boasting about funda of death in a TV interview. I think She is destined for hell, for avoiding her duty and for allowing contempt of so many hindus.
Sri Rama.
Nice article by Shri B. Raman. The Paki worldview and their sense of pride in their "Mughal heritage"
and the paragon of Islamism in India, butcher Aurangzeb is quite well known. The article does make the customary and
entirely avoidable references to the alleged "patriotism", "compassion" and "secularism" (sic) of the Mohammedans.
Now, in fact a few such "Muslims" do exist - but they're overwhelmingly non-practising ones and are a really minuscule minority. I'm more disappointed in his swallowing the alleged denunciation of terrorism by the mullahs of Deoband. The mullahs
actually played with words to repeat the standard Mohammedan line of "root causes of terrorism", how Mohammedans were
being subjected to "state terrorism" by the West - and by logical extension Hindu India in Kashmir, Gujarat etc and went on to assert that Mohammedan terrorism is NOT terrorism, how Mohammedan terror is OK to redress perceived injustices etc. Hahaha,
So much for Mohammedan
"moderation". I really don't blame them - it is the Indian dhimmis who need their heads examined. Here's an analysis on
Jihadwatch about the Deoband fatwa
shredding their alleged "reform".
its good u mentioned raman's entirely avoidable reference to the "patriotism" of Indian muslims. this is frankly bullshit. they are not. They do not identify themselves with India at all. (a vist to any muslim education institution will tell u that). The fact is that successive govt's of India have literally bribed this community to stay peacefully -- the huge subsdies, etc. Muslims are literally a state within a state. And incidentally, what Mr. raman does not mention is that Aurganzeb's grave in (i tnk) Aurangabad is a very popular pilgrim spot with Indian muslims on par with that of any other pir, a honor accorded to the grave of no other muslim ruler. lets not forget that the muslims who fought the maximum for pakistan are those who ultimately stayed behind -- of U.P, Bihar and West Bengal. Muslims will never rest until they regain political control of india. Till then its just a status quo.
The good thing I see from Raman's article is exposing the freaking muslim power. It is like muslim religiousness, though dead body worshippers in vaccum, like Fareed Zakaria, once mentioned the hindu worship ( idol... ) in derogatory terms, in a column in newsweek.
Muslim power has a lot been about opportunity, cruel murders -terror and deviousness.
The muslim league has been a maculayite institute, they were serving the british. British loved their dogs.. a tradition they keep alive... recently their pastor wanted Sharia imposed in London !
So if hindus can be equal to west in understanding modern systems of terrorism and dirty politics, then a lot of the muslim problem will go away.
Another issue is the brits... I think they are still nostalgic about their dogs. I read the vicious Christopher Hitchens in slate.com and his hatredness towards the Serbian orthodox people.. Due to som ereason it reminds me the Kashmir cleansing.
OT: Brahma Chellaney
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2853106.cms
I just feel like thanking British! in bringing down such a freak Kings and Kingdom... If this has not happened over the centuries may be we would have been like Hindus in Malaysia!
It nice to know to know about history of Muslims participation in Freedom moments. It's rarely available to anyone to read. We were thought British divided our nations, I don't think so now. Looks like neither Gandhi or Nehru to be blamed for separation and riots. Hidden fact could Nehru wanted! a freedom for Hindus?
Please post, if you know more links like this which tells genuine history.
One has to hope these Freaky Aurangzebs of today understand humanity... can't say how many centuries it would take.
British of course divided the nation. They gave reasons for the muslim league and Pakisthan.. which meant the land of pure, and terrorism for 5 decades more. From the article... Not at all. In fact, the first gift given to the Muslims by the British was in 1905 in the form of partition of Bengal (later revoked in 1911). The Shimla delegation of 1906 has rightly been called a command performance; the Muslims were assured by the viceroy of separate electorates and weightage as soon as their leaders asked for them. After that, the Muslim League came into being, established by pro-British stalwarts like the Aga Khan, Justice Amir Ali, some other nawabs and feudal lords. And the first objective of the Muslim League manifesto read: "To promote feelings of loyalty to the British government."
The Muslim League never carried out any agitation against the British. The only time the Muslims agitated was during the Khilafat Movement in the early 20s, led by the Ali brothers and other radical leaders. Not a single Muslim League leader, including the Quaid-i-Azam, ever went to jail. It was the Congress which continued the anti-British non-violent and non-cooperation movement in the 30s and 40s, including the famous "Quit India" movement, while Muslim League leaders continued to denounce such movements and exhorted their followers not to take part in them.
"I just feel like thanking British! in bringing down such a freak Kings and Kingdom... If this has not happened over the centuries may be we would have been like Hindus in Malaysia!"
When the British came, Mughal empire was already brought down and was being ruled thru proxy by Marathas, so it's untrue to say that Brits saved us, it was mainly the Marathas starting with Shivaji that destryoyed the Mughal empire, later on Rajputs, Jats and Sikhs all threw off the Mughal yoke and established their own kingdoms.
"It nice to know to know about history of Muslims participation in Freedom moments. It's rarely available to anyone to read."
In proportion to their population, Muslim contribution to freedom struggle was negligible, many of them were staunch British ass kissers including the Muslim league.
Also the business of blaming British for the countries division solely is nonsense, the main reason was Islam and Indian Muslim fanaticism which Brits capitalized upon.
B.Raman will always do the standard nonsense about how the great majority of IM's are great patriots just to lull Hindus into a false sense of security, the IM actions or lack of action when it matters show their patriotism in ample measure, they have time to murder Hindus because Jerry Falwell abused madmo in US but don't have the time to protest when Musharaf visits Bharat.
Also the business of blaming British for the countries division solely is nonsense, the main reason was Islam and Indian Muslim fanaticism which Brits capitalized upon.
Not only they capitalized, they created a structure in which muslims were :
1- Religious brotherhood unlike the jews and H.....
2. Race Islamists Fine warriors, unlike the dravidian negroids or bengalis who were suitable as clerks..- How unfortunate that those whom Brits hated, were conquered by them rather early.
3. Political Islam was a monotheist religion having books etc, so pakistan was accepted as an independent entity according to perverted logic.
It is the same logic that extends to language/religion of Khalisthanis, race of aborigines, Dravidian races etc- JNU folks euphemistically call it sub nationalism !
2- This brotherhood was recognized as eligible for statehood, in the underdeveloped british ideas... thus they supported Pakisthan using Jinnah. Jinnah was not a fanatic mullah.
3- The British ideas was to have few more partitions... This is going to be bit unacceptable... But Ambedkar failed when Jinnah could make it in crucial elections after 1940... Gandhi's congress managed to defeat Ambedkar...but Jinnah managed to win muslim votes.
4- I
Sorry.. the previous post contained some unedited persons... it got posted while changing the wordpress login. Can some body please delete the above post.
Post a Comment