12 year old boy being produced in court under police custody

[Ticker]

Not wholly the truth.

Not only do they earn well, they also rule. Those who were named by Ticker constitute 70% of the Chief Ministers of Indian states.

Yeah some of them do find favours and when they rule they do make a lot of money. Like the Dalit lady Chief Minister, who while in power became a billionaire - did she make the poorer Dalits millionaires at least. No - she like 70% others join the crowd and make riches for you people to praise, while the teaming million Indian poor remain poor.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Your knowledge base is wider than I could fathom.

Bamiyan is in Afghanistan.

We have a hospital in Lahore named Ganga Ram Hospital. Unfortunately it can't fly like Indonesian Garuda.

That sort of kills your earlier theories a bit, doesn't it? The people who built the Sir Ganga Ram Hospital aren't the people living around it today.

Why do you imagine the fate of those who lived in the IVC was any different?

 

[cyphercide]

You got a chair to sit on probably during last few years, before that you squatted in the fields for provision of fertilizer every morning. It'll take you a bit of time to go beyond a mere upstart that you are.

I don't read schmuck posted by schmuckers.

Aww, you poor babies with so much heritage and culture that you feel need to pose as anybody else other than yourself. Could be an en masse outbreak of dissociative identity disorder on Pakistanis or maybe,just maybe, you are sorely ashamed of the identity that you inherited and are accumulating .

Don't dish it out if you can't take it, cupcake.

 

[Ticker]

And, best of all, this is the bonus, they don't get killed by other Muslims.

Just count the total number of Muslims killed in India and in Pakistan. Don't you think we look after Muslims better than you look after Muslims?



Who has been telling you these weird stories? I am a Shudra myself. There hasn't been any trouble I've faced at any time in my career or in society.

My known Indian friends.

Oho - please, at times you say things that surprise me. You are avoiding the truth and the way you say these things, it becomes discernible.

 

[Icewolf]

Aww, you poor babies with so much heritage and culture that you feel need to pose as anybody else other than yourself. Could be an en masse outbreak of dissociative identity disorder on Pakistanis or maybe,just maybe, you are sorely ashamed of the identity that you inherited and are accumulating .

Don't dish it out if you can't take it, cupcake.

As Indians have inferiority complex and need to pose white?

It is being called "Snow White syndrome" in India, a market where sales of whitening creams are far outstripping those of Coca-Cola and tea.
India also has the world's second most lucrative marriage industry - the first being neighbouring China - that has grown to a whopping $40bn a year spent on weddings, dowries, jewellery etc.
And demand for fair-complexioned brides and grooms to grace these occasions is as high as ever
Fuelling this demand are the country's 75-odd reality TV shows where being fair, lovely and handsome means instant stardom.
As a result, the Indian whitening cream market is expanding at a rate of nearly 18% a year. The country's largest research agency, AC Nielsen, estimates that figure will rise to about 25% this year - and the market will be worth an estimated $432m, an all-time high.
With the Indian middle class expected to increase 10-fold to 583 million people by 2025, it looks as if things will only get better for the cream makers.
But there have been questions by medical experts about the effect of these creams on the skin.
Brand ambassador
The implicit assumption by many is this: the whiter the skin, the more attractive you are.

India's skin-lightening cream industry gets ever more lucrative
John Abraham, a top Indian actor and model, says: "Indian men want to look better."
And he should know. The market is booming like never before. Launched way back in 1978, Hindustan Unilever's Fair & Lovely is the leader in women's lightening skincare, while Calcutta's Emami group leads the male equivalent with its brand, Fair And Handsome.
The company calls this brand - launched in 2005 - the world's number one fairness cream.
It achieved sales of $13m in 2008-09 and has Shah Rukh Khan, another Bollywood superstar, as its brand ambassador.
And then there are female stars endorsing similar products. Katrina Kaif, naturally fair, sells Olay's Natural White while Deepika Padukone sells Neutrogena's Fine Fairness range.
Sonam Kapoor sells L'Oreal's White Perfect while Preity Zinta, once a top star, endorsed Fem's Herbal Bleach.

If you apply anything on the skin, there will obviously be side effects
Rues VK Sharma, All India Institute of Medical Sciences
And there are many brands on the shelves to choose from: lightening, brightening, clearing, whitening, anti-pigmentation, freshening, anti-dullness and even illuminating.
"India is on a fairness hook, everyone wants to look fair," says Mohan Goenka, director of the Calcutta-based Emami group, whose Fair and Handsome brand for men was the first of its kind in the market.
A recent study by Hindustan Unilever showed how men in southern states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are fervent purchasers of whitening creams.
For example, Tamil Nadu has been recording - for the past year - the highest number of sales for Narayanan, a skin-whitening cream from the Unilever stable.
Another report in the daily Economic Times says sales of skin-whitening cosmetic products were also high in tribal-dominated states like Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh.
"The market in India is huge, really huge," says a Procter & Gamble spokesman.
Experts say that demand has boomed because of the tendency to discriminate against a person's skin colour, a practice that is still widespread across rural India.
Steroids
"But if your complexion is fair, you avoid that pinch. Everyone in India wants to be fairer. At times it is repulsive, worse than chalking of geishas' faces in Japan, but everyone wants to have a jar or tube of skin-whitening cream," says fashion designer Rohit Bal, who has dressed Bollywood actresses and visited the sets of reality shows.

Demand for fair complexioned brides and grooms is at a high
As a result, the products - priced between 50 cents and $150 a jar/tube - are in great demand countrywide.
No study has ever been done to discover what "fairness in four weeks" achieves.
Worse, there are several controversies attached to such products.
"If you apply anything on the skin, there will obviously be side effects," says Rues VK Sharma, head of the dermatology department at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences.
"Very few know that many of these creams contain steroids. Whatever doctors say will always be a drop in the ocean, as advertisements flooding the market have a far larger impact on the minds of people."
But companies say otherwise.
"We are not selling steroids and to date the company has not been involved in a single lawsuit where someone has blamed us for messing up their skin. Our products are lab-tested and we vouch for it," says Mohan Goenka of the Emami group.

So what is it, why do you love looking white?

 

[Ticker]

Umm.. You do have a major problem. They were born into the Moriya tribe or caste in Magadha. Do you know anything about the sixteen Mahajanapadas? Leave distortions of history to the Jan Sanghis here, they know just enough to produce brain farts but no more. You, on the other hand, have to imbibe a lot more to get to their stage.

Interesting comment indeed. Yes I may not know many things, I know much more than you give me credit for.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Well no, they are not.
The serious (and not so-serious) claims and counter-claims made by Azam Khan, a senior Samajwadi Party (SP) leader and the so-called Shahi Imam of Delhi's historic Jama Masjid, Ahmad Bukhari, on “Muslim representation” in post-election Uttar Pradesh can be interpreted in two possible ways. One may argue, in fact quite justifiably, that these polemical comments simply reflect the post-poll tussle between two rival Muslim elites to secure a wider acceptability in the SP dominated U.P. politics.

However, there could be another plausible approach to interpret this debate. We may problematise these statements to raise a few very significant issues such as: do Muslims actually vote for a particular party because they are “instructed” by religious elites such as the Imam to do so? Or, do Muslims vote for a party because they follow the “advice” given to them by elected Muslim representatives? If we go beyond these first level questions, we might also ask two larger conceptual questions: do Muslims need to be represented by Muslims? If yes, what could be the appropriate relationship between the acts of Muslim representatives and aspirations of Muslim communities? The Bukhari-Khan controversy, in my view, can help us in unpacking these complicated questions. In the first week of April 2012, Bukhari, who had already campaigned for the SP in the U.P. Assembly elections, quite unexpectedly withdrew his son-in-law's candidature for the U.P. Vidhan Parishad. In a much publicised open letter, he accused the SP leadership of not providing “adequate Muslim political representation” at various levels. He said: “The rights of Muslims cannot be satisfied by giving a seat to my son-in-law. If you do not give a fair share to Muslims in administration and power, I turn down the offer made for my son-in-law.”

Two sets of claims

According to Azam Khan, Bukhari actually wanted a Rajya Sabha seat for his younger brother and cabinet slot for his son-in-law. Questioning the political reputation of Bukhari, Khan said: “His son-in-law, Umar Ali Khan, who contested on a SP ticket from the Behat seat of Saharanpur… lost his deposit. This clearly indicates the credibility of Bukhari. He should now realise the status he “enjoys” amongst the Muslims…these peshwas have done little for the betterment of the community. Instead of seeking political favours, clerics should stick to their job.”

One can identify an interesting interplay between two sets of claims here: (a) Muslims of U.P. constitute a political community because they are fully aware of and adhere to a set of issues that could be called “Muslim issues,” and (b) religious/social leaders and representatives of this political community are entitled to take short-term and long-term decisions in favour of Muslims. Azam Khan, it seems, shares the first assumption with Bukhari. He does not make any comment on the Muslim political homogeneity that Bukhari evokes. In fact, his assertions also originate from the premise that the Muslim community is a political entity of a specific kind. However, Khan's criticism of Bukhari's leadership claim is quite significant. Khan, in this sense, makes a clear distinction between the domain of actual politics and the domain of religiosity — a distinction that has dominated modern south Asian Muslim politics for a long time.

Let us look at some concrete evidence to evaluate the first set of arguments that revolves around the notion of Muslim political homogeneity. The recent U.P. election is quite relevant in this regard. According to official figures, 29.15 per cent votes went to the SP. If we deconstruct this official data by comparing it with the CSDS-Lokniti post-poll data based on sample survey, a few very interesting findings come up.

We find that although the SP enjoyed sizeable Muslim support (39 per cent), the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) also performed well among Muslims. It received around 20 per cent votes. Even the Congress manages to get 18 per cent Muslim votes. These figures demonstrate the fact that the “Muslim vote” was highly diversified. The Muslim caste configuration is also relevant here. Our data shows that around 41 per cent upper-caste Muslim (Ashraf) votes went to the SP. Also significant recipients of Ashraf support were the Congress (26 per cent) and the BSP (12 per cent). Although the SP also got 38 per cent non-Ashraf votes, the performance of the BSP is quite noticeable among non-Ashrafs. It secured 26 per cent non-Ashraf Muslim votes, while the Congress managed to get only 11 per cent non-Ashraf votes. This shows that the inclination of upper-caste Muslims towards the SP and the Congress is higher when compared to lower-caste Muslims. This Muslim political diversity, I suggest, exposes the emptiness of the Muslim homogeneity argument that Bukhari and Azam Khan propose.

The 2006 State of the Nation survey by CSDS-Lokniti on India's Muslims can help us in assessing the second set of issues that the Bukhari-Khan controversy raises. For the sake of clarity, let us look at three kinds of questions: what are the Muslim issues? Who is responsible for the present crisis of Muslims? And, what could be the way out?

We find that poverty and unemployment are identified as the most important Muslim issues (69 per cent). Instead of Hindu communalism or lack of religious freedom, a majority of the respondents (60 per cent) feel that the government is responsible for the present situation of Muslims in India. In fact, 16 per cent Muslims say that Muslims themselves are responsible for the present predicaments of the community. Affirmative action policies are considered as the possible way out to get rid of socio-economic backwardness. A majority of Muslims strongly support the view that Muslims must have some kind of reservation in educational institutions (72 per cent) as well as in Parliament and State Assemblies (82 per cent).

Interestingly, these overtly socio-political demands are not addressed to Muslim elites. In fact, the question of Muslim leadership was not at all given any considerable importance. Only four per cent of respondents find that the “lack of the right kind of Muslim leadership” has been a problem for Muslims in this country. On the basis of these findings, it would suffice to suggest that the question of Muslim leadership is not a fundamental issue for Muslims at all. On the contrary, Muslims, like other deprived and marginalised sections of society, seem to recognise the State as a reference point for making political claims.

Can we, therefore, say that Muslims in India do not want to be represented by Muslim political and/or religious elites? I do not think that this complicated question can be answered merely on the basis of evidence/data we have discussed here. It requires a systematic exploration of a different kind by which we can make sense of the contextual placing of Muslim elites in the socio-cultural universe of Muslim communities. Yet, we can certainly argue that Muslim participation in different forms of politics should be taken seriously to understand the multiplicity of the political representation debates. If we continue to pose the question of Muslim political representation in the present form, it would be very difficult for us to move away from the kind of arguments people like Azam Khan and Bukhari make.

And we are to believe that this is your analysis? Without attribution, without citation, it would seem so, and then we think of what you have been writing otherwise.

In a nutshell, this note makes it clear that once the issue of religious identity is addressed, it recedes into the background, and other factors take its place as an identifier. In the case of the Muslims, the religious issue was addressed once they saw that in post-Muslim League India, there continued to be life. They had no ethnic or linguistic issues, living within a society which resembled them as individuals very closely, and they happened to be the poorer folk left behind in the upper class stampede for Pakistan. To them, gradually, with some perturbations, it became clear that education, skills acquisition and an opportunity to learn counted more than forming up in ranks behind the mullah. His day and age are gone. Just as irrelevant is the idiot who thinks that being Muslim himself, he will get the votes of Muslims. What he has is a chance to talk to them. Period.

 

[cyphercide]

So what is it, why do you love looking white?

I don't know, why do Europeans get a tan? But assuming an altogether different heritage, that too one you proclaim has inherited everything from current day Pakistan is beyond shameless(even by your standards).

 

[Ticker]

That sort of kills your earlier theories a bit, doesn't it? The people who built the Sir Ganga Ram Hospital aren't the people living around it today.

Why do you imagine the fate of those who lived in the IVC was any different?

ha ha ha ...... I didn't ask the family of Sir Ganga ram to leave. They left very early on their own - such were the travesties of the era. Many Muslim Ganga Rams had to leave their homes in India and come to Pakistan.

Why do you imagine the fate of those who lived in so-called gangetic valley any different.

Don't mix and hedge - it doesn't work this way.

 

[Joe Shearer]

We can't do anything about stupid tribals

Dangerous statement, that.

These were the same stupid tribals who shared (some of) the space of the IVC, IF we are to believe that those present today represent those living there then.

It would appear that breathing the same air as the IVC people may have breathed means nothing at all. Stupid tribals - I am referring to those in Afghanistan, of course - remain stupid tribals.

These are also the exact same stupid tribals, in a sense, that bred Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammad Ghori. Certainly those who bred Ahmed Shah Durrani, and his master, Nadir Shah. Before you explode, I know that Mahmud was half-Turkish, half-Persian, and the Ghurids were Persian Sunnis, Nadir Shah was a Turk and only Ahmed Shah was a pure bred Afghan.

The point raises its head in a different way when we recognize this diversity of origin. They all came from the same place, the kingdom of Khorasan. Are we to assume that they all shared in the legacy of Khorasan, or that they were individual and each one of a kind? If they shared the legacy of Khorasan, they share the legacy of the destruction at Bamiyan as well, as do you.

If they do not share this legacy, then occupying the same space as the western fringes of the IVC means nothing to them, and should mean nothing to you.

Either ownership of a cultural complex Is through coincidental inhabitation, or it is through generic descent. Very rarely is it both. This is not one of them.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You may like to consider them looters - we don't. They took what was theirs in the first place.

You can't be selective in distributing identity when you have lost yours.

What was whose? The Ghaznavid, the Ghurid were taking what was theirs in the first place? I am afraid this is getting confusing. First, the Ghaznavids had never come east of the Bolan or of the Khyber; there was no dominion over the Indus Valley prior to that. Neither of Sind nor of Punjab. Neither they nor the Ghurids had even remote connections with India. How were they reclaiming what was theirs?

Exactly... IVC is in Pakistan, and the people who migrated from IVC can claim Ganga river as their own

Not so.

The physical remains of the IVC remain in what is now Pakistan. For the time being, as long as Sind and Punjab remain in Pakistan, they have ticketing rights to the ruins. A far cry from owning the legacy. From what you have written, the owners of the legacy are in the Gangetic plains today.

Whatever you say.

The land existed much before that. Recorded history is 40,000 years old, or may be even older. India has only Indian identity and India came into existence 65 years ago. No worthwhile history exist in India's land holdings.

There is NO recorded history relating to the sub-continent older than 2,400 from now, and that was recorded by foreigners.

You may like to look up the differences between history, proto-history and pre-history. These are categories frequently confused by amateurs.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The land existed much before that. Recorded history is 40,000 years old, or may be even older. India has only Indian identity and India came into existence 65 years ago. No worthwhile history exist in India's land holdings.

Which part of Indian history for over 2,400 years do you wish me to summarize: political, literary, architectural, artistic, religious, economic?

I am happy to deal with all of them, if the moderators have no problems with that!

 

[Joe Shearer]

Once Indus River dries up, you can say IVC ended

Err, no,actually, the IVC is a technical term used by archaeologists. It refers to a culture in upper India that flourished between 3500 BC and 1500 BC.

It does not refer to subsequent civilizations along the Indus River.

You must not get mixed up in discussions on subjects that you do not understand, like this one, on archaeology.

We are a Islamic state, you are a secular state. You have to provide full rights and status to your minorities, we just have to give our minorities food water and a house

I will leave you to work out the obvious fallacy in this not-very-intelligent statement. As it is in public view, no doubt it remaining visibly and embarrassingly not worked out will serve as an incentive.

They can't. They will still be illegal muhajirs like illegal Bangladeshis who migrated even at the time of partition.

The fact is that nobody knows whether the people stayed and stayed alive through 4000 years of turmoil, whether they were slaughtered, whether they migrated en masse, or whether they drifted away in ones and twos, or tens and twenties, for that matter. You could both be right, you could both be wrong. Nobody will ever know. It is a lost civilization.

 

[Thorough Pro]

ANd then some Indians talk about Pakistan!!!

Shining India!!!

The only thing I see them shining is American Arse, with 1.2 billion tongues licking anything can shine.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Unfortunately, you translate history as you want to. We have a history and we look at it as it actually was - not from a distance. You see you guys are not here - we are.

You don't have an identity. Identity comes with a place and not with wishful thinking, that you could have there and if you were there, you would have been known as something. Alas it is not so. And this forces you to look for an identity in the gangetic valley, or look for an identity by denigrating the Aryan Invasion and then telling the world, don't you know it was from India that other civilizations emanated!

Don't wish so hard against them - they have an uncanny ability to revisit places.

As it happens, that phrase in bold sums up the Pakistan fallacy, the reason why this is the only country in the world that spends quality time agonizing over its identity and repeatedly coming to no conclusion.

Identity has nothing to do with place. It has to do with various other attributes: religious affiliation, ethnic identity, linguistic group, tribal character, caste, if applicable, class, where other factors have receded, gender, sexual orientation, political conviction, all co-existing at the same time.

Both the leaders of Pakistan and the Congress party made similar but not identical mistakes: they believed either that religious identity was everything, or that religious identity was nothing. Both were wrong, and that is why, on the one hand, Pakistan is miserable with its own quest for knowing what the country is, and what it ought to be, and India, with how to cope with the multifarious demands for recognition that find expression, after the religious and linguistic issues have been addressed in principle.

It is ironic that the sense of identity of the caste Hindu is so strong - not weak, as you have so mistakenly assessed it - that it stands in the way of allowing this dominating section from understanding how deeply all others yearn for their separate identity to be acknowledged. This is the Indian problem, not what you have strived to build, based on half-understood factors and causes.

Unfortunately, you translate history as you want to. We have a history and we look at it as it actually was - not from a distance. You see you guys are not here - we are.

You don't have an identity. Identity comes with a place and not with wishful thinking, that you could have there and if you were there, you would have been known as something. Alas it is not so. And this forces you to look for an identity in the gangetic valley, or look for an identity by denigrating the Aryan Invasion and then telling the world, don't you know it was from India that other civilizations emanated!



Don't wish so hard against them - they have an uncanny ability to revisit places.

Not really re-visit. That is a cruel choice of words under the circumstances.

Most Pakistani infiltrators are killed within a month. It is highly unlikely that they have survived to say 'Boo' to Fateh71. Defies gravity.

ticker they are always confused in hindusium ,,they donot know either hindusium is a religion or race ........

We know we are not a cocktail asking ourselves after 60+ years of freedom who we are.

as we are muslims our identity starts from the adam and eve ,nooh ............

That puts you, intellectually, at about the same level as a member of the American Republican Tea Party.

No wonder you got on so well with the Americans.

Very well put sir, although off topic. Are we to assume that since we can not find fault with producing a child who has committed a violent crime in court, last refuge is being sought into the fantasy world of all Pakistani fanboys - IVC?

They do tend to escape to a perfect world of their own imagining, populated by fantastic creatures not to be found in real life. The country started in this fit of dreaming up something utterly unworkable, then trying to make it work. It is to the credit of their high degree of loyalty to these visions that they have succeeded so far, but it is an exercise in unstable flight - an entire country on FBW.