For the naive and self-blinded....

[Chak Bamu]

You didn't quote again.

Anyways, so you do agree that if a temple is built adjacent to it's original place, it's all the same. That's what I think too.

That is very clever of you, I must say.

 

[scorpionx]

Dont impose your atheism on other people,also dont confuse between an atheistic state and a secular state.

Even the hardcore atheists of communist russia protected their orthodox cathedrals with equal fervor..

And by the following remark you have just clearly depicted your idea of an atheistic state.Just great.I always said, you guys are just bunch of self disillusioned ideologists who neither know anything about Hinduism nor you have any respect for your own country. This is a historical truth.Live with it.

The pride of our religion is completely dependent on two things,making a temple at Ayodhya and taking revenge on kashmiri muslims

 

[bronxbull]

ok,please.

 

[Joe Shearer]

1. You are remarkably level headed - I admire these qualities

2. Modi is not like any of us. While we are fighting with keyboards, he has risen from a lowly chaiwalla to a successful CM.

3. Ashoka did repent. He also renounced his kingdom. The reason why he is given so much respect.

4. We should move ahead, but a National Reconciliation along the lines of Kemal will do us a great deal of good. A line must be drawn once and for all.

Yes I am a fan of Kemal

Asoka did not renounce his kingdom. He reigned for decades after the Kalinga war. It is mentioned on his edict pillars, which were distributed around his kingdom.

He renounced violent aggression on other states.

 

[jaunty]

I don't want another dynastic Congress government and Modi is the only viable alternative. I am no fan of Modi but the man talks about development and I am ready to give him a chance to prove his worth. No politician in Delhi is a saint anyway! If Congress can form so many govts despite 1984, Modi can too.

 

[Kloitra]

3. Ashoka did repent. He also renounced his kingdom. The reason why he is given so much respect.

He repent, but didn't renounced. And he ruined the dynasty and society during his reign.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Asoka did not renounce his kingdom. He reigned for decades after the Kalinga war. It is mentioned on his edict pillars, which were distributed around his kingdom.

He renounced violent aggression on other states.

Yeah sorry sir. I apologize. He renounced the aggression on other states.
Realizing one's mistake is a great quality and more so for an emperor, hence I respect him immensely. Besides I have got a soft corner for Buddhist thought as well.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

1. If I am not wrong, Bakhtiar Khilji was responsible for Nalanda's destruction. Ghauri probably did not wish to conquer all of India - it would have been unmanageable for him. I do think that his slaves, starting from Aibak onwards made a conscious decision to conquer and rule as much of India as they could. They had nothing to lose and really no where to go back to. Moreover, with their education, training, skills, and organization, they felt confident that they could conquer and rule India. After all, Sultan Ghauri did spend a lot of money on their education and training - treating them like his children that he did not have.

2. Historians have wondered about the difference in trajectory, had Muslim conquerors been Arabs of seventh century rather than Turks of the Eleventh & Twelfth. The two were different in their outlook and methods.

3. Aurangzeb excused his killing of Dara Shikoh. He would have done so with or without any reason in any case. Turkish princes routinely killed their brothers for throne. I can not understand or excuse such behavior, but that is how it was. Had Dara Shikoh won, he would have done the same thing to Aurangzeb. The same thing happened among Ottomans. Such practice ensured that the sharpest and most able of princes occupied the throne. As much history as I have read, I am sure that Aurangzeb was the ablest among his brothers.

4. India was a prize. But it took superior organization to take it. For people who feel hurt that Muslims conquered India, I can only say that conquest is not a random happening. It is result of superior social and organizational set up. Indian society was divided and though it put up a lot of resistance to conquest, the divisions eventually mattered negatively. The same thing could be seen with Indian response to the British who came in with superior organization and conquered India mostly because of its divisions.

So my friends. Anything that divides Indians is a bad thing. Divisions always did them in. Believe me, if Indians do a really bad job in this department, others will step in once again.

I made a mistake again. Names remain elusive to me ..
It was actually Qutb ud din Aibak who destroyed the Nalanda complex as ordered by Khilji. The context was actually with reference to a parallel with Ashoka. Unile Ashoka, there was no repentance for Khilji. Indeed, it is mentioned as a matter of pride in chronicles. After Nalanda's destruction there was no center of learning of repute left in India and we moved into the dark ages within a century.

Dara Shikoh may have been killed for the throne. But his killing was peculiar when it comes to the almost ritual slaughter of brothers in Mughal times. Shikoh was reasonably pro-Dharma, even being a Muslim. His rule would have been in stark contrast to the bigotry of Aurangzeb. His interest in Hindu and other scriptures and his personal education in Hindu religious texts and subsequent respect for them stands out.

There are broadly two types of people in India with conflicting ideas about what is good for the country. Even though they have the best interests in their hearts(I hope), their methods differ. One line of thought has been exercised for 60 years and we are still languishing in mirth. It won't do harm to try the other method as well. And oh the other method is putting sectarian differences aside and working for a market based free economy and NOT a Hindu Rashtra.

 

[Roybot]

For the naive and self blinded....from the pseudo intellectual, self righteous, sanctimonious, condescending, thinks their shyte doesn't stink, left wingers.

 

[Roybot]

You got totally pi**ed off didn't you? Chill bro

I don't mind the article, although it so conveniently overlooked the Godhra train burning episode, but its the typical condescending tone of the OP which annoyed me. Apparently if you are not a jholawadi communist, you are naive, ignorant and self blinded.

And if you don't agree with his line of thinking, you earn yourself a negative rating, what a joke!

 

[livingdead]

This is a fact of India,all the hurt and abuse hindus have faced in north india from muslim rulers and their co hindus who converted for money,they have never seen any justice in their lives.

So,the biggest failure of the indian constitution is in overlooking this fact and the only solution congress provides is by providing short time steroids to each and everyone as according to the person,

It is money and freebies for the poor,tactical political power for the OBCs & numerically small brahmins and appeasement for the muslims.

By indulging in such silly short term policies,congress makes way for a much stronger backlash later.

This is like going and getting drunk after having a love failure.The soothing effect lasts only till the next morning,after that one has to face the reality of the girl/guy dumping him/her.

If majority people of India believe that the law discriminates against them,then the law or its spirit will never get implemented.

So all those people who feel the irrational & over idealistc and non pragmatic parts of the constitution should be deemed higher than the common social good at any point of time,may do so in their ow lives.

People of India have a lot of clarity on their choices and exercise them.

I can show you lots and lots of educated hindus and even christians who feel that the local sunnis and ther archaic religious laws are a huge baggage for the indian economy and society.

The lazy slob nawabi culture just doesnt fit into the goals of the country today.

These are the plain facts,in very simple words.

Agencies like the EPW can sit on their *** enjoying taxpayer money and spout any incongruent nonsense as they please.

It makes zero difference to the ground realities.

you are just a saffron version of @Spring Onion

 

[livingdead]

I don't mind the article, although it so conveniently overlooked the Godhra train burning episode, but its the typical condescending tone of the OP which annoyed me. Apparently if you are not a jholawadi communist, you are naive, ignorant and self blinded.

when it comes to modi, most are surely one of these. I dont think most people can be so malevolent as to ignore this episode that blighted his career.

 

[Roybot]

when it comes to modi, most are surely one of these. I dont think most people can be so malevolent as to ignore this episode that blighted his career.

Then you are prejudiced, its like me saying that everyone who hates Modi, is a pseudo intellectual, pseudo secular, communist left winger, living in some Utopian la la land. But then it would be wrong of me to paint everyone with the same brush. Everyone has their own set of reasons to like/dislike Modi. You weigh the positives and the negatives and thats how opinion is formed.

You can't go around saying hurr durr I am an "intellectual" so your opinion is worth shyte and only what I say and think is right. Why can't we just accept each others opinion instead of trying to prove the other wrong?

 

[Dillinger]

Then you are prejudiced, its like me saying that everyone who hates Modi, is a pseudo intellectual, pseudo secular, communist left winger, living in some Utopian la la land. But then it would be wrong of me to paint everyone with the same brush. Everyone has their own set of reasons to like/dislike Modi. You weigh the positives and the negatives and thats how opinion is formed.

You can't go around saying hurr durr I am an "intellectual" so your opinion is worth shyte and only what I say and think is right. Why can't we just accept each others opinion instead of trying to prove the other wrong?

I am indeed an intellectual and ergo in front of me all your opinions are shyte.

Sup?

As to whether the points raised by the article are legit or not, who knows. But they really need to understand that since the early days Modi has framed the discourse in such a manner that any such articles are only seen as a bid to malign him BECAUSE he will put a dent in to the plans of folks with vested interests who are doing the said maligning.

 

[Roybot]

I am indeed an intellectual and ergo in front of me all your opinions are shyte.

Sup?

As to whether the points raised by the article are legit or not, who knows. But they really need to understand that since the early days Modi has framed the discourse in such a manner that any such articles are only seen as a bid to malign him BECAUSE he will put a dent in to the plans of folks with vested interests who are doing the said maligning.

Its not just a bid to malign Modi, there is a more sinister agenda, undermining the Indian judicial system. This article, and many like it that has recently appeared in the Western media(mostly British), are pointing fingers at our judicial system, and our so called left wing intellectuals are gulping it down hook line and sinker.

I mean the Brits are pointing fingers at our judicial system, the Brits are raising the issue of moral and ethical culpability of Modi in Gujarat riots. The very Brits whose prime minister waged a war against Iraq looking for some imaginary WMD, and was responsible for the the death of atleast a million innocent Iraqis, , they have the audacity to question our justice system and our democratic right to vote for Modi !

I accompanied Wahidabano to the Ahmedabad Metropolitan Court in September 2010. The man who knifed her did not come (his lawyer was present), but the other accused came to court. The “courtroom” was a large room with an elevated table and chair for the judge and five rows of cheap plastic chairs arranged in front of him. In one corner of the room, heaps of rotting and dusty files lay next to an abandoned table and chair. On the other side, a large metal cabinet was filled with legal manuals. The judge’s chair sat at the head of the room like a prop in a play: a high-backed plush red-leather chair. His desk was neatly decorated with small piles of Gujarati and English editions of the Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code.

To give you an example, why do you think the above quoted paragraph was added? What value does it add to the article, did it help the author in driving his point home?