Indian Muslims are out to prove their loyalty once again.

[Nilgiri]

We can always do a meet in Singapore little India haha.

Do tell me if yer dropping by Singapore. I also drop by there from time to time. I know Little India there quite well.

 

[waz]

Do tell me if yer dropping by Singapore. I also drop by there from time to time. I know Little India there quite well.

Oh man! How about this Summer? Lol, I have family there who built that country with the founder, it's like a second home. I munch those Dosas like no man alive.

 

[Peshwa]

H: "India is a secular state, prove me wrong."

M: "There's a religiously inspired cow protection clause which gives states the right to curb cow slaughter."

H: "Ackchually, the prophet didn't have cows so it's perfectly acceptable for Indians to ban cow slaughter since their religion teaches them cows are their mother."

Why do conversations with H's always end up like this? Why do H's always use the same garbage responses? Why do H's even bother defending their "secular" constitution when they don't really believe in it?

Let’s first start with why Pakistanis (mainly on PDF) always bring everything down to religion?! Do you guys have any identity outside of your religion that everything has to be broken down to this lowest common denominator?

Then perhaps give it a thought that I haven’t endorsed the cow protection law in the indian states in any of my post.
I have only responded to the claim of the ‘right’ to kill a cow as a fundamental human right as per the poster I quoted.
I added on the argument that a beef ban does not impinge upon the right of Muslims in any way (hence the reference to the prophet). If you believe it does, please tell me how.
Which tenet of Islam makes the consumption of beef a pillar of being a Muslim or the lack of it makes impinges upon the right for Muslims to practice their religion freely.

The beef ban affects other beef eating Hindus, Christians and Other Indian communities as much as it does Muslims. So not sure how that should focus as a Muslim agenda that Pakistanis need to point out (it not being their problem to start out with)

And for the record, I find the cow slaughter law and the violence associated with it to be completely asinine. But that’s irrelevant, Since I was born hindu of course.

 

[Nilgiri]

Oh man! How about this Summer? Lol, I have family there who built that country with the founder, it's like a second home. I munch those Dosas like no man alive.

Haha I will let you know for sure then....you are connected to LKY thru family connection....dayum! hah, no wonder you knew stephanie sun when I mentioned lah haha... @Mista

Yes our dosas are great....along with most tiffin dishes in general.

Do you go for the banana leaf curries and fish head curry etc? Those are great too. The south indian muslim (mamak) dishes are great (paratha, murtabak, lamb/mutton curry, nasi kandar, fried chicken etc).

BTW us Tamils love to call it "dosai" (Do-say) over standard Dosa way (Do-sah)...a little fun fact hehe.

 

[Mugwop]

The emojis definitely add credibility to your statement.

Emojis and zakir naik himself

 

[Hiptullha]

Let’s first start with why Pakistanis (mainly on PDF) always bring everything down to religion?! Do you guys have any identity outside of your religion that everything has to be broken down to this lowest common denominator?

Identity is based on group differences/similarities so you shouldn't be surprised that some people would reduce others to their religion. If it weren't religion it would be caste or ethnicity, like in India. Knowing the hypocrisy of H's on PDF, I guess that wouldn't be much of a problem to you though.

I added on the argument that a beef ban does not impinge upon the right of Muslims in any way (hence the reference to the prophet). If you believe it does, please tell me how.

How does whether it infringes the rights of Muslims or not matter? The question is if it's a secular or not.

 

[PradoTLC]

I need to get you into New Krishna Bhavan, in Malleswaram, and stuff you with their specialities. No help for it, immersion learning for you, my lad.



And that is, of course, the fault of the court. What else can one expect from people whose courts flip-flop based on the size of the crowd outside?

it is simple... you guys are intolerant... there are no ways about it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

it is simple... you guys are intolerant... there are no ways about it.

It doesn't matter if you can't think of an answer; ask for help.

Identity is based on group differences/similarities so you shouldn't be surprised that some people would reduce others to their religion. If it weren't religion it would be caste or ethnicity, like in India. Knowing the hypocrisy of H's on PDF, I guess that wouldn't be much of a problem to you though.

Interesting.

Have you any data on this, have you tracked e-mails and do you have the data on what they say, or is this just a knee-jerk reaction to an uncomfortable question?

How does whether it infringes the rights of Muslims or not matter? The question is if it's a secular or not.

If there is a ban on meat of a kind that will stop civil disharmony, that should be a necessary and a sufficient condition. Nobody pursues secularism to the point where it becomes a pain to society. Like the rule in secular France, where religious signs are not allowed in public, no crosses to be worn, no burkhas, and so on; that would be easy in France where it is comparatively rare, it would fail utterly in India.

Just for the record, I am a beef-eater (rarely; don't eat much meat or fish nowadays due to health restrictions) in a beef-eating town.

 

[Hiptullha]

Have you any data on this, have you tracked e-mails and do you have the data on what they say, or is this just a knee-jerk reaction to an uncomfortable question?

Data on group identity? There's a whole scientific field out there studying it. And no, it's not an uncomfortable question. It might have been years ago, but I've just come to accept it as a simple fact and embrace it. I'm not going to be shamed by H's who talk about bringing back old temples and protecting cows about how I'm somehow in the wrong for thinking about my own religion.

If there is a ban on meat of a kind that will stop civil disharmony, that should be a necessary and a sufficient condition. Nobody pursues secularism to the point where it becomes a pain to society.

Ok, great mental gymnastics, but if in you're struggle to achieve secularism, you end up making concessions to Hindu interest groups and start trying to put their ideas into legislation, you're no longer in pursuit of that struggle.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Data on group identity? There's a whole scientific field out there studying it. And no, it's not an uncomfortable question. It might have been years ago, but I've just come to accept it as a simple fact and embrace it. I'm not going to be shamed by H's who talk about bringing back old temples and protecting cows about how I'm somehow in the wrong for thinking about my own religion.

That's it?

"I don't know why I'm saying it, but it feels good, so I'll keep saying it"?

As you wish. Very impressive verbiage.

Ok, great mental gymnastics, but if in you're struggle to achieve secularism, you end up making concessions to Hindu interest groups and start trying to put their ideas into legislation, you're no longer in pursuit of that struggle.

Do take a look at the Indian Constitution, in particular, its Directive Principles, before bursting into eloquent speeches.

 

[Hiptullha]

"I don't know why I'm saying it, but it feels good, so I'll keep saying it"?

What am I supposed to say? Start trying to justify something which has existed and been proven since the beginning of human history?

Do take a look at the Indian Constitution, in particular, its Directive Principles, before bursting into eloquent speeches.

How do the directive principles relate to the cow protection clause in the constitution?

 

[PradoTLC]

It doesn't matter if you can't think of an answer; ask for help.

.

sorry not malu that answers for the sake of an answer...


mean while..in intolerant india

Pulwama: Jingoism has drowned the voices of sanity

People have to recalibrate their response to terror -- warmongering isn't the answer

Published: February 24, 2019 19:34Bobby Naqvi, UAE Editor
Karachi Bakery’s Sindhi owners forced to declare ‘We are Indians’
In the past, we have dug up cricket pitches, threatened Pakistani singers and actors and in the process of flaunting our nationalism, we have hit our own people and strategic interests.

I always had problems with mass hysteria and collective jingoism that grips our country after every terrorist attack.

There is no doubt in my mind that terrorist incidents, like the one in Pulwama, India, where over 40 soldiers were killed in a suicide bombing, are an attack on the sovereignty of the nation and deserve a well-calibrated response by the government, security agencies and forces on the ground and not the kind of jingoism we see in TV studios, social media and streets.

This kind of hysteria on a national scale actually helps those behind such terrorist attacks. Remember, their job is to terrorise!

Since February 14, when a convoy of paramilitary troops was attacked on a Jammu and Kashmir highway, we have reacted in a childish manner — a news anchor offering himself to be strapped with bombs and dropped into Pakistani territory; TV studios debating when India can launch a nuclear strike were among some bizarre suggestions.

So, what has happened since February 14 is this: A united India pretending to collectively respond to this dastardly act.

While the government has taken a series of steps as part of its diplomatic and security offensive (rightly so), the strong message that it sought to convey has been lost in the din created by this collective jingoism.

Warmongering
The message that should have gone to the perpetrators is lost, what is heard loudest in post-Pulwama India are the screams of warmongering nationalists.

Caught in this hysteria are Indian nationals, including a cricket superstar. Reacting to calls to boycott Pakistan in the World Cup, Sachin Tendulkar expressed his concern that it would lead to India losing two points in the championship.


In a post on social media, Tendulkar said: “India has always come up trumps against Pakistan in World Cup. Time to beat them again. Would personally hate to give them 2 points & help them in tournament. For me India always comes first, so whatever my country decides, I’ll back that decision with all my heart.”

Soon after this post, news anchor Arnab Goswami, who is known for his chest-thumping histrionics, criticised Tendulkar.

“Sachin is 100 per cent wrong. Sachin Tendulkar, if he has any sense, should realise that he should be the first person to say don’t play with Pakistan. And (Sunil) Gavaskar should be the second person to say we should not play with Pakistan. These people say we need two points. Both are damn wrong. I don’t need two points. I want revenge for my martyrs. Understand? Sachin Tendulkar can take his two points and put it in the dustbin.”

While Goswami’s prime time rant may have earned him the respect of his neo-nationalist followers, this kind of irresponsible behaviour by a senior journalist on live television puts the country in poor light.

Geographically, India is the biggest country in south Asia and a nation of over 1.25 billion people, how it responds to a geo-political crisis is watched not just by its neighbours but people across the world.

And media coverage is the first indication of the national mood, not necessarily that of the government though.

Goswami is not alone and those who consume news on television have seen news anchors behaving like street thugs in the last ten days. To be fair, their Pakistani counterparts are not any better, a quick search will throw up videos of Pakistani journalists abusing Indians on live TV.

In another example, owners of a bakery were targeted by some people who objected to the bakery’s first name.

Police arrested nine people after they barged into ‘Karachi Bakery’, a popular eatery in Bengaluru and demanded to see the owners.

After the group left, the owners covered the first name of the bakery. In a statement, the owners said: “We would like to clarify that Karachi Bakery was founded by Shri Khanchand Ramnani, who migrated to India during the partition. The brand was established in 1953 and is an Indian company based out of Hyderabad, Telangana, India. The popularity and love for its products has contributed to its growth throughout India and abroad. The essence of Karachi Bakery is absolutely Indian by heart and will remain so. We request everybody to refrain from any kind of misconception.”

Hysteria, hypernationalism
These two examples stand out but there are many other individuals, including writers and film personalities who have been attacked on social media.

Actor-writer couple Shabani Azmi and Javed Akhtar were called “anti-nationals” by their Bollywood colleague Kangna Ranaut. More problematic are the violent attacks on Kahsmiri students in several parts of the country.

A sitting governor, known for his irresponsible statements, even called for a boycott of Kashmiri traders and businessmen. Alarmed by the trend, the Supreme Court had to step in, asking states to protect the Kashmiris.

The biggest problem is that this hysteria and hyper-nationalism are adding muscle to a narrative that is being built to gain political mileage ahead of national elections.

As the world’s largest democracy, the Indian media and people have to recalibrate their response to terror — warmongering and targeting individuals are definitely not the answer.


https://gulfnews.com/world/asia/ind...-drowned-the-voices-of-sanity-1.1551022666210

 

[Joe Shearer]

sorry not malu that answers for the sake of an answer...


mean while..in intolerant india

O littlest oracle, a Mallu can answer you much better than I can. You will not be able to bear the stinging and the pain. Be thankful that you are talking to a relatively easy-to-amuse individual who looks on posts like yours as the entertainment that one section of the PDF membership owes him as tribute and tax for staying on.