Is being Anti-Islam the same as Pro-Indian?

[GURU DUTT]

ji pop corn akele akele hi khaan lag pare ho ji sannu wee saath le lo ji

ham itne burre nahi hain ji khabhe to muskura diya karo ji hame dekh ke

 

[Spring Onion]

well jana bibi sallam pesh kerta hoon ji

any way it is so called khunnass and the beleave of superiority complex in muslim elite which they took to pakistan and poisened your society beyond repair and which in now creeping in an evrage pakistani like you in form of acute frustaion and helplessness and no so called ehsaas e kamtaree any way there are many in pakistan who still beleave that what they did to hindus in lahore and all over pakistan and bangladesh in 1947 & 1970 dosent matter and hindus will never retaliate and if they retaliated how can that be possible well ji times have changed now if someone will slap us on one cheek we will break his neck rather than to show other cheek so do you get my point

well the bottiom line is JINKE GHAR SHEESHE KE HOTE HAIN WO DOOSRON KE GHARO PE PATHARR NAHEE FAINKTHE

Have noted down all your symbtoms you need an urgent apointment with a psychiatrist

 

[GURU DUTT]

Have noted down all your symbtoms you need an urgent apointment with a psychiatrist

he he hs Shukriya ji aaj to apne hame khareed liya

Bahut Shukriya Bari Meherbani 1962 film Ek Musafir Ek Hasina - Joy Mukerjee, Sadhana Shivdasani - YouTube

 

[bronxbull]

This question, of course, is in context of the perception that India enjoys in its immediate neighborhood.

I read a few articles on the recent tensions in Maldives, Bangladesh and Pakistan. In a number of these articles, the two terms "anti-islam" and "pro-indian" were used almost interchangeably.

So is being anti-islam the same as being pro-indian? What do you think?

No,anyone can be anti-islam for whatever reasons and need not be pro indian,

and even being pro-indian doesn't mean anti islam,only thing i know is that being pro indian means being anti-pseudo secular,they are the ones to be scared of.

This kind of proves the point. How can incidents of hundreds of years ago be brought into the picture today? What's more, we don't see Hindus retaliating, we see them initiating. Why this aggressive behaviour, which is totally not called for?

This is because of centuries of pent up anger.

The converse is usually true. Secular voices are smeared with an anti-Hindu label, however much Hindu they are. They are called anti-Hindu if they oppose the construction of a temple over a demolished mosque, if they ask to move a makeshift temple turned pilgrimage spot touching Charminar to some place where there is more space and where it does not come in the way of Charminar - even if this stance is based on rational principles of fairness and not having a hatred for Hinduism.

Thats not true,

Most secularists are brain washed marxists.

 

[bronxbull]

Here you go gain, using mother-in-law research to come to profound, and profoundly wrong conclusions. The more I think of it, the more your sig. fits.

The problem often is that the very Muslims who converted to get power and cannot reconvert as their people wont take them back,

have to hold onto islam dangerously.

Thats the real problem.

 

[rubyjackass]

That temple next to the charminar is obviously a touchstone of co-existence of the two faiths. .....charminar being a non religious structure and temple being a religious structure...the anger and intolerance it generates in the muslim community is the real issue here.

I said lol at him saying it is a touchstone of co-existence of two faiths. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression. Earlier you would have heard the same guy claiming it is Hindu right to have the temple there. You can read our argument in the related thread.

And thanks for recognizing Charminar as a non-religious structure. Only saffronists and some right wing Muslims demand that the structure be recognised as a religious monument.

So you are also blaming the muslim community for letting a temple be built in the 60s touching Charminar and letting it stay all these years(despite the area being adjacent to their strongholds)?

Legality of the existence of the temple is a separate issue ......and obviously building the temple is a BJP's effort to garner more support for itself and get a foot hold in AP.

Thanks for stating the obvious.

But the fact that such polarization can be achieved by building a structure dedicated to god next to a non religious structure like charminar must make you think about the intolerance in the muslim society in Hyderabad.

Yeah sure, may be muslims are angry at the temple being there. But why do call the monument as non-religious and simultaneously blame muslims for not allowing a temple. Besides there are also secular muslims who want the temple out of there, exactly because Charminar is a secular historical monument in their view. Promoting a temple there to ridicule our heritage just because it was built by a Muslim is demeaning and wrong.

You seem to not know what the real issue was about. The temple itself was allowed to be built and remained there for about 40 years despite such construction around Charminar being illegal. Besides even when the temple was not in the news and barely got any visitors, it was always decorated with a hundred saffron flags in an 'in your face' sort of manner probably directed at Muslims around. Yet the temple stayed.

The dispute was about the Diwali celebrations arranged at the temple. The temple was decorated with scaffolding which some muslim leaders described as efforts to expand the temple. Not many people visited the temple until it came into the news recently. Only after BJP propaganda that it is 500 year old temple(some even claim that Charminar was built after demolishing a temple there!!), people started visiting it. Sadly it also became a pilgrimage spot for people who want Hinduism to score a point.

If the muslim bigot leaders get support from the community because they raise legitimate concern about the temple, then you should not blame the community.

 

[rubyjackass]

Most secularists are brain washed marxists.

Wow! another gem.

 

[KS]

I dont know what people are discussing.


The Andhra High court has thrown into the dustbin all the petitions filed by the raza-kar goons whining about the temple in their "muslim" structure.

The temple is here to stay legally.

If some bigot Muslims cant tolerate to see a temple there, they can wear a blindfold while crossing the char minar.

p.s.: request all posters arguing in support of the temple stop it. The Andhra high court has upheld the status quo and rejected the petitions. There is no need to prove anything to anybody.

 

[ashokdeiva]

Appreciate your opinion. And I wish, religion and one's sense of national pride were exclusive of each other. But we all know how the situation is. But this has to do with India's domestic issues.

But, as mentioned in the first post, i am referring, to perception issues, NOT in India, but in our neighborhood.

Do you know yourself well or you always need some one to tell what you are made off?
come on man, we have to accept that our neighbours except CHINA has a minority population that fears HINDUS as a majority force with carnivorous teaths to peal their very flesh, what can you expect when its in context with such countries.

 

[doppelganger]

I actually think the major problem of perceptions versus reality is that 99% Pakistanis may never have come across a Hindu in real life. At least not the ones living in Pakistan. Those living abroad cannot be taken as a yardstick, because abroad I think all desis in general gravitate together because of the security of familiarity in a foreign white land.

 

[bronxbull]

Wow! another gem.

Thanks dude,

It always feels good to win praise from the opposition.

I dont know what people are discussing.


The Andhra High court has thrown into the dustbin all the petitions filed by the raza-kar goons whining about the temple in their "muslim" structure.

The temple is here to stay legally.

If some bigot Muslims cant tolerate to see a temple there, they can wear a blindfold while crossing the char minar.

p.s.: request all posters arguing in support of the temple stop it. The Andhra high court has upheld the status quo and rejected the petitions. There is no need to prove anything to anybody.

Dude,

India is hindu majority and we ll build a temple wherever we want.

We ll build temples on all sides of the charminar.

well do whatever we want,

people who have a problem are welcome to stop us.

 

[doppelganger]

Dude,

India is hindu majority and we ll build a temple wherever we want.

We ll build temples on all sides of the charminar.

well do whatever we want,

people who have a problem are welcome to stop us.

I am also a hindu but what you are saying is not true and you are I think lashing out here. If we could actually do as you say we can, in close to 70 years of Independence, would we not have demolished many more masjids and built temples over them? As it is we have demolished only one after all this hue and cry, and there also we have not managed to build a temple yet.

 

[rubyjackass]

well your an opologhetik sir but im not im proud to be a hard line hindu ar the follower of santan dharm any way its not about revenge its about your values and owr beleves i dont care whether they call me any thing but RAM Temple was there and will remain there it was it is and it will be owrs its non of my buisness what jews do thats it

Apologetic?!!! I am just being practical and fair.

You are the one who started talking in terms of comparative justice with a hypothetical example. I had to come to your standards to show that there is no point in digging into history to take revenge. Albeit with a better and an actual real life example, showing how the jews did not take revenge by constructing their temple over Al-Aqsa mosque, even though they have practically crushed their enemies.

I am sad that you cannot smell the contradiction in your own statements. You call sanatan dharma as not about revenge but about values. Yet you ask for revenge for something that happened(whether it happened or not is a different debate) centuries ago. What great values will you acquire suddenly by building RAM temple?

This is not an age for communal revenge. I hope you understand this and will come out of your shell.

It is a fact that Hindus suffered from the Muslim ruler under some of the rulers. If a common man Muslim was part of it, it was because of the emotions and religious sentiments riled up by the ruling class. The same happened to muslims under some Hindu rulers. It may be true that Hindus did not get to pay their due because they could not rule for longer period during this time. This one sided narrative that only Hindus suffered is dangerous and is any way not based on facts.

But all that has nothing to do with what we have now, a modern state. Whatever happened was unfortunate. We have to accept whatever we inherited as our heritage. Babri mosque would have stood as grim reminder of what would happen if religious intolerance is allowed to spiral out. Now it just shows we want to go back to the medieval ages.

 

[bronxbull]

we will do it,just see.

 

[doppelganger]

we will do it,just see.

I am not saying we wont. Just that one temple after all this fuss. That too when and if it happens. Face it, we are a secular nation, not a hindu nation. And we have to follow the same law whether we are 900 million or 170 million.