Tarique against religion-based politics

[eastwatch]

Genetic tests have proven that Bengali Muslims have little to no foreign ancestry. The name Bengal comes from a Dravidian tribe called Vang which inhabited the region. Here is what most Bangladeshis look like:
View attachment 48856

Thank you Indian H##uman for uploading your own face. You must be an untouchable Sudra from Bihar. Your face shows this.

 

[eastwatch]

@eastwatch you also misinterpreted my posts.

You must know the language to express your mind. But, you always fail. Now, you are blaming others. You said we should not speak about our fore bearers who came to this land and settled here only because they were invaders. You have a very simplistic mind that deals with only black and white shades.

Why should people who know better than you do will accept your statement at the face value. This is why I requested you to read thoroughly the Muslim history of Bengal from 1200 to 1750. Read first and then come and speak your opinion.

 

[monitor]

Tareq remark may be to dodge the western power who are worried about religious extremism .as BAL is always tries to link Jamat and other religious organization with outlawed banned organization as sole Saviour of Bangladesh he is showing BNP don't like religion based politics the either . if this tactics right only times will tell . intill now BNP politics and ANDOLON are roaming in GOOL table meeting and press briefing. i wonder whether they have any power to fight BAL police league alone without direct support of dedicated Jamat supporter . any division between Jamat and BNP will only weaken BNP which the BAL wants by framing Jamat with militant organization.

 

[Luffy 500]

@kalu_miah

With due respect I believe your understanding of different islamic movements is very poor and shaped by western sources which inherently will have a polemic bias. U didn't read the article by posted in my last post. Plz do read that. Salafis have faults just like any other movement since its run by humans and not angles but they have strong aqeedah and basics is very strong and thus don't fall in committing shirk. They have a hugely positive impact on the muslim world. As for their methods of dealing with current social issues affecting muslims , even prominent scholars disagree with many of their views and there r many factions within salafis. There r pacifist, moderates as well as extremist and opportunists like the pro-sisi egyptian "salafists".

As for following turkish model, well sociopolitical landscape of all muslims countries r not the same and thus I don't think muslims states with relatively more conservative sociopolitical landscape than turkey have to follow turkish model. Turkey had a militant french version of secularism dictatorially imposed on them by a fascist like attaturk and underwent 80 years of institutional discrimination in all walks of life against islam & muslims. Its most likely has the largest no. of atheist and anti-muslim bigots in the muslim world. Islamic parties& muslim conservatives had to adapt in such an hostile environment and struggled to come to power in the form of centre-right AKP. AKP also has to consider the significant secular minority while formulating policies. I my opinion islamic parties have to consolidate power and have policies suited to the socio-political environment of the respective countries and thus I don't think its warranted for BD's islamic parties to be overtly secular , at least not yet.

Egypt's case is different. MB was not suited to US/israel interest and morsi wasn't smart enough in dealing with the mubarak era deep state. He was no way dictatorial. He hardly managed to even exercise his constitutional executive powers.

 

[eastwatch]

Indians, can you see the differences among the Muslims of Bengal? Bengali Muslims do not have a typical face.

 

[Mattrixx]

You must know the language to express your mind. But, you always fail. Now, you are blaming others. You said we should not speak about our fore bearers who came to this land and settled here only because they were invaders. You have a very simplistic mind that deals with only black and white shades.

Why should people who know better than you do will accept your statement at the face value. This is why I requested you to read thoroughly the Muslim history of Bengal from 1200 to 1750. Read first and then come and speak your opinion.

Thanks for replying. But the things you replied wasnt part of this thread. @khair_ctg started this.
So you cant understand the main intention of that topic. I have very much doubt that you ever read anyone's post thoroughly.
Now Im finding your reply very irrelevant.

How to delete account in PDF.

 

[Saiful Islam]

can you show me the post where i did that? i am unaware of this

BD is a present part of the Mughal sultanat that came under Britsh invasion. do you have any doubt about that? as for Mughals, even the ruling class of the Mughal sultanat contained people of different backgrounds, and over successive generations, the lineage of the original Mughals that came with Babar became more and more diluted because of intermarriage with Persians, Arabs, Pathans, later-Turkic Mongolians, Hindus (for example between Rajputs and the upper echelon of Mughal ruling class), Buddhist, Jains, etc. BD as a community is descended from the Mughal sultanat. whether i get some self-worth out of it or not, these are the bare facts of history. if i don't even acknowledge this, i am denying the very history of not just BD but the entire subcontinent.

They are denying history which is proved by concrete evidence.

 

[kalu_miah]

They are denying history which is proved by concrete evidence.

That has always been the Indian tactic, to erase our history from 1200 - 1757, the most crucial part, so people of Bangladesh would remain and accept being slaves of Hindu's.

 

[RanvirSena]

Thank you Indian H##uman for uploading your own face. You must be an untouchable Sudra from Bihar. Your face shows this.

His flags show he is Nepali.

 

[EasyNow]

can you show me the post where i did that? i am unaware of this

BD is a present part of the Mughal sultanat that came under Britsh invasion. do you have any doubt about that? as for Mughals, even the ruling class of the Mughal sultanat contained people of different backgrounds, and over successive generations, the lineage of the original Mughals that came with Babar became more and more diluted because of intermarriage with Persians, Arabs, Pathans, later-Turkic Mongolians, Hindus (for example between Rajputs and the upper echelon of Mughal ruling class), Buddhist, Jains, etc. BD as a community is descended from the Mughal sultanat. whether i get some self-worth out of it or not, these are the bare facts of history. if i don't even acknowledge this, i am denying the very history of not just BD but the entire subcontinent.

So what?

You are a Muslim - isn't that enough for you? As a Muslim it doesn't matter if you're descended from a beggar or a Sultan.

But in your selective 'acknowledging' of history you'd deny recognition to the poor Muslims who came from lower classes. You talk like only Arabs and Rajputs became Muslim.


To put this from your immoral perspective; Sylheti's have some the highest genetic influence of Arabs, Yemeni's and Persians due to the 300 Aulia who settled here. So should Sylheti's use this fact to 'acknowledge' their history by announcing it regularly? Or do you think it's better that we identify ourselves as Bangladeshi's, same as everyone else.

Like i said, we are Muslim Bangladeshi's today - come to terms with it.

 

[Saiful Islam]

So what?

You are a Muslim - isn't that enough for you? As a Muslim it doesn't matter if you're descended from a beggar or a Sultan.

But in your selective 'acknowledging' of history you'd deny recognition to the poor Muslims who came from lower classes. You talk like only Arabs and Rajputs became Muslim.


To put this from your immoral perspective; Sylheti's have some the highest genetic influence of Arabs, Yemeni's and Persians due to the 300 Aulia who settled here. So should Sylheti's use this fact to 'acknowledge' their history by announcing it regularly? Or do you think it's better that we identify ourselves as Bangladeshi's, same as everyone else.

Like i said, we are Muslim Bangladeshi's today - come to terms with it.

But that's not what he was on about. You completely missed the point.

 

[eastwatch]

Thanks for replying. But the things you replied wasnt part of this thread. @khair_ctg started this.
So you cant understand the main intention of that topic. I have very much doubt that you ever read anyone's post thoroughly.
Now Im finding your reply very irrelevant.

How to delete account in PDF.

I said before you cannot express yourself and you have very little knowledge about our past. Yes, someone switched over to non-related history, but you have started to deny that history to please the Indians. Better you do not answer to off topic posts.

If you find my posts are irrelevant, better you ignore them.

Indian Sudras, these are another group of Muslims in our country. No typical face.

 

[eastwatch]

Sudras from India. This is a picture of Mirza Fakhrul Alam of BNP. Send at least one photograph of an Indian non-Muslim who can beat this face.

 

[EasyNow]

But that's not what he was on about. You completely missed the point.

Tell me what exactly is the point? In a thread about the political ideology of Tarek, what relevance does our genetic lineage have?

He is followed by millions of people not because he is a mughal or khilji but because he represents Bangladeshis.

We are descended from many, many different peoples - what we have in common is that we are Bangladeshi. Its high time we took pride in this identity for a change.

 

[khair_ctg]

So what?

You are a Muslim - isn't that enough for you? As a Muslim it doesn't matter if you're descended from a beggar or a Sultan.

But in your selective 'acknowledging' of history you'd deny recognition to the poor Muslims who came from lower classes. You talk like only Arabs and Rajputs became Muslim.


To put this from your immoral perspective; Sylheti's have some the highest genetic influence of Arabs, Yemeni's and Persians due to the 300 Aulia who settled here. So should Sylheti's use this fact to 'acknowledge' their history by announcing it regularly? Or do you think it's better that we identify ourselves as Bangladeshi's, same as everyone else.

Like i said, we are Muslim Bangladeshi's today - come to terms with it.

aulias and peers settled everywhere. but i believe Jalalabad and former Islamabad were two of the prime places. and there were more than the settlement of 300 aulias as far as settling of non-subcontinental Muslims in Sylhet is concerned.

i did not mention the economic stature of anyone. do you have trouble reading what i wrote? do you not see any other communities besides Arab and Hindu Rajputs in my last post? and i am not sure why you think being Arab or Hindu Rajput means being rich.

you are the one showing discomfort at Bangladesh's and the subcontinent's Muslim history. are you uncomfortable about the fact Muslims from points west (and in a way also east) of today's BD have shaped what BD is? better come to terms with these. because your discomfort at the very essence of how a BD map came about and at the history of the Muslim community is just disturbing. are you identifying yourself as Bangladeshi, i.e. someone of this landmass, or as a concept of Bangladeshi who has no history and heritage?