Warning for mature viewers only-Indian police torture Muslims

[N.Siddiqui]

India is heading towards a worst civil war, with so much hatred and radicalization in both sides.

Smaller towns and rural areas are more prone to it, or the suburban areas of big towns.

 

[hussain0216]

While the acts of the police are barbaric and disgusting, it still doesn't justify Muslims violently protesting and causing a ruckus over such a petty issue.

When peaceful protest become impossible, violent revolution become inevitable

Jinnah's message and warning are coming true

There are over 200 million Indian Muslims and they are being Targeted and harassed on a continuous basis over everything, one day it's head coverings, next day it's mosques, etc



Partition was correct in 1947, it's correct in 2022

 

[hussain0216]

Jinnah said he is willing to 'sacrifice' 8 crore (now 20C) muslims of india to get an islamic nation. but he was so wrong. from 8 they have become 20.

When their are so many numbers it's difficult to control them, that's their biggest weapon

Now getting them to hate and act against Hindus and India is being made easier everyday for us because of hindutva

We need to use the division hindutva has created and use it to really tear India's social fabric and hurt India

 

[xeuss]

Proof that the demonstrations were peaceful at first?

Aaah....the victims of state-sponsored terrorism have to prove their innocence before eliciting a favorable rating?

there has been no intent on any govt to change the police because they have a great tool to implement their political agenda.

True. The same police, same judiciary, same administration happily served the orders of the British. Why are we surprised today?

 

[hussain0216]

you have been trying for 75 years. what ever it is the whole of Asia will be buried under nuclear rubble.

Yes but now we have hindutva

 

[jamahir]

Read your history, Buddhism is 2500 yrs old, Hinduism far older.

I don't dispute that. Hinduism is maybe 600 or so years older than Buddhism.

There was not one caste related issue until arrival of the British.

Come on, do you think the world is unaware of the vile, anti-human book Manusmriti that defines the caste system ( and misogyny etc ) and which Ambedkar burnt in a public ceremony in 1927 ? I quote this article from velivada.com which puts out articles from the Dalit / Shudra perspective :

Manu divides Hindus into four varnas i.e. casteism. He not only divide Hindus into four varnas, he also grades them. Besides prescribing rank and occupation Manu grants privilege to swarnas and imposes penalties on the shudras.The status of the Shudras in the Hindu society as prescribed by Manu the Law-giver and the Architect of Hindu society. There are so many Codes of the Manu Smriti against the Shudras which are below:

1. For the welfare of humanity the supreme creator Brahma, gave birth to the Brahmins from his mouth, the Kshatriyas from his shoulders, the Vaishyas from his thighs and Shudras from his feet. (Manu’s code I-31,)
2. God said the duty of a Shudra is to serve the upper varnas faithfully with devotion and without grumbling. (Manu 1-91) Manu is not satisfied with this. He wants this servile status of the Shudras to be expressed in the names and surnames of persons belonging to that community. Manu says:
3. Let the first part of a Brahman’s name denote something auspicious, a Kshatriya’s be connected with power, and a Vaishyas with wealth but a Shudra’s express something contemptible. (Manu II. 31.)
4. The second part of a Brahmin’s name shall be a word implying happiness, of a Kshatriya’s (a word) implying protection, of a Vaishya’s a term expressive of thriving and of a Shudra’s an expression denoting service. (Manu II. 32.)
5. A hundred year old Kshatriya must treat a ten year old Brahmin boy as his father. (Manu 11-135)
6. The Brahmin should never invite persons of other varnas for food. In case, the latter begs the Brahmin for food, the Brahmin may give them some left-over. Even these left-over must be served not by the Brahmin but by his servants outside the house. (Manu II2).
7. He who instructs Shudra pupils and he whose teacher is a Shudra shall become disqualified for being invited to a shradha. (Manu III. 156.)
8. A Shudra is unfit of receive education. The upper varnas should not impart education or give advice to a Shudra.It is not necessary that the Shudra should know the laws and codes and hence need not be taught. Violators will go to as amrita hell. (Manu IV-78 to 81)
9. “Let him not dwell in a country where the rulers are Shudras.” (Manu IV. 61)
10. He must never read the Vedas in the presence of the Shudras. (Manu IV. 99.)
11. Any country, where there are no Brahmins, of where they are not happy will get devastated and destroyed. (Manu VIII-20 to 22)
12. A Brahmana who is only a Brahman by decent i.e., one who has neither studied nor performed any other act required by the Vedas may, at the king’s pleasure, interpret the law to him i.e., act as the judge, but never a Shudra (however learned he may be). (Manu VIII. 20.)
13. The Kingdom of that monarch, who looks on while a Shudra settles the law, will sink low like a cow in the morass. (Manu VIII. 21.)
14. Any Brahmin, who enslaves or tries to enslave a Brahmin, is liable for a penalty of no less than 600 PANAS. A Brahmin can order a Shudra to serve him without any remuneration because the Shudra is created by Brahma to serve the Brahmins. Even if a Brahmin frees a Shudra from slavery the Shudra continues to be a slave as he is created for slavery. Nobody has the right to free him. (Manu VIII-50,56 and 59)
15. A Shudra who insults a twice born man with gross invectives shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. (Manu VIII. 270.)
16. If he mentions the names and castes of the (twice born) with contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red hot into his mouth. (Manu VIII. 271.)
17. If a Shudra arrogantly presumes to preach religion to Brahmins, the king shall have poured burning oil in his mouth and ears. Manu VIII. 272.)
18. A Shudra who has an intercourse with a woman of the higher caste guarded or unguarded shall be punished n the following manner; if she was unguarded, he loses the offending part; if she was guarded then he should be put to death and his property confiscated.” (Manu VIII. 374.)
19. A Brahman may compel a Shudra, whether bought or unbought, to do servile work for he is created by the creator to be the slave of a Brahmana. (Manu VIII. 413.)
20. No Shudra should have property of his own, He should have nothing of his own. The existence of a wealthy Shudra is bad for the Brahmins. A Brahman may take possession of the goods of a Shudra. (ManuVIII-417 & X129)
21. A Brahman may seize without hesitation, if he be in distress for his subsistence, the goods of his Shudra. The Shudra can have only one occupation. This is one of the inexorable laws of Manu. says Manu. (Manu VIII. 417)
22. A Shudra who wants to just fill his stomach may serve a Vaishya. If he wants a permanent means of living he can serve a Kshatriya. But if he wants to go to heaven or wants higher or superior birth in the next generation he must serve a Brahmin. (ManuIX334 & 335)
23. The most sacred duty of a Shudra is to serve the Brahmins, always, reciting the words “Brahman” with utmost devotion. Such a Shudra will get salvation. Otherwise he will die a worst death and will go to the worst hell. (Manu X-121)
24. But let a (Shudra) serve Brahmans, either for the sake of heaven, or with a view to both (this life and the next) for he who is called the servant of a Brahman thereby gains all his ends. (Manu X. 122.)
25. The service of Brahmans alone is declared (to be) an excellent occupation for a Shudra for whatever else besides this he may perform will bear him no fruit. (Manu X. 123.)
26. They must allot to him out of their own family (property) a suitable maintenance, after considering his ability, his industry, and the number of those whom he is bound to support. (Manu X. 124.)
27. Brahmins to give Shudras food leftovers, old torn clothes, spoiled grain and old utensils (Manu X-125)
28. No superfluous collection of wealth must be made by a Shudra, even though he has power to make it, since a servile man, who has amassed riches, becomes proud, and, by his insolence or neglect, gives pain to Brahmins. (Manu X. 129.
29. A Brahmin shall never beg from a Shudra, property for (performing) a sacrifice i.e., for religious purposes. All marriages with the Shudra were prescribed. Marriage with a woman belonging to any of three other classes was forbidden.

Read also – Some Excerpts from Manusmriti – Law Book of Hindus

A Shudra was not to have a connection with a woman of the higher classes and an act of adultery committed by a Shudra with her was considered by Manu to be an offence involving capital punishment. (Manu XI. 24.)1, 2 ,3, 4In the matter of acquiring learning and knowledge Manu’s successors went much beyond him in the cruelty of their punishment of the Shudra for studying the Veda. For instance, Katyayana lays down that if a Shudra over heard the Veda or ventured to utter a word of the Veda, the king shall cut his tongue in twain and pour hot molten lead in his ear. Manu’s law book and its strict compliance by the Brahmans, it may be summarized that men and women are not born equal. There is no room for individual merit and no consideration of individual justice. If the individual has the privilege, it is not because it is due to his/her personally. The privilege goes with class, and if it is his/her good luck to enjoy it, he/she is destined to be born in the privileged class. On the other hand, if an individual is suffering in a class, it is because he belongs to that class. Thereby, logically speaking from Manusmriti’s point of view, the suffering of Shudras and women is because of their being part of their caste and sex respectively. Manu’s ‘social order’ breeds ‘social out-caste,’ which in turn dishes out ‘social injustice’ to the underprivileged. Narda’s ‘Smriti’ (law book), openly advocate slavery, but since Varnashram (a creation of caste system by the Manu) was critical and deviously interwoven into religion, to subjugate the Shudras through superstitions like opium to an addict, the Brahmans let the slaves die.”

This is the book that the followers of Pragati Purush Narendra bhai want to replace the current constitution with.

The women in india are now far better than in any Muslim lands.

LOL, the last publicly-known case of Sati was just 35 years ago in 1987, the societal and cultural murder of Roop Kanwar who was tortured and thrown on the burning pyre of her dead husband. And then just ten years ago became known that in the Maharashtra town of Beed the ubiquitous-in-India dogs are being fed illegally aborted human female fetuses so that the fetuses are conveniently disposed off ( @Sharma Ji ) :

Maharashtra: Doctors in Beed feed aborted female foetuses to dogs​

The shocking revelation has been made by Varsha Deshpande of Lek Ladki Abhiyan, an NGO working against the practice.​

Krishna Kumar Mumbai May 23, 2012 UPDATED: May 23, 2012 09:47 IST

Some doctors in Beed are disposing of female foetuses by feeding them to dogs in order to destroy evidence of female foeticide.

The shocking revelation was made by Varsha Deshpande of Lek Ladki Abhiyan, an NGO working against the practice.

Maharashtra's Public Health Minister Suresh Shetty also admitted he had heard of foetuses thrown to the dogs in Beed.

Deshpande's allegation is significant as Beed in Marathwada has the worst child sex ratio - 801 girls being born per 1,000 boys (2011 census) - in Maharashtra.

The low percentage of females is attributed to rampant female infanticide in the area.

Last Friday, Vijaymala Patekar (28), was admitted to Dr Sudam Munde's abortion clinic in Beed when she was six months pregnant. She had four daughters and did not want another. But while her pregnancy was being terminated, she died.

The police have arrested Munde and his wife, but Deshpande said the couple were held earlier too for the same offence and will go scot-free again because of their money power and influence.

"We don't want this case to be tried in Beed or Marathwada. Let the case be tried somewhere outside as they wield too much influence for the trial to be fair," she said.

Deshpande claimed her organisation had conducted a sting operation on the doctor in 2010, in which he openly talked about how he was aborting female foetuses and feeding them to his five dogs.

It was then that the police had arrested him, but he was released soon and continued with his activities.

"A person even saw a foetus being fed to the animals. This is known to everyone in Beed, but the police are not taking action as Munde is influential," Deshpande said.
She added that some other doctors in Beed kept dogs for the same purpose - to avoid the hassle of disposing of the bodies.

Health Minister Shetty said: "I have heard of the practice but have no evidence."

He added that since the local police seemed to be under a lot of "pressure", he had decided to ask the crime branch to investigate the latest case.

Substantiating Deshpande's account of the kind of clout enjoyed by Munde, Shetty said: "Our civil surgeon who had gone to investigate Munde's hospital was locked up in a room by some goons. They even abused her and asked her to go away."

The minister said the surgeon while trying to take action against such doctors had been facing threats for more than a year. "We have asked the home department to provide security for our staff," he said.

In which Muslim-majority land are females killed off in wombs and fed to filthy and cruel dogs ?

You shouldn't look at Taliban, Tableeghi Jamaat and Saudia and think that is Islam. Islam is opposite them. Please read this post of mine from some days ago about the basis of the question of human rights for the female in Islam. The post is long but do start from the start. And now I will quote most of a thread OP of mine from 2015 where the article was written by an Indian Christian woman who married an Indian Muslim not under Christian law, not under civil law but under Islamic marriage law because she found it to give her proper socio-economic rights in case of divorce ( the concept of divorce was first codified in Islam and the wife too has the right to divorce ). Note also how Islamic marriage law from 1400 years ago much later inspired European Christian marriage law and to some extent was borrowed by Hindu family law in 1955. Some extent unfortunately, should have been entirely :

Maneka Gandhi, minister of women and child development, recently gave a call for prenuptial agreements to be recognised in India. According to her, if the terms for division of property, guardianship of children and spousal support are settled prior to marriage, divorces will be less acrimonious and disputes could be resolved expeditiously.

In the discussions that followed, as to whether such a step will, in fact, safeguard the rights of women, there was no mention that this concept is already rooted in Islamic law of marriage since the 7th century. The nikahnama, an Islamic marriage contract is, in fact, a prenuptial agreement that outlines the rights and responsibilities of the parties and provides for conditions to be included for safeguarding a woman’s rights upon marriage.

One wonders why a reference to the Islamic law was not made either by the minister or other experts. Married Muslim women, we find, are often on a higher and more secure footing than their counterparts from other religions. In fact, as a Christian marrying a Muslim, I chose to marry under the Muslim personal law, even over the seemingly modern Special Marriage Act, 1954, to better secure my economic rights. My mehr was a house in my name and my nikahnama includes necessary clauses to safeguard my and my children’s rights. My husband’s family members were witness to this document, which is registered and enforceable by law.

When we examine marriage laws in their historic context, it is interesting to note that the universally accepted notion that marriages are contractual rather than sacramental originates in Muslim law, which was accepted by the French law only in the 1800s and incorporated into the English law in the 1850s and became part of codified Hindu law as late as 1955. Today it appears to be the most practical way of dealing with the institution of marriage. Treating marriage as a sacrament which binds the parties for life has resulted in some of the most discriminatory practices against women such as sati and denial of right to divorce and remarriage, even in the most adverse conditions.

The cornerstone of a Muslim marriage is consent, ejab-o-qubul (proposal and acceptance) and requires the bride to accept the marriage proposal on her own free will. This freedom to consent (or refuse), which was given to Muslim women 1,400 years ago, is still not available under Hindu law since sacramental rituals such as saptapadi and kanya dan (seven steps round the nuptial fire and gifting of the bride to the groom) still form essential ceremonies of a Hindu marriage. Even after the codification of Hindu law, the notion of consent is not built into the marriage ceremonies.

The contract of marriage (nikahnama) allows for negotiated terms and conditions, it can also include the right to a delegated divorce (talaq-e-tafweez) where the woman is delegated the right to divorce her husband if any of the negotiated terms and conditions are violated.

Mehr is another unique concept of Muslim law meant to safeguard the financial future of the wife. It is an obligation, not a choice, and can be in the form of cash, valuables or securities. While there is no ceiling, a minimum amount to provide her security after marriage must be stipulated. This is a more beneficial concept than streedhan which is given by choice and usually by the natal family. In addition to Mehr, at the time of divorce, a Muslim woman has the right to fair and reasonable settlement, and this is statutorily recognised under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 as per the 2001 ruling of the Supreme Court in the Daniel Latifi case.

It is also important to address polygamy and triple talaq, two aspects of Muslim law which are generally used to discredit the community and argue in favour of a uniform civil code. While sharia law permits a man to have four wives (before 1956 Hindu law permitted unrestrained polygamy), it mandates equal treatment of all wives. If a man is not able to meet these conditions, he is not permitted to marry more than one woman. (Quran 4:3; Yusuf Ali’s translation)

On the other hand, though codification introduced monogamy for Hindus, the ground reality has not changed and Hindu men continue to be bigamous or polygamous. The most disturbing aspect is that while men in bigamous/adulterous relationships are allowed to go scot-free, it is the women who are made to pay the price. Women in invalid relationships with Hindu men are denied maintenance and protection and are referred to as “mistresses” and “concubines”, concepts specific to the uncodified Hindu law. Any attempt to codify Muslim law to bring in legal monogamy should not end up subjecting Muslim women to a plight similar to that of a Hindu second wife. This is an important concern which needs to be taken into account while reforming the Muslim law.

And lastly, the much maligned triple talaq or talaq-ul-biddat, which the Prophet himself considered as the most inappropriate form of divorce. Fortunately, in 2002, in Shamim Ara vs State of Uttar Pradesh & others, the Supreme Court laid down strict Quranic injunctions which must be followed at the time of pronouncing talaq, hence now fraudulent practices adopted by errant husbands (including email and SMS talaq) can no longer constitute valid talaq. Yet, after a decade and a half, very few know challenge the validity of such divorces in court as they are unaware about this ruling.

Though Muslim law stipulates many different ways to end a marriage, including a woman’s right to dissolve her marriage (khula), divorce by mutual consent (mubarra), delegated divorce (talaq-e-tafweez), judicial divorce (fasq) and dissolution under Muslim Marriage Act

Then read this post of mine about inheritance laws in Islam which give every due human right to the female. I am posting it for you to get an enlightened view of the true Islam though I being a Communist speak for dissolution of the family concept itself as you can read below :

​

"Kids look after the old parents". Fine but that was with the understanding the parents give their kids a good society and a good life and not push them into a dog-eat-dog life first by pushing them into a irrational, unscientific and non-empathy-teaching education system where the only intention the parents have is to force their kids to get higher and higher marks in exams so that they can brag to their neighbors and relatives even if their kids suicide because of the parental and social pressure and then for those kids who didn't suicide the parents pushing the kids into a Capitalist dog-eat-dog socio-economic ecosystem where they are trapped into a life time of wage slavery, insurance, bank loans, hospital bills, water bills, house ownership installments and taxes, income tax, irrational traditional elements, zero political rights and so on. A life of misery yet the stupid parents expect their kids to do charan sparsh every morning and evening ? Such parents should be given a bullet to the back of the head.​

​

Early Communist intellectuals put forth the idea that the family is an artificial organization and spoke for its abolition because primitive human society did not have family structure at all, with every male and female being equal in their life decisions and relationships which might be temporary and there being no political and socio-economic oppression on the children because they possibly raised communally. There was no mother to dictate to a child that if you don't bring salary of 30,000 rupees monthly and two "post-graduate" college degrees on top of you first I won't serve food to you and respect you. These Communist intellectuals considered the family to be a historic Capitalist element that was unscientific and perpetuated family-level anti-democracy and Capitalism at micro-level through unequal rights to different members of the family even though all are humans deserving equal respect and may be brilliant and contributing in their own ways and there was the possibility of low-level and big family violence and unequal distribution of family socio-economic ownership ( money, buildings, estate etc ) among the family members, and the family contributing to macro-level Capitalism through companies being handed down via dictatorial family ownership instead of the worker owning the company he or she contributed to daily that made the company to produce and be alive with of course guidance of the leaders, and families holding land via feudal system where the peasants tilled the land and produced crops / goods but did not have human rights including the right to obtain much of the revenue from the land they had tilled in the first place. something to be abolished. So the family was unscientific, oppressive and anti-democratic to the citizen within the family and outside. See the case of the typical Indian middle class family where the father is nothing outside the gate of his house, working in some stupid Capitalist organization like a backoffice in Bangalore for Wall Street companies and doesn't have the courage to overthrow the oppressive political, social and socio-economic system around him but once he enters the house he becomes a dictatorial person who expects to be served at his beck and call ! His actions may lead to the suicide of his children but the Indian police will not arrest him because he's the great father of the Great Indian Family System. And his parents are willing partners in his crimes.​

​

Buddhism was wiped due to.islamic invasions. Therr was no big war between Buddhist and Hindus.

LOL.

In fact asoka converted to Buddhism and it thrived.

What became of of Buddhists in India after Ashoka ? There was a gap of 900 years from the time Ashoka died and a Muslim military first arrived in India.

Muslims were the caus eof the 1947 blood letting not Patel. It was agreed that a india for Hindus and pakistan for Muslims is created.

It was the Hindutvadis like Savarkar who declared that India should be a land of the culture of the "Indian people" and not of foreign cultures, forgetting that Hinduism itself is a foreign implant into India from 3000 years ago. Don't you know that Jinnah was a leader in the Indian National Congress before moving to the Muslim League and was an advocate of Hindu-Muslim togetherness ?

Jinnah devoted much of his time to his law practice in the early 1900s, but remained politically involved. Jinnah began political life by attending the Congress's twentieth annual meeting, in Bombay in December 1904.[52] He was a member of the moderate group in the Congress, favouring Hindu–Muslim unity in achieving self-government, and following such leaders as Mehta, Naoroji, and Gopal Krishna Gokhale.[53] They were opposed by leaders such as Tilak and Lala Lajpat Rai, who sought quick action towards independence.[54] In 1906, a delegation of Muslim leaders, known as the Simla Delegation, headed by the Aga Khan called on the new Viceroy of India, Lord Minto, to assure him of their loyalty and to ask for assurances that in any political reforms they would be protected from the "unsympathetic [Hindu] majority".[55] Dissatisfied with this, Jinnah wrote a letter to the editor of the newspaper Gujarati, asking what right the members of the delegation had to speak for Indian Muslims, as they were unelected and self-appointed.[53] When many of the same leaders met in Dacca in December of that year to form the All-India Muslim League to advocate for their community's interests, Jinnah was again opposed. The Aga Khan later wrote that it was "freakishly ironic" that Jinnah, who would lead the League to independence, "came out in bitter hostility toward all that I and my friends had done ... He said that our principle of separate electorates was dividing the nation against itself."

Note Jinnah contrast with earlier Hindutvadis like Bankim Chandra Chatterjee ( writer of the Hindutvadi inspiration manual Anandmath from 1882 ) and those after who called for separation of Hindus from Muslims and Christians.

India has been benevolent towards its minority in spite of history. That is the whole truth.

Incorrect. It was the constitution framed by the reasonably progressive Ambedkar that created a legal ideals for the bureaucracy to follow that sustained the minorities despite a lot of the bureaucracy having their own internal anti-minority ideas. But since 2014 that pretense has shattered and now we have officials openly following the orders of Bulldozer Baba, jumping on the half-dead or full dead inert body of a poor Muslim man in Assam, jailing of progressives especially Muslim, Christian and Communist etc etc. After all these are the three primary enemies of the Hindutvadis from before 1947.

 

[ST72]

Tell me, how should police respond in this case? Do you think police should release them after serving tea, biscuits at station?

This stone pelting incident is not a spontaneous thing. I agree, if it happened spontaneously, police should release them with warning.
Now they will think 10times before signing up for these kind of acts next time

If they have proof then charge them with a crime and pursue it through the courts. Or do you think this is how the police should behave all the time? Which suspects can they kick the crap out of?

 

[SuperStar20]

If they have proof then charge them with a crime and pursue it through the courts. Or do you think this is how the police should behave all the time? Which suspects can they kick the crap out of?

Well, for the prophet remark made by Nupur sharma, Muslim could have filed FIR/police case and move on. They don't have to resort to stone pelting. Law could have taken care of Nupur sharma.

 

[xeuss]

Well, for the prophet remark made by Nupur sharma, Muslim could have filed FIR/police case and move on. They don't have to resort to stone pelting. Law could have taken care of Nupur sharma.

They did file an FIR. Instead of the police or courts doing anything, they gave her police protection.

Oh and BTW, how did the law take care of Amit Shah in the Haren Pandya murder case?

 

[ST72]

Well, for the prophet remark made by Nupur sharma, Muslim could have filed FIR/police case and move on. They don't have to resort to stone pelting. Law could have taken care of Nupur sharma.

So you would hold the police to the standards of a violent mob? Should they beat up all suspects or just some?

And I don't agree with the mob's violence or their reasons for it but the point here is police violence.

 

[SuperStar20]

They did file an FIR. Instead of the police or courts doing anything, they gave her police protection.

Oh and BTW, how did the law take care of Amit Shah in the Haren Pandya murder case?

What is wrong with police protection. Why do muslims have issued death treats? Punishment is decided by court right?

 

[xeuss]

What is wrong with police protection. Why do muslims have issued death treats? Punishment is decided by court right?

Oh I forgot I was talking to the member of a depraved society where the concept of fairness does not exist and discrimination is a "way of life"

 

[SuperStar20]

Oh I forgot I was talking to the member of a depraved society where the concept of fairness does not exist and discrimination is a "way of life"

No, it is "peaceful" society.