Articles Comments

Pak Tea House » History » The Man Who Forged An Interview: Shorish Kashmiri's Maulana Azad Hoax

The Man Who Forged An Interview: Shorish Kashmiri's Maulana Azad Hoax

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

Some people believe that if you repeat a lie enough times it becomes the truth. Making the rounds on the internet these days is a “suddenly discovered” interview of Maulana Azad which he allegedly gave to Agha Shorish Kashmiri of Majlis-e-Ahrar-e-Islam in April 1946.

Well I hate to break it to all of you – Agha Shorish Kashmiri was a fraud and the interview itself was most probably cobbled together through excerpts from Azad’s book “India Wins Freedom” and his famous address to the Muslims left behind in India in Jamia Masjid- both easily available texts. Before I come to the actual nature of the forgery, let us re-cap for a second what this creature Majlis-e-Ahrar was and just how deep its motivation ran in discrediting Pakistan and the leadership of Mr. Jinnah who Majlis-e-Ahrar considered an outright Kafir. Majlis-e-Ahrar-e-Islam, a group of Islamic fanatics closely allied to the Congress party, was one of the most rabid anti-Pakistan movements around.

Their leaders Maulana Mazhar Ali Azhar and Maulana Ataullah Shah Bukhari were foul mouthed bigots who resorted to choicest abuses from the pulpit against the Muslim League and Mr. Jinnah. The elections of 1946 resulted in their complete rout and after Pakistan was created, this group was in the forefront of the conspiracies against the state. Agha Shorish Kashmiri was one such Ahrari remnant who was in the forefront of anti-Ahmaddiya rioting in Pakistan and whose hatred for Pakistan was boundless. The internal struggle in Islam has always pitted liberal Muslim leadership against the clergy especially in the subcontinent. The difference in the closing days of the Raj was that through a freak chance, liberal and secular Muslim leadership in form of Jinnah was isolated from the Hindu leadership i.e. Gandhi and Nehru led Congress which in turn used the fanatical Muslims making common cause with them against British raj.

Maulana Azad was the blue-eyed boy of the Ulema who opposed the Muslim League. Azad was a religious scholar of renown, a salafi who followed Ibn-e-Taimiyya. He commanded respect amongst the Ahraris and he was admired by the nationalists. That Azad was a smart politician is evidenced from his support for the Cabinet Mission Plan, where he alone in the Congress was ready to work it to its logical conclusion. He was also an intelligent man who did predict the separation of Pakistan’s Eastern Wing in his book “India Wins Freedom” as dictated to Humayun Kabir in 1957. He did not however make the predictions that are being attributed to him in the so called interview.

Now let us see the obvious gaping holes in this so called interview:

 1. First of all the interview finds no mention in any of the official works on Azad. It is only found in Agha Shorish Kashmiri’s book on Abul Kalam Azad which was financed and published by Kashmiri himself.

 2. Azad says “H S Suhrawardy does not hold Jinnah in esteem”. Jinnah’s relationship with Suhrawardy soured in late 1947 but in April 1946 there were no such signs. Till 1947, Suhrawardy was tipped to be Pakistan’s firs t Prime Minister. Infact in his book “India Wins Freedom” Azad hints that Jinnah sidelined Nazimuddin because Nazimuddin was not the loyalist others (presumably Suhrawardy) were.

3. Azad is quoted as saying that “East Pakistan’s confidence will not erode as long as Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan are alive”. This is a rather odd statement on three counts. One in April 1946 no one used the term “East Pakistan”, secondly Liaqat Ali Khan just did not enjoy the kind of importance that is being attached to him and third that while Jinnah was ageing and was expected to die sooner or later, Liaqat Ali Khan was relatively young, and certainly younger than Azad. This sounds eerily similar to something our established Pakistan Studies’ books would say about Quaid-e-Azam and Quaid-e-Millat.

4. Azad is shown to speak about the “assertion of the subnational identities of Punjab, Sindh, Frontier and – please note- Balochistan”. There was no Balochistan issue till the annexation of Kalat. Balochistan did not exist as a proper province, let alone register as a possible hotbed in April 1946. All of Baloch grievances revolve around the purported events of March 1948 and the annexation in 1956. There is no way Azad could have spoken about Balochistan in April 1946.

5. Then Azad is quoted as saying “incompetent leadership will pave way for military dictatorship as has happened in many Muslim countries”. Till April 1946, there were no known coups in Muslim countries. Perhaps Azad was referring to Turkey but then Turkey was not a military dictatorship as Ataturk had retired from the military and was the elected – though autocratic – president of Turkey. His prime ministers, Ismet Inonu and Celal Bayer, had followed suit.

6. Azad then looks into his crystal ball and speaks of “heavy burden of foreign debt”. Foreign debt was an unknown and unlikely creature in Pakistan till the 1960s when Pakistan financed the building of a new capital. In April 1946, there were no apprehensions of foreign debt. Pakistan no doubt asked for military aid from the US soon after independence but that was hardly debt. Unless ofcourse Azad knew that the Congress planned on withholding Pakistan’s share of the treasury- another unlikely proposition since in April 1946 it wasn’t even clear that there would be a partition (except maybe in the note sent from V P Menon to George Abell on January 23rd 1946 which demarcated Pakistan exactly and precisely).

7. Azad is lavish in his praise of Jinnah as the best ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity, something he misses out completely in his book “India Wins Freedom”. Other than this purported interview Azad has never acknowledged Jinnah’s contributions to the Congress. It was just not Azad’s style. The description itself seems to follow the passages on Jinnah by Dr. B R Ambedkar’s “Pakistan or Partition of India”. Granted that this book was in circulation at the time but my bet will be that it was Kashmiri and not Azad who read it.

 8. Azad then goes on to say “In the battle of Jamal, Qurans were displayed on the lances”. How strange and ironic that a learned Islamic scholar and authority would make such a major error? It was Jang-e-Sifin – between Muawiyah and Ali- where the Qurans were displayed on the lances.  I for one cannot believe that  Maulana Azad would say something like that given that this was his bread and butter.   Had this been suggested about Jinnah or even Nehru or Iqbal it would have been believable but certainly not Azad.

My objective in posting this is to counter the lie and propaganda that Ahrari crook Agha Shorish Kashmiri is carrying out posthumously with the help of those who want to see Pakistan disintegrated. That this was translated by an Indian MP and published in a magazine that calls itself “Covert” only adds to the mystique of it, since the timing couldn’t be better. But as they say in Punjabi/Saraiki “Naqal kan aqal chaidee”. The planners and executors of this third rate attempt at forging this interview and enhancing Maulana Azad’s credentials as India’s Nostradamus have done the ex-Congress president a disservice.

On our part it is time we stopped being impressed with such trickery.

Written by

Filed under: History · Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

170 Responses to "The Man Who Forged An Interview: Shorish Kashmiri's Maulana Azad Hoax"

  1. arsalan Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:


  2. YLH Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    “now i will bring you to the interview which he did took it before the independence while working for his mentor and published it after the Independence from chattan”

    No need to bring me to it. Please merely scan it and shame me by proving me wrong.

  3. Samachar United States Mozilla Firefox Mac OS says:

    Regarding point 3, one.
    Azad is quoted as saying that “East Pakistan’s confidence will not erode as long as Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan are alive”. This is a rather odd statement on three counts. One in April 1946 no one used the term “East Pakistan”, secondly Liaqat Ali Khan just did not enjoy the kind of importance that is being attached to him and third that while Jinnah was ageing and was expected to die sooner or later, Liaqat Ali Khan was relatively young, and certainly younger than Azad.

    Transfer of Power Papers, Volume VII, Item 67, Note of Meeting between Cabinet Delegation, Field Marshal Viscount Wavell, and Mr H.S. Suhrawardy, on Monday, 8 April 1946 at 11 AM

    ….”Asked for his views on Eastern Pakistan, he said Mr Jinnah was their leader and they had all confidence in him. Mr. Jinnah was completely competent to deal with this question, and it was difficult to add to what he (Mr. Jinnah) had already said. …….

    “The Secretary of State said that Bengal was a large country divided in allegiance and religion. Did Mr. Suhrawardy contemplate that Eastern Pakistan should include the whole of Bengal and Assam, or only the Muslim majority areas….”


  4. Samachar United States Mozilla Firefox Mac OS says:

    Azad is shown to speak about the “assertion of the subnational identities of Punjab, Sindh, Frontier and – please note- Balochistan”. There was no Balochistan issue till the annexation of Kalat. Balochistan did not exist as a proper province, let alone register as a possible hotbed in April 1946.

    Well, Jinnah was talking about the six provinces to comprise Pakistan, counting Baluchistan as the 6th (Sind, Punjab, Bengal, Assam, NWFP and Baluchistan). There was as much or as little of a Baloch subnationalism issue as there was a Sind one.

  5. Gogi Pakistan Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Two nation theroy is DEAD…lets move on and bring Muslims of the Sub-Con as one nation we will be over half a billion people….what a froce!

  6. Muhammed Ahmed Shoaib Pakistan Google Chrome Windows says:

    If anyone wants to argue for or against the creation of Pakistan then they should do so by first knowing the differences that exist between Hinduism and Islam.

    - Between being a Hindu and a Muslim.

    - They worship cows. We eat cows.

    -They have a rigid caste system in which one is born into and cannot escape. We have a British imposed class system, which anyone come out off depending on how hard they work.

    -They have 170,000,000 gods and goddesses that they worship and believe in. We have One.

    - The word Hindu held a derogatory connotation that was used to describe them, because of their activities. In stark contrast the word Muslim means, one who submits his will to the will of God.

    If people do not follow their religion it does not make Pakistan a non-muslim state. But rather theirs because they want to follow Potter, Edward, Beiber, American ‘idol’, Katrina etc.

    If the ruling elite of Pakistan had been sincere to the people of Pakistan then it would not have given preference to Indian or Western mannerisms, culture from taking hold. Instead it would have made reforms in the system so as to bring about a model Muslim state.

    And on top of this, the people of this country who follow in the footsteps of their mis-guided elite are as much responsible as them, for not letting Quaid’s and Iqbal’s dream of Pakistan, that being of a model state for other Muslim countries to follow, materialise.

    If anyone is to blame it is our individual self and not our leader, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammed Ali Jinnah.

  7. [...] so such falsification is expected from them. Let me put it easily, the interview is a fake: The Man Who Forged An Interview: Shorish Kashmiri's Maulana Azad Hoax | Pak Tea House Closed Thread « Taseer funeral prayer leader forced to [...]

  8. Arjun United States Safari Mac OS says:

    @Muhammed Ahmed Shoaib, none of the so-called differences you claim above between Hindus and Muslims automatically require that these communities need two different countries. As long as a person believes in democracy, free speech, and other ideals of the Indian Constitution, he or she is Indian. Religion is irrelevant here since it’s how the individual may be living their social life. That has nothing to do with the law. This is the basis of a modern secular society.

    And just to dispute your claims about Hinduism: For your information, ‘Hinduism’ (a word invented by Middle Easterners for their purposes to propagate their religion) is not a static dead religion written in some book – it is basically the sum of the customs and traditions of the people of the subcontinent. And as customs and traditions change, the old ones can be thrown aside. This is why women’s rights can change as values change. This is why the caste system can be thrown aside, just like sati or any other historical social custom that doesn’t hold relevance in the present. This is also why there can be atheist schools in Hinduism, because there is no prescription of any kind. It’s plainly incorrect to look at a way of life through a religious lens. Would you claim that Confucianism is a religion of China? Or would you agree that it’s just a set of philosophies that Chinese people live by?

    The cow thing is a constantly repeated one. But the belief originates in the act of drinking its life-giving milk. Would one kill one’s mother who gave one milk? And also because the cow is a very gentle creature. But again, this custom of worshipping it is on the wane. People nowadays look at it more like a gentle pet.

    Anyway, my personal belief is that its time for humanity to evolve from these ancient beliefs in imaginary deities or a single imaginary Deity. And also belief in some book made-up 1400 hundreds years ago. How hard is it to believe that there is no such thing? It’s time to leave all that behind and step into the 21st Century.

  9. Arjun United States Safari Mac OS says:

    To reinforce this point, look at the countries that have left religious fantasy and dogma behind like China for instance. They have progressed once they dropped all the old baggage. In contrast, look at countries where religion is supreme like Saudi Arabia, the native speakers of the Quran – they’re rich because of the oil but otherwise, their society is as backward as it ever was. Or Afghanistan. Even Turkey progressed only once they decided to leave their Islamist baggage behind and become secular.

  10. Sachbol United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Muhammed Ahmed Shoaib
    Arjun is wrong. Musalmans and indians are 2 different people and nations . I hope Pakistani people press their government to open the door for Musalmans left in India . Stuck in unwanted alien country , they have hard time living their idle life when all the kaffirs around are busy working hard.The only purpose they serve is to try to slow the pace of development for Kuffar folks but question to asked to the followers of true Islam,Pakistani Musalman is that is it worth to leve behind so many miilions of coreligioist people and deny them the priviledge to enjoy the paradise of Pakistan where they can live without seeing any kaffir. TNT is not complet and it require action on fundmental principle of population transfer between 2 dominions.

  11. [...] about Jinnah or even Nehru or Iqbal it would have been believable but certainly not Azad. The Man Who Forged An Interview: Shorish Kashmiri's Maulana Azad Hoax | Pak Tea House Reply With Quote + Reply to [...]

  12. imran Pakistan Google Chrome Windows says:

    doesnt matter whether the interview is hoax or not but the content is true.what ever said in the interview is true and actually happening in pakistan.

  13. shazaim Pakistan Internet Explorer Windows says:

    if anyone have a doubt about ethentication of this exclusive interiew.i would like to invite his attention on the book by Mehmood ul hassan(islam main mashriqiat or magharbiat ki kashmakash).and again just look at poor condition of my beloved homland and the contents of Azad<'s interview.

  14. sadaf India Google Chrome Windows says:

    I am a Muslim and am an Indian and I am a practicing Muslim and I have never had any problem with practicing my religion in India. The people whom Mr. Arjun is replying are consumed by their hatred against Hindus and therefore against India, not knowing that their hatred is the real religion with the mask of Islam. I am a proud Indian and three fourth of my hundreds of friends are Hindus. When I go for prayer before my lunch, my colleagues who are Hindus wait for me to come back to start lunch. When my mother was rushed to hospital for some ailment, they were my Hindu friends who helped her reach there and not just that one of them brought thousands of Rupees in cash for any possible emergency expenses without asking for it. My neighbours who are Hindus, are the first one to join us on Eid, in fact sometime they just start arriving in at the time I am about to leave for Eidgah. And then I am the privileged one that hundreds of them have treated me with great care, respect and love; many times making me feel like a chief guest among them. I have been actually honoured to be a VIP in their weddings and festivals. My point is people in Pakistan of this generation haven’t lived with so many non-Muslim friends, in non-Muslim majority circle; to know exactly how they are is day to day life. All they have is second hand information often passed through several hands with vested interest in altering the truth.
    Yes of course some rioting happens, but then doesn’t it happen in Pakistan between Shias and Sunnis. But to tell you honestly, the news of these riots are also sometimes overrated. One should see things in context. There are about 25 Crore Muslims in India that is about 1/5 of India’s population and any riot in any part of India is so localised that it would be simply very naive to consider that the whole of India gets engulfed with it. In fact more than riots, the thing that matters to Muslims are their disproportionate under-representation in Government Jobs. Has that got to do with some kind of discrimination for them?
    Perhaps yes, but then no. Muslims in India are mostly people of castes other than Syed, Sheikh, Pathan, and are in overwhelming majority against these so called higher castes also known as Ashrafs. Ashrafs are actually doing extremely well vis-a-vis so called lower caste Muslims. This pattern is the same as of higher caste Hindus who are doing extremely well compared to lower caste ones. If there had been no reservation for lower castes Hindus they too could not have competed easily with upper caste Hindus in finding Jobs. Since lower castes Muslims who are equivalent in material sense with low caste Hindus do not have reservation, they are lagging in fetching Jobs. But that is also because of their own fault; Muslim communities fault, their leader’s fault and their religious institution’s fault, which all are living in a denial that Muslims are not caste divided community. Such Muslims believe that they aren’t divided because Islam says not to be divided. But where is Islam in day to day practice of Muslims? There is clear dichotomy. In practice the division is so deep rooted that they do not marry outside their ‘caste’. Caste becomes a criterion in matrimonial columns. And there are many such ills. If they all agree to the ground reality then perhaps they can find reservations and marked improvement in their representation.
    There is another reason too. Majority of Muslims in India are from northern states-Rajasthan, UP, Bihar, Bengal and Assam. These states have low per capita income and even Hindus and this time even upper caste Hindus of these states are not doing that well in these states. So the discrimination theory doesn’t hold good anymore. Specially from UP and Bihar, people are mostly doing low paying jobs in private sector and are referred as Bhaiyyas. Be it a Hindu or Muslim, they are all one- they are all ‘Bhaiyya’.
    So it would be unfair to say that there is discrimination against Muslims apart from the fact that while low caste Hindus have got reservations as crutches, low caste Muslims, and yes let me repeat it, there are castes amongst Muslims, they haven’t got any such crutches. To be honest, such reservations will only land them some Jobs and may cause many heart burn in upper caste Muslims the way it cause to upper caste Hindus, but no way they can overcome the brilliance of upper caste who by the merit of their intelligence have been able to hold on to power for thousands of years, irrespective of the way the changes in the mode of governance happened from time to time. When Kings ruled, it was upper caste who ruled, and when democracy is there, then also upper castes are ruling. And all that in absolute disproportion to their population.
    There is basically no discrimination based on religion, it is all based on how much power you have; how much influence you have; which caste you come from; and how much power that caste brings along. This is democratic and pluralistic India. I may be lucky to be born into privileged family but I feel really lucky to be born in India.

  15. observ Germany Internet Explorer Windows says:

    to sadaf

    We do not know whether you really are a muslim. That is the problem of the internet and the anonymity. So some muslims will/may dismiss what you write.

    Let us assume you are authentic.

    Yet the question of the totalitarianism, fascism, backward-orientation, paradise-fixation, arabic hegemony upon non-arabs, imperialism upon non-arabs, emotionalism and obscurantism that are inherent in islam remains. Every attempt to reform islam has hence ended up strengthening the fascists among the muslims. Every muslim majority area and society has gone down the drain of fascist violence and fear. When I read the kuran I understood why it is like that. This so-called holy final book is very problematic in the 21st century. Every finalism leads to fanaticism and fascism.

    Do your hindu friends ask you about that? Do they have the analytic knowledge about this and the courage to ask such questions? Can you talk about it openly? Have you yourself thought about these things?

    It is good to have friends and peace across group divisions. But certain fundamental questions cannot be and should not be postponed.

    A friendship cannot be just a bag of sentimentality and kind deeds.

  16. Raj TOO Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    glad to hear your views!

  17. sadaf India Google Chrome Windows says:

    @Raj TOO, thanks.
    @observ, why cannot friendship be just a bag of sentimentality and kind deeds? Why can you only dictate how friendship should be? Why cannot you accept when I say that a friendship has to be like this only? The problem is not the book, but you and people like you are the problem. The problem is you and people like you do not support me and people like me to prevail upon those who believe in totalitarianism, fascism, backward-orientation, paradise fixation (that wrong concept that they would reach paradise by their ways), hegemony upon non-arabs, imperialism upon non-arabs, emotionalism (that feeling where their own emotions are more important), obscurantism, that they believe is inherent in Islam. In fact they have already reformed Islam and only make it bad by all these isms. And any re-reform to take it back to its original form is opposed by not just them but by people like you too who reinforce their strength. Yes my Hindu friends ask about this and not just they ask, they tell also, their concept of way of life and mind you they are brilliant, many of them, and we agree that we cannot see religion only on the basis of such superficial by-products of it like some eat cow/beef while the other consider killing cow as sin. Yes I can talk openly, as long as I am not with fascist Hindu or a fascist Muslim, because of course, tyrants has to be dealt with iron and not logic. In absence of the required, it is better to come on forums like this where one can really talk openly. The anonymity helps to speak out the truth without fearing of your reaction. You are free to get mad at it. You may at best rubbish it as all false and then live with your pre-conceived ideas of your ability of judgment. Why else it is only your words that have to be final? Are you fanatic? Won’t your fanaticism lead you to fascism?

  18. Raj TOO Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    sadaf ji wrote:

    support me and people like me to prevail upon those who believe in totalitarianism, fascism, backward-orientation, paradise fixation (that wrong concept that they would reach paradise by their ways), hegemony upon non-arabs, imperialism upon non-arabs, emotionalism (that feeling where their own emotions are more important), obscurantism, that they believe is inherent in Islam.

    It is heartening to read your thoughts, especially those on your desire to rid Islam of its various aggressive memes such as those you pointed earlier. I sincerely wish all the success in your endeavors!

    But allow me to give you some background on the prevailing view in some circles. Let’s consider what is given:

    a) Historical observation has shown that Islam has often shown the above behavior you refer to! Non-Muslims are acutely aware of it. It is unclear how many Muslims are aware of it or whether there is denial of reality is widespread.

    b) What is often forgotten is that there are vested interests in India, locally and statewide, and more importantly internationally who see Islam’s aggressive memes as supportive of their agendas. One could look for such vested interests in Pakistan, in Saudi Arabia, in fact all over the world among many Islamist organizations. Interestingly there are even non-Muslim parties who see Islam as favorable to their agendas. I speak of Anglo-Americans and the Chinese.

    c) What is clear is that these Islamic Extremists make their case for their aggressive behavior based on Quran, and they make their case so successfully among the Muslim masses that some join them whereas others provide them the forest where they can hide and continue with their activities. Some Muslims also do oppose them.

    d) Non-Muslims now have started studying the reasons for the extremist behavior in Islam, which affects them so profoundly, and have developed certain theories.

    e) Some non-Muslims have concluded based on the scriptural material that at the best an intellectual debate between the extremists and moderates in Islam would be a draw. The extremists would be able to point to certain parts of the scriptures, and moderates would be able to score some points.

    f) In the court of public opinion in Muslim societies a minority would continue to buy their arguments and join their ranks, a very large majority would show sympathy for their cause without itself becoming active, and another minority would join the ranks of the moderates.

    f) Considering that the extremists are well-financed through the vested interests and extremist ideological networks where as the moderate side can expect only moderate support as is available in a constitutional “secular” state such as India, it is obvious that this aspect goes in the favor of the extremists and moderates are woefully under-resourced.

    g) Thirdly the extremists are willing to use unbridled violence as well to win their case and intimidate the other side. The moderates can take recourse of the state, but the judicial machinery has a lot of inertia. The state has to go by the law, with one-arm tied behind its back.

    h) Even the state’s free arm has been compromised by vested interests!

    i) Considering the above the extremists have a clear advantage, and from a non-Muslim’s PoV, the extremists would continue to wage war against the non-Muslims, and that too in the name of Islam.

    j) So for the non-Muslims the only alternate left is to push back against Islamic aggression. However if we do so the moderates cry out saying that it would only strengthen the hands of the extremists as they would play the victimization card and thus be able to make their case among the Muslim masses much better.

    k) So whether non-Muslims defend themselves against the Jihad or not has an influence only on the rate of recruitment of the extremists but NEVER on the outcome of the tussle between Islamic extremists and Muslim moderates.

    l) If only non-Muslims could see that the moderates win their intellectual debate against the extremists hands down, non-Muslims could sincerely think of placing their bets on the moderates. But THAT IS NOT THE CASE!

    m) So some non-Muslim circles think that it is hopeless to wait till the moderates win their intellectual battle against the extremists, and that non-Muslims would have to take the war to Islam.

    n) Of course when non-Muslims would do so, Muslim moderates would point to such aggression and give that as justification for their failure to convince the Muslims masses to be peaceful, and they too will side with the extremists eventually!

    o) The only way to give moderates a chance of even getting the chance to make their case in front of the Muslim masses is if non-Muslims are willing to stay pacifist despite all sorts of provocations from the Muslim extremists, and that may not be possible indefinitely.

    p) The sad part is that the forest cover the Muslim masses provide to the Islamic extremists and the forest cover Muslim extremists provide to the Jihadis, make that forest cover also a part of the problem for the non-Muslims!

    q) So even as I commend you on your efforts, non-Muslims may not share your optimism for success.

    r) And all of this happens because the Holy Quran does not allow the moderates to clinch their debate in their favor! So in a way it does come down to the Book! Or would you say the problem lies with the rhetorical capabilities of the moderates? Or would you say the problem lies with the non-Muslims, who do not allow the Muslim Moderates to make their case better? And so you see we land right at the beginning of the issue!

  19. observ Germany Internet Explorer Windows says:

    to sadaf

    I understand your emotions. But your idealized view of islam is a minority view of some scared muslim-born persons, who dare not talk out openly. You admit that yourself.

    Even 1400 years ago (that is where you want to go back to – to a supposedly ideal pristine islam) islam was divided. Even Mohammad himself did or said certain things which are dangerous and evil. Islam did not and does not allow any honest criticism of islam and that has caused it to become a fascist ideology. A good-natured human being (like yourself – I assume) who happens to be born into the islamic fold cannot escape islam and hence he tries to find some good reason to uphold (t)his religion. I can understand that.

    But all that self-deceit will not help. Sooner of later islam’s inherent fascism, totalitarianism and imperialism will drive you to decide, either for it or against it. Islam expects a muslim to kill even his own brothers and father and mother if islam demands or needs it for islam’s totalitarian and imperialist interests. The history of islam abounds in such examples.

    Non-muslims who allow themselves to be fooled by the goodness of some muslim-born persons are weakening the non-muslims against the islamic onslaught. Islam’s demographic and territorial aggression is going on even today. Islam’s slow genocides against non-muslims are continuing. Do you discuss that also with your non-muslim (not just hindu) friends? Or do you just talk about chocolates and visting sick relatives?

    I am not a fanatic – I only refuse to be fooled by the aggression that islam and its agents and quislings are carrying out against non-muslims all over the world since 1400 years.

    The flatterer is never the true friend. Muslims (you also) have to learn that.

  20. observ Germany Internet Explorer Windows says:

    to sadaf

    If you read the PTH comments then you will find that muslims who wish to defend islam’s totalitarian claims use filthy and obscene language.

    The core spirit and aim of the kuran is totalitarian-imperialist. If you mix 1 gram of poison in 99 grams of honey then the resulting mixture is poison. And you can’t remove this 1 gram from the 99 grams.

    Non-muslims have been fooled or let down by muslim moderates so often in the past (1400 years – not some 10 or 20 years only) that we can no more rely on you.
    It is a triple fight. Non-muslims suffering under unending islamic expansionism and imperialist plans have to fight against both muslim extremists and also the muslim moderates. Because many muslim extremists are born among muslim moderates. (Ask yourself why that is so).

  21. sadaf India Google Chrome Windows says:

    Reply to observ: So you don’t rely and support me. And then you cannot expect to reap any dividend, let me take a chance by saying, if it comes. Your confidence to overcome the imperialists seems to me your overconfidence because as you have detailed, they are going on winning and winning and I add it here that that way they are likely to go on and win ultimately. It is unfortunate that you are going to lose but not going to join hands with me. And then like a loser blame everyone else except yourself. Blame the book, blame moderates, and of course blame the winners. But if you think that you will win eventually, then I must say, I am quite eager to see you optimism become reality. Let me see, if you can do it single handedly. With single handedly, I mean, by not taking support from moderates, aren’t you declaring that you will be able to do it single handedly? Just let us see, if someone from us survives the crossfire. But it is highly unlikely that you will win. And if I am to write history then after, I will write that your arrogance and perhaps that sense of insecurity, that distrust or let me say it, fear was another reason beside the fearlessness of your aggressors that led you to lose.

    Clearly there are three players, one being you, the other being I and the third one, let us name him ‘the aggressor’. The three plausible scenario is : The aggressor will win or you will win or may be none of you will win. At best I can expect a tie among you. You have already sealed my future, so my existence is pointless. I will survive, if I survive the crossfire or if there is a tie between you two. So you got the point? My interest will lie in the tie until and unless you buy me some chocolates so that I side with you. It is not vice versa that I am flattering to get you on my side. It is you who will need me to take the battle into the aggressor’s camp and only then after it will be between you and me, because even if you finish me off before your real opponents, you aren’t finishing off the aggressor’s strength. Perhaps, as you rightly said, you will be only adding to their reason to overpower you.

    There is no doubt, the aggressors sympathies with me, and for sure it is not the other way, but only till you are there as their main opponent. If you do not sympathize with me, obviously you will be misreading me and the situation. Your concept that moderates sympathize with aggressors is just opposite of what I am saying. It is aggressors who sympathize with moderates but only viz-a-viz, you.

    Let me try to point out point by point what I read in Raj TOO’s comments. Before that, thanks Raj for commending.

    a. Muslims are also aware of the history and agree that there have been Muslims who have shown the behavior under discussion. So there is no denial, at least not from Muslims like me. My only contention is that it is not Islam but Muslims who have done this. The ones who claimed to be Muslims and the ones who were recognized as Muslims. But were they Muslims as per Islam? Who is going to judge? Will they judge themselves or will you judge them? Why cannot I too judge them?

    b. As per my analysis you are correct to say that vested interest among Non-Muslims are using Muslims for their agenda and let me add that the vested interest of some very established and popularly known Muslims are using Islam to mobilize Muslims- extremist actually and their support groups for their own agenda.

    c. Your analysis seems absolutely correct to me. Masses do not have that much of analytical ability. They get swayed on the basis of emotion. They cannot make out what is there in Quran but they get charged by what is told to them that is written in Quran. The river of their knowledge is poisoned upstream.

    d. Yes non-Muslims are right to feel aggrieved and do something to counter the attacks of such aggressors. Even I am aggrieved for those very same actions and intentions of the aggressors.

    e. The conclusion drawn by non-Muslims that there is going to be tie between me and the aggressor is a major blow to me. The aggressors will point out certain things from Scripture, but that would be out of context, but then who cares? Not the aggressors. The aggrieved is aggrieved because of aggressor’s aggression plus over-reading done by aggressors. The aggrieved will point out the over-reading done by aggressor, but then that has to match the aggressiveness of the aggressor.

    f. In the court of public opinion the minority’s opinion is going to be at two ends of spectrum. It is the majority in the middle that has to be handled with wisdom and care. They show sympathy to moderate extremists also and their sympathy should be harnessed. That would like engineering challenge and the best minds should concentrate and prove the merit of their wisdom.

    g. (Repeated as f) The resources of Moderates are 1. The support from secular minded individuals. 2. The self-defeating aggressors. Also, mind you, the finance of aggressors is depending on non-replenishable natural resource.

    h. (Mentioned as g) Your analysis seems correct to me. The govt. machinery suffers from their inertia. But to tell you, govt. machinery is the real force and one should not underestimate it. These entire aggressors are nothing but minor irritants in front of it. Why these aggressors are as much successful as they are because they are backed by similar govt. machineries, which have their own interest.

    i. (Mentioned as h) Yes, again I agree. These are the leak points in defense against aggressors. The state’s free arm needs to plug those leak points by utilizing aggressor’s enemy – the moderates. Remember, an enemy’s enemy is a friend. But this can happen if state wishes to seek their help and thereby help itself. The state shouldn’t be run by fools or greedy or arrogant cynics.

    j. (Mentioned as i) Yes you are again right in your conclusion. But what to do?

    k. (Mentioned as j) Yes the aggression by rouge Muslims that goes by the name ‘Islamic aggression’ must be pushed back. But the pushing has to be done intelligently. Remember the difference between surgery and butchery.

    l. (Mentioned as k) When the rate of recruitment of so called and so claimed Jihadist comes down then that action is positive action. Such a policy should be pursued even more. What else choice do we have?

    m. (Mentioned as l) Non-Muslims have to see with open eyes first. They should see that moderates win the intellectual debate every time, but then they should know that tyrants know no logic and they are most irked by the intellectuals who manages to holdback masses to join aggressors. Non-Muslims becoming bystander playing bets, not realizing that it is their existence that is at stake and they should participate in debate and see to it that moderates win.

    n. (Mentioned as m) With moderates winning only non-Muslims can have win-win. In fact it is Muslims who need to relearn Islam and even non-Muslims can teach them. That is to take the war to Islam. Literally.

    o. (Mentioned as n) This is the foolish presumption. Fools cannot win wars and perhaps therefore they aren’t winning it. Non-Muslims should not live under apprehension that both moderates and aggressors will join hand. This is the injustice they do in their mind and only to their peril.

    p. (Mentioned as o) Non-Muslims are not expected by moderates to stay pacifist but to participate and participate with wisdom. Remember surgery and butchery thing once again. And with trust on their wisdom first, that enemy must have got enemy and then again on their wisdom the second time that enemy’s enemy must have reason to feel aggrieved.

    q. (Mentioned as p) The forest is not dangerous. The Jihadists are. Non-Muslims have to be enough fearless to counter those fearless Jihadists. They should not feel scared of the forest. Their fear is the fear of unknown. They should explore the forest properly and once they are familiar with it they will easily find the hidden Jihadist. Believe me, if only you believe, the forest will whisper the way Jihadist has taken.

    r. (Mentioned as q) Non-Muslims with not sharing the optimism are losing the war and then crying hoarse that they are losing and then their vow to take the battle to the aggressor’s camp sound hollow.

    s. (Mentioned as r) The reason is not Holy Quran but yes as you said we go back to the beginning of the problem and find two reasons. 1. The foolishness of non-Muslims who are of course without vested interest but are not trusting the moderates, and 2. The tie that has come to be between vast majority of masses plus moderate intellectuals VS the minority aggressors but supported by powerful govt. machinery of both Muslims and non-Muslims having their vested interest.

    Little more reply to observ:

    Despite hearing this entire analysis, if someone wants to walkout and act suicidal then no one can stop him and he will die and lose with a belief in his heart that it happened because of Islam, Muhammad, Quran. Islam certainly expects its follower to believe in killing his own brother and father and mother if they become rabid and start killing others. This is one good reason for me to hold on to it, because I can see justice and interest of humanity in killing away such rabid brother, father and mother. Killing is bad but not as bad as injustice. The wars that kill enemy soldiers and the courts that punish criminals and all those great legendary men who killed individuals for bringing justice shouldn’t be painted by the same brush with which we would paint a rabid killer. I discuss all this with my Hindu and non-Hindu non-Muslim friends and they agree to this and therefore perhaps they like to stick with me because I can see their grievance and then when I articulate my grievance they know we are all aggrieved. Then after of course we talk about chocolates and visit each other’s patient and basically have some life despite our collective grievances. I hope I’ll die in my friends arms, non-Muslims included, without seeing the aggressors win. They aren’t going to win before I die. You are free to be wise, act wise and think yourself wise. Your simile of honey and poison can be equated with the cynic’s suspicion who whenever smell the fragrance of flower thinks that there must be corpse somewhere hidden nearby. Your foolishness equivalent to one gram of poison coated by ninety nine grams of your desire to be proved correct will only prove that that you are fool, much like the person cutting away the same branch on which he was sitting. You too seem to be consumed by your hatred. Hatred corrodes the vessel in which it is stored.

  22. Raj TOO Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    sadaf ji,

    Thanks for your response. I don’t wish to appear condescending but I would like to offer a perspective on how Moderate Muslims can win in the influence stakes viz-a-viz the Extremists.

    As I said, it will be difficult for one side to claim a win in an intellectual debate on what Islam says. The moderates would win some points and the extremists would be able to show the validity of their claims in some cases. So it becomes a tie. So moving on!

    You said that the Indian State should support the moderates. I would like to propose some concrete measures for that.

    a) Girls Education: Make girls education compulsory for Muslim girls. It is so for all children but we know reality. There should be maximum state support from the State with incentives for the family to send their girls to school. Girls education, I believe is the key to reform of Muslim society.

    b) Bridging the Religious Gulf: The girls should be sent to schools where other Hindu girls also learn. This would help a creation of cross-religious bonds among girls. In the case of boys sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn’t because males have to prove something.

    c) Self-Defense: Secondly all Muslim girls, (Hindu girls also) should get some level of martial arts training so that they can they can protect themselves against both street violence as well as household violence. There should be a state apparatus in place to look into household violence against Muslim women. The punishment should be quick and severe.

    d) Jobs: I think, it would be worthwhile considering some form of job quotas for Muslim women. As the women become the bread-winner of the family, her status would change. It is important that for the Muslim society to progress the power in the family shifts from men to women. Muslim men would try to improve themselves in order to be worthy of the Muslim women.

    e) Inter-Religious Marriages: Here there must be some concerted effort, because only this could change the mindsets at the ground level. I would say, that whenever a Muslim marries a non-Muslim, and registers the marriage in a civil court, if the non-Muslim promises to stay non-Muslim for the next 10 years of his life, he/she should be given 1 lakh rupees by the State. The non-Muslim could prove his continuance in his religion through a yearly certificate from a non-Muslim institution. Only when Muslim men and women can marry non-Muslims without needing any change of religion, can the two societies come closer to each other. When Muslim parents demand that the non-Muslim converts to Islam if he/she wants to marry it often shatters non-Muslim families due to this choice between love and family. Cross-religious marriages should be promoted by one and all. If the parents of any side demand a change of religion, a fine of 2 lakhs should taken from them, or imprisonment if they can’t pay.

    f) Civil Registration of Marriages & Divorces: All Muslim Marriages need to be registered directly in civil courts as well, and a Kazi’s testimony should not suffice. This should be done for all religious groups.

    g) Ban Polygamy: Some Indian Muslims have already suggested this. Polygamy needs to be banned. Indian Muslim girls are also citizens of India, and it cannot be allowed that they be treated this way, unequally. It turns marriage into a purchase of commodity, and not a meeting of two hearts for a lifetime. Also Muslim society needs to be much more assertive in seeing to it that no girls under 18 are married. Also the difference in age between girls and men should not be over 20 years. The latter suggestion cannot be legalized but it should be promoted at the society level.

    h) Empowerment of Muslim Liberals: The government should set up some administrative machinery to look into Muslim affairs in various Muslim societies, especially if there is an increase of tension among Muslims and non-Muslims. There should be standing committee to look into this staffed exclusively by Muslims who come from the society and have shown repeatedly that they are forward thinking. The committee members should be active in the community. They should be paid by the state. Right now, the Government has to approach some motley group of self-proclaimed community leaders who are usually some Mullahs. This has to change! Moreover it would provide an extra incentive to the Muslims in the community to be progressive, as it opens up job prospects.

    If the Indian Muslim moderates can put these suggestions into practice, they would have already won the battle!

  23. Raj TOO Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    sadaf ji,
    Continuing with my list above, more suggestions:

    i) Inter-Religious Understanding: I think it is important that non-Muslim experts visit schools with majority Muslim children and madrassas, and try to explain the Dharmic traditions, Dharmic philosophy, Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Baha’i, etc. Similarly Muslim scholars can visit Hindu schools and clarify on matters of Islam. This is important because, it so happens that many extremists use foul language to explain Hinduism to Muslim children, which ends up producing hate among them.

    j) History Education: At the moment India does not do a good service in teaching History in schools. It is important to teach Hindus and Muslims much more about the pre-Islamic era, the common era before the divergence, about the achievements of the Indian Civilization in mathematics, astronomy, city-building, architecture, administration, metallurgy, geographical influence, and historical events.

    Thanks for your consideration.

  24. observ Germany Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    to sadaf and raj

    The debate between you two was very intersting to read, very powerful from both sides.

    So what am I to do now?

    Is a moderate muslim really a muslim? Or does he just have an arabic name given to him when he was a helpless child?
    When I read the kuran I was horrified to find that such a book is believed to be the word of god! What an insult to god! A book so full of contradictions, inconsistenies, ambiguities, self-glorifications, intimidations, manipulations, bribery attempts, mistakes and even idiocies. To assign its authorship to god is blasphemy. It is an insult to god, if god has all those majestic characteristics that we believe him to have.
    I sympathize with the moderate “muslims” …but…I am not hopeful.
    Since 1400 years we are tolerating islam and its fascism, lies, fanaticism, arrogance and imperialism. How much more on time can we spare?
    USA is owned and controlled by a coalition of capitalist and christian fascists. China is owned and controlled by Han ethnofascists and chinese with imperialist ambitions. Arabs have petrodollar arrogance and foolishness. Pakistan is owned and controled by sunni fascist agents of arabs and chinese. Where are we indian hindus to look to? The muslims (=agents and quislings of islam) are strangulating us even in India, our (hindus’) very and only homeland. The muslim population component has gone up from 6.5% to 17%. That is a strangulation of hindus.
    Where is the program of the moderate “muslims”? When will it fruition? How long are we to be patient? Another 10-20 years and hindus will be finished off by the agents and quislings of islam in India. You know what kind of bootlickers of muslims many of the hindu leaders are and have been (M.K. “Mahatma” Gandhi included).

    What is sadaf’s plan? When does it begin? When does it bring us relief from islam’s increasing aggression and shamelessness and abuse by muslims?

    The time to separate muslims’ deeds from islam is long past. If islam had been less than 40 years old I could have gone with that excuse.

    Islam is in danger because islam is a danger.

  25. observ Germany Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    Please make a list of the genocidal wipe-outs of non-arabs and non-muslims which have taken place in the many regions and societies that were taken over by the agents of islam in the past 1400 years. The territorial and demographic aggression, infiltration and robbery by islam against non-muslims is going on even today. The leaders of the non-muslims are more interested in bootlicking the muslims. The fate of hindus in the Pakistan territory (=Sindhu river basin, the name-giving homeland of the hindus) should be an eye-opener to us ALL about the real goals and goal posts and methods of islam. The fate of christians in Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan is also an eye-opener.

    The moderate muslims may also be tricksters. If they are muslims then they are definitely not trustworthy. If they are “muslims” then, may be, yes. Islam’s intention vis-a-vis non-muslims are evil. The islamic god’s intentions vis-a-vis non-muslims (and atheists, polytheists, agnostics etc.) are not good either. It would be a catastrophe if we allow the islamic god concept to usurp the monotheistic position and role.

  26. Raj TOO Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    observ ji,
    1) I am not interested in Islam in West Asia. My primary concern is the expansion of Islam in the Indian Subcontinent and the “Free World” through both aggression and stealth!

    2) I also don’t think, one should direct a message of victimization and angst from Islam towards Pakis. It just makes their heart glad!

    3) I think your message would be more useful if directed at the Hindus who are sleeping! Even so, one needs to use a lot more concrete examples and numbers!

    4) One needs to tailor one’s message very carefully towards the audience for it to be effective!

    5) Pakis are destined to become a land worse off than Somalia and Talibanic Afghanistan. I am here only to see the ship go under!

    6) In the case of Republic of India, we will have to steer the ship around carefully and slowly, without putting th ship to flames! However we do need to destroy the Mullah-Mafia Axis, stop the intimidation of non-Muslims at the hand of Muslims, do deghettoization of Muslim society, and break the hold of the Muslim Chauvinists and Extremists over the Muslim vote-bank!

  27. observ Germany Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    to raj

    We are all in very difficult times due to islam and other problems left for us by our “beloved” ancestors.

  28. sadaf India Google Chrome Windows says:

    @Raj TOO & @observ:Because of the paucity of time, I could not come back to reply in detail, but maybe I’ll come back to this soon. However at the moment, I wish to put down few things.
    See, no doubt, Quran is a powerful book or I must say Islam is a powerful idea that whoever comes to it either turns a believer or refuse to believe in what it says. The power that is therein is evident from the fact that it makes some fanatic people fanatically good, fanatically obedient, or some fanatic may choose to go exactly opposite of what it says. The ability to influence so many of all hues and colours is the power of Islam.

    There are other people too who are born and who die without getting much influenced by whatever Islam say, irrespective of whether they are born in Muslim family or in non-Muslim family. And I can see majority of them happen to be in this category, but surely there are good many number of people who get affected by Islam, either positively or negatively. With positive I mean those who accept it as positive thing to have happened in their lives and negative for those who thinks in an opposite way.

    Islam chooses to address them who believe in its idea as believers and others who don’t believe in it as disbelievers. So whoever chooses to be disbeliever is nothing new for Islam. Islam expects them to be that way. But fanaticism is something that transcends this division of believer-disbelievers. A non-Muslim can be equally powerful fanatic and any Muslim fanatic or any non-Muslim fanatic, both of them can attribute the power in their fanaticism to Islam and Quran.

    Now these fanatic Muslims need not be the kind of fanatics that we generally assume to be. A fanatic Muslim can be extremely good person or another fanatic Muslim can be that murderous kind of fanatic whom everyone despise. The despicable fanatic Muslim is despicable to even fanatically good Muslim. These fanatically good Muslim are not what moderates are. They aren’t moderates. They are extremists but such that you would love them. Meanwhile these moderates are those sleepy Muslims who are born into Muslim families but who haven’t given any serious thought about the issues which is dear to Islam and on which Islam has very strong opinion.

    The reason why we see different samples and categories of Muslims are because of this. And even if we aren’t able to see the differences, such differences exist amongst Muslims and they are aware of their differences. In fact they all do not mix up and their remains a vast gap between them. All these different views and shrill voices coming against each other from the Muslim community are basically because of the differences they have between them.

    The real danger to the world is from such murderous fanatic Muslims and just as much as those who are fanatically opposed to Islam, Quran and Muslims. Rest of the sleepy Muslims and sleepy non-Muslims are mostly into their very personal agenda of small gains of day to day life. They quarrel about small issues and then join hands for smallest gains. It is fanatically good Muslims who is a danger of another kind. If they do not dilute away all the hatred generated by murderous fanatic Muslims at least then they, by their goodness confuse the non-fanatic non-Muslims. Some people have even named such acts of goodliness of Muslims as ‘love Jihad’.

    But until and unless someone is paranoid of the name of Islam, Quran and Muslim, they have no problem with such Muslims. In fact they find them as very pleasant associates and worthy enough to share their world, its joy and its sorrows together. Such arrangement of living, popularly known as ‘to live and let live’ goes by the name of secularism. These Muslims are basically very antithetical of the murderous fanatics and in fact their own survival depends very much on escaping the murderous-ness of the fanatics from both ends. From Muslim’s end the fanatic Muslim see the secularism as atheism and hence kufr and not deserving life while non-Muslim fanatics see such secular Muslims as the ones who are actually doing Jihad, albeit love Jihad.

    The secular Muslims are like the engine and driving force, at least in Indian context and at least so far. They guide those sleepy Muslims who are in vast majority to stay away from those murderous fanatic Muslims. So far they have been largely successful as sleepy Muslims have remained under their influence and believed in the words of secular Muslims. But with changing time and changes in political environment, the secular Muslims are now facing mounting threat from rise in fanaticism from non-Muslim fanatics. Of course the murderous fanatic Muslims had never abandoned their chase for secular Muslims throat. But now the secular Muslims are cornered from all sides, and these secular Muslims are now losing their grip on sleepy Muslims resulting in sleepy Muslims becoming more and more vulnerable to these murderous fanatic Muslims.

    To verify my words, one just needs to check back the quarrel between these two fanatics, one murderous and the other secular all over in history and spread all over the geography. From pajama-walas to patloon-walas, from bearded to shaved ones from Aurangzeb to Dara Shikoh, from Aurangzeb to Akbar, in the past to the present, between Taliban and those who have sided in War Against Terror. If only people like to do surgery and not butchery, would they pay attention to this all important detail.

    Leaving the topic abruptly , I will try to be back soon to discuss point by point the issues raised by raj TOO and observ. But just to give a preview, I agree to each and every point of RajTOO in my capacity as a Muslim with few tweakings to make it more effective. Observ can choose to remain an unbeliever but of no consequence.

  29. observ Germany Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    to sadaf

    How does islam treat or intend to treat ex-muslims? the answer to this question decides whether islamis fascist ideology or not. (Islam also satisfies some other/more criteria of fascism).
    To be born a muslim is something horrible, esp. for the women. It is an inescapable prison. Honesty is impossible under islam and that makes this ideology so vile. Every muslim is a permanent watchdog over every other muslim. What a horible way of living.
    The demographic, territorial, juridical and “cultural” aggression of islam/muslims against non-muslims is going on and on. Often the numbers are being kept hidden by the politicians in order not to “hurt the feelings and sentiments” of the agents and quislings of islam. The feelings and sentiments and the safety of non-muslims play no role.
    If muslims take to the path of honesty then islam will collapse. No muslim leader will hence allow honesty among muslims. Even the liberal muslims will allow no honesty. Islam is the most mendacious and manipulative ideology on the earth since 1400 years and it has now grown stronger than ever.
    The creator-god is one god among many. He is a sadist and cynic and he created mankind to sastisfy his sadism and cynicism. Islam is an instrument thereof. The muslim is a victim, no doubt, but also an instrument and an enthusiastic and masochist agent of this sadism and cynicism.
    Monotheism is a totalitarian and fascist ideology. An especially vile one, since it uses the word “god” for its goals. The future of mankind is thus endangered. May be muslim women will take the lead (will have to take the lead) in dismantling this ideology and saving mankind. But I have little hopes.
    7) A clump of poison coated with honey is more dangerous (than without this honey coating). Especially when the honey contains some intoxicating and hallucination-causing substance also. That is how to recognize and compare islam’s vileness.

    I am not an unbeliever. But I don’t need to believe when I know for sure that my analysis of islam and muslims is being proved by the muslims through their words and deeds to be correct.

  30. kaalchakra United States Internet Explorer Windows says:


    It is not helpful to call Islam a poison. It surely is poison to those who prefer to think like the way Indian religions teach – not to people of all preferences.

    You are a Mohammad unbeliever while Muslims are Mohammad believers. It helps to use more precise descriptors.

  31. Raj TOO Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    sadaf ji,
    thanks for your detailed post. It made interesting reading.

    But with changing time and changes in political environment, the secular Muslims are now facing mounting threat from rise in fanaticism from non-Muslim fanatics.

    Killing or hurting of Indian citizens simply for reasons of religious affiliation is something not just against the law, but deeply adharmic.

    I think there will always be aggressive Hindu foot soldiers in India and I don’t see that changing. What however needs to change is their use by some in the Hindutva leadership (can be at local level) for harassing innocent Indian Muslims. It is an imperative that both secular Indian Muslims as well as those whom you call ‘sleepy’ Muslims do not have any need to fear the Hindus.

    Till today, Hindutva has been based on superficial symbology and chauvinism much of it copied from the Islamics themselves. Their worldview has been relatively restricted because they have been intellectually lazy in providing Hindus with a solid platform of Dharma and a Unified Model of Indian Diversity.

    In the coming years, one would see a lot more research within the Hindu society on roots, equality, progressiveness, comparative analysis with others, threat analysis, vision for future, etc. All this would provide a more enlightened, unified (not necessarily homogenized) and confident worldview, based upon which Hindu leadership can formulate more Dharmic policies and devise better strategies to deal with Islamic fundamentalism.

    At the moment, the present secular arrangement in India says a lot in name of religion, but ultimately always ends up catering to Islamists and their agenda. It seems many political considerations are also nudging the present political arrangement to allow more Wahhabi influence from Saudi Arabia into India.

    So on two issues I am completely in agreement with you, that innocent secular as well as ‘sleepy’ Muslims need to be assured of their safety, and that Islamic Extremism in India needs to be fought till the last Islamic Extremist!

    I look forward to your reaction to the suggestions.

  32. observ Germany Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    The “argumentative indians” are arguing on this forum. The muslim sneaks away.

    Muslims do not have any need to fear hindus – but the need for hindus to fear muslims is growing day by day.

    The muslims are not a minority.

    400-800 million hindus are facing a highly violent and deceitful muslim majority of 1200 million. The “sleepy” muslims are busy producing their children “in sleep” and thus carry on with the demographic aggression against non-muslims. They are not really sleepy. Calling them “sleepy” is yet another ploy to fool us non-muslims.

    Quotes from Jang/News of 19.02.2012

    “Pakistan calls itself an Islamic Republic but scores of ulema (religious scholars) who were consulted by the Munir Commission after the anti-Ahmadi disturbances in Lahore in 1953 were not even able to agree on a definition of Islam.”

    “Justice Munir observed: “…if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulema we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim but kafirs according” to the others. Being pronounced an apostate lies at the heart of religion-motivated violence in Pakistan.”

    “Another former chief justice of Pakistan, Mr S A Rehman, noted that in none of the twenty instances where apostasy is mentioned in the Quran is there any indication of punishment in this world. He had no doubt that apostasy “will be punished only in the hereafter” and questioned the chain of transmission (isnad) in the hadith which proclaims “…kill whoever changes his religion…” ”

    If apostasy is punished in the hereafter then that too is a compulsion in religion on the earth. How can a muslim feel free to leave islam if he is told that he, if he leaves islam, will be punished after death?

    Islamic fascism extends even into the afterlife. Even the god of islam is a fascist. He punishes those who leave islam. So he is a fascist. Most muslims are cowards, easily manipulated by this god and his agents.

    Muslims are really deceivers at every level.

  33. Raj TOO Germany Google Chrome Windows says:


    The “argumentative indians” are arguing on this forum. The muslim sneaks away.

    I wish you would keep such provocative words to yourself.

    Regardless of what you may presume, you or I are not going to make a difference posting things on PTH. So your emphasis on everybody trying to circulate just your “message” is useless, because even if everybody was doing so, it would make no difference!

  34. observ Germany Internet Explorer Windows says:

    to raj

    What point if we indians/non-muslims argue on the PTH but the muslims have no time for it or are too scared to be honest and admit that our criticism of islam is correct?

    Muslims are winning territory through their dishonesty. Dishonesty is a weapon with which they can easily rob the hindus. What else do you expect in a world created by a sadist cynical god?

  35. Raj TOO Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    observ wrote:

    What point if we indians/non-muslims argue

    No point! You sing your song! I’ll sing mine! I sing it in my way for a good reason! And I make it a point that Pakis do not enjoy it!

    However your songs of imminent Hindu demise and Islamic domination and ferocity under whatever name (barbarity, terrorism, atrocities, dishonesty) just gladden Paki hearts!

    And I don’t see gladdening Paki hearts as some sort of solution to anything! In fact, it undoes some of the positive changes I have noticed – a feeling of desperation, strong enough to trigger some honest introspection! So please rethink!

    My interaction with sadaf here is about tackling Indian issues without all of us jumping in front of a running train!

  36. Fasih Canada Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    A few facts:

    Population of Pakistan in 1950: ~ 40 Million
    Population of India in 1950: ~ 370 Million

    Total Population of Pakistan: 190,291,129

    Muslim (official) 95% (Sunni 75%, Shia 20%), other (includes Christian and Hindu) 5%

    Total Population in Bangladesh: 161,083,804

    Muslim 89.5%, Hindu 9.6%, other 0.9% (2004)

    Total Population in India: 1,205,073,612

    Hindu 80.5%, Muslim 13.4%, Christian 2.3%, Sikh 1.9%, other 1.8%, unspecified 0.1% (2001 census)

    One viewpoint is that if Hindustan were to exist today then the combined population of Muslims (Pakistan: 180.8 Million, Bangladesh: 144.2 Million and India: 161.5 Million) would be approximately 486.42 Million and the total population would have been 1,556,448,545 i.e. 1.5 billion and the Muslims would be 31.2%….

    The total population of Muslims in the world including Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India is 1,619,314,000 and if Hindustan were to exist today then Muslim Population would be 30.4% and Muslims would have saved so much killings, seperation of families, friends etc.

    After 65 years of the separation of Hindustan resulting in Pakistan and India in 1947 and Bangladesh in 1971, a few question comes to mind that what did the Muslims of the Indian sub-contient achieved? Who benefited from it the most? Muslims of Hindustan or the Britishers or the world powers?

  37. [...] founders saw was wrong from the word go. However what all of our media conveniently ignored was the authenticity of this so called interview and the person himself. I have provided the links to the interview and [...]

  38. [...] founders saw was wrong from the word go. However what all of our media conveniently ignored was the authenticity of this so called interview and the person himself. I have provided the links to the interview and [...]

  39. [...] saw was wrong from the word go. However what all of our media conveniently ignored was the authenticity of this so called interview and the person himself. I have provided the links to the interview and [...]

  40. OSA Australia Google Chrome Windows says:

    I, even though have no knowledge of the politics of separation of the time, found the translated interview of Maulana Azad, a little illogical. Especially the terms and events ‘foreseen’ by Azad as stated by Kashmiri, or any other possible malicious translators, have a very contemporary tone to them. Pakistan has some serious problems, but this does not mean that the two nation theory was flawed.

  41. ahem Germany Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    to OSA

    The Two nation theory was abandoned by Jinnah himself, very quickly. Actually after Pakistan was created (14.August 1947) there were 24% hindus in West and 40% in East pakistan and therefore 24% of west Pakistan and 40% of East Pakistan should have been immediately re-divided (on the 15. August 1947) so as not to make hindus into permanent minorities. Why this fairness was not done? In other words, 24% of Pakistan and 40% of Bangladesh should now be sliced out again. Fair?

  42. Zahra Pakistan Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    Almost an year later as i read the above posts, i endure a concoction of thoughts. One part of them confirms my views as I have always held. That hindus and muslims are primarily 2 distinct races. And even if that wasnt true, their mindsets certainly are. If the above posts can roughly be taken as a purview into the minds of hindu Indians, then they prove the extent to which they hold reservations against muslims in the least. And more than that, the hatred and bigotry they carry. Here, an enlightened ‘Indian muslim girl’ almost pleads her case sometimes stooping low enough to ‘apologize’ on her religion’s account. In spite of such pacifism, the hindu posters continue to barge unfounded and naive allegations against the community and the religion at large. I am a Pakistani. And frankly speaking, I dont need any more proof of religious jingoism and bigotry targeting muslims of sub-continent. WHat my ancestors told me, werent mere tales. There was wisdom to it.

    Finally, to Ms. Sadaf, the perennial apologist. Shame on you. If being secular is tantamount to harboring guilt on being part of such a rich heritage, then I would ditch such -ism for the sake of -isms. If you are invited to weddings as a VIP guest, dont think its because they take pride in you for being a muslim. Neither is that, sadly, a litmus test for being respected as a community. The litmus test occurs when a conflict between communities occur and how they are resolved. And sadly, time and again Indian history post 1991 has proved the fallacy of a secular and tolerant Indian. At times surely, they may be nice to you, because they take pity on the state of muslims of India for being a under represented community. However for the most part, you may just be a display option for them. You claimed that you are a practicing muslim. you know, unfortunately, I am not. But at least I am not confused. I KNOW exactly from where I am coming. And although lack of practice is ascribed to my personal weakness, in the larger context, I am proud of my origins.

    And my question to all of you is, name a SINGLE communal riot in the 1000 year history of muslim rule in India. Hindus were always a much larger majority. Surely, if there were atrocities being done to them, they must have rebelled at some point. But did they? Nope. Thats because they were always represented duly in the bureaucracy of the empire and specially so since the time of Akber. Also, lets take a count of the number of great hindu temples that were constructed during those 1000 years. The number will shock you. The Britishers were the first ones to do away with evil traditions like the sati. In the 1000 years prior to that, did the muslim rulers ever meddle with the internal beliefs and practices of hindus no matter how contradictory they were to Islamic beliefs? Now lets reverse sides. SInce 1857 when hindus started gaining reigns of power in high government circles, till present times, how many communal riots have taken place in India?

    The above bigots have simply put up hypothesis after hypothesis. How about talking based on historical facts and figures?

  43. Zahra Pakistan Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    And while we are at it, consider Shahrukh Khan’s recent comments regarding the bias against Indian muslims. COuple that with Shabana Azmi’s comments a few years ago about the inability to find a property in Mumbai simply because she is a muslim. These are FAMOUS and absolutely non-practicing, secular muslims who faced such prejudice. Need more proof on the continuity of two nation theory?

  44. Milestogo United States Safari iPhone says:

    Shabana azmi should consider moving to Saudi Arabia – she will set Arabs on fire with her firey performances.

  45. Shridhar Oman Google Chrome Windows says:

    @Raj too & Sadaf,

    Liked your discussion.. Eager to read more…

  46. mohan United Arab Emirates Internet Explorer Windows says:

    2G Tery says:
    January 29, 2013 at 1:12 am
    mus;lim population of india is a drag on progress. they bring Indian GDP growth by 2% down at least

    muslims are creator of wealth every city in india is known with their handicraft and hard work.from bhadoi to firozabad and in south.hindus are but spender of wealth and dallals.

    2 G TERY, The west is becoming Hindu in aall practical purpose – Vegetarianism, Yoga, Meditation, Art of Living, Ammachi………….

    all bullshit because of vegetarianism we are nowhere in sports.except a hira game call cricket.even pakistan has defeated us in both hockey and cricket.
    yoga is grat hindu art of deceiving and cheating, morning brisk morning is far better than inhailing dirty air in your room and holding it for few minutes.
    mediation is also a fraud.
    zoinists were vegetarian their brothers in india is spreading this bullshit of vegetarianism.vegetarian diet is not complete diet.because of these bullshits we are at 137th
    place world.we are no.1 only in boasting.

  47. YLH Pakistan Google Chrome Windows says:

    One reference to Eastern Pakistan by Wavell does not prove the rule. No Congress leader is on the record speaking of “East Pakistan” when referring to Bengal. That would have been the death knell for their ideology. Secondly Balochistan’s status is well known and quite clear.

    I would request Sarmachar to see things in entirety.

  48. Irfan United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Knowing the life history of Kashmiri, your allegations are incorrect. Also, saying that “Ahrar’ took Jinnah as Kafir is incorrect. It was only Maulana Mazher who called him Kafir in his speech when running against Jinnah in elections.

    Also, just because some disagreed with Jinnah or ML, it means they were wrong? Jinnah did make the same mistake he was warned of by ‘Mullahs’…that opportunitst coming into ML will screw Pakistan. So, instead of rushing up, put together a good team of men of character.

    Today’s Pakistan is a result of Jinnah’s that mistake!

Leave a Reply


× four = 32

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>