"me no big chief …

I was just having a nose around on the beach, like a dog has to.
Picking up smells only a dog can.

And bravely fighting the large pebbles till they rolled off exhausted.

Sniffing sniffing.

A doggie smell there, a puppy smell here.
A fishy smell here, a crabby smell there.

A clump of seaweed.
Fish, I smelt fish. I put my nose in, into the clump, and
it hurt, it hurt. I yelped and yelped, the weed was stuck to my mouth.

I ran to my mummy, and she found something on my lip that was tied to the weed.
She bit the string off with her teeth, just like a dog would do,
and tried to take the thing off my lip, but it hurt.

I ran home with her.
And she took me to the dog doctors.
They tried to give me an jinsecktion on my lip but it hurt and hurt.

So the doctor took me to another room and made me breathe some funny air.
It made me giggly, but I was too much in hurt, and I think I fell asleep.

When I woke up, the thing on my lip was gone.
I felt a lot better and I came home and sat on my chair.

I couldn’t have my afterwalk crunchie munchies, 🙁 I had antiboytics.
Littleindian didn’t help me today, I don’t know where he went.
He left when night was becoming day, before my food time.
So mummy looked after me, she was upset and crying.

I heard it is called a barbie hoook to catch fish, that someone had left behind.
So I beg all fish catching people, please, please, please
don’t leave hoooky things on the beach,

dogs hurt too.

India breathes a sigh of relief. Perhaps.
The controversial Indo-US 123 Agreement is kicking again.

The victims people of Nandigram, lost their own, to give it a new life.
On the day Mr Henry Hyde passed away, his legacy, the Hyde’s Act was reborn.

Nuke deal: BJP slams Left for ‘surrendering’ to Cong.

The Hindu News Update Service: November 29, 2007 : 1515 Hrs

Kolkata (PTI): Describing the Indo-US nuclear deal as unacceptable to the party, the BJP on Thursday slammed the CPI and CPI-M for ‘surrendering’ to Congress despite making ‘noises’ over it and said if voted back to power it would re-negotiate the deal and if it was not possible, cancel it.

“Congress has surrendered to the USA on the nuke deal and the Communist parties have surrendered to the Congress although they had made so much noises over the deal. It was a trade-off between Congress and Communists over Nandigram and nuke deal,” senior BJP leader M Venkaiah Naidu told reporters here.

Naidu said after Wednesday’s debate in Parliament on the nuclear deal, the ‘double standard’ of the Communist parties was exposed and now ‘they were confining themselves to giving sound bytes and not ready for a real fight’. “They (CPI-M and CPI) want the UPA government to continue even after saying that the nuke deal was a surrender to the USA. After all round condemnation of the CPI-M over its role in Nandigram and Singur, they have developed cold feet about going to the people,” he said.

“Indo-US nuclear deal is surrender to Washington, this is the considered opinion of the BJP. If returned to power, we will re-negotiate the deal and if it is not possible, we will cancel the deal,” Naidu said. The former BJP president said “Congress doesn’t know how to run the country and how to manage a coalition. Congress did not do any homework before negotiating the deal, neither it consulted its allies.

Of course.
It had to happen this way.
The Left Front, who stood up against their coalition partners now need the support of the Indian Congress to make murder acceptable as a necessity in politics.

Sonia Gandhi comes out in support of N-deal

The Times of India: 17 Nov 2007, 1049 hrs IST, PTI

NEW DELHI: Congress President Sonia Gandhi on Saturday came out fully in support of the Indo-US nuclear deal saying it would have no impact on India’s atomic programme but enable the country acquire fuel and technology and help in getting the much-needed electricity for faster growth.

A day after the Left parties gave clearance to the government to approach the IAEA for working out India-specific safeguards agreement, she told the AICC meeting that there were differences with the outside allies but efforts were on to evolve a consensus through discussions.

Who then is Ms Sonia Gandhi?

Own Biography: Sonia Gandhi

Born into a family of modest means in an Italian village on the banks of a river 57 years ago, Sonia Maino, now Sonia Gandhi, has weaved a dramatic way to a place in history by becoming the President of India’s century-old Congress party. Being the third woman of foreign origin to hold the prestigious post after Annie Beasant and Nelli Sengupta.

Early life:

In 1964, (aged 18), she went to study English at The Bell Educational Trust‘s language school in the city of Cambridge. Being from a poor family she used to work in a restaurant as waitress for paying the tution fees. While doing this certificate course she met Rajiv Gandhi, who was enrolled at the time in Trinity College at the University of Cambridge.

Born to Stefano and Paola Maino in Lusiana, a little village 50 km from Vicenza, Italy, she spent her adolescence in Orbassano, a town near Turin being raised in a Roman Catholic family and attending a Catholic school. Her father, a building contractor, died in 1983. Her mother and two sisters still live around Orbassano.

How did she become so powerful in India?
Because it was us who gave her that power.
For in a country of 1.12 billions, we could not find one other person as capable.

In The TIME 100:
By Suketu Mehta

Imagine if the U.S. were run by an Indian Hindu woman without a college degree. It’s tough: the U.S. has never elected anyone who’s not Christian, white and male—even as Vice President. But India, which is an even bigger democracy, is run in all but name by an Italian Catholic widow with a high school education. In the 16 years since the assassination of her husband Rajiv, Sonia Gandhi, née Maino, has become the face of the country’s most famous family. As leader of India’s Congress Party, she has also managed the largest political party in the country and steered it to power. And she has done all this wearing a sari.

In Maino country
Orbassano’s Mayor Graziano Dell’Acqua to VAIJU NARAVANE:

“Even so, I wonder if we in Italy would accept a foreigner, and a woman at that, to take over a party which has symbolised the country’s struggle against foreign rule and which continues to enjoy great, if diminished, support across the land.
That a certain section of Indians have trusted her with their destiny speaks volumes for the tolerance of India,” concludes Dell’Acqua.

Italy. Italian. Wasn’t there once before an Italian connection?

Wanted by Interpol: Ottavio Quattrocchi

He & his wife namely QUATTROCCHI Maria were involved in fraud & bribery committed in India between 1982-1987. A percentage of the money paid by the Indian Govt., was illegally transferred by the”AB Bofors” Company to bank accounts in Switzerland, to the benefit of certain Indian public servants and their nominees.

Just who is Ottavio Quattrocchi?

Rediff News: George Iype January 17, 2006

How is he linked to the Bofors guns scandal?
The scandal erupted in 1987 when Swedish radio revealed that Bofors facing stiff international competition had paid more than $50 million in bribes to secure a contract for the sale of field guns worth $1.4 billion to the Indian Army. Then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi was named one of the suspects in the scam.

How could an Italian businessman be the middleman between the Indian Army and Bofors, which is a Swedish company?
The answer lies in Quattrocchi’s proximity to the Gandhi family. Quattrocchi shifted to India soon after Rajiv married Sonia.

If Quattrochi was in India, why wasn’t he arrested?
When the Swiss authorities formally communicated to the Indian government in 1993 that the kickbacks in the Bofors case were deposited in Quattrocchi’s accounts, a Congress government headed by P V Narasimha Rao was in power. The Opposition immediately wanted the government to impound Quattrocchi’s passport and arrest him. But that was not done, and he was allowed to leave the country. He left India for Malaysia on July 29, 1993. The CBI’s efforts to get Quattrocchi extradited to India have not yet succeeded.

Does the Manmhohan Singh government’s ‘clean chit’ to Quattrocchi absolve him of all charges?
Yes, in a way. Prime Minister Singh said the action of defreezing Quattrocchi’s London bank accounts was taken by the CBI in consultation with law officers.

What does the man himself have to say?
In a statement issued from Milan in Italy this week, Quattrocchi said: ‘I believe it would be in interest of justice and India’s reputation if this case against me is brought to an end.’

So when I read,

Sonia Gandhi raises disarmament issue at UN meet
2 Oct 2007, 2107 hrs IST, PTI

UNITED NATIONS: As the UN marked Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday as the first International Day of Non-violence, Congress president Sonia Gandhi on Tuesday spoke of the international community’s collective failure to move towards comprehensive universal disarmament.

it makes my hair stand on end. Why her?

There must be many Indians still alive today, who had been with the Mahatma,
shared his vision of non-violence
shared his struggle for freedom,
who should have been representing his country at the UN. Not Ms Sonia Gandhi.
Are we selling off our country, only to perpetuate the Gandhi name?

IndiaAmericaSonia GandhiMarxistsNandigram

Reading Nukes on the loose, I am.
And these are my reasons.

The Islamic Bomb

By: Tashbih Sayyed in Pakistan Today: Friday, December 26, 2003

Pakistan’s admission that her scientists may have spread the nuclear technology to Iran, has rekindled the fears that nuclear technology in the hands of an unstable state will remain a threat to the world peace. The serious observers are reluctant to accept that the government of Pakistan has not authorized or initiated any transfers of sensitive nuclear technology or information to other countries. There have been strong indications that Islamabad has sold nuclear secrets to some countries including Iran and North Korea over the years. And the latest development has only reinforced the suspicions.

The fact that the admission was not a voluntary act but a result of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities that showed conclusively that “Pakistani-linked individuals” had acted as “intermediaries and black marketeers,” makes the situation more scary. Experts point out that Tehran’s acknowledgment that it had used centrifuge designs that appeared identical to ones used in Islamabad’s quest for the Islamic bomb did not leave any room for Pakistan but to admit.

Even Bush administration’s statement that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had assured Washington that his government had not—at least “in the present time”—provided any nuclear secrets to countries like Iran and North Korea did not help in alleviating the anxiety of the international community. The experience of the international community with Pakistan has taught it to be cautious before accepting any assurances. The world still remembers that Pakistani plane was caught picking up North Korean missile parts thought to be part of a swap for Pakistani nuclear technology, long after General Musharraf told the world that he stopped such sales after coming into power.

And the world believed him!
Too many skeletons in the cupboard, for Musharraf, B Bhutto and N Sharif.

NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA: NERVOUSNESS IN PAKISTAN

South Asia Analysis group: Paper no. 2004 dated 26. 10. 2006

8. The nervousness in Islamabad after the North Korean nuclear test is due to,
firstly, fears that fresh enquiries by the US might bring out hitherto unadmitted (by Pakistan) aspects of its co-operation with North Korea;
secondly, fears that the pressure on it to hand over A. Q. Khan for interrogation by US investigators might increase; and,
thirdly, that Mrs. Benazir Bhutto and Mr. Nawaz Sharif, who were considerably in the picture about this c-operation, might reveal the details to the US because of their anger over Musharraf’s refusal to let them return to Pakistan and contest next year’s elections to the National Assembly. If rightly approached by the US, Mrs. Bhutto and Mr. Sharif might be inclined to speak about the role of the Army—particularly Musharraf–in this co-operation, but not about their own role. According to these sources, Musharraf is particularly nervous that Mrs. Bhutto, who is more knowledgeable than Mr. Sharif, might start talking about this co-operation with the Americans. It is to pre-empt her doing so that he has reportedly been trying to make some political overtures to her.

Experts insist that unless Pakistan allows international agencies to install some kind of monitoring devices in its nuclear facilities to make the whole process really transparent, there is no guarantee that radical Islamists vying for power in the Islamic state will not share the secrets with their counterparts in other Muslim countries. In my opinion even if General Musharraf is sincere in his pledge to fight against radical Islamists, he is only one man against a national ethos. And as there is no alternate leadership that shares his enlightened vision, it is only a matter of time before an improved and “wiser” version of Talibaan will seize control of the nuclear installations.

The latest attempt on the life of General Musharraf has highlighted the dangers of continuing dependence on an individual in a non-democratic setup. Pakistan is a very different kind of a Muslim country. No Muslim country in the world was founded in the name of Islam. Pakistan did. As such it claims to be the citadel of Islam. Its armed forces are the armies of Islam and it champions the cause of each and every Muslim. Religion is not just its raison d’être but the only guarantee of survival. A system that has failed to provide equal rights to all of its citizens can only depend on a religious totalitarianism.

Pakistan is not a natural country. It is composed of regions, sects, ethnic groups and linguistic factions who, in the absence of social justice, have never felt a part of the Pakistani nationhood. It is only the iron hand of the armed forces that has prevented them from seceding. Bangalis, taking advantage of their geography that placed them far away from the military and political center, did secede and established their own country, Bangladesh. This is a very volatile state. A country that is kept together by a fascist religiso-military ideology can never be a productive and positive player in the comity of nations. It will always try to seek alliances with totalitarian regimes.

Pakistan was created for the Muslims of South Asian subcontinent. It was supposed to be a secular Muslim state working for the benefit of its citizens irrespective of their religion, color, ethnicity or creed. But soon after its creation, Islamists who had opposed its creation, hijacked it and declared that the state was founded in the name of Islam and will work to defend and expand the frontiers the faith. The non-Muslims were reduced to the status of second class citizens and the armed forces of Pakistan were declared as the armies of Islam.

Radical Islamists do not believe in the true faith of Islam that preaches equality and social justice. They practice an ideology that believes in persecuting those who do not share their philosophy. The fundamentalists found a ready support in an oligarchy that lacked legitimacy. This oligarchy too was in need of a weapon to perpetuate its rule. They knew that the allegiance of all the citizens cannot be won without establishing a system of social justice, which they did not want. So they opted for a system that has always been the choice of the totalitarian minds. Religion was used to enslave different ethnic and linguistic groups in an artificial unity. Pakistan was declared an Islamic state.

Oligarchy’s dependence on religion to sustain their rule forced them to depend more and more on radical Islamic groups. It presented itself as the champion of all Islamic causes. Every issue was now cast in a religious light and the world was either green or ungreen. Although this “Islam” failed to fool the minority groups, it did succeed in winning the support of fundamentalists and religious fanatics from all over the world. From Palestine to Paris, from Indonesia to Indiana and from Kashmir to Karbala, wherever there was religious terrorism, Pakistan found herself defending it. That’s why when Pakistan decided to have a nuclear bomb of its own it touted it as an Islamic bomb.

Religion is the only effective weapon in the hands of an oligarchy that does not respect the will of the people to keep the centrifugal forces tamed. Pakistan’s armed forces representing the ruling class believe that religion can make the minorities and smaller provinces forget the absence of social justice that keeps them in a perpetual state of poverty and helplessness.

There are enough documents
to prove the Americans were aware of China’s nuclear proliferation.
It is entirely possible that Pakistan handed over tracts of Kashmir to China,
as a payment for China’s assistance with nuclear technology as far back as 1963.

In 70s when Pakistan’s then Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto launched his campaign to win funds for the nuclearization, he sold the idea to Libya, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Iran as an Islamic project. All these Muslim countries supported the project whole heartedly. Pakistan never faced any shortage of funds as far as her nuclear ambitions were concerned. And therefore it feels obliged to share the technology with other Muslim countries.

Mr Abdul Kadeer Khan,
found reading secret documents in Almelo,
Netherlands’ top-secret gas centrifuge factory, escaped investigation
as he was hurriedly recalled to serve in Pakistan’s Economic Affairs Ministry.

But in 1976,
Dr Khan returned home to head up the nation’s nuclear programme with the support of then prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.… revelations that he has passed on nuclear secrets to other countries have shocked and traumatised Pakistan. Abdul Qadeer Khan, who has confessed to transferring nuclear technology to Iran and Libya, is regarded as a national hero for helping Pakistan become a nuclear state.

There has always been a tacit understanding that Pakistan’s bomb will be used to regain the glory of Islam and defend the “rights” of the Muslims wherever they are persecuted by infidel powers. This was truly an Islamic bomb. On the one hand it strengthened the autocratic hands of the oligarchy and allowed Pakistan’s armed forces to rehabilitate themselves after the humiliating defeat in 1971 and on the other hand it allowed Pakistan to gain a very profitable position within the Muslim world. It was felt that Pakistan’s nuclear capability served as a morale booster for the entire Islamic world. Foreign Minister of Iran expressed his joy and pride and said that the nuclear test by Pakistan has strengthened the confidence of the Muslim world in the face of the nuclear threat from Israel.

Other Muslim nations were equally proud of Pakistan’s achievement. “No more shall the West humiliate Muslims,” thundered the Imam of Al-Aqsa mosque who saw in the explosion of the Pakistani bomb “the beginning of the resurgence of Islamic power.” Sheikh Ahmad Yasin, the leader of the Hamas thought that the Pakistan nuclear bomb was a shot in the arms of the Arabs who had failed to produce even a single tank. The Saudi King Fahd and the Crown Prince Abdullah also expressed their satisfaction over Pakistani detonation of nuclear device and thereby strengthening the defense of the Islamic world. The UAE president too described the Pakistani nuclear response fully justified in the face of serious threats to its security. The Egyptian Mufti called upon the Muslims to rally support for the nuclear blast by Pakistan.

The detonations, which, according to Christian Science Monitor “transformed the global balance of power setting the pace for remaking the world order,” were according to the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mian Nawaz Sharif were the results of an inspiration he derived from the holy book – Quraa’n. After conducting the nuclear tests, he proclaimed to the nation on May 28 that in resolving the dilemma “to explode or not to explode” he ultimately turned to the Holy Quran (Muslim holy book) for guidance and he came upon the divine commandment “always to keep your horses ready.”

The relevant verse of the Holy Quran is as follows:
“Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, (steed of war will mean the latest war technologies in the present context) to strike terror into (the heart of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others beside whom you do not known but Allah doeth know, whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah shall be repaid unto you and ye shall not be treated unjustly” (VIII: 60)

Islamists quote another verse of Quraa’n, to define the faithful and the enemies of Allah, “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah and those who reject Faith (Kafroon) fight in the cause of Evil (Taghoot). The concept of Ummah under which all Muslims are like the parts of one body, does make it an obligation for every Muslim to fight in defense of other Muslims. That’s why the Muslims in Indonesia feel their responsibility to come to the defense of Palestinians. And that’s why it is not a surprise if the ISI and the radical Islamists in the Pakistan armed forces and other sensitive establishments do not feel it inappropriate to help Iran, Libya or Saudi Arabia to attain the nuclear power or other weapons of mass destruction. A prominent political analyst in Pakistan wrote, “. . . the Ummah as a whole must keep itself ready with the state-of-the-art weapons and the latest war technologies and never to relent. And whatever spent on it would be recompensed by Allah.”

They have had recompensation hundred times over from America, in US $$.

Islamists want Muslims to conclude from the verses of the Holy Quran that the nuclear capability acquired by Pakistan should not be deployed only for the defense of Pakistan but also for the defense of the entire Islamic world. It should be used against the Judeo-Christian powers to re-establish the Khilafah. Muslim street is made to understand that the world of Islam has common enemies and they have common ideological frontier to defend. Therefore it will always be justified for Pakistan to share its nuclear secrets with the those who are willing to fight the Judeo-Christian powers.

The fall of Saddam Hussein and the establishment of a democratic and true Muslim government in Iraq will change all this. The radical Islamism will have a hard time to find governments ready to share their technologies with them to defeat freedoms.

(The writer is editor-in-chief of Pakistan Today, a California-based weekly newspaper, president of Council for Democracy and Tolerance and adjunct fellow of Hudson Institute.)

Read the original text in full here: http://www.paktoday.com/islamic.htm

Can we really rely on the “promises” of Musharraf or whoever succeeds him next,
that the Islamic bombs will never reach the hands of the fundamentalists?
I cannot.

The threat now faces us all, the whole non-islamic world.
Surely the time has come for the world to
dismantle and remove Pakistan’s Nuclear arsenal and all related technology.
There can be no more blind eyes turned, no more wink and a nudge
to get the promise that these nukes will be only used against the Indians.

MusharrafPakistanKashmirIndiahistorynews

… once too often; and has proved his
Pakistan cannot be trusted with human rights, democracy or world peace.

I had written in:

United Suckers of America
You may forget everything else written here or on the referred webpages.
But do remember this, Pakistan is only looking after its own interest.
They can be “with you today, and against you tomorrow”,
call them friends at your own ignorant peril.
Mr Musharraf, called Mr Bush’s bluff,
and has outsmarted him.

Time did come, for Musharraf to balance his books,
and his numbers do not add up.

I hope he has laughed his last laugh.

To hold on to absolute power, he enforced “emergency rule” read Martial Law,
removed his judiciary and thought he was safe.

He thought wrong. He is no longer the darling of the gullible west.
He could not fool all the people any longer. So now,

Musharraf now also referred as a ‘‘terrorist’’!

Pervez Musharraf is a democrat, a visionary, and a loyal ally in the war on terror for the president George Bush but to an ever-widening phalanx of critics, he is a ’’thug, ’’ a ‘ power hungry dictator’’ and now, a ’’terrorist.’’ A California daily has referred to him as a ’’terrorist,’’ attributing the epithet to critics. Many analysts have been pointing his dark side of siding with extremists and fundamentalists at the expense of moderate forces, even as the administration certifies his indispensability in the war on terror.

While US’ penchant for backing despots, have been criticized in the past, seldom has the language descended to this level. In fact, there are almost no takers now for the Bush policy of backing Pakistan’s military ruler. Even those believing that Pakistan’s military is a stabilising force are now concluding that Musharraf has outlived his promises and utility.

Pakistan is today suspended from the Commonwealth.
I hope, that all other world bodies too wakes up to realises the truth.

Blackmailing the West once to often, of their nukes falling into the terroists’ hands.
If at all, he would have handed over the bomb to them himself, gift wrapped
just how the technology was transferred to Iran and Syria.

Hopefully the Islamic Bomb is probably safely out of his reach.
Pakistan can no longer be trusted, their nukes should be taken away,
for the safety of every other world’s nations.

Pak nukes already under US control: Report
20 Nov 2007, 2028 hrs IST,Chidanand Rajghatta ,TNN
WASHINGTON: Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are already under American control even as analysts are working themselves into a lather on the subject, a well-regarded intelligence journal has said.

In a stunning disclosure certain to stir up things in Washington’s (and in Islamabad and New Delhi’s) strategic community, the journal Stratfor reported on Monday that the “United States delivered a very clear ultimatum to Musharraf in the wake of 9/11: Unless Pakistan allowed US forces to take control of Pakistani nuclear facilities, the United States would be left with no choice but to destroy those facilities, possibly with India’s help.”

“This was a fait accompli that Musharraf, for credibility reasons, had every reason to cover up and pretend never happened, and Washington was fully willing to keep things quiet,” the journal, which is widely read among the intelligence community, said.

A desperate general is now threatening a different wolf:

Pak-based militants planning worldwide attacks: Musharraf

ISLAMABAD: 24 Nov 2007, 0000 hrs IST, ANI
President Pervez Musharraf has once again justified his Emergency rule, saying that foreign militants based in Pakistan were planning terrorist attacks around the world.
He said Pakistan had to “get their own house in order” and then show its efforts to the West. “Foreigners are sitting here and are planning terrorism all over the world,” he said in an interactive programme.
“We have caught people who had maps of European countries and targets there. They (the West) are asking us to eliminate these people,” said Musharraf.

Tell us something we do not know, Mr Musharraf.
Pakistan has been the training ground for terrorists for years.

Musharraf was Chief of Army Staff at the time of Mujahideen incursions into India
from Pakistan-administered Kashmir in the summer of 1999.

From May to July 1999,
Indian soldiers fought and died in the Kargil Conflict.
It was planned and executed by Musharraf, then the Army Chief of Staff.
PM Sharif has claimed that Musharraf was solely responsible for the Kargil attacks.
He boasted he would hoist the flag of Pakistan atop the Srinagar Assembly.
Instead his Army was given such a hiding that

Victory in reverse: the great climbdown
So Pakistan’s war leadership did what flowed naturally from its basic instincts: go cap-in-hand to Washington and agree to an extraordinary statement which commits us to undo our Kargil folly

I hold this man responsible, directly or indirectly,
for every single Indian life that has been lost in Kashmir since 1999.

Take away the nukes, stop pouring in $$$ and let Musharraf take his country
back to the stone ages.

MusharrafPakistanKashmirIndiahistorynews

A recent published article calls “Indian Hindutva – the eternal genocide”.
I resent his alignment of the entire Hindu community (Hindutva) to genocide.

Reason 1. In a judgment the Indian Supreme Court ruled that “no precise meaning can be ascribed to the terms ‘Hindu’, ‘Hindutva’ and ‘Hinduism’; and no meaning in the abstract can confine it to the narrow limits of religion alone, excluding the content of Indian culture and heritage.” The Supreme Court also ruled that “Ordinarily, Hindutva is understood as a way of life or a state of mind and is not to be equated with or understood as religious Hindu fundamentalism”.

A Hindu may embrace a non-Hindu religion without ceasing to be a Hindu and since the Hindu is disposed to think synthetically and to regard other forms of worship, strange gods and divergent doctrines as inadequate rather than wrong or objectionable, he tends to believe that the highest divine powers complement each other for the well-being of the world and mankind.”

Reason 2. He claims the alleged genocide has been eternal.

I wrote a blog “unashamed hypocrisy” arguing against this misalignment.
The author of the article left this long winded comment,
which I publish here, his comments being within the blockquotes.

Dear Friend

I must be thankful that you have submitted a wonderful article, a fair and free way of expression that you posted on comments for the article in my blog. The point is not whether you are right or I am. Let us speak more openly on this issue so that if we reach at a solution, the losing side would be enlightened with knowledge from the winning side.
I always prefer to lose this debate as I would learn more from you.

You start your long comment with self contradictory statements.
One one hand you say, it is not a point of being “right or wrong”,
but you go onto the “winning or losing” of the debate.

I am a realist.
I believe in the truth, and being right is more important to me than winning a debate.
A debate won can uphold the wrong or untruth. That doesn’t right what is wrong.
That is just hypocrisy.

When you say you may learn more from the “debate”, that says it is possible you do not know enough yet; then I ask how can you publish such a strongly worded report that is bound to inflame sentiments.
Are you really a journalist, or a propagandist.

I’ve been busy a couple of days in the press meeting regarding the Nandigram issue and as it’s almost the last 10 days of the month, I’m busy with bringing out my magazine for the next month. I realized after reading your article that I must write a reply (a thanks) to you and to share my opinion on this particular article.

Let me first say, you called your article “Indian Hindutva – the eternal genocide”.
With one headline you are calling every Hindu alive or dead criminals of committing perpetual murder. I say put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

One thing must be understood very clearly.
A genocide, no matter who did it. It is always a genocide. Whether it is a Christian, a Jew, a Mozlem or a Hindu . Human values are more important than religion. Though I’m a staunch atheist, I wouldn’t comment on the Belief of God as I respect the belief people have on God. It is neither my wish to comment on Gods. But I’m obliged to make some strange remarks on Gods when the very existence of a sin is being carried out in the name of God.

And a genocide stays as heinous a crime even after 500 years.
Passage of time, does not lessen the criminality.

And no, you are not obliged to make any remarks.
You chose to do so on your own free will.
But if and when you decide to speak out to the world,
is when you become obliged to speak the truth and the whole truth.
Deliberately not doing so is hypocrisy.

I’m neither a sympathizer of any religion, nor a phobic towards any religion.
If the muslims are being killed to death in India, the same muslims also carry out murders, rapes and killings in Bangladesh and other parts of the world (as you said). My point of the article is just about what I see in India as a journalist, what I feel looking at it and what history clearly defines.

A journalist has a moral duty to portray the truth.
If what you write is the way you look at events,
then it is your opinion, and not unbiased journalism.

And you have clearly distorted the facts of history.
Unscrupulous and biased jouranalism thrives on stoking up further controversies.
Your article comes across as another example.

1. You said: This article is either a result of absolute ignorance, or disgraceful hypocrisy.Why just go back a few decades in time to find the root cause? How did the muslims come into a hinduland? Not with flowers but with swords in their hands, and killed and plundered. That was genocide. How did portions of hindu homeland become predominantly muslim? By ethnic cleansing.

I can accept my ignorance of Historical facts and my writings.
But wouldn’t felt anything guilt about being hypocritic.
If the freedom of my expression is hypocritic, then even you are hypocritic to have expressed what you think.

A human’s basic rights is not hypocrisy.
Exercising one’s Freedom of Expression is not hypocrisy.
But using that “right” to deliberately distort the truth,
and to publish that as the whole truth to the world, is hypocrisy.
And that is why I have called your article, hypocrisy.

Now how did mozlems come to India?
I agree (to some extent) the fact that many Mozlems came with the swords.
But the religion of Islam came to India as a religion, not as a war.

It doesn’t matter to what extent you agree or deny how Islam entered India,
what matters is the historical evidence.
If you want to make such sweeping statements, show me your evidence,
I will show you as many historical evidence to refute, if not many times more.

A religion couldn’t be blamed for what it’s followers do.

No? yet you have so pompously stated above “But I’m obliged to make some strange remarks on Gods when the very existence of a sin is being carried out in the name of God”.
That is hypocrisy

A religion has to accept the blame for any offense or act that has been committed in the name of that religion. Either the religion denounces every such act or accepts the full blame.

(That is why I never blamed Hinduism for what Hindu Fascists do. I just blamed Hindutva-the modern Politics of Hindu Fascism).

Who or what is a Hindu fascist?
The Hindu nationalism? Calling for a Hindu state?
Or because they have the holy hindu emblem of the swastika on their banner instead of star crescent or the sickle and hammer?

So very convenient, so very easy to fool westerners to believe
the hindu swastika only proves fascist intentions.

Is the call for an islamic caliphate, fascism at an international level?
How would you describe the call of Mr Bin Laden to Muslims to “establish the righteous caliphate of our umma.” The call of Islamist political parties and Islamist guerrilla groups for the restoration of the caliphate by uniting Muslim nations, either through peaceful political action (e.g., Hizb ut-Tahrir) or through force (e.g., al-Qaeda)?

Where is the difference?
If you are unable to call that fascism, that is hypocrisy.

Now… As you say, if historical evidences suggests surely that Mozlems did Genocide, then does that mean that Hindus must also do the same Genocide on Mozlems? How can Hindutva fascism could be compromised by saying that Mozlems were also fascists? You ask me how could a portion of Hindu homeland became predominantly Muslims? Now let me ask you- How the Dravidian Society of India became predominantly Hindu? So Hindus too did an ethnic cleansing against Dravidians?

2. You said: According to Professor K.S Lal, the hindu population decreased by 80 million between 1000 AD, invasion of India by Mahmud Ghazni and 1525 a year before the Battle of Panipat. Add another 20 million that were killed during the muslim reign. Koenraad Elst wrote in Negationism in India – Concealing the records of Islam: destruction of about 100 million hindus (by muslims) is perhaps the biggest holocaust in the whole world history.

Now, (considering that Mr.Mahmud Gazni and other mozlem rulers deliberately killed millions of Hindus)..
what link do the present Indian mozlems and Mohamed Gazni have?

You have called the Hindutva an eternal genocide. Eternity did not start in 1947.
You have written “The riots and aggressions against the muslims were routine in the Land of India from the origin of an anti-Muslim Brahminical society“.

That links the modern day muslims to their invading murdering forefathers.
You yourself have brought in history in an attempt to justify your argument.
I have taken you back to the origin of that history, the truth,
which you have conveniently failed to mention.
That history you do not like published.
That is hypocrisy.

You have resorted to deliberate misrepresentation of history.
Either you have the guts to tell the whole truth.
Or you are a cowardly hypocrite.
There is no third choice here.

If a community knows that in the name of a religion,
100 million of their fathers, and forefathers were killed by muslims,
that their places of worships had been looted, desecrated and destroyed,
can they ever forget the inhuman injustice?
Its naive to think that such acts of crime will not generate hatred or distrust for centuries.

Indian mozlems neither defend the killings of Mohamed Gazni (if there is a very authentic evidence to prove that), nor enjoyed it. If mozlems killed 100 million Hindus, sure, it is agreed that that is also a genocide!!!
I acknowledge Koenraad’s claim that Mozlems killed 100 Hindus!

Please get the facts right. He claimed Muslims killed a 100 million Hindus.

Now cleaning out all mozlems, raping them, torching and firing their home, looting their properties would bring back those 100 Hindus who were killed?
And would that bring peace to the Hindus who live today?
I’ve not seen any Mohamed Gaznis today. So the mozlems today must be punished for the crimes of Gazni?

You will never see one, because you do not want to look for one.
A train full of Hindu pilgrims were burnt to death by muslims,
is just a single example.

I am amazed at the immaturity of your arguments.
To bring peace in India, the atrocities on both sides of the religious divide has to be acknowledged. All that I read in you article is your pathetic attempts to criticise RSS, while crimes no less atrocious is still being committed by the muslims.

If the muslims kills for religious reasons, they should be tried by the same laws
that you want to be exercised on the hindus for the same crimes.
Why do they deserve cover ups or any protection.

You try to portray muslims as eternal victims, I drew my readers’ attention to the numerous genocide carried out in the name of Islam in and beyond India.

If so, then let all the Germans shall be punished for the crimes of Hitler.

The modern day neo-nazis will pay for any racial crimes they commit.
So that Hitlers crimes are never forgotten, holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 13 european countries: not just in germany, but also Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Switzerland.
Why is there a blatant muslim denial of the Islamic genocide?

3. You said: If a muslim majority country can have a constitution that declares it an Islamic state, the hindu majority in India also has the same right to call for a Hindu state?

I have seen Muslim constitution practiced just in Iran. Frankly, no where else (though there may be some extremists demanding the Islamic constitution in some villages in Somalia or Indonesia). And even in Iran, boys and girls kiss in parks, several teenage girls become pregnant by having pre marriage sex. If Iran really follows an Islamic constitution, all these people must be punished for it. Why Iran does not punish? Because precisely, what they follow is NOT an Islamic constitution. It could rather be called their country’s traditional law. To defend such a law, Islam’s name could be used! Right?
If country like Saudi Arabia follows Islamic constitution, then the Kings of Sauds and Nahyans must be hanged to death. Because these kings are familiar in France to sleep with one prostitute for one night, in their vacations! Where is the Islamic constitution ? Show me one country! The very claim that Islamic Consitution exists can be neglected through these arguments!

What you write here is not just irrelevant, but so laughable in this context, I am have serious doubts as to your capability to understand simple written english.
I have written ” If a muslim majority country can have a constitution that declares it an Islamic state, the hindu majority in India also has the same right to call for a Hindu state?”

It has nothing to do on the merits or demerits of being an Islamic state.
It is about one’s rights of freedom of expression to call for a Hindu state.
To have independant thoughts and be able to express those thoughts
without persecution is every human’s fundamental right.

If the leaders of the Muslim league could ask for a muslim homeland,
why cannot any Hindu ask for a Hindu state?
To accept the demand for the muslim state as justified,
but deny the simple right to ask for a hindu one, is blatant hypocrisy.

Ok… Now if Hindus need Hindu State as you say, how many of them need a Hindu state?
Without a Hindu state, they cannot worship God? Without a Hindu state will Hindustan become Islamic?
If yes, then why Turkey and Bosnia are still Islamic when there is an all-western modern culture with the absence of Islamic state?
If we consider imposing an Islamic state in a country is strange, then how could we impose a Hindu state in India which is a multi cultural, multi religious and democratic nation?

With your own logic I ask:
Why did the muslims demand a separate muslim homeland?
Could they not worship Allah in secular India?
Or without Pakistan would they have all become Hindus.
You conveniently have different arguments for different communities.
That is hypocrisy.

Now again.. If you judge that claiming a Hindu state for India is not a wrong thing, then are you an anti-democratic person? Democracy and Religion cannot go hand-in-hand. (If you need explanations for this, I’m ready to give that too). So you want India to throw the democracy out and bring Hindu rule?

Do you really understand democracy?
Are you just being funny, or are you really that idiotic.
Or are you a marxist in disguise hoping that one day india
will become a religionless communist state. Dream on, hypocrite.

Democracy and religion cannot go hand in hand!!
Tell Mr George Bush that,
he has been fighting to force democracy on muslims in the middle east.
The Communists claim that their ideology doesn’t go with religion.
Islamists claim democracy cannot go with Islam.
But to contradict your prejudiced view,
you have no evidence to say there cannot be a hindu democracy.

4. You say: To demand a separate nation and to carve up India to form Islamic states, and then to condemn the activities of RSS and VHP is a sheer hypocricy!
I agree! It is a hypocrisy. But I neither demanded a separate nation, nor encourage an Islamic state into India.
So am I allowed to condemn the activities of RSS and VHP?

Yes, you can condemn any bodies activities.
But you cannot exercise your freedom of expression to condemn other for exercising their right to freedom of religious belief, their freedom of independant thoughts and their rights to free speech. That is hypocrisy.

5. You say: There are muslims who are no less innocent than the hindu extremists. Why cry only for the rights of muslims in India?

I agree. So you have not read in any newspapers we journalists crying even for Sikhs, Hindus and Christians? I must accept that we cry more for mozlems, because for every 1 Hindu being killed, atleast 10 muslims are killed. So we are obliged to cry more for Muslims (and dalits). That does not mean that our media keeps silent in the issue of Bombay Don Dawood Ebrahim and Kovai Blasts!
Our media sometimes sprays even false accusations on Muslims which were later identified to be totally irrelevant. So we cry for Hindus, muslims, Sikhs and almost everyone in India who are victims of crimes. Even if RSS chief Sudarshan is punished by our government for what he did not, we will defend him. Don’t worry.

What is written in newspapers by “we journalists” is not being discussed here.
It is what “you the self-proclaimed journalist” who have published to the world.

And from what you write, the manner you write,
if you are the face of Indian journalism; I do worry for my country.

6. You say: Jews have been forced out of Pakistan… Hindus are being systematically cleansed and killed in Bangladesh…

What does it has with my article regarding Gujarat Riots and Hinduism? Like how hindus are sent out of Bangladesh, mozlems must also be sent out of India? If yes, I would advice you to give this suggestion to the Indian Government. Let our Government decide on that issue. Not the RSS.

You have called it an eternal genocide, remember? Not one single incident of riots.
You have generalised hindus and made this a hindu – muslim issue.
So it concerns hindus muslims conflict everywhere it happens.
Keeping it restricted to within the boundaries of Gujrat
just to strengthen your argument is hypocrisy.

You have published your article on the worldwideweb.
It will be read by people outside of India, some of who, without knowing the full history of Islam in India, may believe your unsubstantiated garbage and have a distorted view of hindus.

But that is precisely what you have aimed for, isn’t it? Either as a muslim, or a marxist.
For I cannot believe a non-marxist hindu will ever present arguments
in such a dishonest way as you have.

7. You say: Just for once… I challenge the muslims to have the courage to come out and say that they cannot tolerate any other religion.

Just count how many Hindus are anti-Muslims.. And count how many Muslims are anti-Hindus.. And take a percentage out of it. You would obviously find more anti-Muslims than anti-Hindus! You don’t believe me? Just go out in your area and take this statistics. Remember, don’t go to Pakistan! Because Indian Mozlems are different from Pakistani Mozlems. (Like how Israeli Jews are different from Jews elsewhere. Israeli Jews are more Zionists, while other Jews are less. Likewise, Pakistani Mozlems are more Islamists and Indian Mozlems are good Humanists. They are no more Mohamed Gazni’s followers)

Now remind me in which of the two religions, Hinduism or Islam is this relevent:
The shahadah: “‘ašhadu ‘al-lā ilāha illā-llāhu wa ‘ašhadu ‘anna muħammadan rasūlu-llāh“, or “I testify that there is none worthy of worship except God and I testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of God.

You didn’t answer the question which was: can muslims tolerate other religions?
If not why do they not have the courage to openly declare it?
This world would be a lot simpler place if they would honestly say so.

“Indian muslims are different from pakistani muslims??? In what way?
They will blast your theory and prove each and one of them are anti-Hindu?

Sixty years ago they were the same. So were the Bangladeshis.
Just a political boundary doesn’t change their genetic markup or beliefs, does it?
You are such a pathetic hypocrite.

Once again, you either do not understand what I have said,
or deliberately wants to sidestep the issue.
For what you have written
not only makes a mockery of statistical methods, but is idiotically irrelevent.

I hope I did my best to answer your questions. But still I feel that I’m obliged to explain some parts of it. As I said, I wish to lose this battle with you. So I hope you will bring good questions like these again. You may freely write on my comments blog whatever you feel. I think the discussion will continue..
So I let this reply without mentioning..Good bye..

What you have done is proved my point.

When the ideal way forwards would be to accept the truths of the past, and reconcile,
evil reporting will deliberately distort the truth in the name of journalism.
That is hypocrisy.

I have no desire to continue a discussion with someone
who cannot understand my simple written English
or be honest with the facts
or capable of looking beyond their own backyard.

Neither will I let my blog become a venue of a “win / lose” debate,
so any further points you wish to make, do so on your site.
If I disagree, I of course will write my own response here and with real evidence.

Indiahindusmuslimscommunal violencepropaganda