What's new

Hinduvata Leaders and their BS

Nope, that never happened under Mughal Rule! The Mughals brought the most peace and tolerance to the sub-continent, as far as empires are concerned! You know nothing about history, just propaganda!

This is bit offtopic but.....
Either you are kidding or ill informed.Babur, Jahangir, Aurangzeb killed and tortured people like they were pigs. You also needs to check your history books.
 
Nope, that never happened under Mughal Rule! The Mughals brought the most peace and tolerance to the sub-continent, as far as empires are concerned! You know nothing about history, just propaganda!

True for most Mughals.....but a few bad apples spoil the bushel....I think Aurangzeb falls under this catergory....
 
‘The Cops Did As The State Wished’



Blood thirsty Genocidal maniac ADGP intelligence, RB Sreekumar

Talking to HARINDER BAWEJA, former ADGP Intelligence, RB Sreekumar, endorses the rioters’ view that the government was on their side

When you were ADGP intelligence, had you filed a report saying weapons had been smuggled from Sabarkantha?

In 2002, weapons were recovered from some Muslim areas. Our information was that they were manufactured in an iron works unit in Wadgam, owned by a VHP worker. I had sent the report in writing and also informed KR Kaushik, then the Ahmedabad police chief. When they conducted a raid, nothing was found, but I learned later that the raiding party had leaked the information, which is why nothing was found. The press found out and Hindustan Times ran a front-page report. They kept harassing me but nothing came of it. It was strongly suspected that they were manufacturing tamanchas — country-made firearms.

Were these weapons used during the riots?
This information came later on. An inquiry was ordered against me — but the DGP said no action could be taken because it is routine for Intelligence to share information.

Was any action taken against the raid party?
(laughs) The raid party’s action was in tune with the political interests of the ruling party. The recovery was shown from the Muslims to make the point that the police was doing a good job of maintaining law and order. Subsequently, on August15, DG Vanzara and others were rewarded for this recovery.

Did you file any reports on the flow of arms or bombs during the riots?
Copies of my reports were appended in my first affidavit to the Nanavati-Shah Commission. There was a report on the distribution of trishuls. I took over in April 2002; by then, the frenzy had come down. I had sent reports saying FIRS were not registered properly, many offences were being clubbed together and that the names of the VHP leaders at the head of the mob were being left out of FIRs. This became a controversy. On none of these reports did the government take any follow-up action or seek any clarification. That is very relevant.


Source: Tehelka:: Free. Fair. Fearless
 
LK Advani all praises for mass murderer Modi



Unbelievable, these genocidal maniacs working hand in hand praising each other and supporting each other.


It's time we see their real dirty faces. LK Advani supporting Modi one of the masterminds of the Gujarat massacre of 2002.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nope, that never happened under Mughal Rule! The Mughals brought the most peace and tolerance to the sub-continent, as far as empires are concerned! You know nothing about history, just propaganda!



just tell me, where did you get that news about Mugal being peaceful and tolerance, no offense, but till today, no Muslim have ever used non-violence.

now go read some history books before teaching me.

or i have better idea, go and tell some Sikh guy thatMugal empire were peaceful.
he will defiantly help you.

:coffee::usflag::pop:
 
stupid ppl, right!

i agree.

they should go to jail and stay forever their.
by the way , it was done to hindus as well , when india was under mugal empire.
but still, i don't support all this.

this is just soooo stupid.

:pop::usflag::coffee:

How dare you justify this atrocity! Was this woman a mughal?! Most of these muslims who died were from the villages who are converts and came from the same ethnic stock as Gujrati Hindus. There is simply no connection here!

So just because Ashoka slaughtered thousands (including women) in Kalinga battle, should the tribal people of Orissa now massacre Bihari Hindus? You are no better than the Taliban sympathisers if you have these views!
 
How dare you justify this atrocity! Was this woman a mughal?! Most of these muslims who died were from the villages who are converts and came from the same ethnic stock as Gujrati Hindus. There is simply no connection here!

So just because Ashoka slaughtered thousands (including women) in Kalinga battle, should the tribal people of Orissa now massacre Bihari Hindus? You are no better than the Taliban sympathisers if you have these views!


you r right little bit, but
when someone kill from another religion , it matter more.

if your own ppl r killing , than nobody cares.

best example is:
when hindu guy killed Gandhi, nothing much happened, but in 1984, when a Sikh guy killed Indra Gandhi, something big was happened.
 
I present this horrific story to you with sincere sorrow...


I have a personal message to every capable Muslim man.


It is important we never forget and forgive these crimes and that we vow to raise the Sword over the enemies of Islam as Allah intended. Let Heaven's will be done on Earth!

Hmmm this sounds very much like something the Taliban or Al-Qaeda would say, a call for jihad.

Why is it the responsibility of Pakistanis to raise a sword over these 'enemies?' Have Indian muslims asked us to launch a jihad for them?
 
Hmmm this sounds very much like something the Taliban or Al-Qaeda would say, a call for jihad.

Why is it the responsibility of Pakistanis to raise a sword over these 'enemies?' Have Indian muslims asked us to launch a jihad for them?



You are both a secularist and humanist so I do not expect you to understand the concept and practice of Muslim brotherhood, unity, and the divine support for the Ummah as Allah intended.

"Why is it the responsibility of Pakistanis"

Nor did I say the word "Pakistanis", I said "capable Muslim man."

"Hmmm this sounds very much like something the Taliban or Al-Qaeda would say, a call for jihad."

It also sounds like something Gen. Khaled ibn al-Walid, Gen. Tariq bin Zayid, Sultan Mehmet II, Gen. Salahuddin, and other great heroic Generals said and would have said...

"Have Indian muslims asked us to launch a jihad for them?"

Sure some have and some have not, some are too afraid to speak their opinions as they may be killed for doing so...

Read the Quran, it is All Mighty Allah who has asked Muslims to defend their brethren, families, and religion. Then again, you are a secularist and humanist so the words of Allah are meaningless to you by your own ideological definition and identity as a 'secularist' and 'humanist'...


Besides this is not the focus of this thread, you seem to be more bothered by my earlier post than the horrific events of Gujarat Massacre...
 
You are both a secularist and humanist so I do not expect you to understand the concept and practice of Muslim brotherhood, unity, and the divine support for the Ummah as Allah intended.

Nor did I say the word "Pakistanis", I said "capable Muslim man."

It also sounds like something Gen. Khaled ibn al-Walid, Gen. Tariq bin Zayid, Sultan Mehmet II, Gen. Salahuddin, and other great heroic Generals said and would have said...

Sure some have and some have not, some are too afraid to speak their opinions as they may be killed for doing so...

Read the Quran, it is All Mighty Allah who has asked Muslims to defend their brethren, families, and religion. Then again, you are a secularist and humanist so the words of Allah are meaningless to you by your own ideological definition and identity as a 'secularist' and 'humanist'...

Besides this is not the focus of this thread, you seem to be more bothered by my earlier post than the horrific events of Gujarat Massacre...

And how is that 'muslim brotherhood' working out? A lot of unity there? One would think that if the Indian muslims believed in such a brotherhood they wouldn't want to live in a secular country. This 'defence' of the brotherhood is only one sided, its from your side.

Yeah those generals did say that but then again they aren't generals in the 21st century. One needs to see the difference between today's world and the ancient world.

What you essentially reinforced is that religion is a cult. It is more concerned with the well being of its own rather than truly being compassionate towards all humans. It is no wonder that most of the world's problems have to do with religion.

Anyways, this might be offtopic so will end here.
 
You are both a secularist and humanist so I do not expect you to understand the concept and practice of Muslim brotherhood, unity, and the divine support for the Ummah as Allah intended.



Nor did I say the word "Pakistanis", I said "capable Muslim man."



It also sounds like something Gen. Khaled ibn al-Walid, Gen. Tariq bin Zayid, Sultan Mehmet II, Gen. Salahuddin, and other great heroic Generals said and would have said...



Sure some have and some have not, some are too afraid to speak their opinions as they may be killed for doing so...

Read the Quran, it is All Mighty Allah who has asked Muslims to defend their brethren, families, and religion. Then again, you are a secularist and humanist so the words of Allah are meaningless to you by your own ideological definition and identity as a 'secularist' and 'humanist'...


Besides this is not the focus of this thread, you seem to be more bothered by my earlier post than the horrific events of Gujarat Massacre...

And what your idea of "Jihad" cowardly LeT militants and killing innocents (including muslims)? If you really want to help Indian muslims, establish good governance and develop Pakistan, make your army, government accountable and stop any motley group to train on Pakistani soil and terrorise innocents living across the border. That should be your Jihad.

And I suggest you read up on 100s of fatwas issued by ulema in India (and aconcurred by prominent ulema even in pakistan) that there is no Jihad allowed against India as long as muslims have freedom of religion there. So your argument falls flat.
 
Last edited:
This is bit offtopic but.....
Either you are kidding or ill informed.Babur, Jahangir, Aurangzeb killed and tortured people like they were pigs. You also needs to check your history books.

No, you are misinformed! You Sikhs have deluded history! The fact is that these kings did not do as you have said, rather they were tolerant and peaceful! The Sikh kingdom however was one of the most ruthless and barbaric regime in the subcontinent! They killed too many innocent people and destroyed many mosques!
 
And how is that 'muslim brotherhood' working out? A lot of unity there? One would think that if the Indian muslims believed in such a brotherhood they wouldn't want to live in a secular country. This 'defence' of the brotherhood is only one sided, its from your side.

Yeah those generals did say that but then again they aren't generals in the 21st century. One needs to see the difference between today's world and the ancient world.

What you essentially reinforced is that religion is a cult. It is more concerned with the well being of its own rather than truly being compassionate towards all humans. It is no wonder that most of the world's problems have to do with religion.

Anyways, this might be offtopic so will end here.

We do not end on your terms...


And how is that 'muslim brotherhood' working out? A lot of unity there? One would think that if the Indian muslims believed in such a brotherhood they wouldn't want to live in a secular country. This 'defence' of the brotherhood is only one sided, its from your side.

Well it won't work out with attitudes such as yours and apathy and carelessness. But there are signs of Muslim unity and brotherhood though not at the government level but at the street level the Muslims are aware of brotherhood it is at a weak state at this time in history due to multiple reasons...

"One would think that if the Indian muslims believed in such a brotherhood they wouldn't want to live in a secular country."

This is an immature and illogical point, because your whole point is based on the assumption that because they are living there they support the national ideology of the state which apparently is 'secularism' thus their support for it. When it reality, where else are they going to go? Many may not have money to move somewhere else, many may find it a great financial hassle to move, and due to the political situation may not be able to move to other places...Besides it is their homeland and they have been living their for generations when it was an Islamic Mughal empire and now even when it's a "secular" Indian state...So your point is false and foolish.

"Yeah those generals did say that but then again they aren't generals in the 21st century. One needs to see the difference between today's world and the ancient world."

Your grasp of the historical time line is seriously and badly warped...Ancient world? Well more accurately would be medieval times and after...Also they do not have to be Generals in the 21st century because they have encountered many similar problems the Muslims face today, the fundamentals of what they did and believe are relevant today...And in fact much of what we face today see, hear, live, and experience much of it is a continuation of that (Medieval-post) history...


What you essentially reinforced is that religion is a cult. It is more concerned with the well being of its own rather than truly being compassionate towards all humans. It is no wonder that most of the world's problems have to do with religion."

"more concerned with the well being of its own rather than truly being compassionate towards all humans."

Oh really, and this is why most of the Secular countries today have the most blood on their hands, most wars, most horrific crimes, most crime, most stealing, most immorality. Their reasons and motives are always material and superficial and the heads of these nations always seek self rewards and benefits...

What you say about religion, now specifically Islam I would say is a compassionate religion and a tolerant religion. But Islam will not idly stand by as man usurps power from God for man's own self-lordship and corrupt pursuits and endeavors on Earth.


"It is no wonder that most of the world's problems have to do with religion."-SecularHumanist

This is blatantly misguided and a foolish assertion commonly popular amongst the light of thee...Most of the World's problem in fact are caused by the Secular World elite who have the financial, military, political, social, and other means to create and implement global problems.

In fact, conflict begins when man deviates from the truth which is in the depths of his own nature but under the influence of his desires he follows his own deviated and false opinion and immoral ways instead of following Allah.

When conflict between man and his own true nature begins, this conflict spreads to nations, ethnic groups, races, and cultures. And instead of God's Earthly resources being used for the benefit of mankind it is used for it's destruction.
 
No, you are misinformed! You Sikhs have deluded history! The fact is that these kings did not do as you have said, rather they were tolerant and peaceful! The Sikh kingdom however was one of the most ruthless and barbaric regime in the subcontinent! They killed too many innocent people and destroyed many mosques!

prove it Mr. Great Historian or take back your word :pop:
 
No, you are misinformed! You Sikhs have deluded history! The fact is that these kings did not do as you have said, rather they were tolerant and peaceful! The Sikh kingdom however was one of the most ruthless and barbaric regime in the subcontinent! They killed too many innocent people and destroyed many mosques!

Coolyo...you can't post things without proof and with a disregard to history and facts.
The Sikh empire under Maharaja Ranjit Singh covered as many hindu areas as the muslims ones(in modern day pakistan and afghanistan+kashmir)...his standing army and the horse-backs had MORE muslims than it had sikhs and hindus...he had many able muslim generals....his was one of the most tolerant of all regimes.
(a $hitty post to mark my 1000th post!)
 

Back
Top Bottom