------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remembering Aquino Braganca (b. 6 April 1924), who fought for freedom
of the former Portuguese colonies in Africa. An online tribute
http://aquinobraganca.wordpress.com/ (includes many historical
references, some photographs and documents)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- On Sat, 4/4/09, Roland Francis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> A question not worthy of a man of letters. This is only the
> latest in a long line of utterly clueless comments you have been
> making on this subject.
>
I guess a person who does not buy a particular jaundiced view about India
cannot be expected to voice his opinions here without being subjected to
innuendo and insults. As you can see below even that person's profession is
dragged in as a prop for ridicule.
As for the comical defense below of the mythical protection of other religions
and justice in theocratic states of the Persian Gulf, here is a link to what
Human Rights Watch says about the situation in Saudi Arabia regarding "Freedom
of Religion and Religious Discrimination", "Freedom of Expression", "Women's
Rights", "Migrant Worker Rights" and "Arbitrary Detention and Unfair Trials":
http://www.hrw.org/en/node/79258
Contrast this to what it says about India at the link below with regard to
"secessionist conflicts", "Protests in Jammu and Kashmir", "Violence in Manipur
and Other Northeastern States", "Naxalite Conflict", "Impunity", "Protection of
Vulnerable Communities" and "Human Rights Defenders":
http://www.hrw.org/en/node/79327
Cheers,
Santosh
--- On Sat, 4/4/09, Roland Francis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> To answer your question:
> India is supposed to be avowed secular. Therefore what is
> happening in
> India is not to be expected.
>
> Most of the Persian Gulf countries are avowedly Islamic.
> They make no
> bones about it. You go there knowing what the situation is.
> That is
> not your country. You are a guest-worker there. Yet, having
> said that,
> they make sensible concessions to people of other faiths.
> They
> suppress fundamentalists who are against such concessions.
> They will
> enforce law and order and punish any zealots of their faith
> who will
> attack those of other religions. Not that such enforcement
> has been
> necessary. The mere knowledge of the consequences prevent
> such
> anti-religion attacks.
>
> With your knowledge of scientific facts, how to gather them
> and arrive
> at scientific conclusions, I am disappointed you don't make
> use of
> such processes when asking such questions in matters of
> non-science.
>
> Roland.
>
