Rahul,
Sounds like you desperately want equality which preserves all cultures: Hindu, Muslim, Christian, etc. Nonetheless, your interpretation of facts and past events are the misinterpretations that Hindutva uses to justify present day violence against Muslims. The police were very quick to conceal reports about the train burning that instigated riots, because according to Human Rights Watch, the report indicated that the train set on fire from an internal combustion, not an external mob. In any case, the response to this burning was disproportionate and did nothing to bring justice to those who died, or those accussed of burning the the train. Instead, thousands of Indian civilians who had nothing to do with the train, were killed by violent Hindutva mobs, while the police instead of offering protection, aided mobs by supplying lists of Muslim houses and businesses. In addition to this killing, Hindutva kar saveks raped several Muslim women and underage girls. Justifying these types of actions, as an appropriate response to the alleged criminal acts of a few individuals (those who allegedly burned the train), makes no sense to me, except of course, if your goal is to find an excuse to kill Muslims. Also keep in mind that the train killed approximately fifty civilians, possibly including Muslim passengers. Since the police refused to release the report, we really don't know. Moreover, the precipitating event of these riots was not the train incident itself, but rather the destruction of the Babri Masjid, a 16th century historical site, during a Hindutva rally. The train regularly carried Hindutva kar savek's to and from the site of the Masjid. This has been hypothesized as a motivation for those who allegedly burned the train. Nonetheless, if individuals burned a train, they committed a crime, and the criminal justice system should prosecute them. These acts should not be used to justify mob killing and targeting religious minorities.
On the issue of Pakistan, the Muslim League, led by Jinnah, wanted desperately to be a part of India, upon the country's independence in 1947. The Congress Party however, did not want a large Muslim minority in India, and hence advocated forming a separate state for Muslims. The Congress Party, the controlling party in Indian politics, left the Muslim League with no option but to form a separate Muslim state, resulting in Pakistan's creation. Contrary to your notion that Pakistan was created by Muslims who thought they were Bashas, rather Pakistan was created by the Congress Party who did not want a large non-Hindu minority in their country. In this sense, Pakistan was created out of a sense of racism, though not in the sense that you assert.
Lastly, Hindutva as a movement is founded on principles that merge the concept of religion and land. That is, one land, deserves one religion. Hindutva ideology is based on the works of Golwalker who borrowed heavily from Nazi concepts of racial purity and National identity. Hindutva has very little to do with Hinduism, and the two should not be confused. Hindutva is a movement that manipulates peoples' fear of minorities, and hence justifying violence against minorities. If we believe in true equality, we can advocate for any intolerent philosophy, whether it is Hindutva's philosophy or the Taliban's. I hope this helps in sorting out these sordid politics.
Best wishes,
Riaz
>From: "Rahul Sandeshyani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Lessons from History:
>Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:04:49 -0600
>
>
>
>Nilofer,
>
>Why the adverse reaction to an _expression_ of how Muslims feel more
>than equal to anyone else in India.
>
>Does that explain why they began the Godhra carnage by setting afire
>train coaches full of women and children ?
>
>I am for communal harmony and Progressive thinking, but "Your-- and
>Sapna's-- threat yesterday of rethinking on the policy of this list
>is akin to the Patriot Act or the Policy of John Ashcroft."
>
>You don't want an open discussion. I will reiterate again, from my
>experience, that Muslim Aristocracy and clergy in India want each
>and every privilege of Royalty.
>
>Why do they need subsidy for Haj when no othet country gives it(I
>don't know of any) ?
>
>Why do they need minority institutions that mint money when they can
>be a part of mainstream institutions ?
>
>If Sangh Parivar were extremists like the Kashmiri militants, I am
>sure Mulayam Singh Yadav(He again became Chief Minister recently)
>wouldn't be walking alive for orchestrating the killing of thousands
>of Ram Sevaks near Ayodhya!
>
>Somehow you sound cynical about my posting that particular Question
>and Answer from Arif Mohammed khan, who happens to be a dear friend
>of mine. I chose to point to that particular reply of his as he
>summed up the utter chaos that Journalists create, that it doesn't
>help create harmony but brews confusion and hatred.
>
>You may like to "imagine lines" inbetween and read what you would
>have liked Arif say.
>
>Are you living in Denial ?
>
>Denial that Hindus wanting preservation of national heritage and
>removing historical distortion and resurrection of Temples of
>importance is "Affirmative Action" in the light of several painful
>invasion and destruction.
>
>Denial that preventing that would cause another war between
>communities, as was seen in Gujarat.
>
>Now, Why can't the Indian Muslim stand side by side his Hindu
>brethern and
>
>I wrote this: It would be GREAT if Indian Muslims stopped behaving
>like Nawabs, Badshahs,
>etc., and lived "shoulder to shoulder" with Hindus and others.
>
>What do you find as name calling or mean spirit in the above, unless
>SAPAC has it's own defintion where Hindu = Hatred and Muslims are
>the holy beings that need to be lauded and applauded ?
>
>
>
>Who burnt the train coaches that started Godhra and Gujarat riots ?
>
>Then why do so called progressive thinkers make it look like Hindu
>violence on Mulsims ?
>
>Why did the muslim majority chose to create an Islamic nation of
>Pakistan, if not to live in Muslim Aristocracy as Nawabs and
>Sahabzadas ?
>
>What this list promotes is subtle hatred for Hindu culture, history
>and heritage. It's hightime we talk about intolerance of Indian
>Muslims and their fantasy with Pakistan.
>
>If SAPAC is really for Progressive minds, it should work more on
>reforming the plight and suppression of poor muslims in Pakistan and
>Banladesh, and women in all communities.
>
>Hindutva wouldn't have existed if Indian Muslims stood shoulder to
>shoulder with their Hindu brethern.
>
>Supremacism has two faces, and the Head of Hindu supremacism in
>modern times is the Sangh Parivar, while the tail was Gandhi.
>
>Gandhi imposed a feeling of supremacy of hinduism by projecting
>convoluted tolerance and resolve to please the enemy inspite of open
>hatred. Which is what the Hindu society is yet suffering from, and
>which is why we are so taken for granted.
>
>Arif Mohammed Khan has challenged, in his own way, the sangh parivar
>to make good on seeing all Indians in uniformity. He seemed to have
>got assurances. We can only hope
>
>BTW, I dated a few Muslim girls and I have no Prejudice but great
>respect for the way these girls were brought up. What I like about
>them is they don't see their hawkers as "Islamva"(Islam Vadi), yet
>projecting Hindutva as the embodiment of all ILL.
>
>Need I then explain what I think of Hindutva bashing Hindu girls on
>this list ?
>
>Honestly, Hats off to you Nilofer!
>
>Rahul
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Dream of owning a home? Find out how in the First-time Home Buying
>Guide. http://special.msn.com/home/firsthome.armx
>
>------------------------------------------------
>visit http://www.geocities.com/sapacchicago
>email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
>"unsubscribe sapac" in msg body to unsubscribe
>
------------------------------------------------
visit http://www.geocities.com/sapacchicago
email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe sapac" in msg body to unsubscribe
