India's strange preoccupation

In 2003, on a flight to Hong Kong, I had a Frenchman and an Indian sitting behind me. Both must have been in their 30s, as was I. Their conversation throughout the flight was quite audible, especially when the Frenchman begun to groan about the time that he had spent in Mumbai (in the early 1990s).

He was telling the Indian how he (and his wife) got caught up in a riot that had erupted after mobs of Hindu extremists attacked and destroyed an old mosque in the Indian city of Ayoudhia in 1992.

"It was horrific," he told the Indian. "The rioters were attacking people with sticks and I even saw some of them trying to set a Muslim man on fire."

"The rioters were Hindu?" the Indian asked.

"Well, they were attacking Muslims, so they must have been," the Frenchman replied. "My wife refuses to go back to India now," he added, laughingly.

I concentrated a bit more on the conversation because I was now eagerly waiting for the Indian's response.

And voila: "Usually such riots are funded and instigated by the Pakistanis," came the explanation.

One of my eyebrows went north and I hoped the Frenchman would ask exactly how Pakistan could be involved in starting riots in India.

He didn't. He just went on about his ordeal, and how his wife had made them take the very next flight back to Paris.

"It's worse in Pakistan!" the Indian shot back. "It (Pakistan) is destabilizing the whole region."

"Maybe, but we were in India," the Frenchman reminded him.

I couldn't help but turn around and intervene in the conversation: "Can I just pop in, and speak to my South Asian brother here?" I asked the Frenchman. He just smiled and shrugged his shoulders.

Addressing the Indian in Urdu (which is quite similar to Hindi), I said: "Bhai (brother), have you ever been to Pakistan?"

He replied in English: "No, but my father went back in the 1970s. Are you Pakistani?"

"Yes," I replied, "and I am flying to Hong Kong to whip up a riot among the Indian community there."

The Frenchman snickered and so did the Indian. I raised my small green can of Carlsberg, and added: "Here's to the usual mutual accusations and counter-accusations between India and Pakistan. And to the freedom of Kashmir and Khalistan!"

This time the Indian did not snicker, but the Frenchman did, knowing well that I was being entirely sarcastic. The Indian raised his paper cup full of white wine and spouted out his own toast: "And here's to Pakistan stopping being such a nuisance and becoming a part of India again."

I smiled: "Well, it all depends on how the Indian community in Hong Kong treats our French friend here after I incite them to burn a mosque in downtown Hong Kong."

The Frenchman laughed out loud: "So, it's true. This is exactly how we (in France) perceive the way Pakistanis and Indians engage with one another."

I agreed: "Absolutely!"

The Indian didn't: "Well, not the Indians ..."

"But you were just blaming Pakistan for the 1992 riots!" I shot back, albeit smilingly.

"Just like you guys blame India for everything that goes wrong in Pakistan," he replied.

I raised my can again and repeated: "Yup. So here's to the usual mutual accusations and counter-accusations between India and Pakistan."

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:That was in 1992 and 2003.

The same Frenchman would now understand what the Indian meant. By now, he would have become an "islamic" expert - thank to the Arab ghettos all over France.

The hindu should have asked the Frenchman about his views on the Algerian and North African muslim refugees in France.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:That was in 1992 and 2003.

The same Frenchman would now understand what the Indian meant. By now, he would have become an "islamic" expert - thank to the Arab ghettos all over France.

The hindu should have asked the Frenchman about his views on the Algerian and North African muslim refugees in France.

ashdoc wrote:pakistan is such a hellhole that however much nadeem paricha hopes india will come down to pakistan's level ( and tries to create an impression that india is going down pakistan's path ) , it will find it difficult to reach that depth .

for example , ever since the afghan jehad in the 80s kalashnikov automatic rifles ( AK 47 AK 56 etc ) are found everywhere in pakistan . that is why such violence is endemic to pakistan . india does not have that kind of proliferation of automatic rifles nor will it ever will .

swapna wrote:

ashdoc wrote:pakistan is such a hellhole that however much nadeem paricha hopes india will come down to pakistan's level ( and tries to create an impression that india is going down pakistan's path ) , it will find it difficult to reach that depth .

for example , ever since the afghan jehad in the 80s kalashnikov automatic rifles ( AK 47 AK 56 etc ) are found everywhere in pakistan . that is why such violence is endemic to pakistan . india does not have that kind of proliferation of automatic rifles nor will it ever will .

who needs kalashnikovs? we have trishuls, don't we?

swapna wrote:

ashdoc wrote:pakistan is such a hellhole that however much nadeem paricha hopes india will come down to pakistan's level ( and tries to create an impression that india is going down pakistan's path ) , it will find it difficult to reach that depth .

for example , ever since the afghan jehad in the 80s kalashnikov automatic rifles ( AK 47 AK 56 etc ) are found everywhere in pakistan . that is why such violence is endemic to pakistan . india does not have that kind of proliferation of automatic rifles nor will it ever will .

who needs kalashnikovs? we have trishuls, don't we?

Hellsangel wrote:On the other hand, Amit Shah wants to prove the author right.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:On the other hand, Amit Shah wants to prove the author right.

Actually what Amit ji was saying is "Muslims will fire crackers if BJP lost. It will be regarded as a defeat of the hindus" He caanot openly use "mislims" per electoral laws and hence, using the WELL-Known perception that Indian Muslims are as much Pakistanis.

Smart move,

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:On the other hand, Amit Shah wants to prove the author right.

Actually what Amit ji was saying is "Muslims will fire crackers if BJP lost. It will be regarded as a defeat of the hindus" He caanot openly use "mislims" per electoral laws and hence, using the WELL-Known perception that Indian Muslims are as much Pakistanis.

Smart move,