20 years after---do you remember your reaction at babri demolition ?

by ashdoc Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:52 pm

Frankly , mine was that of disbelief---how could the cowardly vegetarian hindus have the guts to tear down the mosque ??

If you were old enough to understand the magnitude of what was going on , please tell your reaction......

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:04 pm

ashdoc wrote:Frankly , mine was that of disbelief---how could the cowardly vegetarian hindus have the guts to tear down the mosque ??

If you were old enough to understand the magnitude of what was going on , please tell your reaction......

Exactly my thoughts. I even suspected that Muslims must have broken the dome bcz there were hindu idols inside...

I had a heated argument with some RSS guy who said it was wrong to tear it down, and I told him to go repent at some mosque.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:13 pm

I was sixteen when the mosque was brought down. I was shocked and deeply disappointed at India's failure to uphold the law of the land. India's institutions had completely failed that day. I was disgusted at the glee and gloating I saw among the Hindus around me, who thought the demolition was a good thing. For the first time in my life -- but not the last -- I was worried about the long-term outlook for the Indian republic. Over the next few days, I was relieved by the quiet manner in which Hyderabad reacted to the demolition, while much of northern India burned in the wake of the demolition.

Looking back, I am impressed at the ability of India's institutions to weather that storm. Back in late 1992 and early 1993, it looked almost inevitable that the Indian state would move ever closer to religious extremism. There have been times since then that parts of India have lived those fears -- like Gujarat ten years later -- but on the whole, India successfully stepped back from that madness.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:14 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:I even suspected that Muslims must have broken the dome bcz there were hindu idols inside...

Classic Uppili... thinking the Muslims must be behind anything big that happens.

by nevada Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:18 pm

Disbelief and sadness about the communal riots that would follow.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:39 pm

Yes i remember.

I was 19.

Our driver's daughter was born the same day. Her nick became Babri. ('waha ek babri giri, yaha doosri aa gayi'). Still is. I don't remember her real name, if she had one.

My classmate who is Muslim lived in a Hindu dominated colony of a Muslim dominated city. Their house was burned down. The family then moved to safer area and forever lived in fear of Hindus. Since we were still in first year, and he was a hostler, he would be picked extra for ragging and made to rub his nose on the wall. Life is funny. He fell in love with a full chaddi girl. Both got threats from each other's religiois groups, if not from direct family. I adviced them to move out of that hell, and come to the us. So they did. And got married here. Soon enough, 911 happened. Poor guy. His mom took 10 years to finally accept her.

My first year first sem exams were going on, and on 7th was our last theory, physics. I wasn't prepared at all. Through the night wasn't sure if the exam will happen or not. The riots happened as expected and the college was shut down. For a month. Phew. I took the exam then and was STILL unprepared. Passed with 42/100. That too cos I cracked small numericals @ 35/35. I scored 7 out of the rest of 65. Pityfull.

I also used the time by chilling with my then bf. First one. He was happy that finally I was getting 'bold'. But that fizzled out 5 months later. That whole phase was depressing. First half of 93. Bombay blast. Riots. Sanjay dutt. Divya Bharti. And lots of personal losses too. Somehow I club them all together in my memory.

Oh. And my ex fil was there with his best bud. Not by chance. They went there for this purpose. Mostly to see the tamasha. He was half expecting to happen. But when it did, his wife at home went into major panic. But he managed to be safe. Craycray family I tell you.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:41 pm

Disbelief and amazement at how gutsy hindus had become and worry abt the communal riots that could follow.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:54 pm

LOL, nats. Most of us answered in one or two sentences. Look at yours!
To a simple question, 'do you remember your reaction to babri demolition', we get to hear half your life story, other ppl's stories, many characters including your classmates, ex bf, ex fil, bollywood personalities, etc. Nats IS drama! Enjoyed reading it though Smile

.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:02 pm

my surprise and amazement came much later -- close relatives who had felt personal shame at having to face muslim colleagues at work in the ensuing days after the destruction of the mosque, hardening their positions and attitudes towards muslims in the decades that followed. people i thought i knew very well whose positions have moved closer and closer to right wing hindu groups over the years. that has surprised and saddened me.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:07 pm

what does "ex fil" mean?

-- former father-in-law?
-- father of a person you thought at the time you were going to marry but did not?

if the latter, is this a peculiarity of indian english, or is it a peculiarity of romanova?

by Jeremiah Mburuburu Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:13 pm

ashdoc wrote:Frankly , mine was that of disbelief---how could the cowardly vegetarian hindus have the guts to tear down the mosque ??

If you were old enough to understand the magnitude of what was going on , please tell your reaction......

shock and deep disappointment that, after 45 years of independence, the people of india, especially the hindus, had not grasped the fundamental concepts - democracy, equality, secularism, and freedom of thought - on which our republic was founded. persistent skepticism, maybe a distrust of hindus, aggravated by the routine, unprovoked expressions, by educated hindus, of hostility towards muslims and other non-hindus, exemplified here by gyanputra, uppili, and ashdoc. growing admiration for the muslims of india. a greater determination to not give up on india and our ideals. optimism that free markets, capitalism, and economic development will set most things right.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:24 pm

The muslims did get enough of revenge for the babri demolition though.

the terrorist attacks related to babri demolition:
The bombay serial blasts orchestrated by dawood ibrahim happened.
Then comes the hijacking of the IA plane. India was humiliated enough. Its home minister Advani (serves him good) himself had to accompany the terrorists to afghanishtan and hand them over safely. One of the terrorists was Maulana masood azhar. Big mistake! That guy was again instrumental in the parliament attacks and then again the 26/11 bombay attacks. hundreds of ppl died in all these terrorist attacks.

one mob act by hindus=several terrorist attacks by muslims.
one old, abandoned mosque=lives of several hundred (or thousand?) human lives.

why? what does india need to learn?

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:24 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:what does "ex fil" mean?

-- former father-in-law?
-- father of a person you thought at the time you were going to marry but did not?

if the latter, is this a peculiarity of indian english, or is it a peculiarity of romanova?

The former.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:28 pm

former as in you've been married before, or that it's a peculiarity of indian english? i can't believe it's a peculiarity of indian english. i know indians have really weird english usages, but i've never come across this one.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:41 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:former as in you've been married before, or that it's a peculiarity of indian english? i can't believe it's a peculiarity of indian english. i know indians have really weird english usages, but i've never come across this one.

Lol. Rc issues today? U gave me two options. I picked one.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:35 pm

kinnera wrote:The muslims did get enough of revenge for the babri demolition though.

the terrorist attacks related to babri demolition:
The bombay serial blasts orchestrated by dawood ibrahim happened.
Then comes the hijacking of the IA plane. India was humiliated enough. Its home minister Advani (serves him good) himself had to accompany the terrorists to afghanishtan and hand them over safely. One of the terrorists was Maulana masood azhar. Big mistake! That guy was again instrumental in the parliament attacks and then again the 26/11 bombay attacks. hundreds of ppl died in all these terrorist attacks.

one mob act by hindus=several terrorist attacks by muslims.
one old, abandoned mosque=lives of several hundred (or thousand?) human lives.

why? what does india need to learn?

In "communal riots" since independence, many more Muslims died than Hindus. This holds true for the post-Babri Masjid riots in Bombay and other parts of India. The post-Babri rioting in Bombay in particular was the handiwork of the Shiv Sena which targeted Muslims.

by Nila Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:02 pm

Grew up in a town where every year on Ganesh Chaturthi the idols of Ganesh shouldn't go thru the mosque street - peculiar it was on MG Road. Every other year there used to be riots and someone getting killed. Even today none would dare to walk thru those certain streets after 9:00 PM. So...babri blash wasn't really surprising.

Schools closed, my elder sister got engaged on the same day...so BIL had to stay in our house. They really enjoyed, I think and BIL wasn't happy it became normal so soon.

Geez...time flies and except for the age nothing much changed. People are same, religion still exists and people kill each other and bomb each other and the world is not a safter place to live, yet do we have a choice?

Well,

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:37 pm

panini press wrote:In "communal riots" since independence, many more Muslims died than Hindus.

what's the basis for this statement?

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:00 pm

Natalia Romanova wrote:
panini press wrote:In "communal riots" since independence, many more Muslims died than Hindus.

what's the basis for this statement?

Reports of investigations and various commissions appointed to look into these things. Here are some examples:

Bombay riots, 1992-'93: 575 Muslims, 275 Hindus, 45 unknown and 5 others. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_Riots

Gujarat riots, 2002: 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gujarat_riots

Ahmedabad riots, 1969: 660 (Muslims: 430; Hindus: 24) http://www.indianmuslims.info/reports_about_indian_muslims/ahmedabad_riots_1969_judicial_findings_about_rss_participation.html

The major exceptions to this are: the Delhi riots of 1984 (mostly Hindu perpetrators, mostly Sikh victims) and the ethnic cleansing of Hindus from the Kashmir Valley.

It is easy to understand why this is the case. When two communities fight, one outnumbers the other, neither has superior arms, one is over-represented in the police compared to the other, then the larger community usually tends to kill more of the other community. This should not be a surprise.

PS: I remember arriving in Kanpur on the evening of Dec 5 on the fifth anniversary of the demolition. Mr. Tripathy who picked me up at the station was a local. I asked him if he was concerned about security. His response shocked me: nothing to worry about; "we" have deployed the PAC, and they will make sure the Muslims don't make trouble tomorrow. He said the PAC has made sure the Muslims don't dare come out to protest. PAC is the UP Provincial Armed Constabulary, a part of the state police.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:10 pm

You are talking about probably BIG riots. In cities where riots have happened with the frequency of 1-2 every other years, figures maybe different. The kind Sasthi described, e.g. some hindu julus during moharram. I don't know the facts, but I won't be surprised if the #s are equal or reversed. i have known people who are on emergency calls in such situations and the ratios were bad, from their account. They would say 3-4H for each M.

Regarding 1984 riots too, Hindu casualties were quite high. How? Coz most surds kept guns. By the time people broke in and went to loot/kill that one surd, he would have shot 10 from his balcony.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:14 pm

Also, that PAC you mentioned, they have to live with their reality. They would not be talking like that if that was not an issue. They have to keep LnO in their place, and if they need to go to one extreme, then be it.

you go to any big city here, and law enforcement people have specific guidelines how to deal with black gangs/nuisance.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:40 pm

Natalia Romanova wrote:You are talking about probably BIG riots. In cities where riots have happened with the frequency of 1-2 every other years, figures maybe different. The kind Sasthi described, e.g. some hindu julus during moharram. I don't know the facts, but I won't be surprised if the #s are equal or reversed. i have known people who are on emergency calls in such situations and the ratios were bad, from their account. They would say 3-4H for each M.

I grew up in a city where riots used to be frequent. (They have thankfully become a lot less frequent in recent decades.) I know that both sides claim that their side lost more people in each riot, because that is how you raise anger levels and keep the hatred alive. But given the fact that Hindus outnumber Muslims and the police is overwhelmingly Hindu, the casualties are disproportionately Muslim.

Natalia Romanova wrote:Regarding 1984 riots too, Hindu casualties were quite high. How? Coz most surds kept guns. By the time people broke in and went to loot/kill that one surd, he would have shot 10 from his balcony.

I don't know that situation as well as I do Hindu-Muslim rioting. But I find that hard to believe from the accounts I have read of those riots and the death toll. If the death toll really was one Hindu for every Sikh killed, half of Delhi Congress would have been wiped out.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:49 pm

I am talking about medical folks who worked on emergencies. They don't have a side usually. It's not just about who outnumbers who, which factors in for sure in bigger scale events, but in many cases it also depends on who is better prepared and can be more lethal.

Delhi was not the only city where 1984 riots happened.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:58 pm

panini press wrote:I grew up in a city where riots used to be frequent. (They have
thankfully become a lot less frequent in recent decades.) I know that
both sides claim that their side lost more people in each riot, because
that is how you raise anger levels and keep the hatred alive. But given
the fact that Hindus outnumber Muslims and the police is overwhelmingly
Hindu, the casualties are disproportionately Muslim.

If you are talking about hyderabad, you are either totally ignorant of the facts, or trying to make an effort to be an apologist for muslims.You are not doing any good by skewing the facts and spreading misinformation. Hypocritical apologists are the ones who drive the moderate hindus toward the right in disgust.
Communal riots in Hyd happen mostly in the muslim dominated areas, the standard areas like Old City, Charminar, Golkonda, Caravan, Asif nagar, Darga, Tappa Chaburtra, Shali banda, Mehdipatnam etc. Muslims outnumber hindus by a large number in these areas. You don't find any communal riots in the hindu dominated areas.
Even among Hindus, Brahmins, Reddys, Kammas, Vaisyas, Naidus, etc are never involved in clashes with the muslims. It's mostly Gouds and Yadavs who are. And MIM (Majlis Ittehadul Muslameen) is way more communal than BJP. They whip up the communal passions among lower middle class and uneducated low class muslims. Hydi muslims are way more aggressive than hindus.
BJP doesn't have that much of an influence on hindus. Hindu support is anyway divided among bjp, congress and tdp.
Coming to the police force, there are a lot of muslim constables and subinspectors. The higher ups may be hindu, but the lower rungs are mostly muslim.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:24 pm

Natalia Romanova wrote:Also, that PAC you mentioned, they have to live with their reality. They would not be talking like that if that was not an issue. They have to keep LnO in their place, and if they need to go to one extreme, then be it.

The issue is not maintaining law and order. Mr. Tripathy was not a police employee. But he saw the PAC as "one of us" to be used against "them." The perception arises from the PAC's standing by as the demolition happened, and their aggressive targeting of Muslims.

Natalia Romanova wrote:you go to any big city here, and law enforcement people have specific guidelines how to deal with black gangs/nuisance.

I don't approve of racial profiling any more than I approve of Indian police targeting Muslims for being Muslims.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:27 pm

kinnera wrote:The muslims did get enough of revenge for the babri demolition though.

the terrorist attacks related to babri demolition:
The bombay serial blasts orchestrated by dawood ibrahim happened.
Then comes the hijacking of the IA plane. India was humiliated enough. Its home minister Advani (serves him good) himself had to accompany the terrorists to afghanishtan and hand them over safely. One of the terrorists was Maulana masood azhar. Big mistake! That guy was again instrumental in the parliament attacks and then again the 26/11 bombay attacks. hundreds of ppl died in all these terrorist attacks.

one mob act by hindus=several terrorist attacks by muslims.
one old, abandoned mosque=lives of several hundred (or thousand?) human lives.

why? what does india need to learn?

the perpetrators of terrorism are not indian citizens. the people who often pay with their lives at the hands of indian hindus in retaliation for the actions of terrorists are indian citizens.
masood azhar - pakistani, hijackers of ia plane - the taliban/harkat ul mujahideen a pakistani terror group, dawood ibrahim - a lapsed indian citizen who knows he cannot live amongst indian muslims and continue his way of lie and hence has become for all intents and purposes a pakistani citizen.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:36 pm

kinnera wrote:If you are talking about hyderabad, you are either totally ignorant of the facts, or trying to make an effort to be an apologist for muslims.You are not doing any good by skewing the facts and spreading misinformation. Hypocritical apologists are the ones who drive the moderate hindus toward the right in disgust.
Communal riots in Hyd happen mostly in the muslim dominated areas, the standard areas like Old City, Charminar, Golkonda, Caravan, Asif nagar, Darga, Tappa Chaburtra, Shali banda, Mehdipatnam etc. Muslims outnumber hindus by a large number in these areas. You don't find any communal riots in the hindu dominated areas.
Even among Hindus, Brahmins, Reddys, Kammas, Vaisyas, Naidus, etc are never involved in clashes with the muslims. It's mostly Gouds and Yadavs who are. And MIM (Majlis Ittehadul Muslameen) is way more communal than BJP. They whip up the communal passions among lower middle class and uneducated low class muslims. Hydi muslims are way more aggressive than hindus.
BJP doesn't have that much of an influence on hindus. Hindu support is anyway divided among bjp, congress and tdp.
Coming to the police force, there are a lot of muslim constables and subinspectors. The higher ups may be hindu, but the lower rungs are mostly muslim.

I am talking about Hyderabad, and I am speaking from first-hand knowledge. I know of both Hindu and Muslim victims of riots. Hyderabad is a large city, and rioting in the old city does bring in Hindus from other parts of the city to the Muslim dominated areas, just like it happens in other cities. The BJP enjoys more support in Hyderabad than anywhere else in AP. Most of its members and supporters are young Hindu men, and I know people from several castes who are members.

The MIM is a huge problem in Hyderabad, and I am not denying that. All said, the MIM is a much more regressive and dangerous force than the BJP in the city. And Congress factions are to blame for instigating many of the rounds of rioting I am familiar with. But the narrative that Hindus are disproportionately represented among the victims of riots in Hyderabad is just plain wrong. Also, your claim that lower rungs of police are "mostly Muslim" is completely false. In the riots that I am familiar with, the police was prone to fire and lathi-charge Muslim mobs, but go easy on Hindu ones.

I am not making apologies for anybody here. I am stating the awful truth as it is.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:38 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
kinnera wrote:The muslims did get enough of revenge for the babri demolition though.

the terrorist attacks related to babri demolition:
The bombay serial blasts orchestrated by dawood ibrahim happened.
Then comes the hijacking of the IA plane. India was humiliated enough. Its home minister Advani (serves him good) himself had to accompany the terrorists to afghanishtan and hand them over safely. One of the terrorists was Maulana masood azhar. Big mistake! That guy was again instrumental in the parliament attacks and then again the 26/11 bombay attacks. hundreds of ppl died in all these terrorist attacks.

one mob act by hindus=several terrorist attacks by muslims.
one old, abandoned mosque=lives of several hundred (or thousand?) human lives.

why? what does india need to learn?

the perpetrators of terrorism are not indian citizens. the people who often pay with their lives at the hands of indian hindus in retaliation for the actions of terrorists are indian citizens.
masood azhar - pakistani, hijackers of ia plane - the taliban/harkat ul mujahideen a pakistani terror group, dawood ibrahim - a lapsed indian citizen who knows he cannot live amongst indian muslims and continue his way of lie and hence has become for all intents and purposes a pakistani citizen.

tiger mamon was. afzal guru was. there are many sleeper cells in india. without their help, nothing could've been done by the overseas ones. can't ignore that fact. Face the facts. it seems morally high/breadminded, etc to seem like an apologist, but it is not.

by ashdoc Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:39 pm

Natalia Romanova wrote:Yes i remember.

I was 19.

Our driver's daughter was born the same day. Her nick became Babri. ('waha ek babri giri, yaha doosri aa gayi'). Still is. I don't remember her real name, if she had one.

My classmate who is Muslim lived in a Hindu dominated colony of a Muslim dominated city. Their house was burned down. The family then moved to safer area and forever lived in fear of Hindus. Since we were still in first year, and he was a hostler, he would be picked extra for ragging and made to rub his nose on the wall. Life is funny. He fell in love with a full chaddi girl. Both got threats from each other's religiois groups, if not from direct family. I adviced them to move out of that hell, and come to the us. So they did. And got married here. Soon enough, 911 happened. Poor guy. His mom took 10 years to finally accept her.

My first year first sem exams were going on, and on 7th was our last theory, physics. I wasn't prepared at all. Through the night wasn't sure if the exam will happen or not. The riots happened as expected and the college was shut down. For a month. Phew. I took the exam then and was STILL unprepared. Passed with 42/100. That too cos I cracked small numericals @ 35/35. I scored 7 out of the rest of 65. Pityfull.

I also used the time by chilling with my then bf. First one. He was happy that finally I was getting 'bold'. But that fizzled out 5 months later. That whole phase was depressing. First half of 93. Bombay blast. Riots. Sanjay dutt. Divya Bharti. And lots of personal losses too. Somehow I club them all together in my memory.

Oh. And my ex fil was there with his best bud. Not by chance. They went there for this purpose. Mostly to see the tamasha. He was half expecting to happen. But when it did, his wife at home went into major panic. But he managed to be safe. Craycray family I tell you.

aaahh !! nostalgia.... Cool

good to read---carry on natalia......

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:43 pm

panini press wrote:
Natalia Romanova wrote:Also, that PAC you mentioned, they have to live with their reality. They would not be talking like that if that was not an issue. They have to keep LnO in their place, and if they need to go to one extreme, then be it.
The issue is not maintaining law and order. Mr. Tripathy was not a police employee. But he saw the PAC as "one of us" to be used against "them." The perception arises from the PAC's standing by as the demolition happened, and their aggressive targeting of Muslims.

Natalia Romanova wrote:you go to any big city here, and law enforcement people have specific guidelines how to deal with black gangs/nuisance.
I don't approve of racial profiling any more than I approve of Indian police targeting Muslims for being Muslims.

I am not sure what is the specifics, and usually I don't follow all these threads. I have no point to prove or disprove.

As a final, just want to know what you think.... do you think muslims create (have created) problems in India or not? Do you think they have created problems in many countries or not. Not just now, but in last 500 years. Then will worry about whether they are being unfairly profiled or not. Or whether they are justified or not.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:46 pm

Natalia Romanova wrote:

As a final, just want to know what you think.... do you think muslims create (have created) problems in India or not? Do you think they have created problems in many countries or not. Not just now, but in last 500 years. Then will worry about whether they are being unfairly profiled or not. Or whether they are justified or not.

this thread is about muslims in india. muslims in india have been no nastier to the hindus than the hindus have been to them. there is no documented instance of muslims destroying wholesale a hindu place of worship in democratic india, whereas the babri masjid destruction stands forever as an ugly scar on indian democracy thanks to right wing hindus.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:51 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Natalia Romanova wrote:

As a final, just want to know what you think.... do you think muslims create (have created) problems in India or not? Do you think they have created problems in many countries or not. Not just now, but in last 500 years. Then will worry about whether they are being unfairly profiled or not. Or whether they are justified or not.

this thread is about muslims in india. muslims in india have been no nastier to the hindus than the hindus have been to them. there is no documented instance of muslims destroying wholesale a hindu place of worship in democratic india, whereas the babri masjid destruction stands forever as an ugly scar on indian democracy thanks to right wing hindus.

I have a diff opinion. maybe it's a regional opinion diff. I do agree about babri masjid. was not needed.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:54 pm

panini press wrote:
kinnera wrote:If you are talking about hyderabad, you are either totally ignorant of the facts, or trying to make an effort to be an apologist for muslims.You are not doing any good by skewing the facts and spreading misinformation. Hypocritical apologists are the ones who drive the moderate hindus toward the right in disgust.
Communal riots in Hyd happen mostly in the muslim dominated areas, the standard areas like Old City, Charminar, Golkonda, Caravan, Asif nagar, Darga, Tappa Chaburtra, Shali banda, Mehdipatnam etc. Muslims outnumber hindus by a large number in these areas. You don't find any communal riots in the hindu dominated areas.
Even among Hindus, Brahmins, Reddys, Kammas, Vaisyas, Naidus, etc are never involved in clashes with the muslims. It's mostly Gouds and Yadavs who are. And MIM (Majlis Ittehadul Muslameen) is way more communal than BJP. They whip up the communal passions among lower middle class and uneducated low class muslims. Hydi muslims are way more aggressive than hindus.
BJP doesn't have that much of an influence on hindus. Hindu support is anyway divided among bjp, congress and tdp.
Coming to the police force, there are a lot of muslim constables and subinspectors. The higher ups may be hindu, but the lower rungs are mostly muslim.
I am talking about Hyderabad, and I am speaking from first-hand knowledge. I know of both Hindu and Muslim victims of riots. Hyderabad is a large city, and rioting in the old city does bring in Hindus from other parts of the city to the Muslim dominated areas, just like it happens in other cities. The BJP enjoys more support in Hyderabad than anywhere else in AP. Most of its members and supporters are young Hindu men, and I know people from several castes who are members.

The MIM is a huge problem in Hyderabad, and I am not denying that. All said, the MIM is a much more regressive and dangerous force than the BJP in the city. And Congress factions are to blame for instigating many of the rounds of rioting I am familiar with. But the narrative that Hindus are disproportionately represented among the victims of riots in Hyderabad is just plain wrong. Also, your claim that lower rungs of police are "mostly Muslim" is completely false. In the riots that I am familiar with, the police was prone to fire and lathi-charge Muslim mobs, but go easy on Hindu ones.

I am not making apologies for anybody here. I am stating the aweful truth as it is.

The recent/current police commissioner of hyd is a muslim, btw. You think he went easy on hindus and had the muslims killed? As far as i know, he is liked by both hindus and muslims. Dunno what facts you know. i was born and brought up in hyd and lived in the era of high communal tensions. I was there. i know the ground realities. Anyway, it is much much better now compared to that. hardly any communal riots. so i don't know how much u know.

i end my discussion here. Just claiming that 'i know it, muslims died disproportionately to hindus' doesn't cut. In fact, stating the other way around doesn't do any good either. Too dangerous to make such statements! Even news agencies don't give the religion of the victims or the number of casualities in either communities. Pls don't make such wild and dangerous statements.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:06 pm

kinnera wrote:Just claiming that 'i know it, muslims died disproportionately to hindus' doesn't cut. In fact, stating the other way around doesn't do any good either. Too dangerous to make such statements! Even news agencies don't give the religion of the victims or the number of casualities in either communities. Pls don't make such wild and dangerous statements.

I have cited casualty reports that are available for some of the biggest sets of riots in Indian history. Those numbers do back up my claim.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:09 pm

Natalia Romanova wrote:do you think muslims create (have created) problems in India or not?

Sure, the Muslim community has created problems for India, like partition, ethnic cleansing in Kashmir, and providing recruits to Pakistani terrorists. They have not created other types of problems, like the entire Babri Masjid turmoil. (Even after the demolition of the mosque, mainstream Muslim opinion has been in favor of accepting -- and enforcing -- the rule of law with respect to that property dispute.) Just like it would be wrong for the police to target Hindus, it is wrong to target Muslims -- which the police actively does in tense situations.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:11 pm

Natalia Romanova wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Natalia Romanova wrote:

As a final, just want to know what you think.... do you think muslims create (have created) problems in India or not? Do you think they have created problems in many countries or not. Not just now, but in last 500 years. Then will worry about whether they are being unfairly profiled or not. Or whether they are justified or not.

this thread is about muslims in india. muslims in india have been no nastier to the hindus than the hindus have been to them. there is no documented instance of muslims destroying wholesale a hindu place of worship in democratic india, whereas the babri masjid destruction stands forever as an ugly scar on indian democracy thanks to right wing hindus.

I have a diff opinion. maybe it's a regional opinion diff. I do agree about babri masjid. was not needed.

you said earlier that you are not sure of the specifics. it is not healthy to form an opinion without knowing the specifics. i suggest you read up on the specifics instead of carrying around an opinion not founded in reality.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:13 pm

how is the partition a problem created by muslims? it is a problem created by the british for which hindus, muslims, and sikhs paid a heavy price through mutual carnage.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:14 pm

panini press wrote:
kinnera wrote:Just claiming that 'i know it, muslims died disproportionately to hindus' doesn't cut. In fact, stating the other way around doesn't do any good either. Too dangerous to make such statements! Even news agencies don't give the religion of the victims or the number of casualities in either communities. Pls don't make such wild and dangerous statements.
I have cited casualty reports that are available for some of the biggest sets of riots in Indian history. Those numbers do back up my claim.

those are just a few. Doens't give the info abt e'one. There were many riots in India post independence/partition. Looks like some apologist brought out the one where the numbers for muslims are higher than for hindus.

Anyway, gn

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:16 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:how is the partition a problem created by muslims? it is a problem created by the british for which hindus, muslims, and sikhs paid a heavy price through mutual carnage.

I think the partition was a problem created almost entirely by the Muslim League. Had the Muslims of various provinces not voted for the League in the 1946 elections, the British would not have had a political rationale to partition the country.

As I have said before, I am glad partition happened, and I do blame the British the most for the carnage that accompanied it. But if you want to identify the primary actor that caused Partition, it is hard to argue that the Muslim community wasn't it.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:17 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Natalia Romanova wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Natalia Romanova wrote:

As a final, just want to know what you think.... do you think muslims create (have created) problems in India or not? Do you think they have created problems in many countries or not. Not just now, but in last 500 years. Then will worry about whether they are being unfairly profiled or not. Or whether they are justified or not.

this thread is about muslims in india. muslims in india have been no nastier to the hindus than the hindus have been to them. there is no documented instance of muslims destroying wholesale a hindu place of worship in democratic india, whereas the babri masjid destruction stands forever as an ugly scar on indian democracy thanks to right wing hindus.

I have a diff opinion. maybe it's a regional opinion diff. I do agree about babri masjid. was not needed.

you said earlier that you are not sure of the specifics. it is not healthy to form an opinion without knowing the specifics. i suggest you read up on the specifics instead of carrying around an opinion not founded in reality.

specifics of the arguments presented here on diff threads by diff posters. I am not interested in politics, but i have sleep-heard and read a lot. enough to form opinions. will I drag them down on threads here? unlikely.

by Rishi Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:28 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:how is the partition a problem created by muslims? it is a problem created by the british for which hindus, muslims, and sikhs paid a heavy price through mutual carnage.

Why blame British for partition?

The earliest proponents of Pakistan was a Muslim named Choudhry Rahmat Ali. It was Jinnah another Muslim who was determined to make it a reality. And he did.

It was not the British who came up with the idea of partition to begin with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choudhry_Rahmat_Ali

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:33 pm

panini press wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:how is the partition a problem created by muslims? it is a problem created by the british for which hindus, muslims, and sikhs paid a heavy price through mutual carnage.
I think the partition was a problem created almost entirely by the Muslim League. Had the Muslims of various provinces not voted for the League in the 1946 elections, the British would not have had a political rationale to partition the country.

As I have said before, I am glad partition happened, and I do blame the British the most for the carnage that accompanied it. But if you want to identify the primary actor that caused Partition, it is hard to argue that the Muslim community wasn't it.

PP's communal side surfaces again. Even though there is sufficient evidence that hindu fundamentalists in pre-independence India were also talking of partition, PP prefers to close his eyes to them and wishes to focus only on the muslim fundamentalists.

by Idéfix Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:35 pm

Rashmun wrote:
panini press wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:how is the partition a problem created by muslims? it is a problem created by the british for which hindus, muslims, and sikhs paid a heavy price through mutual carnage.
I think the partition was a problem created almost entirely by the Muslim League. Had the Muslims of various provinces not voted for the League in the 1946 elections, the British would not have had a political rationale to partition the country.

As I have said before, I am glad partition happened, and I do blame the British the most for the carnage that accompanied it. But if you want to identify the primary actor that caused Partition, it is hard to argue that the Muslim community wasn't it.

PP's communal side surfaces again. Even though there is sufficient evidence that hindu fundamentalists in pre-independence India were also talking of partition, PP prefers to close his eyes to them and wishes to focus only on the muslim fundamentalists.

Haha, I am not talking about fundamentalists of either side. I am talking about the broad religious communities. It is a fact that the Muslim League won large majorities of the seats reserved for Muslims in the 1946 elections, running on a platform of Partition. In other words, mainstream Muslim opinion supported the League's partition agenda. Mainstream Hindu opinion, OTOH, favored the anti-Partition plank of Congress.

by Guest Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:41 pm

panini press wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
panini press wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:how is the partition a problem created by muslims? it is a problem created by the british for which hindus, muslims, and sikhs paid a heavy price through mutual carnage.
I think the partition was a problem created almost entirely by the Muslim League. Had the Muslims of various provinces not voted for the League in the 1946 elections, the British would not have had a political rationale to partition the country.

As I have said before, I am glad partition happened, and I do blame the British the most for the carnage that accompanied it. But if you want to identify the primary actor that caused Partition, it is hard to argue that the Muslim community wasn't it.

PP's communal side surfaces again. Even though there is sufficient evidence that hindu fundamentalists in pre-independence India were also talking of partition, PP prefers to close his eyes to them and wishes to focus only on the muslim fundamentalists.
Haha, I am not talking about fundamentalists of either side. I am talking about the broad religious communities. It is a fact that the Muslim League won large majorities of the seats reserved for Muslims in the 1946 elections, running on a platform of Partition. In other words, mainstream Muslim opinion supported the League's partition agenda. Mainstream Hindu opinion, OTOH, favored the anti-Partition plank of Congress.

The Muslim League won many seats in the 1946 elections because the British succeeded in communalizing the electorate. This was relatively easy to do. For example, just throw a cow carcass in a temple and a pig carcass in a mosque and instigate communal tensions and riots.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:09 am

I defer my comments and don't want to participate in this discussion by a bunch of fundamentalists.

by Guest Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:10 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:I defer my comments and don't want to participate in this discussion by a bunch of fundamentalists.

Uppili the Poopili, let nobody disturb you. Please carry on pooping.

by Rishi Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:40 am

Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
ashdoc wrote:Frankly , mine was that of disbelief---how could the cowardly vegetarian hindus have the guts to tear down the mosque ??

If you were old enough to understand the magnitude of what was going on , please tell your reaction......
shock and deep disappointment that, after 45 years of independence, the people of india, especially the hindus, had not grasped the fundamental concepts - democracy, equality, secularism, and freedom of thought - on which our republic was founded. persistent skepticism, maybe a distrust of hindus, aggravated by the routine, unprovoked expressions, by educated hindus, of hostility towards muslims and other non-hindus, exemplified here by gyanputra, uppili, and ashdoc. growing admiration for the muslims of india. a greater determination to not give up on india and our ideals. optimism that free markets, capitalism, and economic development will set most things right.

Have Muslims all over the world grasped the fundamental concepts - democracy, equality, secularism, and freedom of thought?

Growing admiration for Muslims for what? For engaging in terrorism against non muslims all over the world?

Anyway pulling down that mosque built by an invader was not too smart. The crowd behavior got out of control. The consequences were disastrous.

by Hellsangel Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:49 am

Rishi wrote:

Growing admiration for Muslims for what? For engaging in terrorism against non muslims all over the world?

When d is dating one, he better admire them.

by Guest Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:56 am

Hellsangel wrote:
Rishi wrote:

Growing admiration for Muslims for what? For engaging in terrorism against non muslims all over the world?

When d is dating one, he better admire them.

it reflects poorly on your upbringing to talk crassly about Mburuburu's daughter. Also, Mburuburu is your father's age and so it behooves you to show respect to him. Go ahead and make your family proud of you.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:08 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
Rishi wrote:

Growing admiration for Muslims for what? For engaging in terrorism against non muslims all over the world?

When d is dating one, he better admire them.

it reflects poorly on your upbringing to talk crassly about Mburuburu's daughter. Also, Mburuburu is your father's age and so it behooves you to show respect to him. Go ahead and make your family proud of you.

You should be the last person to criticize others about dragging in family members or abusing family members.

Just saying.

by Sponsored content