Thanks to Krishen-ji for alerting me to this interview of Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI). CSPI is devoted to the scientific study of the foundational texts of Islam, including the Koran and Hadith.
Its approach is unusual in that it relies on statistics to study the doctrines (e.g. see the discussion about “Jihad” below) and considers the Koran alongside the Sira and Hadiths as part of the Islamic Trilogy. Although published more than a year ago, large parts of it are still very relevant.
Excerpts:
…Our major intellectual breakthrough is to see that dualism is the foundation and key to understanding Islam.
…Endless ink has been wasted on trying to answer the question of what is Islam? Is Islam the religion of peace? Or is the true Islam a radical ideology? Is a moderate Muslim the real Muslim?
This reminds a scientist of the old arguments about light. Is light a particle or is light a wave? The arguments went back and forth. Quantum mechanics gave us the answer. Light is dualistic; it is both a particle and a wave. It depends upon the circumstances as to which quality manifests. Islam functions in the same manner.
Our first clue about the dualism is in the Koran, which is actually two books, the Koran of Mecca (early) and the Koran of Medina (later). The insight into the logic of the Koran comes from the large numbers of contradictions in it. On the surface, Islam resolves these contradictions by resorting to “abrogation”. This means that the verse written later supersedes the earlier verse. But in fact, since the Koran is considered by Muslims to be the perfect word of Allah, both verses are sacred and true. The later verse is “better,” but the earlier verse cannot be wrong since Allah is perfect. This is the foundation of dualism. Both verses are “right.” Both sides of the contradiction are true in dualistic logic. The circumstances govern which verse is used.
For example:
(Koran of Mecca) 73:10: Listen to what they [unbelievers] say with patience, and leave them with dignity.
From tolerance we move to the ultimate intolerance, not even the Lord of the Universe can stand the unbelievers:
(Koran of Medina) 8:12: Then your Lord spoke to His angels and said, “I will be with you. Give strength to the believers. I will send terror into the unbelievers’ hearts, cut off their heads and even the tips of their fingers!”
All of Western logic is based upon the law of contradiction—if two things contradict, then at least one of them is false. But Islamic logic is dualistic; two things can contradict each other and both are true.
No dualistic system may be measured by one answer. This is the reason that the arguments about what constitutes the “real” Islam go on and on and are never resolved. A single right answer does not exist.
Dualistic systems can only be measured by statistics. It is futile to argue one side of the dualism is true. As an analogy, quantum mechanics always gives a statistical answer to all questions.
For an example of using statistics, look at the question: what is the real jihad, the jihad of inner, spiritual struggle or the jihad of war? Let’s turn to Bukhari (the Hadith) for the answer, as he repeatedly speaks of jihad. In Bukhari 97% of the jihad references are about war and 3% are about the inner struggle. So the statistical answer is that jihad is 97% war and 3% inner struggle. Is jihad war? Yes—97%. Is jihad inner struggle? Yes—3%. So if you are writing an article, you can make a case for either. But in truth, almost every argument about Islam can be answered by: all of the above. Both sides of the duality are right.
Keep Reading…
August 20th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Current Affairs, Impact of Islam on India, Islam & Reform, Islam & Terrorism, Medieval Indian History |
4 comments
Great article by Tarun Vijay in today’s TOI: Reclaiming India.
*** Excerpts below (emphasis mine) ***
“None should say Omar is not allowed in Jammu. Let him come, listen and speak. Like any other Indian should feel free to visit Kashmir or any other part of the nation. He is welcome to visit my home even if he denies me a piece of land in Kashmir. Why should a few words uttered by him make me change my Indian-ness? If he spoke in Parliament as a Muslim, asserting his Islamic identity, let denial of land to Hindus be his Islam and my Hinduness must keep my nation as a free democracy where difference of opinion is a natural phenomenon unlike Islamic countries.
…But he must stop to think why he can own a bungalow in Delhi or Bangalore and at the same time deny that privilege to a fellow Indian in Kashmir? Kashmiri Muslim leaders would like to enjoy the fruits and liberties of a Hindu majority democracy but vehemently deny that to Hindus in their area of influence. Why?
When they are in a minority they crave and get special privileges. But once a majority, every single right to be at par is refused to other minorities.
…Kashmir is predominantly Sunni and Wahabi. Hence the intolerance that denies even the basic features of Kashmiriyat.
And see what the de-Indianised intellectuals wrote on the front pages in Delhi’s newspapers: “All over a piece of land!” Really?
Then why are the Indian soldiers defending a barren piece of dead snow in Siachen? Or what’s that piece of cloth known as the Tricolor? Is it worth dying for?
…In fact the whole movement is a revolt of Tricolour people against unpatriotic politics on Kashmir. It’s an effort to reclaim India in a region where the central leaders and regional parties have abandoned the idea of pan-Indian nationalism and geographical integration. India has been reducing every day in the valley and the seculars keep on counting their votes and encouraging separatists at the cost of an Indian identity.
Keep Reading…
August 6th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
A Hindu Identity, An Indian Identity, Current Affairs, Human Rights and Legal Issues, Impact of Islam on India, Jammu & Kashmir related, Medieval Indian History, Politics and Governance in India, Politics of Minority Appeasement |
8 comments
Mufti Abdul Rehman Al Rehmani, head of Darul Ifta wa Al-Qazzath of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JD) Pakistan:
if…Indian Muslims…comply with Indian law, then the coming generations of Muslims in India will be involved in Hindu beliefs
Here is the story:
A few days ago, the mufti or head cleric of one of Indias biggest madrassas, the Darul Uloom Deoband (DUD), Mufti Habibur Rehman, said that Indian Muslims should take care when slaughtering the cow that is considered sacred by Hindus. He pointed out that the slaughter of the cow is prohibited under Indian law and thus it was not right to use its meat secretly.
In response, the head of Darul Ifta wa Al-Qazzath of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JD) Pakistan, Mufti Abdul Rehman Al Rehmani, said that the fatwa should be withdrawn immediately and justified. The fatwa encourages Hindu beliefs, Al Rehmani said while talking to Daily Times on Tuesday. His official stance was published on the JD website the same day.
Al Rehmani claims that Rehmans fatwa is wrong because according to Islamic education the cow was a major cause of idolism and polytheism. And if Mufti Habibur Rehman tells Indian Muslims to comply with Indian law, then the coming generations of Muslims in India will be involved in Hindu beliefs, said the text. [ link ]
Related Posts:
If Muslims revered cattle - excerpt
Of Sacred Bulls, Divinity &Development
July 16th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Current Affairs, Distortions, Misrepresentation about Hinduism, Identity, Impact of Islam on India, Pakistan related |
4 comments
From the original post by Dr Andrew Bostom, “End the Moral Idiocy on Kashmir”
*** EXCERPTS BEGIN ***
I participated in a forum on Kashmir last night at MIT in Boston, as this Muslim supremacist, jihad-inspired conflictreally a tragic ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Hindus by Muslim jihadists which began in earnest during the 14th centuryre-emerged in the news recently when the Indian government had the temerity to want to transfer 99 acres of land to the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board…
…Please watch the video linked below, which chronicles in gory detail the brutal ethnic cleansing of some 350,000 indigenous Hindus from Kashmir during early 1990, orchestrated by Pakistan and its moderate Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto.
I was privileged last night to meet the astute, courageous, and passionate filmmaker, Ashok Pandit, who produced this documentary, And the World Remained Silent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCRFWStxV_4 (Part 1)
Focus on the time period 2:15 to 4:00 minutes, from part 1 above, and witness the jihadist speech of the late, much ballyhooed modernist reformer Benazir Bhutto. She was a jihadist, plain and simple; the head of what remains a jihadist state, our ally Pakistan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2vsztUdkpU&feature=related (Part 2)
Here is the text of the comments I delivered last night for historical background:
Islamic Separatism & Kashmir: A Panel Discussion Exploring the Relationship Between Religion and Kashmiri Tangle, July 9, 2008,
During mid-November, 2007, a grim milestone was recorded in the macabre tally being kept assiduously in cyberspace by blogger Glen Reinsford: the 10,000th attack by jihad terrorists resulting in some 60,000 dead and 90,000 injured since the cataclysmic acts of jihad terrorism on September 11, 2001.
Reinsford does not include combat-related statistics…His tally also excludes the genocide in Darfur committed by the Islamic government in Sudan…whose murderous ravages the UN estimated last year had resulted in some 400,000 dead, and 2 million displaced.
Reinsford identified three episodes of such continuous, mind numbing jihadist carnage which had perhaps unsettled him most: Nadimarg, Kashmir India (3/23/03), dozens of Hindu villagers roused out of their beds and machine-gunned by Lashkar-e-Toiba; Beslan, Russia (9/3/04), some 350 people slaughtered by jihadistshalf of them children; Malatya, Turkey (4/18/07), three Christian Bible distributors bound, tortured for hours, then gruesomely murdered by men who acted explicitly in the name of Islam.
These data should remind us that there is just one historically relevant meaning of jihad despite contemporary apologetics. Jahada, the root of the word Jihad, appears 40 times in the Koranunder a variety of grammatical forms. With 4 exceptions, all the other 36 usages (in specific Koranic verses) are variations of the third form of the verb, i.e. Jahida. Jahida in the Koran and in subsequent Islamic understanding to both Muslim luminariesfrom the greatest jurists and scholars of classical Islam (including Abu Yusuf, Averroes, Ibn Khaldun, and Al Ghazzali), to ordinary peoplemeant and means he fought, warred or waged war against unbelievers and the like, as described by the seminal Arabic lexicographer E.W Lane. Indeed, Lanes, An Arabic English Lexicon (6 volumes, London, 1865) is still used to this day by Muslim and non-Muslim scholars for definitive Arabic to English translation. Thus Lane, who studied both the etymology and usage of the term jihad, observed, Jihad came to be used by the Muslims to signify wag[ing] war, against unbelievers.
Keep Reading…
July 12th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Conversions, Missionaries in India, Hindu Dharma, Identity, Impact of Islam on India, India & Its Neighbours, Islamic Rule in India, Jammu & Kashmir related, Medieval Indian History, Modern Indian History, Pakistan related |
no comments
A: They are both offensive to Muslims (and possibly against Islam)…
Shia cleric Maulana Kalbe Sadiq, vice-president of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB)…said the nuke deal does not sound good…” “Our contention is national as well as Islamic.”
Samajwadi Party rebel MP Munnawar Hasan…(said)…Support to the nuclear deal is tantamount to back-stabbing Muslims. Muslims across the world are opposed to the US,
as for the “puppy”…
A puppy postcard (with an image of) a black dog sitting in a police officers hat…has prompted complaints from members of the Islamic community (in UK).
It is understood that Muslims have been upset by it because dogs are considered ritually unclean. Some shopkeepers have been refusing to display the advert.
Fortunately, some sense seems to have prevailed.
I am struggling to understand what has Islam got to do with a nuclear deal (lets forget Pakistan and its own nuclear programme for a minute) and how candisplaying the picture of any “life”be anti-religion?
Thoughts welcome
Related Post: Of Sacred Bulls, Divinity & Development
UPDATE: Siddharth Vardarajan has written a post titled, “Don’t use Muslims as crutch on nuclear deal“. It makessome interesting points.
July 3rd, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Current Affairs, Geo-Strategic Issues (incl. Nuclear, Oil, Energy), Impact of Islam on India, Politics and Governance in India, Politics of Minority Appeasement |
4 comments
Fellow blogger Varnam recently wrote twoposts on how learning Sanskrit is now considered to be a “communal” activity and something that might put you at odds with the “secular” brigade.
In the first one, he pointed out:
Usually you see the word saffronization associated with the Hindutva folks, not Sanskritization…the revival (of this word)is with mischievous intent. Now the name of a language has become a synonym for communal politics.
In fact this attempt to brand Sanskrit as a non-secular entity happened once before, believe it or not - by the Central Board of Secondary Education. It was an attempt to pull the rug off India’s cultural heritage and history by branding an entire language as not-secular.
…The Supreme Court in a landmark verdict rejected the accusation that teaching Sanskrit was against secularism.
…the Court wrote that Sanskrit was the language in which Indian minds expressed the noblest ideas. It was also the language in which our culture, which includes the Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, the teachings of Sankaracharya to Vallabhacharya and classics of Kalidasa to Banabhatta were expressed. Without understanding Sanskrit, the Court wrote, you cannot understand Indian philosophy on which our culture is based.
In a follow-up, he wrote:
This January, the Indian Govt. cut funding for a Sanskrit program because it is now a sin to learn an ancient language and the reason: India has a large Muslim population.
When the Supreme Court of India writes judgements admiring the language in which Indian minds expressed noblest ideas, it takes the UPA Govt. to accuse that it is communal.
JK suggests (and I fully endorse): Instead of whining about the Govt. the best course of action would be to organize a Samskrita Bharati camp in your area.
Fellow blogger Sandeep has also commented on this issue:
…Sanskritisation, a noun used as a verb form is a strange creature that really defies definition. Interestingly, Seema uses this without defining it, an act similar to her boss Sonia Gandhi who wields power without responsibility but alludes to M.N. Srinivas who coined it.
…Sanskritisation, however, you want to define it, has no factual basis in Indian history or tradition or societyunless you equate Sanskritisation with Brahminisation (ugh and sic!).
Related Posts:
Dont wear a tilak to work!
Secular Fundamentalismalive & kicking inIndia
Also read: Pseudo-secularism at itsbest?
June 17th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Ancient Indian History, Current Affairs, Distortions, Misrepresentation about Hinduism, Distortions, Misrepresentations about India, Identity, Impact of Islam on India, Indian Culture, Arts and Music, Indian Media, Media Related, Politics and Governance in India, Politics of Minority Appeasement, Sanatana Dharma, Spirituality & Philosophy |
2 comments
I recently came across The Whitewashing of History, by Nithin Sridhar. Nitin has kindly agreed to let me reproduce the article on this blog. Those of you who are interested in history will find here a devastating critique of current studies and interpretation of Indian History - which has largely been driven by leftist-leaning scholars steeped in their prejudices and with varying agendas.
The article looks at the now thoroughly discredited “Aryan Invasion Theory” (AIT), the impact of Islamic invasions on India and the red-herring of “Hindu vandalism”.
I have also included a selection of comments at the end.
*** ARTICLE BEGINS / LONG POST ***
The history of India has been whitewashed and distorted, first by European rulers, and after independence by eminent historians of India and their supporters the Leftists, Seculars and self-claimed Progressives of India to meet their own ends. They have painted the pre-Islamic invasion period as a Dark Age and have glorified the Islamic period to be very peaceful and prosperous.
Ram Swarup says, Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth. The Marxists contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists.1 Some of the common claims of these eminent historians are:
1] The Aryan Invasion Theory is true2
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples was done by Hindus in pre-Islamic India.3
3] The Muslim rulers were religiously tolerant and Islamic rule was prosperous. The eminent historians deny the destruction of Hindu temples or the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers. They also deny the religious motive behind the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers.4
Let us examine the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT).
Keep Reading…
May 18th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Ancient Indian History, Conversions, Missionaries in India, Debates & Discussions, Distortions, Misrepresentation about Hinduism, Distortions, Misrepresentations about India, Impact of Islam on India, Islamic Rule in India, Media Related, Medieval Indian History, Politics and Governance in India, Politics of Minority Appeasement, Saraswati-Sindhu Civilization |
20 comments
A well-wisheralerted me to thisstatement made bysenior advocate Shri K Parasaranin the Supreme Courtlast week:
“Government should avoid causing any damage to the “Ram Setu” as it might leave a permanent scar in the minds of people like the demolition of Babri Masjid in Ayodhya….“
I am amazed…
Notice the multiple levels of mixing up, confusion and juxtapositioning that is going on here…
The matter of of Rama Sethu has somehow been clubbed with Babri Masjid, juxtaposing the demolition of Babri Masjid that happended WITHOUT any government or official sanction withthe destruction of Ram Sethu which is being forced with the full blessings of powers that be…
In the process, we have the extraordinary spectacle of Lord Shri Ram, a revered figure to millions being “bracketed” with Babar, a foreign invader.
What worries me most about this statement though is its implication(s) for the Janmabhoomi movement…
Any thoughts? I am keen to hear responses.
Finally, a question to get you thinking: regardless of whether the Rama Sethu is man-made or is a natural formation, can it really be equated with Babri Masjid which was a structuredeliberately constructed to humiliate a population that had been subjugated?
As someone wrote to me in an email, “…with “friends” like Sh. Parasaran, who needs enemies?” !
P.S. In case any of you is tempted to ask: my position on the demolition of Babri Masjid is that it was wrong, unfortunate and should not have happened.
Related Posts:
Voices of caution onSethuSamudram
The search for a historicalRama
Summary of the Historical Question - RamJanmabhoomi
A suggested stance on Kashi &Mathura
May 10th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Ancient Indian History, Current Affairs, Debates & Discussions, Impact of Islam on India, Islamic Rule in India, Medieval Indian History, Politics and Governance in India, Ram Janambhoomi, Ayodhya |
4 comments
I recently came across this interesting admissionby a senior US government official putting it on record that:
Saudi Arabia today remains the location where more money is going to terrorism, to Sunni terror groups and to the Taliban than any other place in the world
As the report, Saudi Arabia’s Terror Finance Problemby Douglas Farah notes,
There is little willingness to tackle the Saudis anymore on the issue of cracking down on terror finance. Intelligence services here and in Europe know most of the money for the mujahadeed in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere still come from wealthy donors in the Kingdom.
Only a handful of officials, however, dare to say so publicly
The exception has been Stuart Levy, the Treasury undersecretary for terror finance issues, who recently and publicly took on the Saudis in little-noted Congressional testimony.
One of the more interesting parts of the story, however, is…that, in essence, the Saudi government has repeatedly lied to the U.S. government over the steps the Kingdom has taken to crack down.
For example more than two years ago, the Saudis assured then-Rep. Sue Kelly (R-NY) that the Kingdom, as promised in 2003, had set up a financial intelligence unit and a commission to oversee the financial dealings of charities, many which have had ties to funding terrorist activities.
Now, Saudi spokesman Nail Jubeir (brother of ambassador Adel Jubeir) confirmed that Saudi Arabia has not set up the financial intelligence unit or charity commission, but said it was cracking down on the financiers of terrorism in other ways, such as making it illegal for anyone to send money outside the kingdom without going through official government channels.
Why should I loose sleep over this, you may ask. What concern is it to us?
If this reportis anything to go by, it should be of pretty serious concern to usI doubt though that anyone is loosing sleep over this yet.
From, Saudi Arabia Woos China and India by Harsh V. Pant, read this richly referenced extract:
A more significant impediment, especially with regard to India, is the proliferation of Saudi-funded religious schools in the country.
A madrasa (Islamic school) education in India has long been a part of many Muslim children’s lives. Madrasas in India number between 8,000 and 40,000.[46] But concerns have been rising in India about the dated and, with Saudi financing, increasingly radical curricula. In 2001, a report of the Group of Ministers on “Reforming the National Security System” recommended the need to modernize madrasa education.[47]
Saudi financial assistance has gone to a range of Indian-Islamic organizations resulting in the establishment of mosques, madrasas, and publishing houses inculcating the Saudi worldview.[48]
Riyadh also provides scholarships to Indian students to study religion in its universities. The Ahle-Hadith (People of the Tradition of the Prophet), a Sunni Islamic sect with ties to the Saudi state dating back to the 1920s, has arguably been the biggest beneficiary of Saudi monetary assistance contributing to internecine rivalries among various Indian Muslim sects.[51] While the early Ahle-Hadith was in many ways progressive, it has now altered into an intolerant, literalist strand.
Several Indian Islamic jurists and scholars seem to have gravitated towards this Saudi-sanctioned, radical interpretation of Islam and to a conspiratorial version of global politics. Instructive in this context is a claim made by a Muslim jurist from the Deoband sect in India that “should it be proved that Osama was the mastermind behind the attacks of September 11, he would not be punished under Islamic law since his actions were the result of an independent, legal opinion issued by top jurists.”[52]
Another Islamic scholar from a prominent seminary in north India has argued that “a worldwide anti-Muslim alliance has been formed and is headed by the U.S. It runs in an arc from Hindu fundamentalist India, through China and Russia, and ends with Europe and the U.S. in the west. The effect is to encircle and choke the Islamic world.”[53]
While the radicalism of Deoband would hardly surprisereaders - given its reputation for teaching”the most fundamentalist, narrow, puritan, rigid, oppressive version of Islam that exists anywhere in the world today -what is more worrying (at least to me) is the slow radicalisation of otherwise harmless Madrassas now flush with Saudi money and dominated by Wahabbi ideas(do remember the “S” in SIMI)
That is the real danger lurking beneath the surfaceand that is what we should be most worried about.
Unfortunately, such worries are rather unfashionable in Lutyen’s Delhi…andsuch thoughts are far from the mind of our government which earlier this week sent External Affairs Minister, Sh. Pranab Mukherjee to Riyadh to establish a “strategic partnership” with Saudi Arabia.
Curiously, ministry spokesman Navtej Sarnaissued a statement after the meetings saying:
“Both sides were keen that genuine businessmen from both sides be given multi-entry visas to boost bilateral investment…”
“genuine businessmen”?I hope they mean it!!
Related Posts:
Indias Islamist Groups -Extracts
Madrassas on Nepalborder
April 23rd, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Impact of Islam on India, Islam & Reform, LeT, SIMI etc., World History |
one comment
This is a sad story of what happened to a meetingarranged with a sense of purpose and responsibility by Vigil in Chennai to discuss Gautier’s exhibition and the administration’s response to it.
Against the backdrop of the cancelled exhibition, Vigil had invited Dr Subramaniam Swamy and Shri C P Radhakrishnan (National Executive Member of the BJP) to speak on the “Politics of History and Minorityism“.
They both agreed to come and Vigil spent a significant amount of money and effort in spreading word of the event (see ad below).
At 1230 on the day of the meeting, Radha-ji of Vigil got a call from Dr Swamy who conveyed his inability to come as he had to go for some *urgent* work to Delhi.
Shri Radhakrishnan excused himself saying he was not feeling well.
Keep Reading…
March 15th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Distortions, Misrepresentations about India, History, Impact of Islam on India, Islamic Rule in India, Media Related, Medieval Indian History, Politics and Governance in India, Politics of Minority Appeasement |
6 comments
As the Darul Uloom maintains that its fight against terrorism will continue, read this thought-provoking essay by M. Zuhdi Jasser* on what are the ideological standards required to confront militant Islam.
In view of the points made by Lt Commander Jasser,are the scholars of Darul Uloom at Deoband prepared to take the next step and declare/accept:
1. The rejection of Islamism as a political ideology.
2. A rejection of the concept of the Islamic state …or (the) vision of a Muslim majority society led by theologians (imams and clerics) who run government through their interpretation and enactment of Islamic law (sharia).
3. Identification of radical Islamist organizations by name …that utilize terrorism as a tactic for political change…While these organizations may at times “condemn terrorism,” they often offer apologies (if not justifications) for terrorism and seek the establishment of both individual Islamic states and a global or regional caliphate of them.
4. The acceptance that the root cause of terrorism is political Islam.
5. …the toxic role that Wahhabism (a radical Saudi Arabian interpretation of Islam) has had upon the radicalization of some members of the Muslim community.
6. To unequivocally recognize the state of Israel and its right to exist.
7. (the) separation (of)faith (spirituality) and nationalism.
8.…individual freedom and liberty.
9. To advocate for the rights of dissidents and liberty-minded Muslims in Muslim majority nations against the dictatorships and monarchies which oppress them
10. To acknowledge that much of current Islamic jurisprudence (sharia) is in dire need of ijtihad (reform)
***
* M. ZuhdiJasser is a former U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander andfounder/Chairman of the Board of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy based in Phoenix, Arizona.
Related Posts:
Islamism - not Islam - is responsible forterrorism
Indias Islamist Groups -Extracts
Islams uncomfortabletruths
Other voices of reason: We Muslims Have Work To Do - SalimMansur
March 12th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Impact of Islam on India, Islam & Reform, Islam & Terrorism, LeT, SIMI etc., Terrorism in India |
6 comments
Now that The Economist has said it, is it”official”? Excerpts from “Bridging the divide” (Nov 7 ‘07):
“…but what would have distressed Nehru particularly is the prominent role played by religion in domestic politics. India’s constitution writers tried to get round this in two ways.
The first was to embrace pluralism. The new country would be a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic…Pluralism is the keystone of Indian culture and religious tolerance is the bedrock of Indian secularism. (Not strictly true - please see note below*)
The second was to go out of their way to provide protection for the (generally poor) Muslim minority.
…How did things go wrong?
The short answer is that many Hindus, like Mr Togadia, came to see India’s secularism as a code for favouritism towards Muslimsespecially by Nehru’s Congress party (which until recently most Muslims voted for).
Muslims are allowed to live by their own family law and enjoy plenty of positive discrimination, including subsidies to fly to Mecca. …”
See also this interesting chartfrom the main article in that issue which shows major religions in the world by population:
Source: In God’s name
Related Posts:
Of Subsidies and Politics ofSecularism
Another fine example ofpseudo-secularism
Pseudo-secularism at itsbest?
.
*This is not entirely true; As some of you know, “secular” and “socialist”were terms that were forced through an amendment during Emergency by PMIndira Gandhi - B Shantanu
February 21st, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
Distortions, Misrepresentations about India, Impact of Islam on India, Politics and Governance in India, Politics of Minority Appeasement |
11 comments
Extracts from a BBC news story:
“…Dr Nazir Ali, the bishop of Rochester…in a separate interview with the BBC…said
“Britishness” had to be recovered if it was to “have the identity to face another highly organised ideology, perhaps for the first time since the disappearance of Marxism”.
He said the government’s approach to multiculturalism was wrong, adding: ” I think an affirmation of the Christian roots of British society would actually provide a better way of affirming other people than the sort of secular all-faiths-are-the-same kind of route.
“Because the secular approach will in the end marginalise everybody.”
Try substituting “Hindu” for “Christian” and “Indian” for “British” in the extract above. Could he be talking about India, I wonder?
***
Here are somemore extracts from the Bishop’scomments as they appeared in The Telegraph:
“…Alongside these developments, there has been a worldwide resurgence of the ideology of Islamic extremism.
…Attempts have been made to impose an “Islamic” character on certain areas, for example, by insisting on artificial amplification for the Adhan, the call to prayer. Such amplification was, of course, unknown throughout most of history and its use raises all sorts of questions about noise levels and whether non-Muslims wish to be told the creed of a particular faith five times a day on the loudspeaker.
This is happening here even though some Muslim-majority communities are trying to reduce noise levels from multiple mosques announcing this call, one after the other, over quite a small geographical area.
There is pressure already to relate aspects of the sharia to civil law in Britain. To some extent this is already true of arrangements for sharia-compliant banking but have the far-reaching implications of this been fully considered?
…
Much of this has come about because of a “neutral” secularist approach which refuses to privilege any faith. In fact, secularism has its own agenda and it is certainly not neutral…”
Well said.
Related Posts:
Secular Fundamentalismalive & kicking inIndia
Secularism or Politics ofAppeasement?
Perverse secularism and Indiasfuture
Pseudo-secularism at itsbest?
Another fine example ofpseudo-secularism
January 8th, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
A Hindu Identity, An Indian Identity, Current Affairs, Impact of Islam on India, Islam & Terrorism, Politics and Governance in India |
5 comments
Extracts from Shri B Raman’a article in the recent edition of Outlook (Dec 24 ‘07), “The Secular Hypocrisy“:
***
…The pathological dislike–even hatred–that some of our journalists–particularly in the electronic media–have for Modi could be seen or sensed as one watched the TV coverage of the counting of votes on December 23, 2007. Initially, as it appeared that the BJP might not do well in the final tally, there was excitement among many of the TV anchors. They thought they had tasted blood. After an hour, the BJP candidates started racing ahead and it became clear the the Congress (I) was in for a drubbing.
The disappointment on the faces of some of the anchors was to be seen to be believed. A five-star lady anchor could not help remarking: “Modi might be able to win the elections in Gujarat, but he still can’t get a visa to go to the US and other Western countries.” Some consolation!
Keep Reading…
January 1st, 2008
Posted by
B Shantanu |
A Hindu Identity, Current Affairs, Elections Analysis, Hindu Dharma, Identity, Impact of Islam on India, Politics and Governance in India, Politics of Minority Appeasement |
19 comments
