Dear Salman,

As I sit in the US, I could sit here and say..."hang in there", somehow those words are not at the tips of my lips or do they even seem appropriate.

What I can say is that I will keep you in my prayers along with all the people going thru this horrible war...especially the children, who most likely do not even understand...

Joanie

Someone needs to ask the U.S. News Media,why they report everyday the exact number of Hezbollah Missiles fired at Israel, and never once put any numbers on the Israeli Missiles fired, number of Bombs they dropped, or Tank rounds they fired into Lebanon?

The purpose of this serious kind of biased reporting seems obvious.

the world has already been listening to Israel's side of the story, witness the fact that Israel has not yet stopped its attacks.

now is the time for the human story in Lebanon to be told, and i think this is what Salman Ahmad and friends are doing.

Ravi, if you have the nerve, look at this:

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/world/20060804_MIDEAST_GRAPHIC/

and this:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/08/04/world/04beirut2_395.jpg

full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/04/world/middleeast/04mideast.html

the world has already been listening to Israel's side of the story, witness the fact that Israel has not yet stopped its attacks.

now is the time for the human story in Lebanon to be told, and i think this is what Salman Ahmad and friends are doing.

Ravi, if you have the nerve, look at this:

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/world/20060804_MIDEAST_GRAPHIC/

and take a look at my comment 172 on Mallika's "Bombings Hit Children Hardest" post.

dear stan, the NY Times has been doing a decent job of unbiased reporting on this conflict.

Dear Salman,
"For us, human beings from everywhere, unarmed and powerless, may the time of which we are masters (ours), be the space without borders where the word, indestructible, resists to all the armies of the world"

This is indeed a powerful thought and intent!

Oh world ... one day ... may it come to full expression .... the allowance for the uniqueness of each human being to be a source of celebration, not conflict.

With love,
~ Kate

There are two sides of the story:
One is that Israel must defend itself, but at the same time refuses Hezobollah's requests for cease-fire. At this point in history the word "defense" cannot be uttered without some obvious insincerity.

The second side, and this is overwhelmingly clear to all, is that Lebanon is under attack not by one army, but two. At the head of both there are individuals who seem hell-bent to have their way regardless of the cost in human lives. These armies are equipped with fantastically efficient modern weapons of mass destruction.

Not even Hezobollah's threat of bombing Tel Aviv's commercial center has been a sufficient deterrent for Israeli's relentless bombings. I am left to wonder if Israel's leaders aren't risking responsibility for the sacrifice of their capitol in order to tell the world, one more time, "do you see what they are doing to us?" But why stage this drama at all? Blair and Bush couldn't be more sympathetic to the Israeli plight.

Now a third side of the gloomy story is emerging: could this be Pres. Bush's interest in expanding U.S. control to Iranian and Syrian lands?

My heart goes to the Israeli and Lebanese peoples. May they be safe from their leader's insanity. May they experience lasting peace soon

I'm not sure, linguistically, what the term "terror", as used in the popular press, means anymore.

Is it affect(anger) or effect (fear). Or is it a transaction between two people of both of these? Like Cain and Abel? As in, "here: I'll trade ya. Martyrdom for a good whack on the head."

The term used in sentences today seems to have taken on a life of its own.

When Senate Republicans say, "Democrats are weak on terror," it sounds odd to me. Is it to say that they are weak on anger? On weak on fear?

Or are they saying that democrats are just screwing up the quality of the transaction altogether?

Dear Salman, I feel a certain helplessness here in Canada; being in a safe-haven(so far) untouched by the sounds and whistles of bombs enroute overhead. The only post traumatic stress disorders I endure; are from illness and poverty-related; not war. I cannot fathome, the depths of despair and fear and fatigue, to which all sides are going through; for those, whom only want to live in peace and harmony; they are in a living "hell."

May everyone around the world; living in country's of non-war; unite in prayer and peaceful intent, to lift them up with our light, our love, our hope "with them" for peace on earth.

North

Shaheed, what Salman has said is of course one side of the story that is under-represented. People do have the choice to read stories that are from both stories. It is up to them to evaluate the 'truth' from what they choose to read. That is the freedom viewers/readers have as opposed to the Media.
You say "People do not listen to one sided stories", when in fact, people do listen to one sided stories, the stories that they want to hear and identify with. They have many sources, but they form their opinions and biases depending on what they grew up believing. Salman is just presenting that story that you hardly find in conventional news media.
The key here, is CHOICE.

Contd...Shaheed,
so instead of just accusing Salman of a one-sided story, why don't you refute what he has said and bring your non-shallow perspective as opposed to just saying "As in all wars, one must expect collateral damage. No body wants to kill the innocents. But unfortunately it happens."
You are able to say this last line 'as a matter of fact'...when in fact, that is what may make this violence never-ending.
Collateral damage is collateral only when it is unintended, everyone knows what kind this is.
You can make all the statements you want about stories being biased, opinionated, sentimental etc, but only when you present your story, taking the time to be accurate/truthful, subjective/objective, you can be considered to make sense.

Hello Salman,

The death of every innocent Lebanese civilian is absolutely unnecessary an uncalled for, they are innocent victims of a military machine that is every bit as sophisticated, clever, treachorus and ruthless as all the might of the Israeli Army, and they are the ones that have invited death and destruction on your people, they are Hezbollah.

Hezbollah cared nothing for your People when they crossed the border into Israel to commit acts of war, they knew what the Israeli response would be, the Israeli's always said that if they were attacked their respone would be severe. Hezbollah knew, and said "that is fine with us", "the more Lebanese they kill the more we are loved and adored," and isn't that true today?

Qana is the worst example of Hezbollah military strategy, why mostly women and children, abandoned, in a war zone? Where were the husbands, fathers?
Maybe the men were caring for their missles instead of their children, maybe even directing those Israeli planes?

If this is a harsh uncaring response, I am sorry, to deliver it, but you left out the biggest criminal of all from your list and that is Hezbollah. With a friend like Hezbollah, you would be in bliss with an enemy.

I wish peace to all the Lebanese and peace will come to them when Hezbollah is disarmed.

peace Salman
ruth

RJ:

Good points!

Why dont we hear the cries of the kids and women in Israel who are victims of hezbollah sponsored suicide killings?

Its a war - that somehow *both* the sides - due to a combination of choice and laxity have brought upon themselves.

While Hezbollah/Lebanon/Syria combine uses a suicide bombing guerilla force.. Israel uses conventional war techniques.

Both kill and both are ruthless. Quite honestly, both dont learn.

As far as Israel's lack of claim on the land it occupied long back is concerned - it is the MOST STUPID and useless logic I have heard.. anyone who conquers a land ITS HIS!! Thats how the history works!! The problem with Islamic clerics is that they try and conquer minds by conversion!! So what does one do about that???

This is real world and real life.. where you have to live with the hand you are dealt! The Islamic World... has been dealth a hand that was in many ways a reflection of its own doings! Most of it is backward.. and if it wasnt for the Oil.. most of it would have been like Afghanistan by now...

.. to accuse Jews - who work hard and are progressive - that they are ruling the US finance and media is a lazy man's estimate of a hard-workers worth!!

Until the Islamic world is full of poor, backward people who would kill themselves because of their religious ideology.. and others who are educated instead of doing introspection - start giving out lectures on suffering of their fellow-religious people and accusing others of "terrorism" .....

.... I honestly cannot feel much sympathy for such a disillusioned and hallucinating mass of people!!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

As a child of war from Vietnam I am grateful to be alive. It pains and saddens me to watch the tragedy unfold in the Middle East. The long history of hatred in that and other parts of the world makes me feel that we are still living in our infancy. Very, very sad.

Yes, the Israelites are so smart they too are homicidal killers, using state of the art U.S. made weapons,

nothing different than the first cavemen who discovered it is much more efficient to kill others with big clubs instead of their hands . . .

So yes, we are indebted to the most 'intelligent' race tht they can rationalize genocide with sophistries, with such grand reasonings as "God said so" . . .

As the killing, on both sides, continues . . .

May the Lord forgive my inability to stop it . . .

peace

I can assure you that most people in Europe are appalled by what is happening in Lebanon. In the UK a poll taken in the last couple of days shows that the vast majority of people do not support Blair's actions.

I cannot understand why they did not just exchange prisoners. Israel holds thousands of Palestinian prisoners without trial, hundreds of these are women and children. Why not just exchange some and make the world a better place?

I hope peace comes to your country soon. In the meantime please be assured we do care about you a great deal.

Mary

Arjun:

With a name like yours - its interesting to see you so resigned. :-)

Isnt God a nice alibi for all your heart's mischief. We have conveniently converted the only subject.. into an object and assume a power of subject.... to say what we want..

"how would Jesus do this?"
"how would Mohammad do this?"

... etc...

As if God could (more importantly, WANT to) do anything!!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

There are no sides to a truly global community, each human being's circle of life would be respected by ALL. The global community would concentrate on uniqueness, like Kate mentioned in post#7, and USE it to help others not abuse it to control others.

Take good care of yourself and the others, Salman!

you are not fine
let us both
feel strength
from the divine.

I once had a dream: that language shared between people was just a series of dominant or recessive refrains. I dreamed that Shakespeare knew this and played around with it in iambic pentameter for his amusement (and yours).

I dreamed that the common cold was nothing more than a virus in this interchange where the pattern had been breached (either accidently or knowingly) and that when one takes cold medicine, the pill is just symbolically accepting the terms of the "fine print" on that little piece of paper stuffed in the package that does nothing more than complement the closure of your last conversational exchange.

And that the fine print in those packages is getting more and more and more complex and difficult to produce.

It's mostly crazy thinking that I've retired and left to those better suited to deal with it. I sleep better at night now.

But I can say that it's my wish that this thread concludes in a way that's loving and peace-bearing.

The textbooks miss a million audacious acts of love.

But poets, never.

Dear Dana,
I will join you in your dream!
and wish.
Love,
~ Kate

Hello Everyone,

News: 14,000 Shia Iraqis march in Baghdad in support of Hezbollah shouting "Death to America and "Death to Israel"..

Gee.. What do we have here?

The Freedom to Assemble in Public

Freedom of Speech

A Non-Violent Protest

When was the last time any Shia in Iraq was able to say boo when Saddam Hussien was in power?

Yes, those Americans sure are pigs!

Friends to this ground, Kate!

Shaheed,
Where is your sword?
(Or gun, or whatever deadly weapon you would use on another human being)
So far,
only words from you.
Is there a time we will read about you,
having joined 'comrades in arms'?
~ Kate

Ever wonder why ground control forbids astronauts to stop working and idly admire the earth for even a second?

Because they'll love the whole thing and then they're screwed.

War keeps us occupied in this same manner.

There is suffering sufficient to remain perpetually slighted if one so chooses.

As an infant, I was betrayed and sold to monsters. Raised by sneering defilers.

That's one way I could tell the story.

Do you know any lore that conveys love, Shaheed? Do you ever quote from it?

Or do you skip past it?

Shaheed,
Your voice has been heard, and many are in agreement with you.
Many are dying and will continue
to die.
God bless each and every one,
~ Kate

SK, your 31: thank your lucky stars you are not a president like the USA's current one, who, by the way, does not know "what is right and wrong and how to protect his nation". please see: http://www.newyorker.com/shouts/ (this New Yorker column will expire in a week or so after this post, so read it now -- it's titled "The Bush Quiz: The Twentieth hudnred Days" and it's written by Paul Slansky, and it's both hilarious and revolting.)

who says what people are the smartest, most brilliant of people, btw? what poll do you have, what research, to show what you claim? you may love a culture, but no culture has all the virtues, and no culture can claim the highest percentage of brilliant people.

who has deprived Israelis of living in peace, please tell me? when European Jews entered Palestine in large numbers in the last century, they could not have done it without the support of the Brits, who were overseeing the region. chaos in the area already existed when Israel was created. the initial tension and dissension was between the European, especially the Brit-introduced European, and the Palestinian -- not the Jew and the Palestinian. Sephardic Jews had lived in Arab lands for centuries, and they were well integrated across the Arab world. the European Jews who initially entered Palestine, and later, the Sephardic Jews who left their Arab homelands for Israel after persecutions started, could have worked to reduce chaos and barriers, could have learned the existing cultures and tried to harmonize with them. or, they could have acted as if chaos and barriers were impossible to defeat, and others' cultures were irrelevant. unfortunately for this moment in time, and for the hundreds of Lebanese and the dozens of Israelis killed, the leaders of Israel have usually chosen to live by the latter philosophy, if it can be called one.

if someone comes to rape my child in front of my eyes, i will fight him tooth and nail, and call the cops if i can. if i break into his house with my child in hand, and he takes revenge on me through my child, i will still fight him tooth and nail, but i will try to avoid calling the cops, because they will haul me off to jail, not the man whose house i broke into. now where are the world cops, who would make the situation between Israel and its neighbors right? why, it's the same dudes who opened the door to the neighbor's house in the first place! would that have anything to do with the fact that this conflict still exists? hmmm, now, maybe so...

as far as your sending words that are right, oye ve! (not Romanized Hindi, btw.) you write words, and then try to justify them. you take a position, and then try to justify it. oh please, read a book of history once in a while, and keep your mind open.

prayers are not nonsense, btw. prayers have done miracles. i have seen this in my own life, and the lives of those i have loved and prayed for. and that is only my own experience.

and now: to anchor this comment in the earth we all live on, here is something about summer tomatoes...
the best thing to do with a ripe summer beefsteak tomato, in my book, is to slice it and make it into a sandwich: rub the inside surfaces of two slices of whole grain bread with a cut clove of garlic, add a smear of mayo on both slices of bread, put down a few leaves of butterhead lettuce or young leaves of romaine, a sliced beefsteak tomato, salt, pepper, a few leaves of fresh basil (chiffonaded, if desired), maybe a tiny bit of mint, too, close the sandwich, put it on a plate, cut it up, get lots of napkins, and enjoy one of life's simplest and best pleasures.

and coming back to the topic: how many tomatoes have been smushed to vapor, how many leaves of fresh basil have tinged the air pale green, how many people, all innocent, all ages, have been lost, unnecessarily, in Lebanon, since this action started? they could have been sitting at home, or outside on roofs or patios, enjoying summer fruits, grains, vegetables, drink and good cheer with family and friends, writing poems, stories and essays (the Lebanese have a great and ancient literary tradition), reading books, making love, caring for their children, educating each other, worshiping according to their many faiths, singing, dancing, going out to films, preparing for the winter months... but now they are dust and blood-red mist and shards of broken bone, and not always could they be found to be buried. is this fair and right, and is it justifiable? what did most of these people have to do with Hezbollah?

why is it 10 or 20 Lebanese per 1 Israeli, who have died? answer me that one question, that one alone.

love to all, and peace to all, heather

Shaheed, personally I fear that you are fashioning an enemy fit for your weapon.

Do you want to hear one of the finest pieces of advice I ever received from a friend? He said, "Dana, keep your struggles to yourself."

I don't understand war, and I don't want to. I know, that it is a failure of leaders of nations/countries, to live in harmony, trust and respect. I know too, war can be hailed in "Gods name" without God's pre-approval. Often, via media; I know the circumstance, which sparked the war.

I understand that both sides, will have loss's of life, lives will be effected from injury and disability, children(nine million orphans currently)will become orphaned in an escalating rate; women, will be raped repeatedly, their children killed or stolen, raped, and then she is widow'd, and men will become widower's and childless.

Knowing all the above; I still do NOT understand war, and why humans cannot live side by side in harmony with one another; so we can collectively, reverse the critical harms, being done to Our Mother Earth... and each other.

Let us reach into our hearts of perpetual hope.. and envision the planet and the people, healing. Are we reflecting the sickness of OMEarth?

Where is our blog-resident healer: Geetaji; and her offerings of love and blessings to ALL?

Dear Heather,

Haven’t read the New York Times much, except online, but can't find any numbers even there, on how many rockets, bombs or tank rounds were fired by Israel into Lebanon.

This omission is the bias.

CNN, CNBC, FOX, and every other western news source available here, are quick to report that Hezbollah fired another 100 or 200 rockets at Israel today, but they never tell how many times every day Israel fires something into Lebanon. Perhaps this is because they have no idea, or the number is so large they cannot keep track. Whatever the reason, reporting only the Hezbollah numbers, gives a false picture of who is the bigger aggressor in this war.

Pointing this out is not an attempt to favor Hezbollah; just a call for more balanced reporting. I am very much against both sides use of terror on civilians.

By the way, happy belated Birthday, and hope your son is doing well.

Kind Regards,
Stan

dear stan

it may be that Israeli munitions info is not supplied by Israel, or any other reliable source.

the reporting in the NY Times is quite unbiased in terms of the articles' content, photos and other material. did you see that satellite image graphic of southern Beirut on July 12, then on July 31? check the link in my #4 above, to see it. i haven't seen that kind of reporting anywhere else, and it tells a stronger story, for me, than munitions counts.

read the latest update, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/04/world/middleeast/04cnd-mideast.html

it's powerful in terms of reporting the human, political and tactical stories, the most unbiased US daily reporting i've found.

love, heather

You must be living in the fool's paradise to think this is all about Lebenon, Hezbollah, Syria and Israel, and you'd be insane enough to think that death and destruction of innocent is all there is to it.

Call spade a spade.

It is nothing more then a way for some to protect themselves from extinction. How in the world could Americans let a rogue fanatic from Iran have his cake and it it too? How in the world could Israel expect a fundamentalist mullah wipe them out of this world?

You think neuclear power is a joke? Who is better to know this then the one who possess them right now.

Industrialized nations with big corporations would never let a crazy mullahs take over the power to destroy their world. So what if they kill thousands of innocents and destroy few minor countries along the way? They are saving huge number of human beings by wipping out few. This equation fits very well, any way you look at it.

mmmm, noname, yah, but remember that the essential conflict started before that issue. the essential conflict provides the people and emotions who/that are the fodder for the leaders' designs.

What is present is conflict. They are not looking at conflict resolution, the time for conflict resolution was when Iran didn't declare their intended path. Now it is no time for resolution, it is time for action before it is too late. And they are at it whether you like to believe it or not.

Why do you think they armed Indians with the deal, and why do you think they are not so much afraid with Pakistan's Islamic bomb? Because they got them under control. Iran is not under control and it needs to be.

This is the true state of affairs and history in the making. You and I are nobody to agree or disagree with the course.

yes, you are right, yet without the support of masses of people and their long-standing negative emotions, the conflict would be nothing but a dream in the mind a few. people and emotions are the fuel. the leaders place the fuel and strike the match, sometimes after having drenched the fuel with something or other that's more than normally flammable or explosive. with no fuel, with only a match and a starter, any fire that's lit burns itself out before it does major damage. this is why the US doesn't have big internal conflicts these days. no fuel.

noname

You are sounding quite radical today??

Try Comparing Iran's rhetoric about wanting to wipe out Israel with Bush's rhetoric about eliminating the "Axis of Evil" They sound pertty much the same. Us verses Them. It's all bad.

Stan

yes, stan, you are correct, but the giant is scared, and he's willing to destroy anything and everything to make him feel safe.

This is a plea from the history, which no one listened or cared:

http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html

It has been too late for a while.

Salman,

First hand accounts of those absorbing collateral damage are very persuasive and telling. I just wish we had more of it from both sides. May you live long enough to write many more such experiences and continue to convey your thoughts to us. We are listening intently!

Ruth,

You are very easy to read and understand. We have no doubt as to where you stand on any issue.
That's a positive!

For your honesty, conviction and ability to speak forth courageously, I grant you my vote if you ever run for the Big Seat! Makes me wonder what you do for a living.

Desh,

I could easily say the same for you.
Mankind...we're on our own where war is concerned!

Heather,

Brilliant, girl!
You are a hard worker
and I know you search out
the best resources available.
I bet your teachers loved you!!!

North,

Your bird's eye view
is a welcome interlude
to the mix we have here!

Kate,

If the world would only
listen to you quiet voice...

Dana, Stan, Shaheed, Scribbles, Donna, noname,

It's time to get real! Shall we pray...
for Peace?

I will and I Am! Do as you will.

noname

Thanks very much for that link. It should be required reading for everyone in America.

Ruth

Will you please read it.

Keith

Prayer is for those who want to turn God into a celestial bellhop.
I prefer to act, or in this case write relative to finding peace.

Kind Regards
Stan

Keith

I should have said MOST prayer

Stan

Stan,

I agree in the possibility that prayer consists

mostly of talking to one's Self. Self being the

non-being I speak of when using G-O-D...or Me2!

Roger Assaf, Issam Bou Khaled, Kamal Chayya, Rawya El Chab, Zeina Saab De Melero, Said Serhan, Fadi el Far, Tarek Atoui, Hagop Der Ghougassian, Abdo Nawar, Hanane Hajj Ali, Abder Rahman Awad, Zeinab Assaf, Bernadette Houdeib, Ibrahim Serhan, Nehmat Atallah...

I am so sorry for your suffering and loss. I pray for an end to the insanity of war. I pray for your safety. I pray for the children.

Love, Kristin

Keith, happy to be an transpired interlude within the mix....

for a peaceful break of photo design beauty and might I add, creative genious...

the blue north will transport you there....

Desh:

"Why dont we hear the cries of the kids and women in Israel who are victims of hezbollah sponsored suicide killings? "

Don't you have the habit of reading news papers and watching TV?

Naj,

I read the paper and watched T.V. for years.

You can only learn so much from them.

We've had two contributors post with news from one side.

I'm waiting for Mallika to even the tide.

.

North,

My, my, my...

Your site looks great!

Kewl pics, original looks...

Wish you could find some $$$ use for it!

Advertising? Backgrounds for scenic vacation resorts?

If I have time...I'll check out the broad-cast tomorrow!

Cheerio!

spurious argument, SK -- what percentage of the respective populations was this? and what are the murder rates in Lebanon and Israel, too, as percentages of the population? in a murder, as horrific as it is, it is pretty much one-to-one. in war actions, it is a few to many. it is a few too many, too.

Israel has many choices besides war actions. by using their brilliance and letting their egos and habitual victim postures go, they will come up with a slew of possibilities.

I say:

kill everybody (and I will take Scott on my side in hand to hand combat)!

America is evil! Stop! You are evil! Stop! Christians are evil! Stop!

Let me see here . . .

Shaheed is evil! Bhagwan is evil! I am evil!

Let us just kill everybody . . .

O yeah,

I am ready!

No peace b/c like Bhagwan says Jesus is an evil hypocrital bastard . . .

O yeah . . .

I been working all day..sorry to come late to the party. Looks like folks have been getting their yayas out. I guess that's a good thing.

The death toll on both sides speaks truth. It's 10 to 1 dead Lebanese. That means Israel has been taking ten sets of eyes and teeth for every one they lose. That's the disproportionate argument. 10 to 1, it's in the stats. Any sporting match in which one team scores 10 ten times more than the other you'd have to conclude was a pretty uneven match from the start.

Hiuzbollah is holding off an Army of half a million troops with about 50,000 fighters. That's staving off a force 100 times (or two orders of magnitude) bigger than it is.

They are doing it through strategy - force the Israelis to break up into small untits, fight on the away-team's turf, and do it in dense urban areas populated by civilians.

Hizbollah can't take on the Israeli army - BUT - a team of well-trained and well-armed Hizbollah insurgents is on even ground with a small team of Isreali soldiers in the streets of Lenanon.

The Israelis are causing lots of infrastructure damage and lots of (mostly civilian, but some militant fighter) casualties.

But in the street battles, Hizbollah is holding its own. The United state is watching this development very closely, because that's the kind of war we will be fighting in Iran, not if, but when, we go in there.

Why Israel and Hizbollah didn't simply exchange prisoners: because this isn't about prisoners. This is about who gets to control the Middle East (in which not only is oil a critical resource, but also water - a basic need for life itself), it is about who gets to have a sovereign nation and who doesn't in the Middle East, and it's about whose religious sect will enjoy dominion over all the other sects.

In other words, now they're playing for the big marbles.

Also, this war isn't just between Hizbollah and Israel. It's between Israel and Syria and Iran. It's a proxy for the war between America and Iran. It's the big stakes for the neocon dream of remaking the Middle East as American satellite-states that feed us endless supplies of affordable oil. You know, the Middle East in which big rich Americans come in and run the big oil and contrating businesses, and the locals shine their shoes and are happy for their tips.
The Middle East where American Tourists buy Middle Eastern trinkets and fabrics at outdoor markets for prices that are dirt cheap by American standards and then take their kids back to the McDonald's in the Ambassador's compound after sunset. Camel rides and cotton candy - pyramids and lavish lamb-kabobs at diplomats' house parties.

Bush and Cheney can't understand why in the world wouldn't the Arabs like that. They'd be getting paid too, y'know! And then maybe the little Arab kids could get some real religion- Church of England style. Ah, the good life! Hannibal, we hardly knew ye!

The genie's out of the bottle now, folks.

And where is Al-Qaeda in all this? It doesn't matter. Osama might as well retire, because he has accomplished the goals he formed Al-Qaeda for. He has helped "build a fire in the Middle East" (that's his words not mine), he has helped stoke a conflict that would suck the United States into a war that they cannot win nor walk away from, and that would cause a strain on the nation's finances (similar to the way they used the War in Afghanistan to help bring down the economy of the Soviet Union). He wanted the Arabs to unite against Isael and the US. He wanted Israel and the US to kill lots of Arabs so that it would expose America's moral hypocrisy and make the nations of the world stop loving and start being against America internationally.

His work is done. The fire is lighted and it's spreading. The United States is wading right into the whole quicksand with eyes wide open.

The Arabs cannot win. They are outspent, outgunned, out-manned, and their weaponry is decades behind America's.

America and Israel can and will win. It's inevitable. This is why terrorist ideology is so attractive to young Muslims. It's their way of dealing with a hopeless situation. Thay can't win through diplomacy. They can't compete economically. They can't win through military force. There is no way out for them other than servitude to the West and the decimation of their religion and culture similar to the fate of the American Indians in the face of white expansionism.

The only path of honor left for them is to die trying. This realization is what changes an Arab college student into a radical. This is the shocking reality that makes terrorists. This is the cause that no one in the West deals with in the war on terror.

Yes, America and Irael will win. At what cost? How many nuclear tipped bunker busters will it take? How many bombed out Arab and Israeli civilians? How many dead Americans as well? After the map of the Middle East is redrawn once again, as it has been so many, many times throughout history, who will rule over what?

Who will be the victors, and what will their spoils be?

And how long will it take? This is 2006. Will it be 2012, 2024, or perhaps even 2048?

Condi Rice says a peace treaty by next week.

Yeah, right. I got some prime housing units for you in Gulfport Mississippi, too.

Wow Yogi:

as ever, you lay it out very well,

too well dammit.

But you r right

to this side / that side counters

an excellent graphic of the strikes made on both sides since the start of the conflict is at
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/khtml/2006/07/19/world/middleeast/20060719_MIDEAST_GRAPHIC.html

dear yogi-one

the US is also watching carefully because this is the kind of war our military should have fought in Iraq, did not, and that's why we are still in there.

Bush was CoE, but left that affiliation. Bush and Cheney are both Methodists, of a possible sect i like to think is called "truly creepy Methodists".

dear SK

your argument is always the same: dismiss your opposition with standard labels, make a call for arms that you yourself will never risk having to respond to. this is no argument at all.

better to make a tomato sandwich, take it outside, and enjoy tomatoes and birds in the light of the early morning. this is what life is about. let us do whatever we can to give the same right to peaceful enjoyment of life to every other person on earth. this is what being peace-loving means. notice there is no baloney in the sandwich.

Hello Keith,

Thank you for appreciating my writing, especially, since my grammar and spelling skills are so atrocious. I once had a pretty good handle on my english grammar, but did not use the skills in many, many, many, years on a day to day basis.

I was in "material handling and management" for a fortune 500 company for many, many years. I decided that although my writing embarasses me, a lot, it is more important to express it, from the heart, and not worry about the "ole critical voice" in the head. Really, I am just an ordinary, everyday, anyone- who pays attention to what is happening in our World and puts in her "two cents." Blogs are really a great tool for "everyday" people to have a say.. and in writing that

Thank you Deepak, Gotham, and Mallika and anyone else involved in the everday upkeep for this venture, for offering this space in such an open and non-judgement manner for everyone's enjoyment.

Keith it is equally a pleasure to read your comments...peace ruth

Keith, re: #53; thanks for the rave reviews and critique; and I ditto ya about the wish's; though just making them, enrich's my life, in ways, unmeasurable, monetarily...

A little story, leading--> to a point:

When I were little; a bunch of us were "alley-kids" and that was where we hung out. Poverty, tin-can alley. IN a radius of maybe 6-7 houses from ours to the bakery; lived at least 80 kids!!

It was ghetto-area; riddled with big families. At the one end of the alley, on a corner, were a bakery-the back doors, often slung open, to let the aromatic accumulation of baking, escape... the baker often gave us day-old breads and donuts : ) He was very kind and generous this way, to the poorest, big families.

27 kids lived in our building of 4-apartments. Noise-box, it was. no wonder I treasure my peace and quiet at home(wink.) The Alley, was like a very long, mini-forested alley; overgrown, wild... and un-kempt; lined with unruly backyard sheds and garbage bins.

WE ruled those alleys with an iron fist... and a gentle hand....it was a land of the brave kids(smile)Reserved at night, for Peter Pan's and Wendy's...

Even as children... we play ruler games. Where do we learn that? How do we stop it, at the roots?

Probably, by striving to raise our children, non-biased, non-prejudiced, non-greedy, respectful, and definately, to be compassionate.

These ruler games are not specific and every human is prone to want to play them, as kids..but, who taught us? I don't remember who taught me "king of the castle" "red rover" or even, "hide and seek" etc??

Anyway... I suppose I attempted to do the only thing I could think of, and that was to create a diversion, to "break the string of anger" so that peace can come in.... for me, and then I thought I'd share it, b/c it worked for me obviously...

Kind, remains of the day to ALL,

North

I do daily, Keith. But realizing that the struggles are inside myself makes it easier to know what to ask for...Thy Will, Not Mine Be Done.

France and US have agreed to put a resolution before the UN Security Council, to try to end the Lebanon-Israel conflict. It calls for both sides to cease fire immediately, a buffer zone to be set up in southern Lebanon, guarded by the Lebanese Army and UN peacekeeping forces, then negotiations for a more permanent solution. I pray that this resolution is accepted by, and passes, the Council, and goes into effect.

link to the text of the resolution:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/05/world/05cnd-counciltext.html

Dear Heather,
Thanks for posting the link. I support the resolution and wish that it will take effect immediately.

"OP6. Calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution based on the following principles and elements:

- strict respect by all parties for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Israel and Lebanon"
...

If only ..... let it be very soon.
With love,
~ Kate

At last some hope. Kate, I agree, let them not quibble over punctuation, just bring the violence to an end first and foremost.

Desh
I am surprised with your comments. I agree that they have been dealt with a poor hand but that does not mean others should cheat them. I think Israel is not playing a fair and just game with them which is the root cause of all the problems.
Israel wants to negotiate peace with them but the final outcome of such negotiations have been altready decided by Israel. That is submision not negotiation. No wonder they cannot find palestanian leader willing to negotiate a peace treaty
Morris

Morris:

Tell me one country/organization/society/person - who, when in a position of power gave everything away to the weak or the loser??

I have a philosophy on Competitive Situations - and I call it the "Theory of Silver Platters"

It goes like this:

You are faced with an adversary. You want something from him - which he wont give you on a silver platter. The adversary wants something from you that you quote obviously wont give on a silver platter to him. The challenge is clear to both the parties!! Take the adversary's silver platter and not give yours!!

So, when the challenge and the situation is clear. If my adversary takes my silver platter - too bad for me - I wasnt prepared!!

Israel and the "Islamic Jehadi Combine" BOTH have their silver platters and they BOTH know the challenge! If Israel takes away the silver platter of the IJC - that aint CHEATING!! Thats called WINNING!!

Dont tell me if Palestine was in place of Israel and vice versa - the situation or reactions of the "winner" would have been ANY DIFFERENT!!

My principle is fairly straight forward - either KNOW how to fight before jumping into the ring.. or simply sit outside. Dont jump in with bangles in your hands and then start crying and howling!!

Lebanese, Syrians and Hezbollahs arent Gandhis or Buddhas the last time I checked...

.... So those..

.... who want by the YARD... but try by the INCH....

.... should be kicked by the FOOT!!!

Desh
Drishtikone.com

Naj:

"Don't you have the habit of reading news papers and watching TV?"

That was a classic bad ass comment. Honestly!

Who in all these commentators has talked about the Israeli kids and women?? Everyone and his brother - from Deepak Chopra to Salman ONLY hears the Lebanese kids and women...

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

This whole crisis started with England, and France and later America and Israel, they are all at fault.

It started back in the early 1900’s when Turkey was in control of the area, and European interests wanted greater control over the recourses of the region. France and England formed the Sykes-Picot agreement, which would have effectively separated the area into five zones. The zone that included Palestine from the Jordan to the Mediterranean would have been made an international zone, and the other four would have been controlled by France and England 2 each. This agreement never became a reality because of one minor British advisor to King Feisal, whose name was T.E. Lawrence!

Arabia owes him for their independence.

Later during the Second World War when Hitler was trying to exterminate the Jewish race, many Zionist Jews began to immigrate back to Palestine. It should be remembered that Palestine had been Arab for 1,300 years with a population of only 65,000 Jews in 1918 compared to 1,500,000 Arabs.

After Hitler was, defeated England and America wanted to find a place for the 100,000’s of displaced Jews. Since they were only willing to take a token amount of them into their own countries, they started pushing for a home in Palestine. They got the sanction of the League of Nations, which at that time had no Arab members, and then England made the infamous “Balfour Declaration” which was approved by President Wilson of the U.S.A. before it was even written. This Declaration established a Jewish homeland in Palestine, and begs the question what right did England or America have to give away Palestinian land?
By 1947, there were 600,000 Jews in Palestine most of them put there with American and British money and influence and they were pushing to place another 200,000 there. You now know the rest of the story.

The argument that Palestine is the birthplace of the Jewish religion and the Jewish ancestral home may evoke sympathy from some, but using that to demand back your homeland, flies in the face of logic and reality. WE could ask Illinois to give back the land they stole from the Sac and Fox tribes but it ain’t gonna happen! Neither will any of a 100 other displaced races be able to demand or get their original home back.

Unless you want to start using, arguments like, The Jews are the chosen people of God, and should be able to do what ever they want.
Rational people must see that there are many reasons for Palestine to be angry that the Jews have taken over their country in the last 50 years without their consent, and now run rough shod over them with a colossal supply of modern weapons supplied by America and England not to mention all the financial support Israel receives. Palestine is also the victim of very distorted and one-sided media coverage, branding them as terrorists, whenever they strike back with the only pitiful and barbaric methods available to them.

It is frightening how quickly history is forgotten, and rewritten by the strong.

Kind Regards,
Stan

Yes! Exactly Stan!

Give the Native Americans back the entire North American continent, and then we can talk about fixing the injustice of the Israelis' . . .

O wait God 'said' that the white man can kill off all brown people who stand in there way . . .

oops, let me see here 'the Saints,' Babylon, rich white boys that did not want to pay taxes and practice their own religion . . .

What we need is a good old-fashioned 21st century 'tea party' . . .

peace

dear Desh

your theory doesn't take into account man's complexity and cruelty.

take it back to Poland in the late '30's. Hitler had the silver platter. the Jews in Poland had no platter at all. yet they were forced to fight in order to survive. there was no scenario of relatively equal adversaries on both, then. there was a massively evil personality on one side, who, with a few like minds, was willing to break all past rules of civilized behavior to move his own agenda forward, and on the other side, millions of people who did not have that evil in them, who were caught open-mouthed and flat-footed as evil entered their livs and took most of them to the grave over the next seven years.

would you like to know one of the small, but complex, reasons Palestinian Arabs developed an animousity towards Jews, as Jews began to come into Israel to live in the last century? it was all about olive trees and land ownership customs.

in old Palestine, an Arab farmer normally didn't own the land he worked. he owned the plants he worked on the land. this is completely different from western (read European) land ownership customs, which give ownership of the plants to the land owner. Arab land customs recognized and rewarded sweat equity, in other words. now, one of the most important types of plants an Arab farmer could own was his olive trees. olive trees live for centuries, and they're productive during most of that time. olive oil was Palestine's main export at the time.

as Jews began to come to Palestine to live, they came to live on cooperative farms -- kibbutzim -- that had been put together by individuals or societies with money to buy land. when the land was purchased for the farms, the purchasers assumed everything on the land was theirs. but according to the centuries-old customs of Palestine, the plants on the land belonged to the farmers who had made them grow.

as the Jews began to work the kibbutzim, they came in conflict with the farmers who had worked the land. in order to get rid of the Arab farmers, the Jews cut down olive trees, turning peasant farmers into disposessed and starving men.

so effective was this tactic at undermining Arab self-respect and will, from both a practical and pychological point of view, that even today Israel still destroys olive trees when it wants to get a population of Arabs out of the way. and in these days, not only is the Arab farmer's livihood destroyed, he is also reminded, once again, of his abased status in the eyes of Israel -- and, he thinks, the world, too. this makes for a good breeding ground for converts to terrorist methods.

now this whole things started only because people buying land did not understand the customs in place on the land they bought. what would have been the applicability of silver platter face-offs there? who came to fight, on either side, back in those days? the Palestinian Arabs were like the Polish Jews in 1930's, though they were not faced with as much concentrated evil and military might. but they were certainly victims, and were taken advantage of. and it is still happening today.

might does not make right. man's ethos evolves forward in time, so we hope. in the past, those who won did not give up what they had won. that began to change in the last century, as colonial powers finally began to recognize the moral bankruptcy of their colonial practices, and pulled out, one by one, from their positions of power in other countries. yes, i am aware that it was economic and logistical strains that lubricated these changes. yet those very same economic and logistical problems came about because of the moral and ethical bankruptcy of colonial practices.

the old past is no predictor of whether it is possible and right for the recognition of moral and ethical justice to be put on the table as a high card for action, as solutions are being developed for conflicts around the world. the newer past, that levered the imperialists out of their cushy seats on the backs of other peoples, is a better predictor of how things could, and should, go in the future.

heather:

Everyone has a silver platter - it could be honor, psychological strength, money or land. Quite obviously Hitler was after something when he attacked Poland.

When I stated the Theory above - it was not in the vein of "this is how it SHOULD BE" but more along "this is how IT IS!".

I firmly believe that there are two paradigms to look at the world:

1. This is how the world should be
2. This is how the world IS.

These two paradigms bring out different responses from us.

Romantics are compelled to live in the first paradigm and ignore the latter.

The truly revolutionary ones START from the latter and then try and change the world to fit in the former.

"that began to change in the last century, as colonial powers finally began to recognize the moral bankruptcy of their colonial practices, and pulled out, one by one, from their positions of power in other countries."

I cannot say why they went out of other countries - but as far as India was concerned.. they had taken their silver platter from our country and whatever was left was of not much use.. THAT is why they left.

Remember India got independence in 1947 - 2 years after the end of the Second World War. The uprising in India was costly to England.. so it wasnt a good economic decision! It had nothing to do with Altruism or as much with Gandhi's famed Non-VIolence movement. Gandhi was romanticized by most in the west to subjugate India for centuries to come!!

... And what the Brits sowed.. the Chinese REAPED in 1961!

So... I have seen no major power - including the Arabs ... when they were in the power - they would give away their "silver platter" to the enemy!!

That is the reality. Now, you may not want to believe it... and keep on harping on "this is NOT how it is morally supposed to be".... but then that doesnt take you or the adversary ANYWHERE!!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Heather:

Who said the colonial powers really left the countries? They are still there stoking the conflicts in Africa and elsewhere. If you have been to any UN Peacekeeping mission you will know what I talking about.. the exploitation of the locals by submitting them for sex.. denuding the wealth of diamonds and other stuff by the European and American NGOs in Congo is so rampant that it is commonplace now!!

So, lets not go in there.... the same things are happening now too... just that the colonial powers devised a MORE efficient and economically useful ways to rule!!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Desh,

"That was a classic bad ass comment. Honestly!"

When I read 'honestly' in your comments, I feel something fishy! Honestly!!

Anyway take it easy and how are you?

Desh,

long time back in one of your comments i read that you were disgusted by Teesta setelvad's comment that people who died in godhra were kar sevaks....

Your this comment looks very similar to her comment...

"I honestly cannot feel much sympathy for such a disillusioned and hallucinating mass of people!!"

I was just surprised by similarity of the thought...or maybe i've read and misunderstood your comment.

Keith,

But many have written here and elsewhere I have read how US media cover the story and Desh lives there. That is why I asked him the question. His question, like some other questions of him about other topics was seemed to create an illusion that nobody in the world knows about the victims in the other side.

Andaleeb,

Precisely. I too was surprised to read such a comment from him. Honestly!

Take note of the other sentence where he says with disdain that much of the muslim world would have been like Afganistan. That means those who live in such places are less valuable than those in New York and arguably India and so can be laughed off.

History also teaches us that when you have money, power and weapons, no matter whatever you do, everybody will praise you. And they will base their praise on history too. Like we see here now.

I am fully convinced now that, like 'Bush/Modi/Osama fully deserve each other', Desh/Teesta deserve each other unequivocally.

dear Desh

remember, i said: "yes, i am aware that it was economic and logistical strains that lubricated these changes. yet those very same economic and logistical problems came about because of the moral and ethical bankruptcy of colonial practices."

it was no accident that it became too costly for the Brits to handle the uprising. that cost was built into the structure of imperialism.

moreover, after WWII, which placed a greater percentage of average Joe Brits into Asia and raised the consciousness of the average Brit about the value of the peopls of Asia, the upperclass twits and selfish SOB's who'd been making decisions under the shade of the British monarchy for centuries were not able to decide and act with such impunity as they had before. and how could Britain fairly say it was OK to rule India, when they had just given their very lives for years to liberate Europe and parts of Asia from fascism?

did Britain virtually destroy India before they left? nahi, i think that what was left in India was in immense disarray, but oh, the spirit and resources that remained, on which you all draw now. the generations who lived under or close to Britain's imperialism in India were traumatized by it. the generations that came after are picking up the pieces. but the jewel that is India is radiant, even under the mess that Britain left for you to clean up.

regarding Gandhi, the west romanticised him because he gave them something to look at, as an avatar and excuse, as they gave up their power. he became the symbol of the spirit of colonialized peoples, and thus the shorthand reason why it was ok for big powers to give up their imperialist holdings. let me tell you that in the west, what we see most clearly in Gandhi is his revolutionary spirit, his anger and his determination, not his non-violence philosophy. the production of khadi shirts, and the cultural imperative to wear them -- this is his biggest legacy, and one which the US now needs to learn to live by.

you say there are two paradigms for viewing the world: how the world is, and how it should be.

there is a third paradigm, that is much more complex, but it is this view that allows humanity to move forward. here is paradigm 3: there is how the world is, there is how it should be, and there is what we will do to shift it from one to the other.

this paradigm has no set methods or goals, because how the world should be today is not necessarily how it should be tomorrow, or in 100 years. this paradigm is difficult to live and requires constant self-examination, constant engagement with others, constant intent for compassion and vision, and constant prayers, because this paradigm is really about living in the moment with full consciousness, and man sucks at that, for the most part.

i'm standing in my living room, holding a crystal vase. my hand is wet. the vase slips from my hand...

paradigm 1: whoops, the vase crashes to floor and shatters, too bad.

paradigm 2: it never fell and broke, i only imagined the scenario, and i prevented it, i thought hard before i picked up that vase, i did not pick it up, or my hand was not wet.

paradigm 3: at the moment the vase slips from my hand, i reach below it and catch it before it hits the floor.

we all live by all three paradigms. the one i work on the most is 3. this is because there is so little that's under my control, that by living paradigm 3, i can respond to reality. it requires me to be in good condition, in terms of knowing reality, and knowing what's wrong and changeable about reality, and i often can't do it, but i try.

i have succeeded often enough in my life, in small and big things, to know that a moment of the world can be shifted from how it is to how it should be, if one is alert and focused, and one responds quickly and appropriately at the right time. the everyday revolutionary lives by paradigm 3. and that's me.

paradigm 3 takes me there -- there, where things are as they should be, despite their ever-changing nature -- as often as i can live by it. and that's why i try, all the time.

p.s. -- who ever said the process of de-imperialising the world was complete? not me. but compare it with how it was 100 years ago. an improvement, for sure.

I agree with those who said that the U.S.-French agreement on a resolution to end the conflict is a very good sign. Let's hope it will be signed very soon.
Peace everywhere, for all,
Donatella

Mary,
Do you live in Europe?
I am glad that the polls show little public support for Blair's foreign policy.
Peace,
Donatella

Deah
I am with you to a certain extent but not all the way. Your pardigam #2 keeps changing. World is very different to day if we compare it with what it was 100 years ago. Israel is probably working with pardigam #1. This how it should be. So I am not sure that it is that clear cut.
Might is right. May be. But if the powerful are grossly unjust to the weak,then the weak resort to unconventonal weapons to fight which we call terrorism.
Morris

Andaleeb:

Very good question! The two situations are completely different. One is a war and the other was an unprovoked aggression that was blamed on a person's 'alleged' description.

What is happening the world over is that the Muslim population is in conflict with the rest of the constituents. There are two viewpoints that I have heard:

one: Muslims are being subjugated the world over! That is why they have taken to violence.

two: Muslim population hasnt learnt to live with the others!

The names of the places that often are cited by both, the Muslim leaders or the sympathizers are Kashmir, Chechnya, Palestine, and Bosnia in the same breath! Now, I am not so conversant with the rest.. but as far as Kashmir is concerned... it is pretty obvious that a sizeable percentage of the Muslim population there either on their own or in connivance with Pakistan and the Arab Jehadis were responsible for ETHNICALLY CLEANSING the area of the Kashmiri Pandits! In the war that ensued from 1980 onwards (yes the mess started the day Paki Ranges entered in Kashmir in 1948) atrocities were committed by both sides.. deaths occured in both sides - Indian Army and the Muslim population.... butu the worst sufferers were the Indigenous population of the OTHER FAITH! They were simply wiped out!!

If that is anything to go by.. and the preponderance of such conflicts AROUND the world.. then you do think with a sense of frustration - why is it so? For a community allowing such a sick "Stream of COnsciousness" to prevail it is time to take responsibility!!

I have come to believe that the "Two Nation Theory" of Jinnah was a Freudian slip in the vast articulation of the Muslim mind.... why because it emphasized something that we are witnessing AROUND the world!

I honestly feel that we all need to revisit and understand the basic premises under the Two Nation Theory to understand the conflicts that are plaguing today.

My only explanation is that the very premise of Deeni+Duniyavi and the overbearance of Deeni over Duniyavi to an extent that religion leads the polity IS THE reason why we are seeing what we are seeing. But then my understanding is limited.

Heather:

I also said after introducing my two paradigms that :

"The truly revolutionary ones START from the latter and then try and change the world to fit in the former."

Which is essentially what you articulated so well with your vase example.

There are still TWO paradigms to understand the situation. The "third" paradigms ASSUMES the second and THEN contemplates an action plan!

"did Britain virtually destroy India before they left? nahi, i think that what was left in India was in immense disarray,"

Well they did EVERYTHING that they could to destroy anyways. It was just resilience that saved us! What happened at partition is UNIMAGINABLE.... millions uprooted!

As much as I think about that - I cannot let the thought escape that it was a formula that was set to destroy the basic fabric... because it was meant to sow a permanent wedge!

The wedge of the "Two Nation Theory" has turned out to be the most potent force destroying most of the world's societies now.

As far as the Brits contributions earlier is concerned - they used everything from Missionaries, "Indo-philes" like Max mueller etc, the trade that took out every industry and left the nation bankrupt... to drain the population away!

Teaching English was another way to slave the Indian mind forever.... it is just a quirk of fate that it has come to haunt them with loss in jobs!

Heather - the resilience of an adversary does not wash off you sins!

But I truly believe - after reading the Indian history and pondering over the times in that era that Indian population brought the destruction UPON THEMSELVES!! They just lost the silver platter! If you could read the drama of Mir Jaffer and Mir Qasim in Bengal and loss of Jhansi as well as Tipu Sultan you would know what I am saying!! We were just not prepared and so too bad!!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

we are told that it is always the Islamic fundamentalists who turn out to become suicide attackers and kill the innocents. Here are some data that contradicts with this assumption:

"In writing my book on suicide attackers, I had researchers scour Lebanese sources to collect martyr videos, pictures and testimonials and the biographies of the Hezbollah bombers. Of the 41, we identified the names, birth places and other personal data for 38. SHOCKINGLY, ONLY EIGHT WERE ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISTS. Twenty-seven were from leftist political groups like the Lebanese Communist Party and the Arab Socialist Union. THREE WERE CHRISTIANS, including A FEMALE HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER with a college degree. All were born in Lebanon.

What these suicide attackers — and their heirs today — shared was NOT A RELIGIOUDS or political ideology but simply a commitment to RESISTING A FOREIGN OCCUPATION. Nearly TWO DECADES of Israeli MILITARY PRESENCE DID NOT ROOT OUT Hezbollah. The only thing that has PROVEN TO END SUICIDE ATTACKS, in Lebanon and elsewhere, IS WITHDRAWAL BY THE OCCUPYING FORCE."
(Emphasis added)
- Robert Pape

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/03/opinion/03pape.html?ex=1312257600&en=622d42186901404b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Donatella, I am from Ireland.

10 years ago we had violence and conflict in the northern part of our country and now it has been solved, for the most part.

Senator Mitchell was instrumental in this process and he and Clinton are greatly admired here for the help and inspiration they gave.

I believe that the US can provide similar guidance in the Middle East.

Ruth, You have continuously blamed Hezbollah for this war, but under what circumstances did Hezbollah come into existance?

They did not exist before 1982. They were formed when Israel illegally invaded Lebanon. They were defending their country.

I think it is really important for both sides to recognise and take responsibily for co-creating this situation. It is the first step in solving the problem

Kind regards,

Mary

If that is so, who were the inventors of Two Nation Theory?

"The common discursive framework that Hindu and Muslim chauvinists share is predicated on the notion of Hindus and Muslims as two separate nations. In this sense, Advani's praise of Jinnah should come as no surprise. In actual fact, although Hindutva-walas would hate to admit it, Hindutva ideologues can claim the dubious distinction of inventing the notorious 'two nation' theory—of Indian Muslims and Hindus being two separate, irreconcilable nations—well before Jinnah and the League stole it from them to use it to spearhead the cause of a separate Muslim state of Pakistan.

The Hindutva invention of the two-nation theory is a carefully guarded secret. Hindutva-walas are, of course, understandably reluctant to broach the subject as it would expose the hollowness of their patriotic claims. The notion of Hindus and Muslims being separate, antagonistic, nations was central to the Hindu 'nationalist'discourse articulated by 'upper' caste, principally Brahmin, ideologues in late nineteenth century Bengal and Maharashtra. It was these ideologues who laid the basis of Hindutva as the full-blown ideology of Brahminical fascism in later years. Advocates of this discourse of Hindu supremacy sought to create the notion of what they called a single Hindu 'nation' out of a bewildering number of castes
and sects by setting them up against an imagined monolithic Muslim 'other' that was branded with all that the 'Hindu' was not meant to be: violent, iconoclastic, lascivious, murderous, and, above all, an 'enemy' of 'Mother India'. Muslims, they insisted, could not coexist comfortably with the Hindu 'nation'. Accordingly, the nationalism that these ideologues of Hindu racism devised made no provision for Muslims to exist on terms of equality. Muslims were given three unenviable choices: migration to some other country; conversion to Hinduism, or else acceptance of second-class citizenship, being forever at the mercy of the Hindus [read Brahmins and other 'upper' castes].

In pre-Independence years the principal organization representing Hindu communalism was the Hindu Mahasabha. The Mahasabha was essentially an 'upper' caste outfit, representing as it did 'upper' caste interests while at the same time claiming to champion the rights of 'Hindu nation'. A number of RSS leaders were schooled in the Mahasabhite tradition of Hindu 'nationalism'. As Jinnah and his Muslim League were to later go on to do, from its very inception the Mahasabha spoke in terms of Hindus and Muslims being two separate and antagonistic 'nations'. In fact, Hindu supremacists associated with the Mahasabha were peddling the 'two nation' theory at a time when Jinnah was still being hailed as the 'Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity'.

The Maharsahtrian Brahmin V.D. Savarkar, inventor of the term and concept of 'Hindutva, also spoke of the Hindus and Muslims of India as two separate 'nations'. He served as the President of the Mahasabha for six years, from 1937 to 1942. Addressing the Ahmedabad session of the Mahasabha in 1937, he declared, '[T]here are two nations in the main, the Hindus and the Muslims, in India'. The official biography of the Hindu Mahasabha extols Savarkar's commitment to the 'two nation' theory in the following words: 'To Veer Savarkar […] goes the credit of creating the ideology which is popular by the name of Hindu Rashtravad. It is Veer Savarkar who gave the national soul to Bharat and asserted that Hindus are a nation by themselves'.

In actual fact, then, it could be said, Hindu supremacists, and not Jinnah and his ilk, were the founders of the pernicious 'two-nation' theory. Although earlier ideologues of Hindu supremacy did speak of Hindus and Muslims as two separate 'nations', none of them went so far as to suggest that a possible solution to the Hindu-Muslim question was geographical separation or the partition of India. The credit for that goes not to Jinnah, as is generally believed, but to leading Hindutva ideologues. One of the first to suggest this drastic measure was a certain Bhai Parmanand, a major Hindutva icon and one-time President of the Hindu Mahasabha. Shortly after the British government announced the division of Bengal in 1905, Parmanand was provoked to demand that 'the territory beyond Sindh should be united with Afghanistan and North-West Frontier Province into a great Musulman Kingdom. The Hindus of the region should come away, while at the same time the Musulmans in the rest of the country should go and settle in this territory'. Parmanand's suggestion for the Partition of India, it should be noted, preceded the Muslim League's Pakistan Resolution by over three decades.

Parmanand's proposal was not a mere personal whim. Rather, it seems to have reflected a considerably important shade of Hindutva opinion for the official biography of the Hindu Mahasabha, published in 1966, mentions that 'very few understood the Hindu-Muslim problem better than Bhai-ji (Parmanand)'. The obscure Bhai Parmanand, not Jinnah, then, could well be said to be the ideological founder of Pakistan! Advani's visit to Jinnah's mausoleum may not be that inexplicable after all, although some might be distressed that, given Hindutva-walas' remarkable penchant for claiming a Hindu origin for just about everything, from the Taj Mahal to the Ka'aba in Mecca to the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, Advani did not make so bold as to declare that the credit for establishing Pakistan should go to the Hindu Mahasabha and not to the Muslim League!

Another pioneering proponent of the 'two nation' theory and Partition was Lala Lajpat Rai, hailed in Hindutva circles as a great advocate of the Hindu 'nation'. Pandit Sunderlal, a close friend of Gandhi, and for six years Lajpat Rai's personal secretary, claimed in an article published almost four decades ago that 'The idea of Partition of India into a Hindu India and a Muslim India for solving the Hindu-Muslim problem occurred first to the mind of the late Lala Lajpat Rai'. Well before Jinnah came up with his demand for Partition, Rai had suggested that the Frontier Province and the Muslim-dominated parts of Punjab 'should be separate from the rest of India and allowed under exclusive Muslim administration', while the rest of India should 'remain Hindu India'. Sunderlal adds that 'the majority of Indian Muslim leaders of that day not only pooh-poohed the suggestion but even called it a device to exclude the Muslims from the country'.

The Maharashtrian Brahmin M.S.Golwalkar, the second RSS supremo, was yet another of the early Hindutva advocates of the 'two nation' theory. He fiercely condemned that the 'composite' or 'territorial' nationalism propounded by groups such as the Congress that sought to build an Indian identity that transcended religious differences. He insisted that Hindus were a 'nation' by themselves and that India belonged to them alone. Muslims and Christians, he argued, were not
part of the Hindu or Indian 'nation', using these two terms interchangeably. In contrast to Parmanand and Lajpat Rai, he did not envisage Partition as a means for resolving the problem of the 'two nation' theory. Instead, he held out to Muslims the bone-chilling choice between death, conversion to Hinduism or complete capitulation to Hindu (read 'upper' caste) tyranny. 'The non-Hindu peoples in Hindusthan', Golwalkar pronounced, 'must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must entertain no ideas but the glorification of the Hindu race and religion…or may stay in the country wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment—not even citizens' rights'. If Muslims and other non-Hindus refused to accept this, he warned, they would be treated in exactly the same way as Hitler treated the Jews.

Hindutva-walas and Islamic fundamentalists make the most comfortable ideological bedfellows. There is little to distinguish the ranting of Hindutva ideologues from the likes of the Muslim League or even Islamists like the Lashkar-e Tayyeba and the Jama'at-i Islami on the question of 'authentic' religious, communal and national identity. Looking at the world through the same conceptual lens and speaking essentially the same discourse of exclusivism and exclusion, they desperately need each other to survive and thrive. Advani's recent utterances, should, therefore, come as no surprise. Contrary to what some in the Hindutva camp insist, far from constituting a betrayal of the ideology of Hindutva they actually amount to an enthusiastic endorsement of it."

http://www.cobrapost.com/documents/AdvaniJinnah.htm

Naj, thanks for the above article. From what I have read of Jinnah and Gandhi, it seems Desh is out to lunch for accusing Jinnah of two nation theory. The guy has been smoking pot from what I have seen of his many comments for a while. It only takes a quick read into Jinnah's various speeches to note that he was no exclusivist at all.

Naj:

What you have cited is 'another' opinion. And just by the way - the RSS was not instrumental in creating pakistan.. it was the Muslim League. THEY ASKED FOR IT!!

It is pretty fashionable to put all the sins of partition and the violence at RSS and Sangh Parivar's door.. without putting any responsibility at ML's footsteps.... but that is another example of one-sided thinking.

noname: "Jinnah's various speeches to note that he was no exclusivist at all."

then pray, what was the great motivation to create another country at the cost of millions dead??

Even today - even if you would leave out the Punjabi Sunnis - rest of the "Muslims" are much safer in India than in B'desh and Pak put together!! Nobody goes to Shia masjids to shoot them off.. or is there any state policy to cleanse the country off of Ahmediyas!

So, in essence Jinnah wanted to create another country for the sake of Muslims freedom - but a "secular" one - with whose blood he actually paid for it..

.. you know, tell this nonsense to those who have never read history.. dont go around giving opinions or eds of leftists as "evidence" of the truth!!

Desh
Drishtikone.com

Desh,

To make things clearer, let's separate the facts from 'opinions'.

Fact# 1 - In fact, Hindu supremacists associated with the Mahasabha were peddling the 'two nation' theory at a time when Jinnah was still being hailed as the 'Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity'.

Fact #2 - The Maharsahtrian Brahmin V.D. Savarkar, inventor of the term and concept of 'Hindutva, also spoke of the Hindus and Muslims of India as two separate 'nations'. He served as the President of the Mahasabha for six years, from 1937 to 1942. Addressing the Ahmedabad session of the Mahasabha in 1937, he declared, '[T]here are two nations in the main, the Hindus and the Muslims, in India'. The official biography of the Hindu Mahasabha extols Savarkar's commitment to the 'two nation' theory in the following words: 'To Veer Savarkar […] goes the credit of creating the ideology which is popular by the name of Hindu Rashtravad. It is Veer Savarkar who gave the national soul to Bharat and asserted that Hindus are a nation by themselves'.

Fact #3 - One of the first to suggest this drastic measure was a certain Bhai Parmanand, a major Hindutva icon and one-time President of the Hindu Mahasabha. Shortly after the British government announced the division of Bengal in 1905, Parmanand was provoked to demand that 'the territory beyond Sindh should be united with Afghanistan and North-West Frontier Province into a great Musulman Kingdom. The Hindus of the region should come away, while at the same time the Musulmans in the rest of the country should go and settle in this territory'.

Fact #4 - Parmanand's suggestion for the Partition of India, it should be noted, preceded the Muslim League's Pakistan Resolution by over three decades.

Fact #5 - Pandit Sunderlal, a close friend of Gandhi, and for six years Lajpat Rai's personal secretary, claimed in an article published almost four decades ago that 'The idea of Partition of India into a Hindu India and a Muslim India for solving the Hindu-Muslim problem occurred first to the mind of the late Lala Lajpat Rai'. Well before Jinnah came up with his demand for Partition, Rai had suggested that the Frontier Province and the Muslim-dominated parts of Punjab 'should be separate from the rest of India and allowed under exclusive Muslim administration', while the rest of India should 'remain Hindu India'.

Fact #6 - Sunderlal adds that 'the majority of Indian Muslim leaders of that day not only pooh-poohed the suggestion but even called it a device to exclude the Muslims from the country'.

Fact #7 - 'The non-Hindu peoples in Hindusthan', Golwalkar pronounced, 'must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must entertain no ideas but the glorification of the Hindu race and religion…or may stay in the country wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment—not even citizens' rights'. If Muslims and other non-Hindus refused to accept this, he warned, they would be treated in exactly the same way as Hitler treated the Jews.

Nobody - the author or me - claimed that muslim league has no responsibility for the creation of pakistan. I was just proving as the author does, that "the credit for two nation theory goes not to Jinnah, as is generally believed, but to the leading Hindutva ideologues".

Naj
I am not impressed with all that mumbo jumbo you wrote about who said what and when. All those folks did not succeed in crating a Hindu nation. What emerged in 1947 was a Muslim Pakistan and a Secular India. Not the other way around. As I understand India has almost 15% population Muslim. I do not know the percentage of Hindus in Pakistan. The history speaks loudly and clearly about communal mentality of the people
Morris

Naj:

You have presented "facts" based on who???

Let it as it is the way you put it.. the FIRST "Hindu" voice according to you - for Hindu-Muslims as two different nations came in .......1937??

Here is what Illama Iqbal said in 1933:

Allama Iqbal's statement explaining the attitude of Muslim delegates to the Round-Table Conference issued in December, 1933 was a rejoinder to Jawahar Lal Nehru's statement. Nehru had said that the attitude of the Muslim delegation was based on "reactionarism." Iqbal concluded his rejoinder with:

"In conclusion I must put a straight question to punadi Jawhar Lal, how is India's problem to be solved if the majority community will neither concede the minimum safeguards necessary for the protection of a minority of 80 million people, nor accept the award of a third party; but continue to talk of a kind of nationalism which works out only to its own benefit? This position can admit of only two alternatives. Either the Indian majority community will have to accept for itself the permanent position of an agent of British imperialism in the East, or the country will have to be redistributed on a basis of religious, historical and cultural affinities so as to do away with the question of electorates and the communal problem in its present form.""

Later in 1940.. Jinnah - the "Oh-so-secular" leader explained the philosophy THUS:

In his Presidential Address delivered at Lahore, on March 22-23, 1940, he explained:

"It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religious in the strict sense of the word, but are, in fact, different and distinct social orders, and it is a dream that the Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality, and this misconception of one Indian nation has troubles and will lead India to destruction if we fail to revise our notions in time. The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, litterateurs. They neither intermarry nor interdine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspect on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other and, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built for the government of such a state."

And and that time there were TWO major parties Muslim League and the Congress. If anything, the RSS was still a preipheral movement.

This is more history on the Two Nation Theory:

"Allama Iqbal's presidential address to the Muslim League on 29 December 1930 is seen as the first introduction of the two-nation theory in support of what would ultimately become Pakistan. Ten years later, Jinnah made a speech in Lahore on 22 March 1940 which was very similar to Al-Biruni's thesis in theme and tone. Jinnah stated that Hindus and Muslims belonged to two different religious philosophies, with different social customs and literature, with no intermarriage and based on conflicting ideas and concepts. Their outlook on life and of life was different and despite 1,000 years of history, the relations between the Hindus and Muslims could not attain the level of cordiality. The only difference between the writing of Al-Biruni and the speech of Jinnah was that Al-Biruni made calculated predictions, while Jinnah had history behind him to support his argument."

It is a FACT that Jinnah had left for London following his fall-out with Congress leaders... and returned on the calling of the Muslims students in Cambridge... and what Mohd. Iqbal had articulated in 1930.... Jinnah took it forward in 1934!!

You are right about one thing though - the credit for the two nation theory cannot be entirely laid at the door of Jinnah.. he merely used the thoughts of Al Biruni to forward his agenda!

You know Naj... you just look for excuses to put the ball in the others' courts... little realizing the gravity of the mess this world is in today.

My hope was that through our interaction you and others may see the need for introspection... but its plainly clear that it is a dream....

.. a dream which will turn out to be a nightmare for your future generations to come.

Mark my words... they will resonate 10-15 years from now.. the direction where we are headed is destructive sans introspection!!

Desh
Drishtikone.com

Morris,

The purpose of that mumbo jumbo was not to impress anybody. It was to show that there is history even before 1947 and for those who might be interested in history not just in its convenient, selective segments. I am sure that you will not be impressed but you might be interested to know that there were muslims who as fiercely as any other hindus opposed Jinna, muslim league and the creation of Pakistan.

Desh,

“You have presented "facts" based on who???”

- Facts based on
i)Hindu Mahasabha
ii)V.D. Savarkar
iii)Bhai Parmanand
iv)Pandit Sunderlal
v)Lajpat Rai
vi)Golwalkar

“Let it as it is the way you put it.. the FIRST "Hindu" voice according to you - for Hindu-Muslims as two different nations came in .......1937??”

- First thing first. Not according to me, but according to the historical fact.

And it is not 1937. It is 1905, at the time of division of Bengal. Despite quoting two times, since your eyes some how evaded the fact about Parmanand, will re-quote again:

“Shortly after the British government announced the division of Bengal in 1905, Parmanand was provoked to demand that 'the territory beyond Sindh should be united with Afghanistan and North-West Frontier Province into a great Musulman Kingdom. The Hindus of the region should come away, while at the same time the Musulmans in the rest of the country should go and settle in this territory'. Parmanand's suggestion for the Partition of India, it should be noted, preceded the Muslim League's Pakistan Resolution by over three decades.”

Since this happened three decades before Allama Iqbal and Jinna, the quotes about them in your post are irrelevant in this context. I repeat in this context.

“And and that time there were TWO major parties Muslim League and the Congress. If anything, the RSS was still a preipheral movement.”

- Agree to certain extent. As the article points out at the end, they needed each other and the presence was sufficiently enough to whip up the communal tension.

“You know Naj... you just look for excuses to put the ball in the others' courts... little realizing the gravity of the mess this world is in today.

My hope was that through our interaction you and others may see the need for introspection... but its plainly clear that it is a dream”

- Are you sure you are not doing the same?
No Desh. There is no such intention from my part. I have already said elsewhere that it is not my purpose and I have also said that I am not trying to absolve muslim league or jinna for anything what they have actually done. But when present day Muslims are single handedly picked for the responsibility for not just the ‘gravity of the mess this world is in today’ but also even in the past history, then I will point out what I know. This should not be taken as an attempt to evade the necessity for introspection.

Are you able to take such a stand on Hindu Mahasabha and agree that they are the inventors? No, because you have now one Al-Beruni! Did you mean that it was actually Al-Beruni, who was the man behind Pakistan? Did you mean that Al-Beruni’s words influenced Indian muslims for the creation of Pakistan? I would be interested know, honestly!

Now, just for fun, let’s deconstruct your sentence: “My hope was that through our interaction you and others may see the need for introspection.” You are writing that your intention of interaction is, myself and others may see the need for introspection. But not you!

“the direction where we are headed is destructive sans introspection!!”

- Completely agree. Do you think you too need to do or only others ?

NAJ: Post 82
"Hindu supremacists "
Ha Ha ha....LOL
I want to know who/where the hell "Hindu supremacists" are/Were ?
I thought supremacists term used for people who have world domination ambition..
Hindus or INdia was ruled by all colors of People except black.I m just curious to know what they proud of..their "VEGETARIAN DIET" OR " PU*SY" attitude or Their closed Culture and society or Nutty G*Y people like DESH....

Jignesh,

Encarta dictionary defines supremacists as:

somebody who holds the view that a particular group is innately superior to others and therefore is entitled to dominate them.

Jignesh,
What is you opinion of the following?:

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which assumed power in 1998 at the head of a coalition of centrist parties, functions as the political wing of the Hindu nationalist Sangh Parivar. Within the Sangh Parivar, it is allied with extremist groups that engage in a virulent hate campaign and sometimes acts of violence against religious minorities. The RSS, one such group, was founded by admirers of fascism and Naziism, produced the radicals who killed Gandhi, and is now a major paramilitary organization with millions of members. Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee publicly praises the RSS, and attends their functions.

The new report shows that, while the governing BJP has occasionally persuaded Hindu militants to tone down their rhetoric, it appears unable or unwilling to control or hold accountable Hindu militants and, in some cases, its officials have incited and orchestrated militants, and participated themselves in attacks on religious minorities. As the report details, this is combined with its use of political power to Hinduize the school curriculum, declaration of intent to change the constitution in order to undercut the rights and status of minorities, and support for laws that restrict conversions to non-Hindu religions among lower castes and tribal people.

Recently, with BJP support, laws have been adopted that restrict the ability of a Hindu to change his religion in Tamil Nadu and Gujarat states, and proposals are underway for national restrictions on religious conversions. Pope John Paul II spoke out against these developments in June 2003 as “unjust” and “prohibiting free exercise of the national right to religious freedom.”

Such BJP policies coincide with increasingly violent attacks by Hindu militants on religious minorities. One target of extreme Hindu nationalist groups is the Muslim community, which is haunted by the fear of communal riots that have taken the lives of thousands of Muslims and Hindus since Indian independence. Between one and two thousand Muslims were killed in massacres in the state of Gujarat in February and March 2002, which began when Muslim mobs reportedly set fire to a train carrying Hindu nationalists, killing at least 58 people. No one has been punished to date for the thousands of Muslim deaths in Gujarat. [On November 24, 2003, 15 Hindus were convicted of 14 Muslim murders in Gujarat and the case is headed for appeal.]

Christian persecution in India gained international attention in 1999 after Australian missionary Graham Staines and his two sons were burned alive by a Hindu extremist mob. India’s Home Ministry (internal security) and National Commission for Minorities list over a 100 annual attacks against Christians in recent years. The attacks include the murder of missionaries and priests, the sexual assault of nuns, the ransacking of churches, convents and other Christian institutions, the desecration of cemeteries and Bible burnings. A list of such attacks is recorded in the appendices to the new report. Though the perpetrators of the Staines’ murders have been sentenced, the vast majority of the anti-Christian crimes go unpunished.

This mounting violence has taken place against the background of provocative statements by BJP members and their allies. After the massacres in Gujarat, the state’s Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, a BJP member, called upon his supporters to “teach a lesson” to those who “believe in multiplying the population,” referring to the Muslim community. Ashok Singhal, the President of the VHP International, one of the components of the Sangh Parivar, described the Gujarat carnage as a “successful experiment” and warned that it would be repeated all over India.

Violence against the Christian and Muslim minorities is more common in election periods as Hindu radicals resort to hate rhetoric and violence in calculated political moves to solidify their support, according to the report. Sangh Parivar threats and violence aimed at stopping lower caste members from converting from Hinduism has also helped garner Hindu votes.

K

Naj:

If historic dates is what makes you happy then one can easily go back to Syed Ahmed Khan who brought this out well before the advent of Hindu Mahasabha -

In a conversation with the governor of the United Provinces, Syed Ahmad Khan told him:

"I am now convinced that the Hindus and Muslims could never become one nation as their religion and way of life was quite distinct from one and other... I am convinced that both these communities will not join whole heartedly in anything. At present there is no open hostility between the two communities but it will increase immensely in the future."

Khan died in 1898!

Then you also talk of my introspection....

1. Hundreds of Thousands of Kashmiri Pandits were either killed, raped or made to leave their homes .... and NOT A SQUEAK from any quarters!

A few thousand Muslims killed in Gujarat and everybody and his brother in the world wants to rake it up!

What do you want me to introspect here??

2. HIndu Mahasabha and RSS were at anytime fringe movements/parties... the two biggest opponents were Congress and Muslim League. ML was clearly sitting on the horse of "Two Nation Theory".. and it ACTUALLY DEMANDED and resorted to violence because of it despite the requests from every COngress leader...and finally CREATED the final model of the TWO NATION THEORY!

.... and yet you and every Muslim and "secular" has the temerity to throw the gauntlet of "two nation Theory" at the feet of RSS/Hindu Mahasabha????

What do you want me to introspect here????

3. Hundreds of temples in B'desh and Pakistan are destroyed and Hindus either forcibly converted or killed or made to leave .... NOT A SQUEAK from Muslims in India or the seculars! Why? it is NOT our country..

Now, Jews bomb Lebanon.. and we want to march in Delhi, Mumbai, Calcutta... and where have you...

What do you want me to introspect here??

4. Russia: Russians-Muslims
Nigeria: Christians - Muslims
China: Chinese- Muslims
India: Hindus/Sikhs- Muslims
Jerusalem: Jews - Muslims
France: French (christians and atheists) - Muslims
US-led areas: Christians-Muslims

I am sure there are many other communities which are minorities in all these areas/countries.. and yet you dont get the others fighting! If the "hurt" of discrimination was anything to go by then by now Muslims areas would have been bombed in Delhi/Jammu by Kashmiri Pandits over the last two decades!

DO you see any pattern? A pattern of whinning and killing?? While others who are discriminated do not have the right to even whine.. it suddenly becomes kosher for Muslims to whine as well as KILL with impunity!!

I can understand when one community is targetted in one country... hmmm that is bad.. but when in EVERY major conflict in the world one side is ALWAYS the same community... (and the MUSLIM from India has a heart attack as the Muslim in Lebanon is bombed - clear Pan-Islamic feelings).... it surely becomes too much of a coincidence!! It actually makes you believe that they have a COMMON PATTERN of functioning!!

So, it is not me who is responsible for :

"But when present day Muslims are single handedly picked for the responsibility for not just the ‘gravity of the mess this world is in today’ but also even in the past history,"

.... .but the Muslims THEMSELVES through a PATTERN of being the OTHER SIDE of EVERY MAJOR conflict PICK THEMSELVES UP as being responsible for the conflicts!!

THAT is the introspection that I request!

But heck .. here you just want to bring another quote from this guy and that guy to show Why Lebanon is not guilty and Israelis are ... .why Hindus in India have discriminated against Muslims.. so they start bombing.. why Chechens are not responsible ... but the Russians are for having their kids bombed et al...

.. everywhere there is an EXCUSE for the terrorism that is perpetrated by the Muslim extremists...

... and the "Moderates" like YOU and others... dish out EXCUSE after EXCUSE... to BACK UP THESE EXTRMISTS in EVERY SOCIETY AND COUNTRY!!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Kamini:

"The RSS, one such group, was founded by admirers of fascism and Naziism, produced the radicals who killed Gandhi"

Nathuram Godse is ON RECORD to have said that he did that alone based on HIS CONSCIENCE and there was no connivance of RSS in Gandhis killing.. and YET you just go about your own version??

The ONLY time the truth regarding Gandhi's murder came out was when Gopal Godse opened his mouth... because as far as the Secular-Nehru's Govt. was concerned they had simply banned and COMPLETELY restricted any word from Godse's trial to come out!

So, they could say what they wanted!

Heck Gandhi did not even utter Hey Ram.. Nathuram Godse was the closest when he actually got the third bullet and died.... YET we are made to believe that kind of crap!!

So, either LOBBY for all the records of Godse's trials including the remarks of the Jury to be made public... OR stop making ill-informed statements!!

It is Congress' pet peeve against the RSS.. even the present PM wasnt spared from that when he non-challantly went up on the stage in Tilak Nagar when he fought his only elections to say that 1984 riots were orchestrated by RSS!!! I mean I was there in Delhi.. and we all know that this is a BUNCH OF BALONEY!! In 1984, what happened was a MASSACRE - of a community BY a political party - Congress!!

And what does the COngress goons call it now?? "HINDU-SIKH RIOTS"!! What mischief!!

And while you are on your high horse of bringing Modi down... have you said a word about Rajiv Gandhi??

WHY NOT???

How was Rajiv Gandhi ANY DIFFERENT from Modi??

Both were at the helm when their subordinates went about killing and raping an entire community!

Both justified it! (remember "Jab ek bada ped girta hai" speech??)

And both did NOTHING to bring the culprits to justice!

So why this SELECTIVE AMNESIA??

Is it because the blood of a Muslim is more valuable versus the blood of a Sikh?

Or is it because it is SEXIER to shout against a Hindu versus COngress party??

Whatever be the reason .... in my eyes - the complete silence on Rajiv Gandhi on part of Modi baiters is an indication of HYPOCRISY!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Hi Kamini,

Well.. Whatever understanding I have about Hindus or Indian is they are not trouble to world politics. They are extremely peaceful country.
Now is this right? I guess not however I do not care much about it. If they do not want to take action against extreme Muslim fascism it's their choice.
If they do not want to learn from Israel It's their choice.
Your example of Hindu extremism may be exceptions. I guess May be it's reaction to extreme Muslim fascism. However overall they are not aggressive in fight against Islamic terror as they should be .Is it right thing.Of course not. But hey that is their choice.
My Point is may be people like DESH are aggressive in arguing(Only Talk No Action) However they are not even 1% close to Americans or Israelis as far as fighting against root of the problem.

Two questions. May be there are obvious answers and I am ignorant about them.
If Hindus were as fanatics as you folks are describing then how come there are millions of Muslims still living in predominantly hindu India?
And if Muslims are anywhere as peace loving as Hindus are then how come existence of minorities in Muslim contries is generlly very small,if any?
Morris

Desh,

Now I got it, honestly! It is muslims, muslims and muslims. And If I and other muslims do not heed your advise for introspection, our future generations will suffer. Got it

No wonder Iran wants to make nuclear bombs!! If I am the president, I am sure I will do the same in a world that is full of Deshs.

Desh,

Just remembered another guy, with whom I used to discuss in another forum. It was when US was about to attack Iraq. He said that India should join US as this is the golden chance to revenge the first muslim attack on India from Baghdad about 1000 years ago!

Somehow, you made me remember him.

Salman,

We are partners of Intent Blog how can we
get the message out to the world NOW please let
us know. These stories need to be told not through mainstream but via the net.

Main Stream media will only deliver what it wants to show.

Please let us know how we can help to get the message out globally.

we are in communication with Mallika.

Ashie

Naj:

"No wonder Iran wants to make nuclear bombs!! If I am the president, I am sure I will do the same in a world that is full of Deshs."

That is your prerogative.

I could say the same for you.. but that is not how I take a debate. Its strictly a debate of ideas... and has nothing to do with a person.

"It was when US was about to attack Iraq. He said that India should join US"

I never believed that. It has though turned out to be helpful from the Indian national interest viewpoint - because now all the jehadis dream to go to Iraq instead of Kashmir... its better to kill a white American than 20 Indian brownies... it gets them more publicity!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Naj:

One last thing. The "reply" to all who disagree with you is not to bomb the heck out him.. like you suggest doing to the "likes of me"...

... often it is to think how everyone can look at the world in a new perspective.

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

This is nauseating Desh, pls stop acting like a saint.

What kind of debate of ideas you are talking about? What were the ideas you were debating? You were only spreading lies, lies and lies again. Let’s recap what have been going on here between desh and me.

First you said that the muslims in India do not face any threat from Shiva Sena and other sangh parivar scoundrels. This is only a lie as proved by many independent and government agencies and you call it an idea?

Then you said Vajpayee government conducted nuclear test only to bring its masters’ attention to what is happening in its neighborhood. Without any proof except what army officers had talked to you and we know what will happen when you talk to somebody.

Then you said you have talked enough to understand how Sufis, who ‘added spirituality’ to Islam are treated. As anybody who has lived with muslims knows, it is also a total lie. I have also shown that ‘adding spirituality’ part is also a lie.

Then you said that more than 90% of Indian muslims in US whom you spoke with, are loyal to Pakistan. While the truth is just the opposite, as proved by a survey conducted by a reputed agency. I have also spoken to a few of my friends in US and checked with them to tell me frankly. None of them said they are loyal to Pakistan. And you call this lie an idea!

Then you said only Jinna and muslims are responsible for two nation theory and to add effect you called in Freud too. I have shown that hindus too had the same opinion and as hindus, there were muslims too who were opposed to the idea of Pakistan. Again, there were numerous muslims who ‘stayed back’ in India as they did not had much love for jinna. You ignored this fact. And you call this propaganda an idea?

The last straw was when you said ‘moderates like me’ find excuses for terrorists activities. Where and when did I write excuses?

Yet you shamelessly ask what I want you to introspect.

Desh, this show of extreme poverty of honesty is appalling. I did have this feeling since the beginning but I gave you the benefit of doubt and asked you whether you are just repeating what the media tells. You reiterated that you do not do that and you put everything on the table and expected the same from everybody.!

Your duplicity does not end here, either. When it comes to the issue of Israel/Palestine you talk about the history and the lesson it taught you that whoever conquers wherever, it is theirs. What is then your problem? Why not you apply the lesson you learned from history in Kashmir and elsewhere and take relief in the conclusion that history is just repeating there now. Why, if the lesson you learned from history can be applied in Israel/Palestine issue, it can be applied in Kashmir too. (To emphasis, I am typing in uppercase, THIS IS NOT MY VIEW about Kashmir. I am just applying your theory in another situation only) Are these the ideas you wanted to debate? Come on. Why this hypocrisy?

Yet, you shamelessly repeat the question that what do I want you to introspect and I wonder how blind a man can be.

Now you come back again, confirming the ‘muslim love of violence’, like the prostitute who preaches vedanta. FYI, that bomb is not to attack anybody, it is to protect not just me but my future generation too who are unwilling to ‘introspect’ the way you dictate. Now Desh, may be you can do something to attract your master’s attention to Naj’s nuclear activity!!

PS: This post is not a personal attack on Desh and I know this type of post can be very boring and not suitable for a site like IB. In fact, I am not interested at all whether or not he introspect or he spread lies and lies. I am writing this to acknowledge the presence of a dangerous cancer whose purpose is to demonize muslims. It will use all types of tricks to realize their vested interests. Sings of such elements can be felt in IB too. Like terrorism, this too has to be opposed.

Naj:

I am not being a saint. I have said what I have and I stand by it!

Lets see what I said and what YOU "thought" I said:

1. Threat to Muslims from Shiv Sena:

I said that the threat to the future of Muslims across the country - specially in the rural areas - is MORE from the lack of opportunities and the education THAN from Shiv Sena. YET most seculars go after Shiv Sena and completely disregard the former!

2. Nuclear Blast and Vajpayee: It is incovertible that China, Pakistan, and North Korea had a nexus where Missiles and Nukes were being exchanged freely. US was not doing anything and so wasnt anybody else. The AQ Khan Bazaar was rampant in its activities! These are FACTS.. NOW!! They were behind the scenes at THAT TIME!

I said that the TRIGGER was the need to bring out the Pak Nukes in the almirah so everything - whatever was there - could be brought into the open! And I stand by it .. as the future developments CLEARLY SHOWED that to be the truth!!

I also said - that since they were going to do the blasts - as a strategic decision it was prudent to conduct all the tests that they required in ONE GO!! Nothing contradictory about it!

3. SPirituality and Sufis: You gave ONE Example and totally and arbitrarily diregarded the names of "those popular in the West" like Hafeez, Rumi, Bulle Shah etc...

"Then you said you have talked enough to understand how Sufis, who ‘added spirituality’ to Islam are treated. As anybody who has lived with muslims knows, it is also a total lie. I have also shown that ‘adding spirituality’ part is also a lie."

What you just STATED IS AN OPINION... and NOT A FACT!! Simply because you say so.. doesnt make it obvious! In strict Sunni sense - where no future Prophets are to be there or respected - you are telling me that has a spiritual ring around it??? I am the ONLY one .. and rest after me are useless??

I had asked you specific questions - and you answered NONE.. except saying in a rather "High Road" Nonsense - that it was the Prophets way of showing love and compassion??!!! Love and COmpassion to see everyone as EQUAL in NAME ONLY??

4. Indian Muslims in the US: I said the ones I HAD MET! That may be a skewed sample.. but that is a fact that you cannot dispute by bringing you friends into the picture now!!

5. Two Nation Theory: I have shown you the dates too.. dating FAR BACK into the 19th century when Syed Ahmad Khan was to decry the differences between Hindu/Muslims.. and that as much as you say that Hindus had similar thoughts - I can as much say that such thoughts AND the various acts thereafter by the ML and other organizations made those in Hindu Mahasabha have those thoughts!

I have said and it is correct historically.. that RSS was indeed a fringe organization for most part UNTIL the partition!!

6. FREUD and Two Nation Theory:

I had said that it is seen in most societies that Muslims do end up on one side of the conflict. Whether they are in Minority or Majority. Now, my conjecture is that this is DUE to the proverbial "TWO NATION THEORY" - which was a Freudian slip when it comes to the VERY nature of dynamics that occurs in a Muslim society!

7. Kashmir and Palestine:

"Why not you apply the lesson you learned from history in Kashmir and elsewhere and take relief in the conclusion that history is just repeating there now."

I had said that Israel has won the land and that is that! In history nations win and lose battles.. they must learn to either fight well or just learn to live with it! And it is no different with India. I have said too that as brutal as the British Raj was.. we, Indians, BROUGHT IT upon ourselves by our divisive mentality! If the Persians - Moghuls - conquered Hindu territory.. then TOO BAD!! Those idiotic Kings were no good!

As for Kashmir.. that is what I say too.. if India got Kashmir .. then Dear Pakistan .. TOO BAD for yoU!!

There is no excuse to go around killing innocent folks .. AFTER THE WAR in a clandestine fashion.. EITHER FIGHT THE WAR in a fair and upfront manner ... or just sit tight!

8. Your Last Straw:

Instead of coming down heavily and seeing an OBVIOUS STATISTICAL pattern in every major conflict.. when you come throwing in smart-ass factoids that I have contradicted - you still go on with your STORY that these conflicts are because of all sides rather than SQUARELY AND ROUNDLY confronting the Extremist mentality that is so prevalent in the Islamic world today.... to me its fairly evident that there are really TWO fronts to this Terrorism:

Extremist Front - Which Actually undertakes the Actions

Moderate Front - which OBFUSCATES the entire scenario!!

I know exactly what I am saying. And I stand by it!

What needs to be introspected is:

1. Why isnt the opposite side Chinese? or Indians in general? or Jews all over the world? or Christians? Who are fighting every other conflict?? Why just Muslims?? Is it because people of EVERY ideology, faith, Government get some kind of sarcastic pleasure to target the Muslims??

2. If indeed the Islamic teachings are for peace.. can someone please start putting them into ACTION in a TANGIBLE fashion around the world to win over the Extremists and the Terrorists??? Honestly, you dont need to recount these teachings in front of me.. but take the book.. open it .. and start reciting and explaining to the Maulvis and Clerics and the Extremists in the Mosques who repeatedly churn out hate-filled stuff???

Well.. now you can have two Nukes ready for me in Iran!

And yes, there is nothing contradictory about a prostitute preaching Vedanta.. for that One is a reflection of Everything! Even a Butcher can attain enlightenment while doing his work as a selfless duty!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Naj:

And given your and others venom against the "Hindu" organizations' opposition to Muslim Rule in India...

.... lets look at it in this way:

You and your generations are living in a society where for centuries a certain Ideology runs the roost.. and that ideology has tried EVERYTHING.. literally EVERYTHING from Murder, Rape, Killings, Taxes, COnversion and whatever could be thought of to completely DESTROY you, your culture, your faith, your families (Palestine and Iraq look like peaceful serenities compared to what was unleashed during Aurangzeb's time)....

.. when you do get a chance to live away from them -

What would your FIRST THOUGHT BE?

Anyone who has seen Muslims take over the Governance of ANY society.. it is a foregone conclusion that the REGRESSIVE Shariat Laws will soon be the law of the land.. which means you cannot pray or celebrate what you hold dear...

.. for people who have lived through a Taliban Style rule of Jahangir and Aurangzeb... is it too much to expect that they would NOT want that nonsense again??

Is it too much for them to ask for some basic guarantees?

There is a BASIC and FUNDAMENTAL difference when the Hindu Organizations suggested staying away from Muslim rule in the political circles ....

... AND......

.. When the Muslim League demanded that they GET ANOTHER NATION!

And that difference was best brought out by a Pakistani Gentleman in my discussions with him.. this is what he said...

"Since our everyday lives HAVE to be led by a certain religious structure it is not possible for Muslims as a group to survive AND keep their Religious identity intact while living in a polity ruled by others than Muslims. That is why Pakistan is a thriving country and we would not have succeeded if we lived in India"

I was appalled but I had to say - Its great that Pakistan is doing well.. but the thought that you cannot survive with other groups and faiths is not a particularly happy way to live!

Now, you talk of Muslims who stayed back in India - BUT ON THEIR OWN TERMS.. they still have their own law structure .. POINT BLANK refusing to obey a general law that they would have to obey in the US or UK.. (Indian law is directly derived from the UK laws - in fact some laws have not been changed since the 1800's!!)

And if you see the entire MidEast, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and all the Islamic societies in the past... (Turkey of Attaturk was an exception).. and the conflicts where the Muslims are in a Minority.. it is well nigh impossible to argue with that Pakistani Gentleman!!

Desh
Drishtikone.com

Desh,
It is time to sleep. Good night

before going to bed, one more - the last - point:

"In strict Sunni sense - where no future Prophets are to be there or respected - you are telling me that has a spiritual ring around it"

- Desh, it is better to keep quiet when you do not know the subject.

Naj, Desh
A boring discussion.
Naj , I think you have to admit, that is, if you think seriosly and honestly, that there is something not right with Islam as we observe around the world. A friend of mine just sent me a website where I heard a woman named Wafa Sultan debating with a muslim cleric all about present day Islam. An eye opener. May be you wont agree. I do not wish to go into any details. All I would say is that if you honestly see nothing wrong with Islam then perhaps rest of the world gone mad. May be . Who knows?
Morris

something's gotta change. I'm happy to see a site where people are expressing their views, as most of the atrocities around the world are due to the apathy of people, or if not apathy, then the lack of speaking out. I'm involved with a project dedicated to having people be HEARD. It's a music project, and if you go to www.losbigheads.com , I think the people here will appreciate the work. The members have all agreed to remain anonymous, as this project is all about the message. The lyrics are "poems" by some published writers of novels, poetry, screenplays, etc, and handed to a musician and just made into songs. The results are what you can hear at the website.
Anyway, we're just doing our part, however small because if we all make small efforts, the power is large in instituting change, and we need that now, don't we? If you go there, be sure to sign the guestbook and make comments.
Keep making noise. Change the world and thanks for your active nature.
Peace
Los Big Heads

www.losbigheads.com

Morris,
I absolutely agree that there is something horribly horribly wrong at the grass root level.
I wonder how these people process the religious information.What goes in their mind is so extremly twisted.

Common Ground Zero

Desperation-
pain embraced;
the last resort for desolate souls,
as loss and oppression
and terror take their toll.

Anguish becomes fury,
its mounting madness conceived
deep in the bloodstained
shallow grave
of his firstborn.

Still, the enemy does not lie
familiar across the sea.
We cannot see his face
or watch his children play
in forgotten fields of mine and mortar.

We both face the same way,
humbled when we pray.
Grieving for clan and nation;
weary tears from
fear focused eyes.

Each heart holds
the evil stain of hatred,
yet somewhere far within
a small voice whispers a hope
forever beyond reach.

Shared footsteps
sharing sorrows parallel;
common bonds all contemplate
broken brotherhoods relate-
longing for peace.

Salman:
Thank you for painting a picture that none of us wants to see but needs to. My prayers go with you all.
TGR