Indian Muslims - An Oppressed Minority

[QUOTE]
Did you even read this post just above the one you wrote?

I backed up my claim with links from Pakistani sources. But I guess the poor journalists made up those cases...
[/QUOTE]

u have not proven anything. In my very first post I said "Both india and pakstan have problems with minrities." In India there is state sponsored VIOLENCE against the minorities. On a regular scale. Go through those links and u'll see involvement of political parties. In response u have just one thing, the blasphemy law, which u are consistenyl throwing up and even in that not a single person has been condemned to death due to blashpemy. While we are on the subject, what is ur personal opinion regarding blasphemy? What should be done? What do u think the sharia suggests?

Anybody who insults the Prophet :saw: deserves the death sentence that is carried out by the state. It is a law widely known, so eveyone must refrain from breaking it. Why is it so hard for you to digest this law?

I am proud of this blasphemy law! Nobody is allowed to disrespect our Prophet :saw: because we love him more than our parents.

Re your links above - Dalitstan? :hehe: What next?

Has anyone ever been convicted in Pakistan for falsely accusing Christians of Blasphemy? BTW, did you see the instances where policemen in Pakistan killed Blasphemy accused? Were those people who killed Blasphemy accused ever tried and jailed or executed?

State Sponsored = Government involvement. Political party involvement does not count. If that were the case, we can say that since SSP is a political party, Pak govt kills Shias as a policy can’t we? :wink:

BTW, the people who attacked the Australian missionaries in India were tried and sentenced to death. That’s not exactly state sponsored is it? In Pakistan, the government made laws that makes it easy for any Pakistani to torture Christians and socially acceptable to kill them by accusations of “blasphemy.” In India, we prosecute and punish those who attack and kill Christians.

Stop clutching Dalitstan straws and get back to reality.

As far as my opinion on blasphemy laws is concerned, I think that it is a joke and a mechanism by which bigoted people frame laws to punish those who don’t follow their faith.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Rebel X: *

is that what behram avari does?
[/QUOTE]

One example doesn't mean anything. Even in the days of extreme segregation and jim crow laws in the US, there were some very well to do African Americans in the US.

I think the people here don’t have a problem with those laws, the problem they have is falsly accusing people of “Blasphemy” and prosecuting people based on those false accusations. One could cry out that such and such Christian person disrespected the Prophet, and no one would bother actually finding facts before the punishment.

Oh and welcome to the year 2004, where the only reason the so called “Islamic” govt of Pakistan has such laws is to prosecute minorities and keep them under control. It could give a damn about respect.

now now, lets not assume others will be swayed by your picking and choosing of links. he posted links from hrw and the US state dept. amongst others. dont be coy lass..

SSP was never a part of the government nor was it even ever a sizeable majority. BJP is now the second largest party in the country, once firmly the largest, voted out because of economic policies (and not social policies), and they are the ones implicated in minority bashing/kiling.

hm. lemme think for a bit. perversion of the law to victimise an individual you have a grudge against (which could be done through other laws too..) or periodic orgies of indiscriminate, widespread minority bloodbaths where the police stands by at worst, or aids the coldblooded killing of dozens, hundreds, thousands (depending on the season and minority targeted..) of utterly innocent people?

tough choice.

ps.. picarday.. hes not a Muslim..

[QUOTE]
State Sponsored = Government involvement. Political party involvement does not count. If that were the case, we can say that since SSP is a political party, Pak govt kills Shias as a policy can't we?

[/QUOTE]

SSP has been banned in pakistan. Has RSS, BJP or the likes been touched? Heres a parallel for you: While politicians in pakistan, even those affiliated with religous partys condemn secatrian violence and all political parties affiliated with such violence have been banned inculding SSP and TNFJ; Advani was a senior official in the BJP administration and even the supreme court let him go scot free (though its reconsidering its decsion now and that too due to congress pressure) inspite of everyone with a sane mind knowing that he instigated the babri mosque riots.

Heres another: The gujrat riots were CLEARLY state sponsored and state backed. yet Modi hasnt been touched. I challenge u to bring even ONE example of pakistan governments involvement in ANY incident on the scale of gujrat regarding religous minorities. Blasphemy laws??!!!!! thats pathetic when u have gujrat in ur backyard.

:rotfl: :rotfl:
Man, it never fails to amaze me that you still spend your days waiting for Pak/India troubles so you can jump on the net and have an e-jihad. Let me give you a clue man, no one cares anymore. Its a dead issue.
Why dont you get a new hobby, pottery, canoeing maybe. Oh, I know, since the NHL is on lockout - why dont you think of taking up the NBA. You know the whole Kobe/Shaq thing is really interesting, I mean give it a shot and give us all a break.

Sure why not. Take the latest State Dept report

About India - It says that the govt’s fault was lax enforcement sometimes.

About Pakistan It says that the govt itself encourages anti-minroity action. Now which one is “State Sponsored”? :wink:

Am I being coy now? Also do you want me to post HRW, Amnesty reports on Pakistan? :wink:

Last time I checked no BJP leader was convicted of any major violence. Unless you somehow believe that all Hindu extremists are the same… In which case we can say that your neighborhood maulvi == Al Qaeda supporter :wink:

As to SSP, you might want to check back to October 2002 and see who cast the deciding vote in favor of Jamali’s lota government. Yes sir, it was the one and only Azam Tariq, who had only 200 murder cases against him but still was a member of Parliament.

“Periodic Orgies”? Hmm. I don’t recall any other episode than Gujarat in 2002 of “bloodbaths.”

But I do recall the actions a few hundred miles east in say 1971… You know those million plus darker skinned people…

The fact is that there are no “bloodbaths” in Pakistan because there are no more minorities left in large numbers. You have either killed them all or converted them to Islam. Whoever remains is getting picked off day by day through Hudood and other Islamic “laws.”

As to “tough choice,” you guys haven’t left enough people to make a choice have you :wink:

Read up on the life and times of Maulana Azam Tariq, how he became an MNA despite being a mass murdering thug etc. :wink:

As to example of Pak govt’s involvement, please read the very revealing Op-Ed by Khaled Ahmed in the Sep 9. 2001 issue of The Friday Times. Posted below in full:

Previous post continued:

[quote]
The shia-sunni conflict is as old as Islam itself in the Indian subcontinent, but it was effectively marginalised by a secular British raj which treated it as a law-and-order issue. After 1947, the policy was continued and the worst sectarian riots were defined by the state as no more than public disorder which the executive handled as violation of the CRPC, the legal code of criminal procedure. The clergy involved in the conflict gradually became tired as the citizens mixed and intermarried across the sect boundaries. The breakdown of the secular state under General Zia's martial law brought the shia-sunni differences to centre-stage. **

General Zia versus the Shias: General Zia took over the populist slogan of Nizam-e-Mustafa and imposed 'shariah' on Pakistan. It really meant the imposition of the Sunni Hanafi 'fiqh' or jurisprudence followed by the majority population from which the shias were excluded. The two early laws under 'shariah' that he enforced failed miserably: the first, abolition of 'riba', failed because of the inability of the Islamic scholars to reinterpret Islam for modern conditions; the second, 'zakat', failed because the shia jurisprudence, called 'Fiqha-e-Jaafaria', had a conflicting interpretation of zakat. In 1980, an unprecedented procession of shias, led by Mufti Jaafar Hussain, laid siege to Islamabad and forced General Zia to exempt the shia community from the deduction of zakat. The concept of sunni 'ushr' (poor-due on land) is also rejected by shia jurisprudence.

It appears that, when the anti-shia movement started in Jhang in the 1980s, General Zia not only ignored it but saw it as his balancing act against the rebellious shia community. This was worsened by Imam Khomeini's criticism of General Zia. The rise of Maulana Haq Nawaz Jhangvi in the stronghold of big shia landlords in Punjab changed the sectarian scene in Pakistan. There is evidence that General Zia was warned of Jhangvi's anti-shia and anti-Iran movement, but he ignored the warning and allowed it to blossom into a full-fledged religious party called Anjuman-e-Sipah-e-Sahaba of Pakistan (ASSP). In small towns, the old shia-sunni debate restarted with the fury that had become dampened in the past. The tracts which carried this debate were scurrilous in the extreme and helped the clerics to whip up passions. Meanwhile, *in 1986, General Zia allowed a 'purge' of Turi shias in the divided city of Parachinar (capital of Kurram Agency on the border with Afghanistan) at the hands of the sunni Afghan mujahideen in conjunction with the local sunni population. *

Pakistan versus the Turis of Parachinar: Parachinar was the launching-pad of the Mujahideen attacks into Afghanistan and the Turis were not cooperative. Tehrike-e-Nifaz-e-Fiqha-e-Jaafaria had come into being during the dispute over zakat in 1980. When the Parachinar massacre occurred, it was led by a Turi leader, Allama Arif-ul-Hussaini. Allama Hussaini was murdered in Peshawar in August 1988, for which the Turis held General Zia responsible. That was also the year of General Zia's death (within a fortnight of Hussaini's murder) in an air-crash in Bahawalpur, and for a time there was rumour of shia involvement in his assassination although no solid evidence supporting this speculation was ever uncovered. The NWFP governor General Fazle Haq, whom the Turis accused of complicity in the murder of Allama Hussaini, was ambushed and killed in 1991. (Mehram Ali, the shia terrorist who blew up the Sipah leader Maulana Zia-ur-Rehman Farooqi at the sessions court in Lahore, was trained in Parachinar).

In 1989, the Afghan mujahideen government-in-exile came into being in Peshawar after the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan. At the behest of Saudi Arabia, the exiled shia mujahideen of Iran were not included in this government. The Saudis, according to author Barnett R.Rubin in The Search for Peace in Afghanistan (page 103) paid over 23 million dollars a week during the 519-member session of the Mujahideen 'shura' as bribe for it. In 1990, Maulana Jhangvi was murdered at the climax of his anti-Iran and anti-shia campaign of extreme insult and denigration. The same year, as if in retaliation, an activist of Sipah-e-Sahaba shot the Iranian consul Sadiq Ganji dead in Lahore. The tit-for-tat killings were thus started. Maulana Isar-ul-Qasimi, chief of the Sipah, was gunned down in 1991.

Since then, the state of Pakistan has had to answer for the killing of more Iranians in Pakistan. Another consular officer was gunned down in Multan and a number of Iranian air force trainees were ambushed in Rawalpindi on inside information received by the killers, thus making the army not uninvolved in the sectarian mayhem. Most commentators in Pakistan are scared of telling the truth. Most inter-sectarian dialogue is fake since its great facade of speech-making is nothing but divine-sounding hogwash. Almost all Muslim clerics lie when it comes to sectarian deaths.

[/QUOTE]

Also, I suggest you read up on the 1988 cleansing of Shias from the Kurram agency as well as the infamous Zia sponsored SSP raid on Gilgit shias where hundreds were shot dead to teach "them a lesson."

Below is an excerpt from Mohammad Shehzad’s article from the July 7, 2003 issue of “The Friday Times.” It was titled “The Textbook controversy in Gilgit”

You can also see the article reproduced here

[QUOTE]
Also, I suggest you read up on the 1988 cleansing of Shias from the Kurram agency as well as the infamous Zia sponsored SSP raid on Gilgit shias where hundreds were shot dead to teach "them a lesson."
[/QUOTE]

Both these incidents occurred during the zia era and heres what I wrote in my very first post:

"Both india and pakstan have problems with minrities. The difference is in India its mostly state sponsered. In pakistan, apart from zia-ul-haqs goernment, there has been no state involvement to my knwoledge in the persecution of minotirties"

I told u that ssp and tnfj were banned and u responded that maulana azam tariq was still active. I agree that pak gov didnt do everything it could have done like stopping the likes of azam tariq. But we are not arguing pakistan's minority record in the absolute sense. This thread is a comparison of India and pak. Now my question to u was has India even done as much as Pak did (in banning SSP and TNFJ)??? Has India touched BJP, RSS and the other half dozen hindu zealot partys, let alone convicting modi and advani????? U very conveniently avoided a direct answer.

U also completely ignored when I asked u to bring foth even one incident comparable to gujrat. The gilgit maasacre doesnt compare because 1) the numbers arent substantiated, if friday times is all u have to go by, then its better u leave this forum 2) Even the unsubstantiated numbers dont come close to the numbers in gujrat 3) I already admitted in my very first post that zia was an exception, what I said was APART FROM ZIA no pak government has been involved in anti-minority violence

ah.. ‘anti-minority action’.. great wordplay once again.. i repeat.. laws that might be abused as compared periodic, glorified, naked to the world orgies of blood. atleast we have some shame.

how the heck can you compare a person who won a single seat in twenty years and then was blown up (such is the political career of violent extremists in Pakistan) to those who were foremost in hammering down Muslim mosques, to those who issued fiery anti muslim statements during the height of Gujraat violence (cue: BJP).

seriously dude, you’re short of ammo.

You have selective Amnesia. Gujrat riots. Bombay riots. The massacre of Sikhs in the 80s. And we’re talking minorities here miyan, musalmanon kay muamlay may kyu partay ho?

BULL****. give me any evidence that there was any large scale killing of minorities in Pakistan after partition and the ensuing violence was over. have any? i’d wager not.

i remember I’ve debunked this theory of minority killing charge induced from statistics at partition and now, arguing with yahudi.

http://www.gupistan.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=128301#post2054268

read and see yet another ‘talking point’ die.

[QUOTE]
And we're talking minorities here miyan, musalmanon kay muamlay may kyu partay ho?

[/QUOTE]

thats true. I think he started with paks persecution of christians and hindus and when cornered there he shifted to violence against shias. Such is the nature of our neighbours: squirmy.

see the trouble with them is that the have to squirm eventually. they do sorta have a chequered history when it comes to average-prasad in average-mumbai thinking 'hm thats a nice Muslim, why dont i drive a pick axe through him after all thats what prasanna and kumar and javed have been doing all day'.

no matter how much our polarity and no matter how crazed our extremities are, bloodbaths have never been as mainstream in our country mashallah.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
no matter how much our polarity and no matter how crazed our extremities are, bloodbaths have never been as mainstream in our country mashallah.
[/QUOTE]

who is left to be killed? the only prominent minority community is the Shias....and like i said, their masjids are blown up every week.

can you even imagine if there was a prominent Hindu community of, lets say 15% of the population?

you and i both know why such a population doesn't exist. they wouldn't last 2 weeks. if such animosity can exist towards Shia MUSLIMS, i can't imagine what it would be like towards Hindus...the worst kind of kafirs.

seriously bhai, this is no bragging point for Pakistan. open your eyes.

conjecture and rhetoric, is that all that u people are left with?????

We were arguing about minority abuses and in which country it is worse. Do u then agree, even if the cause is low numbers, that minority abuses in pakistan are less than in India? At the moment I dont care much for what reasons u have as long as u accept the very obvious fact that minority abuses in India ARE much worse than in pakistan. U have implicitly accepted as much the last post.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by picard: *
conjecture and rhetoric, is that all that u people are left with?????

We were arguing about minority abuses and in which country it is worse. Do u then agree, even if the cause is low numbers, that minority abuses in pakistan are less than in India? At the moment I dont care much for what reasons u have as long as u accept the very obvious fact that minority abuses in India ARE much worse than in pakistan. U have implicitly accepted as much the last post.
[/QUOTE]

the indian minority population is approximately 100x larger than the pakistani minority population. as such, of course there are more abuses. given the respective percentages, there are also far more non-abuses.

also, "treatment of minorities" does not end with abuse of minorities. it also includes opportunities given to minorities. in this sense, india is leaps and bounds ahead of pakistan. i doubt any pakistani would think of denying this given each country's relevant track record and resume.

My innocent and simple Pakistani brothers got influenced by these Indian Hindu liars and blasphemers. The topic of the discussion was Opression of Minorities in INDIA, not a comparison of the situation in India and Pakistan.

Well played ...Indians!