Saturday, November 8, 2008
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Azaadi for Kashmir
Monday, August 25, 2008
'Azaadi' for Kashmir
Arundhathi Roy has created a stir by supporting Azaadi for Kashmir. Some columnists have done likewise. This seems a cute, liberal thing to do. Without pretending to be an expert on Kashmir, let me highlight a few issues:
Would a move to allow Kashmir to secede be without implications for the rest of India? What would it mean for the principle of secularism and for the fate of Muslims spread over India?Partition was followed by a holocaust. Will this not be seen as a partition-like move?
Can an independent Kashmir maintain its independence for long given the interest of every single power in the area? Pakistan would fish in troubled wars; so would Iran, Afghanistan, China, Russia. India and the US would not be able to hold aloof. Kashmiris, who detest India's presence, will find themselves sitting on a veritable tinder-box.
What would be the basis for the economic viability of a an independent, landlocked Kashmir?<>I doubt that western opinion favours the creation of another Muslim state in a highly combustible zone of the world. Because of its location,because of the interest of every power in the area in the state, western opinion would view Kashmir as having the potentialf for becoming another Iraq or Afghanistan- perpetually on the boil thanks to warring factions serving as proxies for various competing powers.Autonomy and self-rule must seem preferable options once you consider the implications of 'azaadi'.
Labels: Indian Politics
posted by T T Ram Mohan at 12:22 PM
5 Comments:
jatinder said...
the only logical argument in favor of so called freedom kashmir would be that the people of the state favor a different country....but then why not for Punjab..majority sikhs would favor it...why not nexalite state..they would favor it..why not a separate tamil nation...they would favor it...surprise is not over such a statement but the source from which it is coming.....
11:16 PM
apurv said...
a seperate state will never be an option.....it can't be.....it surely will not beI am an optimist
1:30 AM
Deepthi C said...
Separate state might seem to be a better option , compared to the politically unstable Pakistan.But may be the separate state would also become an example of unstable democracy!
11:25 AM
shalini said...
Kashmir does not have the resources to become a separate state. Though Kashmiri proudly talk about Azad Kashmir, it will be gobbled up by Pakistan. (or maybe even China)Surely India needs to take a stronger stand here.
10:30 PM
Venu said...
I think we must end the charade of talking about Azaadi for Kashmir. It is only the Muslims in Kashmir who want Azaadi or to become a part of Pakistan. Since they are not the sole residents or inheritors of Kashmir, let us call it what it is - a Muslim secessionist movement. Only then would we be able to see clearly the consequence of such a movement upon the integrity of India.
2:22 PM
Post a Comment
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Muslim moderates and extremists work as a team
Posted by jagoindia on August 17, 2008
The Misnomer of Radical Islam: America’s Security Blunder Martel Sobieskey, September 25, 2007 www.newmediajournal.us
There is the erroneous assertion that Radical Islam is not connected with mainstream (moderate) Islam in any way, that the religion of Islam has been “hijacked by a few extremists” that the vast majority of Muslims do not agree with the Islamofascists. Such thinking is a terrible error and a grave threat to America’s national security, especially in this age of nuclear terrorism.
So what is Radical Islam and what should it be properly named? Radical Islam is actually the Islamic Military. The so-called radicals are not a fringe element; they are fully supported by the worldwide Islamic community (Ummah). If they were a fringe element, they would have been defeated long ago. The fight rages on because of strong support from the moderates both covertly and overtly. This means the Islamic Military (wrongly labeled radicals) is intimately connected with today’s moderate Muslims who we have mistakenly labeled as innocent bystanders.
Today’s Moderate Muslims are not innocent bystanders. They provide the base of operations which makes it possible for the Islamic Military to continue their terrorist operations. Hate America, demands to replace constitution with the Koran, and outbursts for Sharia law are preached openly from nearly every Mosque in America under the guise of freedom of speech and religion. Freedom of speech and religion has morphed into a weaponized tool of Islamic psychological warfare which is defeating America’s will to protect her national security. Any American who says Islam is less than perfect may become the victim of an unfair lawsuit by a “moderate” Muslim organization.
Why can one be so certain about this fact? The answer is the Koran. The Koran fuses together both moderates and their military. No Muslim dares to contradict the Koran because the penalty is — death and loss of personal salvation. The moderate Muslims of every nation, including those in America fully support their Islamic military because worldwide conquest is the primary religious duty of all Muslims. Fellow Americans, if you believe that your local Muslims are not secretly harboring in their hearts an agenda for the conquest of America by Islam then you are dead wrong and understand nothing about the Koran.
Moderate Muslims may not carry weapons and murder innocent people hands on, but they play the role of “wolves in sheep’s clothing”. Moderate Muslims use two primary strategies to make conquest for Islam.
The first is dawa, which is influence peddling, “wining and dining” and manipulation. You make conquest by “pleasing” your opponent, “buttering them up” — bribery and back room dealings are common place. There is a “ton” of Muslim oil money buying preferential treatment for Islam in America.
The second is taqiyya, which is outright deception and lying. Deception and lying to infidels as a strategy of conquest is one of Islam’s most valued “weapons”, a precedent set by the prophet Mohammed himself. Americans hear this deception everyday with proclamations that “Islam is a religion of peace.” This phrase is an excellent example of successful psychological warfare which has caused Americans to let down their guard, and made us very vulnerable to future terrorist attacks, even possible nuclear attacks as several experts have pointed out.
Recent history proves that the “so called peaceful Muslims” work as a team with their Islamic Military. They immigrate to a country touting what peaceful law abiding citizens they are, establish themselves, build mosques, increase their numbers and “bingo” terrorist acts start occurring in the host country. Do the attacks in Spain, England, France, Thailand, Bali, the Philippines, Holland, Sweden and the USA ring any bells here? All these attacks have been preceded by the establishment of moderate mosque communities which in turn became footholds from which the Islamic military could launch their terrorist attacks. The larger the percentage of Muslims that occupy a country the greater the havoc they wreak. The situation is directly proportional. Reducing the percentage of Muslims that dwell in the host country is the most effect way of stopping terrorism. Western governments must evaluate this fact very seriously if they wish to win the war against Islamofascism long term.
Have we Americans become gullible fools? As long as we fail to deal aggressively and comprehensively with the intimate Koranic connection between the moderate Muslims and their Islamic military we can never stop the terrorist attacks. Have you ever wondered why, so numerous the complaints worldwide, that Muslims are not assimilating into their host nation? It is because they are not there to assimilate — they are there to conqueror the host country for Islam as their Koran requires. Fellow Americans please read the Koran for your self. Don’t take my word on it. You will learn first hand that anyone who tells you that Islam is a religion of peace is insulting your intelligence. The Penguin Classic edition, The Koran, translated by the Arab Scholar N. J. Dawood is a well respected version having sold over a million copies worldwide.
The best description of the symbiotic Koranic relationship between the moderates and their military comes from the Muslims themselves. They have a saying, “the poisonous fish swim in the sea”. The “poisonous fish” are the militants and the “sea” is the moderate mosque community. For example, for their 9/11 operation, the Islamic Military (poisonous fish) used the Al Farouq mosque in New York as the “sea” from which they “swam” to pulverize the trade towers. The next poisonous fish may be swimming from the sea of your local Mosque community with a nuclear explosion.
Wake up Americans we are not fighting with bows and arrows anymore. We must take aggressive preventative measures to stop the Islamic military’s “euphoric” obsession to make a nuclear attack on American soil.
It is a great mistake to continue calling the Islamic military radicals because the term “radicals” has blinded us to think that the moderates are not in cahoots with their Islamic Military. In so doing we have violated the primary dictum of warfare which is to know and understand one’s enemy.
Consequently, we have failed to understand that the Islam of Osama Bin Laden is main stream Islam – not a radical fringe. Osama Bin Laden is one of the generals of the Islamic military which is fully supported by the worldwide community of moderate Muslims, including American Muslims. Both moderate Muslims and their military have the same goal which is the Islamic conquest of the entire world — this is the primary religious duty of all Muslims as required by the Koran. Americans desperately need to understand this fact if they wish to protect their country from great harm.
Martel Sobieskey has 35 plus years of research experience in the field of religion and its relationship to warfare. He is greatly alarmed that American politicians, educators, and security personnel fail to understand the deep seated religious conditioning inherent in Muslims. A religious conditioning that surpasses rational thought yielding a chronic Jihad “mental syndrome and pathology” This explains the large number of highly educated and credentialed persons such as engineers, medical doctors and others amongst the Islamo-terrorists.
All Muslims emphasis that there is only one Islam which is based on the one and only Quran. And since the avowed aim of Islam is to transform Muslims into loyal slaves of Allah, there cannot be much difference in approach among Muslims to any issue. Those who differ are the ones who have not been abject slaves yet. But so long as they are within the closed societies of Islam, they will eventually fall in line. Emancipation of the slaves would occur only when closed societies are opened up through democracy and secularism.
http://islamicterrorism.wordpress.com/2008/08/17/muslim-moderates-and-extremists-work-as-a-team/#comment-1023
Muslim protestors disrupt public forum on dual legal system’s jurisdictional disputes.
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, August 15 (Compass Direct News) – A civil court on Aug. 5 denied a woman’s appeal to renounce Islam in favor of Christianity, highlighting the jurisdictional disputes in Malaysia’s dual legal system.
Lim Yoke Khoon had filed a suit in her original ethnic Chinese name to renounce Islam and embrace Christianity. In a 2-1 majority ruling, the Shah Alam Court of Appeal denied her case on a technicality: According to judges Tengku Baharudin Shah Tengku Mahmud and Sulong Mat Jeraie, Lim had ceased to exist under her original name when she converted to Islam and assumed a new name, Noorashikin Lim binti Abdullah.
The 35-year-old Lim is reportedly expected to appeal to the country’s top civil court.
After marrying a Muslim man in 1994, Lim converted to Islam and obtained a new identity card with her Muslim name. She divorced three years later. In 2003, she applied for a change to her name and religion on her identity card, but the National Registration Department told her she must get permission from the Islamic sharia court to renounce Islam.
She sought a declaration from the high court that she was no longer a Muslim, but it ruled in 2006 that it had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
Malaysia’s civil courts have not been known to rule in favor of non-Muslims in conversion cases in recent years. Many, such as Lina Joy, have been directed to obtain an exit certificate from the sharia court in order to leave Islam. But Lina – and others like her – are reluctant to subject themselves to a religious court that has no jurisdiction over them since they are no longer professing Muslims.
Quelling Discussion
A public forum to discuss such jurisdictional disputes, in this case the dual court system’s effect on families of people who convert to Islam, was scheduled for Saturday (Aug. 9) but Muslim protestors succeeded in halting it after only one hour.
Sponsored by a body of legal practitioners called the Malaysian Bar Council, the public forum that began at 9 a.m. was scheduled to last until 1 p.m., but police advised organizers to end it at 10 a.m. as protestors outside the council headquarters shouting “Allahu Akbar [God is greater],” “Destroy Bar Council” and “Long Live Islam” became rowdy. A handful of protestors flanked by police officers marched into the building shouting for the meeting to end immediately.
The protestors included members from several Malay-Muslim movements, including the Malaysian Islamic Propagation and Welfare Organization and the Federation of Malay Students Union, as well as members of political parties such as the United Malays National Organization, the People’s Justice Party (PKR) and Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS).
The forum had been widely criticized by various Malay-Muslim groups and individuals for raising the ire of Muslims by touching on issues sensitive to Islam. Among those critical were cabinet ministers, including Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak, Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar and Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
Prior to the event, the Bar Council had been urged to either cancel the forum or hold the event behind closed doors, but the organizers decided to proceed albeit with the cautionary measure of requiring participants at the open forum to register.
A day prior to the forum, the Bar Council issued a press release to clarify the purpose of the forum through council Vice President Ragunath Kesavan. Ragunath made clear that the forum would not question the provisions of Article 121(1A), which confer jurisdiction over Muslims in personal, religious and family matters on the sharia courts, and that the forum would not question Islam or its status as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.
Rather, Ragunath said, the purpose of the meeting was to address issues affecting families of those who convert to Islam and were caught between the separate jurisdiction of the civil and sharia courts.
The morning of the forum, two unidentified men on motorcycles threw kerosene bombs into the compound of a residence formerly occupied by the president of the Bar Council, Ambiga Sreenevasan. Many believed the incident was linked to the Bar Council’s forum on conversion.
Other Muslim Responses
Not all Muslims agreed with the protestors’ actions.
Leaders of the Muslim political party PAS and Muslim-led multi-racial party, PKR, have distanced themselves from members who participated in the raucous disruption of the Bar Council forum.
Dr. Dzulkifli Ahmad, director of the PAS Research Centre, told The Star daily on Wednesday (Aug. 13), “We were unanimous that [the forum] should have been allowed to proceed,” and that “those who had united to oppose the forum had no understanding of the issue at hand.”
PKR Deputy President Syed Husin Ali reportedly also condemned the “rough action” of the protestors, although he said the party agreed with its adviser Anwar Ibrahim that the meeting should have been held behind closed doors “in view of the sensitive reactions and wrong perception among a section of the Malay-Muslim community.”
Karim Raslan, a Malay-Muslim columnist at The Star argued that “we can’t achieve any sense of mutual agreement unless we are willing to talk – and openly – to one another about the issues that matter.”
Non-Muslim Reactions
Civil society groups and members of the non-Muslim community, including those from the ruling coalition government, have also criticized the Muslim protestors’ actions for failing to acknowledge long-standing problems non-Muslims caught in jurisdictional conflict situations have had to face and endure.
Others have urged the government to take decisive and immediate steps to address the problems arising from the country’s dual legal system. In Malaysia, sharia laws are binding on Muslims in personal, religious and family matters while civil laws apply to all citizens.
Joint Action Group for Gender Equality, representing five different women’s groups, reportedly called on the government “to act against mob rule and to allow citizens more democratic space for open dialogue.”
T. Mohan, youth coordinator of the Malaysian Indian Congress, a party within the ruling coalition, told online news agency Malaysiakini on Monday (Aug. 11), “[The protestors] should have come out with their proposals in addressing the issue of non-Muslim husbands who abandon their spouses and their families and convert into Islam, rather than stop a legitimate forum.”
Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, acting president of Gerakan, a party within the ruling coalition government, was quoted in local media as calling for the government to convene a joint committee of civil and sharia lawyers “to formulate, clarify and rectify procedures related to marriage between Muslims and non-Muslims, conversion, custody of children and burial rituals.”
Report from Compass Direct News
I think the final choice of which religion one should belong to should be left to the individual. But Islam seeks to transform an individual into a loyal slave of Allah. Once a slave, always a slave appears to be its dictum.
http://pbaptist.wordpress.com/2008/08/17/malaysia-court-denies-woman̢۪s-appeal-to-leave-islam/#comment-90
