RSS role in bombing samjhota express. mecca masjid

[Yusuf]

infact one should get a reward for treating him a pig.

DFI isn't handing out any awards for the best showering of abuses on anyone including terrorists like saeed.

 

[S.A.T.A]

My two bits

If a post or the general content of its message is in violation of the policy of the forum,the post must deleted,if there are certian uncharitable remarks they must be edited out.Summarily guillotining posts for an innocuous remark will give raise to misgivings regarding such measures.

 

[Rage]

Congress never makes any effort to disown anything unsavory,nothing beyond the usual cosmetics.The recent release of book chronicling the history of congress,has practically re written contemporary indian history.Instead of expressing remorse over the excesses of the Emergency years,they have chosen to defend Indira Gandhi and instead accuses great Gandhians like JP as being undemocratic.

Because they know they could never dissociate themselves from their leaders. Yes, they defend Indira Gandhi, which is equally vile and disgusting.

But, no amount of politicking, will ever change the fact that they were their leaders. Just as no amount of politicking will ever change the fact that Gowalkar, Moonje & Co. were RSS leaders. Gowalkar is revered to this day by RSS pracharaks. I know that for an absolute fact.

Just correcting the fact that the 26/11 terrorists were not Islamic or had anything to do with Islam. The list of condemnation of this act of terrorism did not come from just Indian Muslims but from religious scholrs around the world.
Arab scholars condemn 26/11 attacks, support India - India - NEWS - The Times of India
I hope that was an unintentional mistake on your part. I think almost every one in the Indian polity, be they from the left or right or anything in between, that terrorism should not be related to any religion.

Let's not get ridiculous, Ejaz. The attacks on Mumbai were part of Islamic terror, they were carried out in the name of muslims, by muslims, as parts of jihad derived from differentially interpreted texts of the Quran and as functionaries of organizations that goaded them on in the name of Allah and the Kuran and Muslims worldwide and in the region, as a whole. You have to understand what the world means when it uses the term 'Islamic' terror. It does not mean terror perpetrated or propagated by the religion itself. It means to say, terror perpetrated by the groups that associate themselves with the religion, and that derive strength and ideological support from their (mis)interpretations of it's texts, however warped or distorted they may be. Which, because of the variety of interpretations present, we are not in a position to pass judgment on.

 

[Rage]

My two bits

If a post or the general content of its message is in violation of the policy of the forum,the post must deleted,if there are certian uncharitable remarks they must be edited out.Summarily guillotining posts for an innocuous remark will give raise to misgivings regarding such measures.

SATA, it was not in violation of forum rules. That was my, personal reaction to your post. Nothing less nothin' more.

 

[Yusuf]

My two bits

If a post or the general content of its message is in violation of the policy of the forum,the post must deleted,if there are certian uncharitable remarks they must be edited out.Summarily guillotining posts for an innocuous remark will give raise to misgivings regarding such measures.

Moderation is a minimum on DFI. We don't resort to any deletion of posts without reason. Yes we can be uncharitable with those scums but come on we cannot degrade ourselves by using low language.

 

[Ray]

Use of foul language and low class epithets and that too in an open forum does not behove a gentleman.

It is taken that gentlemen visit this forum and are members.

Please desist from using language nomally associated with guttersnipes.

 

[Ray]

SATA,

JP asked the Army to revolt.

That is hardly democratic or being loyal to the tenets enshrined in the Republic.

Jayaprakash Narayan has no resonance in the Congress, where he is regarded as an arch villain, one who had challenged Indira Gandhi, forced her to impose Emergency, and had at a public rally asked the Army and the police to revolt against a democratically elected Congress government.
Link

The day the Army responds positively to such desires of ambitious politicians who wish to use it to further their agenda, these very politicians will become history, since the Army, having tasted blood, would make India like the sorry state Pakistan is in!

Democracy will be killed from the roots!

 

[S.A.T.A]

A leader and her regime who has suspended constitutionally guaranteed rights of the citizenry,locked up her democratic opponents,subverted democratic institutions,has no right to seek the protection under other tenets of the very same constitution.A society must overthrow a tyrant by any and every means possible.

 

[S.A.T.A]

SATA, it was not in violation of forum rules. That was my, personal reaction to your post. Nothing less nothin' more.

Sorry rage the message was directed at you,sorry for the confusion.

 

[Ray]

A leader and her regime who has suspended constitutionally guaranteed rights of the citizenry,locked up her democratic opponents,subverted democratic institutions,has no right to seek
the protection under other tenets of the very same constitution.A society must overthrow a tyrant by any and every means possible.

No quibble on that.

The elections threw her out.

But it is treacherous to subvert the law and order machinery.

And what is the guarantee that throwing out such a regime by every means available, will not turn a Frankenstein that will not even allow the good old chap who called for their participation to throw out a unsavoury regime, to take over?

And how would it be if the Army revolts and it is 50:50 for/ against?

Who will then save the nation that JP wanted to 'save'.

A most irresponsible call!

 

[Rage]

Sorry rage the message was directed at you,sorry for the confusion.

Don't apologize, man.

 

[ejazr]

@bhogta and Rage

I simply tried to clarify that Islam in itself as a religion does not inspire acts of terrorism like 26/11 and by calling them Islamic terrorists it gives an incorrect impression. I appreciate SATA correcting it to refer to as Islamists (i.e. those who consider Islam in a political religious ideology in opposition to traditional Islamic thought). Thanks SATA. If you look at the way these are referred to by Muslim scholars, they are usually called irhabi (lit. war mongering) or takfeeri groups which would be technically accurate, but for ease of understanding I guess political Islamists is alright.

The links that I provide are quotes of religious Islamic sholars from Al Azhar which is the most esteemed Islamic shool in the Muslim world to various other parts of the world including Deoband that is usually given the second position when it comes to matters related to Islamic theology. Not to mention the over 200 JUH meets all over India which had over 1lakh people gathering between 2004-2009 where clerics spoke to local Muslims publicly against terrorism in the name of Islam.

Now these are people who have studies Islamic theoology for years or end and when they say that 26/11 is an act of terrorism and has nothing to do with Islam, its not saying that Muslims are not involved in it. And the scholars are not refraining from attacking their ideology of political Islam either. I don't want to go off-topic and so I will not go into details but just provide a link of Maulana Wahiduddin Khan speech on the 26/11 anniversary where many people including Arab and other Muslim scholars from around the world came to condemn the incident.
The articles are here and here

If anyone has been following this, you will realise how many ulema and scholars have stood up against terrorists acts done in the name of Islam and how vigorous the debate has been against OBL type ideology. Because, lets be honest, its terrorists who happen to be muslims that are the global concern at present and Muslims themselves have to and have taken a frontline role in combatting that ideology.

Basically, only Muslims can fight Fundamentalsts amongst them and if anyone knows me, this is what I have highlighted and don't shy from it at all. Smilarly, only Hindus can confront Fundamentalists amongst them and so on for other religions. Otherwise fundamentalists from opposite spectrums only strengthen each other.

 

[Ray]

While intra religion dialogue and actions are very effective to curb misuse of religion as an agenda, it may not be correct to assume that opinion of others do not matter in curbing the misuse.

A barrage of information, commentaries, even ostracising by the general public, does have its effect.

Take the case of the fundamentalist surge in activity encouraged by OBL and radical Islamic cleric. The open advocacy has taken a dip because of incessant electronic and international exposure of the contradictions in interpretation of convenience.

Likewise, while it was felt that Hindus are incapable of terrorist or quasi terrorist acts, it has thorough incessant exposure and condemnation made many an adherent to stop and think. For instance, there is no outcry over the Dara Singh sentence! In the days of yore, it would have rocked the nation. One hardly hears anything from the ilk of Togadia and others.

Or take the Babri Mazjid judgement. There would have been riots. Was there any?

The outcry over forced or fraudulent conversion, even commented by the Supreme Court, as late as day before, has made it an issue that cannot be brushed under the carpet.

The Pope's call to harvest souls in Asia put conversions on the backfoot, since such actions were looked upon as suspect.

Therefore, to my mind, I think, even outsiders can play a role to rein in the zealots of religious fundamentalism.

To make religion as islands or sanctuaries that cannot be questioned by others would make it appear suspect.

 

[S.A.T.A]

JP's call to the Police and the Army not obey orders that are illegal and immoral was probably correct in the context,when governance is reduced to a tyranny and democracy itself is subverted,what is the legitimacy of a govt or its orders.

 

[Ray]

So, JP is the bottomline for deciding what is legal and what is immoral?

Some may give a cry that today's govt at the Centre and also in many States are steeped with immorality and illegalities.

And so the Army and the police take over?

Army is not the custodian of governance. In Pakistan, the Army is the custodian of governance.

Mrs G did not give any immoral or illegal orders that the Army was supposed to do.

If the Army is used against Maoists, then people like Swami Agnivesh, Binayak Sen, A Roy, Varavara Rao and many others would feel it is illegal and immoral. Does the Army then obey these people?

There are many who feel that Modi Govt has no legitimacy because of the riots. A penny for their thoughts. The Modi Govt, riots or no riots, have won repeated election. Therefore, actions by Modi Govt would be legitimate or illegitimate and should the Army and the police rise against the Modi Govt just because Mrs Sonia G, the last word these days in the dispensation of the Fate of India, feels that Modi is a 'maut ke saudagar'?

I don't think the Army or the police should get embroiled in political battles. It should remain apolitical inspite of being buffeted by the contradictions of democracy and its system.

The legitimacy of the Central Govt is the votes of the majority of the Nation that has put them in office as is the votes of the people of a state for a State Govt.

 

[S.A.T.A]

It is JP's right to call upon all organs of the state to desist from following illegal orders.Summary extra judicial executions of political opponents,locking them up on trumped up charges without being presented with an opportunity to present their case in a court of law,shutting down print press that were sympathetic to the JP movement,all were acts which could not have happened without the active connivance of law enforcement agencies,hence the call to them, to desist from following such orders that made them accomplice to the murder of democracy, was a democratic call.

Democracy is not subservient to the constitution,to the contrary democracy should always claim preponderance over the Constitution,constitution can be amended but the principles of democracy cannot be.If a democratically elected regime manipulates the statutes of law to subvert democracy,Constitution loses its legitimacy and a sovereign society must undertake measures to restore the democracy,all organs of state must be involved in this exercise without any exception.

If Modi suspends the assembly,refuse to call for elections,lock up all political opponents,then the society must take law in its own hands,this principle applies to all.

Constitutionalism cannot not be an excuse for subversion of democracy.

 

[Ray]

It maybe JP's right to ask the army and police to rise against the Govt.

But it is also right that it maybe sedition.