[CHEAPPoem]

He had attended the Jaipur Literary Festival earlier also but it was not so open - people came to know about these things post facto only. Now India being the only country where Muslims sacrificed their lives in their fight against his infamous book it is strange that this fact has not registered on the government's psyche. It is dumbing down of the powers that operate the wheels of this country. If the government can not understand the feelings, ideas, opinions and attitudes of a population that is larger than any European continental country then they are seriously deficient. During the author's last visit the Marxist newspaper The Hindu published a prominent interview with him in their Sunday supplement. It is this kind of ideology that is operating in our country. The strange thing is that these are the people who self-righteously represent the downtrodden. May be it is time for Muslims to get on their own feet - a long overdue contingency.

PS: Another small post.

aoa,

obviously the solution for the indian muslims is to migrate to pakistan : p ; )

[didrexx]

aoa,

obviously the solution for the indian muslims is to migrate to pakistan : p ; )

No thanks.

[Sydaycymn]

There is no shortcut here. You have to be able to express your emotion in a reasoned manner. Mere emotion will achieve nothing except some temporary fear factor by issuing veiled threats to a persons life. Yesterday there was another debate on this on ndtv. The unfortunate case was the inability for the Muslim side to construct and express the reasoning behind his stance. The Muslim politician from Hyderabad kept on repeating that "blasphemy" is not allowed but criticism is allowed. That's a poor choice of words as blasphemy is irrelevant to someone who does not even belong to the religion in the first place. If Deoband has issued the fatwa, why not get a Deoband spokesperson to conduct a media session to explain in reasonable terms why that should be the case and why such limits to speech should be kept and adhered to in Indian laws. After all, the law is on Muslim side. Its the liberal who when it comes to their own issues that are mum on the laws and consider themselves above all laws. That mentality should be criticized and it should be made clear that they are in no way whatsoever a exception to the law. The clear hypocritical aspect of these liberals are that they are the first once to make a big hue and cry if some mullah makes a statement or issues a fatwa. So do mullahs also not have unhinged and absolute free speech ? One side is portrayed as fundamentalists while the other side is portrayed as forward walking, barrier breaking, heroes.

On a side note, there is a thin line between whats constitutes valid criticism and what consults insult or so forth. So i think this aspect should be clarified by those who argue for limits to speech. It is because of the inability to make this case properly that we have America instead chosing the path of absolute free speech.

[didrexx]

There is no shortcut here. You have to be able to express your emotion in a reasoned manner. Mere emotion will achieve nothing except some temporary fear factor by issuing veiled threats to a persons life. Yesterday there was another debate on this on ndtv. The unfortunate case was the inability for the Muslim side to construct and express the reasoning behind his stance. The Muslim politician from Hyderabad kept on repeating that "blasphemy" is not allowed but criticism is allowed. That's a poor choice of words as blasphemy is irrelevant to someone who does not even belong to the religion in the first place. If Deoband has issued the fatwa, why not get a Deoband spokesperson to conduct a media session to explain in reasonable terms why that should be the case and why such limits to speech should be kept and adhered to in Indian laws. After all, the law is on Muslim side. Its the liberal who when it comes to their own issues that are mum on the laws and consider themselves above all laws. That mentality should be criticized and it should be made clear that they are in no way whatsoever a exception to the law. The clear hypocritical aspect of these liberals are that they are the first once to make a big hue and cry if some mullah makes a statement or issues a fatwa. So do mullahs also not have unhinged and absolute free speech ? One side is portrayed as fundamentalists while the other side is portrayed as forward walking, barrier breaking, heroes.

On a side note, there is a thin line between whats constitutes valid criticism and what consults insult or so forth. So i think this aspect should be clarified by those who argue for limits to speech. It is because of the inability to make this case properly that we have America instead chosing the path of absolute free speech.

First things first - no one is issuing and veiled threats to anybody's life. Change your sentence - you do not know what horrible situation you are creating.

We Indian Muslims do not want Salman Rushdie in India and that is all.

Indeed it is mighty difficult to explain this to America and the west in general.
And it is indeed difficult to explain it to Indian media and intelligentsia - both of them are extensions of the western mindset, only located in India.

So the western attitude is the only one that has to be dealt with. They threw Christianity and hence all of religion out of the window because of Church atrocities. It is really that simple. Now they expect others also to follow suit. It looks natural to them and they are bent upon it. So are our intellectuals, unfortunately including some Muslims. If you deny 1915 massacre by Turkey then it will be illegal in France and US. So they have limitations on the so called freedom of speech. But the latter option is not available to Muslims. Some people are really too dense. Well so be it. By the Grace of Allah (SWT) Muslims at least get out of the house to assert that Mr Rushdie is a persona non grata for us.

[Sydaycymn]

First things first - no one is issuing and veiled threats to anybody's life. Change your sentence - you do not know what horrible situation you are creating.

True, but that's where the current crux of the argument is resting upon. The idea that Muslims(by conspiracy of "evil mullahs") will start a riot and there will be law and order problems.

We Indian Muslims do not want Salman Rushdie in India and that is all. And kafirs do want Salman Rushdie in India. To tilt the law to favor one guys "want" over another, requires reasoning and wisdom.

Indeed it is mighty difficult to explain this to America and the west in general.
And it is indeed difficult to explain it to Indian media and intelligentsia - both of them are extensions of the western mindset, only located in India.

So the western attitude is the only one that has to be dealt with. They threw Christianity and hence all of religion out of the window because of Church atrocities. It is really that simple. Now they expect others also to follow suit. It looks natural to them and they are bent upon it. So are our intellectuals, unfortunately including some Muslims. If you deny 1915 massacre by Turkey then it will be illegal in France and US. So they have limitations on the so called freedom of speech. But the latter option is not available to Muslims. Some people are really too dense. Well so be it. By the Grace of Allah (SWT) Muslims at least get out of the house to assert that Mr Rushdie is a persona non grata for us. And that's exactly what Muslims have to do. The kafirs aren't guided by the Quran. It is Muslims who have the guidance. The onus falls upon Muslims to do dawa rather than simply expect kafirs to straight away agree to whatever a Muslim "wants". This is not a issue of Muslim personal law, but a law that infringes on the society irrespective of religion. So to get such a law that a covers a broad spectrum of people, it requires that these broad spectrum of people come to agreement with the Muslims on this issue. But the current issue is that, we already have laws. Yet no one is able to to take the law to its conclusion by showing how these ultra liberal speech is no different to some ultra right hindutva activist or some muslim "extremist". They all agree on preventing free speech to the latter, yet its somehow a free space for these ultra liberals to say anything they want as it is supposedly quite "creative".

[RicyReetred]

There is no shortcut here. You have to be able to express your emotion in a reasoned manner. Mere emotion will achieve nothing except some temporary fear factor by issuing veiled threats to a persons life. Yesterday there was another debate on this on ndtv. The unfortunate case was the inability for the Muslim side to construct and express the reasoning behind his stance. The Muslim politician from Hyderabad kept on repeating that "blasphemy" is not allowed but criticism is allowed. That's a poor choice of words as blasphemy is irrelevant to someone who does not even belong to the religion in the first place. If Deoband has issued the fatwa, why not get a Deoband spokesperson to conduct a media session to explain in reasonable terms why that should be the case and why such limits to speech should be kept and adhered to in Indian laws. After all, the law is on Muslim side. Its the liberal who when it comes to their own issues that are mum on the laws and consider themselves above all laws. That mentality should be criticized and it should be made clear that they are in no way whatsoever a exception to the law. The clear hypocritical aspect of these liberals are that they are the first once to make a big hue and cry if some mullah makes a statement or issues a fatwa. So do mullahs also not have unhinged and absolute free speech ? One side is portrayed as fundamentalists while the other side is portrayed as forward walking, barrier breaking, heroes.

On a side note, there is a thin line between whats constitutes valid criticism and what consults insult or so forth. So i think this aspect should be clarified by those who argue for limits to speech. It is because of the inability to make this case properly that we have America instead chosing the path of absolute free speech.

salam alikum
yeah, this what you require here is possible within educated and wide minded people. And `politics `is for masses , I mean the process goes very slowly as we have many kafir screamers in the world, many thoughts are not heard. Inshallah it goes better ahead a wish to believe, inshallah, inshallah.
As for freedom of speech - right, many in west slowly realize what actually freedom of speech is and why it it not possible t o have barrierless freedom (of speech). But it only happen when particular person pays personaly heavy account on that. I can give you one example: Our prime minister Mrs. Radicova had to leave government and we will have new election. She said that something should be done, and the free speech should have limits, becasue the repeting (false) allegations must stop...

w alikum asslam

[didrexx]

True, but that's where the current crux of the argument is resting upon. The idea that Muslims(by conspiracy of "evil mullahs") will start a riot and there will be law and order problems.


And kafirs do want Salman Rushdie in India. To tilt the law to favor one guys "want" over another, requires reasoning and wisdom.



And that's exactly what Muslims have to do. The kafirs aren't guided by the Quran. It is Muslims who have the guidance. The onus falls upon Muslims to do dawa rather than simply expect kafirs to straight away agree to whatever a Muslim "wants". This is not a issue of Muslim personal law, but a law that infringes on the society irrespective of religion. So to get such a law that a covers a broad spectrum of people, it requires that these broad spectrum of people come to agreement with the Muslims on this issue. But the current issue is that, we already have laws. Yet no one is able to to take the law to its conclusion by showing how these ultra liberal speech is no different to some ultra right hindutva activist or some muslim "extremist". They all agree on preventing free speech to the latter, yet its somehow a free space for these ultra liberals to say anything they want as it is supposedly quite "creative".

Brother you are not looking at the problems of Muslims from the Muslim point of view.
In the history of independent India that seems to be the rule.
You are looking at the problems of Muslims as anybody else will look at them.
If everybody is doing that then there is something terribly wrong.
I'll tell a statement by former Congress chief Mr Sitaram Kesari. This was published perhaps more than ten years ago in a periodical from Kerala called the Meantime. He said that they were aware of the problems of Muslims but time and again they had put Muslims in charge of the things that affected the interests of the Muslims and every time they behaved exactly as others had behaved before that.
I am sorry brother warea you are committing the same mistake.
It might hurt you but I am not writing with that intention.

One of the first benefits of Islam is that you become aware and privy to the purpose of life. If you start thinking like others then you have wasted your advantage. That is a loss.

[Axxflcaj]

Brother you are not looking at the problems of Muslims from the Muslim point of view.
In the history of independent India that seems to be the rule.
You are looking at the problems of Muslims as anybody else will look at them.
If everybody is doing that then there is something terribly wrong.
I'll tell a statement by former Congress chief Mr Sitaram Kesari. This was published perhaps more than ten years ago in a periodical from Kerala called the Meantime. He said that they were aware of the problems of Muslims but time and again they had put Muslims in charge of the things that affected the interests of the Muslims and every time they behaved exactly as others had behaved before that.
I am sorry brother warea you are committing the same mistake.
It might hurt you but I am not writing with that intention.

One of the first benefits of Islam is that you become aware and privy to the purpose of life. If you start thinking like others then you have wasted your advantage. That is a loss.

[RicyReetred]

salam alikum, I think it is great point:
muslims forgot to look at things from muslim perspective,
so - that is result that we try to be so kind and
try to find best way how to adopt to western world.
I dont say we should not, but be careful where we are
and where we go.
w alikum assalam

[Sydaycymn]

Brother you are not looking at the problems of Muslims from the Muslim point of view.
In the history of independent India that seems to be the rule.
You are looking at the problems of Muslims as anybody else will look at them.
If everybody is doing that then there is something terribly wrong.
I'll tell a statement by former Congress chief Mr Sitaram Kesari. This was published perhaps more than ten years ago in a periodical from Kerala called the Meantime. He said that they were aware of the problems of Muslims but time and again they had put Muslims in charge of the things that affected the interests of the Muslims and every time they behaved exactly as others had behaved before that.
I am sorry brother warea you are committing the same mistake.
It might hurt you but I am not writing with that intention.

One of the first benefits of Islam is that you become aware and privy to the purpose of life. If you start thinking like others then you have wasted your advantage. That is a loss.

Frankly, I dont know how this is connected to what I said. Nor do I see any real basis for the idea that muslims are supposed to shut themselves of from the subjective view of others especially in an issue which by nature necessitates listening to subjective view and concerns of others. Discussions arent a one way lecture. It is quite a closed minded view of things and encourages shutting up what Allah Himself has provided Muslims with I.e brains. Finally, I don't see any reason why Muslims should qualify your subjective view as "Islamic" when you too are subject to error and influence of satan and more importantly, a laymen like most of us on this forum.

[didrexx]

Frankly, I dont know how this is connected to what I said.

A Muslim is supposed to behave like a Muslim. You are not.
A Muslim is a person who looks at the things from his own perspective.
You are not doing that.
And if you are for a moment switching to others' point of view then sooner you turn your back better it is.
You are insisting on looking at the things from a point of view that is not Muslims'.

You may ask others, IA, they shall also give you the same perspective.
And I am not giving my personal view only. There are activities everyday in various cities. Look at the updates in the link that I have given above.

[Axxflcaj]

A Muslim is supposed to behave like a Muslim. You are not.
A Muslim is a person who looks at the things from his own perspective.
You are not doing that.
And if you are for a moment switching to others' point of view then sooner you turn your back better it is.
You are insisting on looking at the things from a point of view that is not Muslims'.

You may ask others, IA, they shall also give you the same perspective.
And I am not giving my personal view only. There are activities everyday in various cities. Look at the updates in the link that I have given above.

Right again Sidi.

[didrexx]

Right again Sidi.

Now I have a difficult home work for you Dr Sahab. Have a look at this thread. Make a post in that thread. Take the print out and do the needful to post it to the target who will not be impossible for you to locate in that megapolis. in advance.
Wassalam

[BritneySpearsFun@@@]

Rushdie has insulted the leader of 2 billion people world wide (and growing). And it is not like insulting the head of a state; Rasoolullah is the leader these 2 billion people try and imitate in every way shape or form, naming our children after him , sending prayers upon him , trying to look like him , crying in the hope we may see him in our dreams and after our death... it is just common sense not to insult these 2 billion people further by inviting him into a country filled with over a 100 million Muslims.

May Allah destroy those who insult the best of creation . Ameen

[Axxflcaj]

Rushdie has insulted the leader of 2 billion people world wide (and growing). And it is not like insulting the head of a state; Rasoolullah is the leader these 2 billion people try and imitate in every way shape or form, naming our children after him , sending prayers upon him , trying to look like him , crying in the hope we may see him in our dreams and after our death... it is just common sense not to insult these 2 billion people further by inviting him into a country filled with over a 100 million Muslims.

May Allah destroy those who insult the best of creation . Ameen

Aamin.

[Axxflcaj]

Now I have a difficult home work for you Dr Sahab. Have a look at this thread. Make a post in that thread. Take the print out and do the needful to post it to the target who will not be impossible for you to locate in that megapolis. in advance.
Wassalam

Sidi.
I was never good at home work. Us back benchers.........
wa iyyakum.

[didrexx]

Sidi.
I was never good at home work. Us back benchers.........
wa iyyakum.

Is there an icon in SF posting options for broken heart?

On the topic of the thread:
The Urdu newspaper says that because of intelligence reports the administration is thinking of cancelling the proposed visit.

Wassalam

[TyncTyncSah]

بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ
تَبَّتۡ يَدَآ أَبِى لَهَبٍ۬ وَتَبَّ (١) مَآ أَغۡنَىٰ عَنۡهُ مَالُهُ ۥ وَمَا ڪَسَبَ (٢) سَيَصۡلَىٰ نَارً۬ا ذَاتَ لَهَبٍ۬ (٣) وَٱمۡرَأَتُهُ ۥ حَمَّالَةَ ٱلۡحَطَبِ (٤) فِى جِيدِهَا حَبۡلٌ۬ مِّن مَّسَدِۭ (٥

Perish the two hands of Abu Lahab, and perish he![111:1]
Neither his wealth benefited him, nor what he earned.[111:2]
He will soon enter a Fire, full of flames,[111:3]
and his wife as well,__the wicked carrier of firewood.[111:4]
Around her neck, there is (a collar of iron, like) a well-twisted rope.[111:5] - [Translation: Shaykh Taqi Usmani]

[ufUUZCnc]

May Allah SWT grant true guidance to bro Warea and save him from going astray. Summa aameen. Bro you need to do full on taubah, you know your views are similar to the kuffar, go to any news website and read the comments section, and thats what they say too. And man, that pig hasn't criticized some Muslim king or nation, he has criticized the Holy Quran, the word of God himself.

Do you even follow the papers? Hasn't the Indian Government intervened to stop the banning of the Gita (Hindu Scripture) in russian schools? Then how can they allow the pig in India? What right do they have to stop the ban in russia? But still they do.

For the Hindus, they can petition an whole country to lift the ban, and that too in a country where the population of Hindus is next to nil, and where as its not 'good manners' for us 200 million Muslims to petition their own government to not allow a super pig to enter India. In both the cases, its the sentiments that count.

Frankly bro, you speak like the kuffar. This argument is just so ridiculous, abdurd and pathetic. Where is the free speech? Rights? All Bull ****, India is a nation of hypocrisy.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-...e1-788330.aspx

Reply.

Do you get it now at least?

[Sydaycymn]

I still don't see any baisis for your accusation. Even I can throw the same charge at you at point plenty of kuffar who think like you.

My point was mere about reasonable protest rather than putting out the brains on a platter and then screaming:

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...tf5RKG3bR8RGuw