Date: 04 Aug 2012


HERE ARE SOME VERY VALUABLE COMMENTS THAT WE REPRODUCE WITHOUT GIVING ANY NEMES. ========================================================================= \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ In a message dated 04/08/2012 23:15:25 GMT Daylight Time, XXXXXXXXXXXXXwrites: Has all this been recorded anywhere either by him or anyone else? Or all this is your own presumptions as others have their? \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ --- On Sat, 4/8/12, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ <\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\> wrote: \\ \\\\\\\\\\After having got his Pakistan in the name of Islam, he feared that sooner or later the Mullah power would get hold of the country and all but destroy it and that too in the name of Islam. He knew what he was doing and that is the reason why he made that speech. For him the game of two nations was over and he wanted to run the country as a secular Pakistan but did not live long enough to steer it in any clear direction.nor did he immediately tell his people not to kill the non Muslims living in Pakistan. May be nobody would have listened to him as he himself was the reason for the madness that he caused in the first place.. So he lived with it just as ruthlessly as when he caused it. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Some people believe with some justification that it was the Muslim in him which compelled him to do what he did but I find it a bit difficult to swallow this as he was not the type of Muslim who could be properly credited with such an honour or achievement. I still believe that he used Islam to achieve his political aim. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Gandhi, dhimmitude and Dhimmi (was: carve out separate homeland..) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ I wrote about his speech In Karachi and I was there with my father and heard the words and if you recall I wrote tht when we came out my father said how could a man talk with double tounge. Is he not aware of burning Punjab and was he not the one who started Direct Action in 1946. He is just trying to make people happy and show the world that he is not a fanatic. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ He was a Shia of Agha Khan followers and thus in early days when he did not follow the Sunna he ate bacon and drank and didnot know how to pray but after joining Mulsim Leauge he learnt what was needed.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ He had a double personality and wanted to be leader of all India while still became of Pakistan.One can say not being Sunni he was liberal but one can see that even his own only daughter didnot go to Pakistan with him and remained an Indian citizen and lived in Bombay. It is a dead horse and facts are there that he whether to show his graspe on Mulsims compared to Gandhi or ego did win his demands and created Pakistan and was responisble for blood of many innocents families.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ He was lucky that British didnot lock himj up like gandhi and so he was able to build Muslim Leauge and told openly to Gandhi Nehru group that he and his pary only represent the Muslims of India. After all 86% voted with him \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Who was Jinnah to give a nation the opportunity to split itself into two communal nations. He was nothing more than a self serving politician who wanted power for himself. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ After he got his Pakistan, he did not know what to do with it. So he turned secular.again. At the same time he laid the foundation of his own, so called Islamic State, to be split into two countries in his own lifetime when he told the Bengali Muslims that they will have to learn Urdu. This was the foundation for further split within his Islamic empire. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Strangely enough, the adultrated Hindu nation called Bharat, created by Dhimmi MKGandhi still exits in one piece and it is our own brothers the Sikhs who want to break it up and are waiting for us to put a foot wrong in J & K and we shall have our Northern boundary somewhere near Karnal/Paniput.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ So it is good to dream about a Hindu only State but think about the price you will pay for a Hindu only State. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ I am familiar with Dhimmis used to refer to Jews and Christians in islam majority lands. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Jinnah gave an opportunity to morally, legally, and ethically create two zones: Muslim only zone of Pakistan and non-Muslim zone, India.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ I think Gandhi was also a Dummy!\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Hindu heritage is full of such mahatmans, who are actually Atma huns (Self inflicting, inflicting others and both) \\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ The old thread had become too long and I am taking it in a new direction based on mail by Koti Sreekrishna ji. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ In his mail, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX wrote: "What was lacking with Gandhi was common sense. When you divide a house, it has to be equitable. Gandhi was insane, blinded by his ideology. It is immaterial what British or anybody thought." \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\=========================== I don't know if it was just lack of common sense. Most probably it was a classic example of dhimmitude. Some excerpts from my paper on dhimmitude are below. For extensive information -- google dhimmitude and read articles by Bill Warner and Bet Yeor and others. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ "Dhimmi is an Arabic term literally meaning “protected”. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ A dhimmi is a unique invention of the Prophet of Islam. In simple terms a dhimmi is non-Muslim citizen of an Islamic state who has agreed to live as a non-Muslim. He has the freedom to practice his religion but under highly restricted conditions. He has very few legal rights and must pay a special tax called jiziya. He leads a very humiliating existence. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ It arose from the need of Islamic rulers to deal with non-Muslim subjects in their realm. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Dhimmitude also has the effect of turning the victims of harsh Islamic rule into its defenders; there is an unconscious fear that criticizing them might make their condition worse. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Dhimmitude is a term derived from dhimmi. The word "dhimmitude" as a historical concept, was coined by Bat Ye'or in 1983 to describe the legal and social conditions of Jews and Christians subjected to Islamic rule. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Dhimmitude is also the mindset of a dhimmi -- the type of mentality that they have developed out of their particular historical condition which lasted for centuries, even in some Muslim countries, till today. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ World reaction to current Islamic terrorism is best explained by Stockholm syndrome and India is no exception to it. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Centuries of Islamic domination and subjugation of Hindus have left deep wounds on the Hindu psyche. Whatever little hope of recovering from those wounds was there in the early part of last century when India was waging struggle to rid itself of British domination were dashed by the Muslim violence during first half of last century and specially during the partition in 1947. The wounds inflicted by centuries of Islamic rule and partition of India and the violence that accompanied it on a large segment of the Indian population have been so debilitating that they continue to live in a state of constant fear, not necessarily physical, and has today given birth a segment of intelligentsia and the political class who are best described as Islamic apologists. Its main aspect in India today is denial of history – denial of atrocities suffered by the Hindus during the Muslim rule. Physically Hindus are not dhimmis any more but mental dhimmitude still exists.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ This was earlier elaborated by historian R C Majumdar. In his words: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\“The official history of the freedom movement starts with the premise that India lost independence only in the eighteenth century and had thus an experience of subjection to a foreign power for only two centuries. Real history, on the other hand, teaches us that the major part of India lost independence about five centuries before, and merely changed masters in the eighteenth century… The Hindu leaders deliberately ignored patent truth and facts of history… They live in a fancied fraternity and are sensitive to any expression that jars against the slogan of Hindu-Muslim bhai-bhai…” \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ A V Williams Jackson in his 9 vol History of India (1907) observed:" Hindus orthodox by nature cherish their own oppressors." At that time Williams Jackson was not familiar with the term dhimmitude. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Gandhi, with all his worthy qualities and dedication to India, was a victim of dhimmitude, and by any chance he was not alone.And today's India is full of them. Instead of acknowledging themselves as such, they go under the pretense of being secular, progressive, free thinkers. The more a person or community has been a victim of Muslim atrocities, the more of a dhimmi the person or community tends to be. That is the general observation. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Muslim appeasement is another form of its manifestation. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ In her two books and numerous articles, Bat Ye'or has done an excellent job of exposing dhimmitude in Europe and the Middle East and among Christians and Jews. A comprehensive book on Hindu dhimmitude is yet to be written. Hopefully, and it is big hopefully, one these of days yours truly will accomplish that job. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ PS \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Bat Ye'or's two books \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 1. The Dhimmi -- Jews and Christians under Islam \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 2. Islam and Dhimmitude -- Where Civilizations Collide \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Another must read if one wants to understand what dhimmitude does to a civilization. \\\\\\\\\\\\ ============================================ 000000000