[Reader-list] Jihadis abduct, rape young girls in Jammu -

[akmalik45 at yahoo.com]

Dear Mr Durrani,
                  Well, I intentionally refrained myself from replying to Rakesh because I didtn't like the tenor used in language by him.Difference of opinion comes because people think differently but someone who thinks  whatever his views be, only he is right-there is no use of a discussion. If someone has seen Supreme Court judgements, it would be very obvious that the learned judges too differ very widely on the same facts of the cases even to the extent of one acquitting the accused while other convicting the accused to a higher degree.It is accepted as a sign of intellgent difference of opinion.
Probably Mr Rakesh doesn't know that Somnath Temple is an archeological site being maintained by Min of Culture, Govt of India and money is being spent on its refurbishment because it is an archeological site being maintained by the Min and not because it is a Hindu temple.
2. On the appeasement,
Giving Haj subsidies only to a particular community is a Muslim appeasement.Those disagreeing need to let us know why not then to others as well and why only to Muslims.If I want to go for Haj, why I should not get the subsidy? Even Supreme Court raised the points on a PIL.
Why giving Money only to Muslim girl students? Why not to other girl students similarly placed. Is it not a Muslim appeasement?
Why not hanging the Parliament attack terrorist convicted by Supreme Court of India is not a Muslim dis-appeasent.(This is how I could describe)
Sachar Committee recommendations to be obeyed-what Constitutional provision says you obey something which goes against the provisions of the Constitution of India.The Govt of India didn't even agree to the Election Commision of India's views on Office of Profit held by Madam Sonia Gandhi and Lok Sabha Speaker Som Nath Chatterjee while changing the law overnight to benefit them.The Constitution of India provides no citizen should be discriminated on the basis of caste, creed or religion excepting as provided in Art 16. This article prvides for discrimination for weaker sections based on CLASS of people irresective of their religion.  Discrimination based on religion has been held ultra vires by various courts in the country.But the Govt still wants to circumvent it by giving benefits to Muslims somehow or the other.IS IT NOT A MUSLIM APPEASEMENT? Why not people from other religions allowed to benefit alongwith Muslims because it does not result into vote
 bank politics.
If I go on giving instances, I will have to sit all night which I do not wnat to.
Please mind at no stage have I opined that Muslims are bad and Hindus or other community people are good. I have opined only that all citizens of India be treated equally and no one should be discrimnated based on religion which is enshrined in our Constitution as well.
Such appeasement & divisive policies by the English to keep us divided resulted in the creation of Pakistan.The scars of people of specific religion being killed ,women being raped in front of your eyes still remain after 62 years to those who suffered.Such appeasement have started up now intra-communities in paricular religions.Such policies are going to harm the entire country. Let us not accept it now.Mr Rakesh will perhaps understand it in next 20-25 years. Till then we can live with our different views.
By the way the Web definition of SECULARISM:
secularism n. Religious skepticism or indifference. The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.

Regards,  
(A.K.MALIK)


--- On Mon, 6/29/09, Pawan Durani <pawan.durani at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Pawan Durani <pawan.durani at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Jihadis abduct, rape young girls in Jammu -
> To: "Rakesh Iyer" <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
> Cc: "A.K. Malik" <akmalik45 at yahoo.com>, "Sarai List" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> Date: Monday, June 29, 2009, 9:35 AM
> Rakesh Ji ,
> 
> Any historical monument , which was originally built for
> some cause is
> being looked after by Indian Goverment.
> 
> Kindly do not mislead by giving example of only Somnath
> temple , even
> Jama Masjid in Delhi is renovated and masde beautiful with
> help of
> public money by Goverment.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Pawan
> 
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Rakesh Iyer<rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Dear Malik jee
> >
> > I don't understand how skewed can your views be? The
> incident has been
> > reported in the Daily Pioneer. What do you want? Do
> you want the case to run
> > like 24- hr news item the way our media reports, and
> then reduce it to
> > caricature?
> >
> > Do you want our newsprint media to also portray it the
> way they usually do,
> > and thereby reduce it to just one news?
> >
> > Or do you want only all news of Hindu sufferings to be
> published, and no
> > news of any Muslim or Christian or any other suffering
> to be banned?
> >
> > What do you want? What is your problem, if I may ask
> you? In anything and
> > everything you see Muslim appeasement only.
> >
> > When the Indian govt decides to give Haj subsidies,
> it's Muslim appeasement.
> > When the Indian govt decides to reserve seats for
> Indian Muslims, it's
> > Muslim appeasement. When the Indian govt decides to
> set up bank branches in
> > Muslim dominated areas, it's Muslim appeasement.
> Obeying the recommendations
> > of the Sachar Committee Report is Muslim appeasement.
> >
> > But naming the missiles of India as 'Arjun' or giving
> them only Hindu
> > mythical names is not appeasement. The decision of
> Indian govt to build the
> > Somnath temple by public money is not appeasement.
> Neither is it appeasement
> > to spend money of the public on Amarnath and Kedarnath
> yatras, even to give
> > security there, that too by organizations other than
> the police. It's not an
> > appeasement indeed to state that India is taken as a
> 'Hindu' rashtra (by the
> > BJP govt of course).
> >
> > So giving money for temple construction or allowing
> people in the name of
> > Hindutva to destroy mosques and mazars is not
> appeasement too.
> >
> > Malik jee, for every one argument you give about
> Muslim appeasement, I will
> > give you an example of Hindu appeasement. And this
> will not end. What I want
> > to know is this, what do you wish to portray through
> this end listing? And
> > this is all for those who believe there is Muslim
> appeasment in India.
> >
> > Let me state the obvious here. India is a state where
> every community is
> > appeased or sought to be appeased. It's a compromise
> with which we have to
> > live. Otherwise, there always is the option of
> breaking away into 543 and
> > more principalities where each minority section can
> live amongst themselves,
> > produce amongst themselves and not bother others.
> >
> > Learn to compromise Malik jee. That's how we live as
> India. Otherwise, be
> > prepared for thousands of partitions of India. And if
> you think partition is
> > not trauma, remember 1947 or at least read about it.
> And for more, you can
> > read about how Pakistan felt in 1971 after losing
> Bangladesh.
> >
> > I would have been happy if you had said that let's not
> stop at appeasement
> > but take steps to improve the lives of people on the
> ground. But this is
> > simply name calling and nothing else.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Rakesh
> >
>