[Reader-list] The Epitaph of a Mind: Vir Sanghvi

[Vedavati Jogi]

Dear Rakesh,
 
I would like to discuss all these points with you.
 
1) Very first thing,
 
There were 2 reasons why muslims decided to stay in India , firstly they were assured security by nehru and Patel, secondly, their daily bread & butter was here. If you read true History (and not the 'secular' one) that too with open mind then you will come to know that more than 90% muslims had supported 'pakistan' but most of them stayed back after partition. 
 
I was shocked to read that it was magnonimity of muslims which made them to choose  India as their homeland. 
 
2) Muslims come out to vote in large numbers does not mean they are very much in favour of democratic processes. Democarcy does not exist in muslim countries- see the past & present of all middle east countries. Muslims are quite aware of this fact that Hindus are divided in castes hence muslim votes can decide the future of the candidate which gives them power of bargaining. 
 
Thats why 'secular' parties cannot cancel article 370, they can not bring 'uniform civil' code.
they don't dare to hang Afzal guru. they don't show sympathy to kashmiri pandits or godhra victioms, list is very big.
 
3) You have said that, 
 
'secular folk' has never stated that they want Bangladeshis to vote in elections. Neither have they made any statement in favor of Pakistan.
 
seculars have created hue and cry whenever shivsena or BJP have talked of sending back bangladeshis 
 
Shankarrao Chavan former minister had said that he would like to provide permanent settlement to bangladeshis.
 
After pokharan testing in 1998, Mulayam singh had advised Bajpeyi Govt. to pay 2000 crores to pakistan. 
 
Manishankar Ayyar loves and trusts Pakistan and hates RSS. and whatever happened in Swat valley was just a 'deal' and not something one should worry about.
 
Arundhati Roy openly supported Afzal Guru and advised govt. to give Kashmir to pakistan 
 
I would prefer not to talk about 'Tista Settlewad'
 
4) For me, muslims are Indians moreover they are human beings and not votebanks, 
Not Babar but Ram was their ancestor. They should mingle with  their Hindu brothers freely. They should send their children to English / Hindi or Regional language medium schools and allow them to mix up with their Hindu brothers and sisters. They should accept uniform civil code.
 
Unfortunately that is not happening because you seculars continously give them feeling that they are different than Hindus, they are suffering because they are Muslims
 
I would like to give you one example,
 
I am a media professional working in the field of Education since last 23 years. Presently I am working for socio-economicall unprivileged children 20% of them are Muslims. Among them my most obedient and favourite student 'Rahil Tamboli' happens to be a Muslim .
His mother is a victim of Talaque, who is now working as a peon. Rahil is a very hardworking student who wants to be an IAS officer,
 
Recently some congress workers visited his slum area mostly occupied by muslims. These workers started talking about descrimination against muslims and how congress gave them gift of Sacchar etc. Rahil stood up and dared to ask those workers 'which descrimination you are talking about?' Because he is quite aware of this fact that he is the most favourite student of his Jogi madam. What he said was very very important. 'Talaque' is the reason behind his sufferings. This 17 years old youth  wants to be an  IAS officer but he can't  achieve his goal because he can't join even Junior college, he has to work because he has to look after his three younger siblings. "I will throw your Sacchar report into waste paper basket" believe me these are his words.  
 
There are thousands of Rahil Tambolis in India.  Politicians and  seculars are constantly reminding them of their religion,  trying to separate them from Hindus, Politicians get votes and seculars can prove their secular credentials. They are more worried about preserving their separate identity and expect Hindus to forget their own identity, 
anything 'hindu' is communal anything 'muslim' is 'secular' 'liberal' . Does this situation encourage Hindu-Muslim unity? 
 
Keep aside your 'secular tag' and think over it'
 
Regards
 
vedavati
 
 
 
 
--- On Sat, 28/3/09, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] The Epitaph of a Mind: Vir Sanghvi
To: "Vedavati Jogi" <vedavati_jogi at yahoo.com>
Date: Saturday, 28 March, 2009, 4:50 PM


Dear Vedavati

Since you have stated that you can't accept certain things, I would be glad if you could answer the following questions in regard to these itself. These are:

1) You state that Hindus had shown magnanimity to Muslims by allowing them to stay back. As far as I remember, violence during Partition had occurred in Bengal and Punjab, and may be in some other parts of North India. Rajasthan and Gujarat, as well as the rest of India, was not involved in any time of strife or violence, so there the Muslims stayed back. And even in Punjab and Bengal, many Muslims did stay back. 

Hence, your understanding that Hindus were magnanimous enough to let Muslims stay back, is in my minds contentious. This may be true only upto an extent in Bengal and Punjab. Infact, to my mind, the Muslims were magnanimous enough by staying back in India rather than going back to Pakistan, thereby strengthening the idea that they believe in surviving in a secular republic rather than in an Islamic state.  

This idea is further strengthened by the fact that Muslims come out to vote in large numbers (forget for the moment the parties they vote for), which means they are very much in favor of democratic processes. And they do believe in the rights of the state. Infact, while the Muslims of India oppose US for its' foreign policy, they don't oppose the Indo-US Nuclear Deal or any deal.  And all talk of Left fell flat when they said Muslims are against the deal. 

2) What makes you say that 100% Indianisation of Muslims has not taken place? And first of all, can you define what Indianisation is? I can understand Talibanization, but I don't understand what Indianisation is. Do you have personal experiences of Muslims not being Indianized, or are these just statements which keep on circulating as usual through media folk and the like. 

I would be very glad if people who post these statements actually come out, put their names, and show photos and visuals of these happening. 

3) You say dividing the country. I agree that Congress and the other 'secular' parties are more interested in getting the Muslim vote, and if they can get that through communal riots, so be it. The fact is that the same Sachar committee which you deride, has proven that in the last 60 years, Muslims have actually become worser, so much so, that their position today is comparable to that of Dalits (which is not great, irrespective of Mayawati becoming CM of UP). 

And even the Muslims know that they have been taken for granted as a vote bank, but they can't help it. If the second most important party in India had not been the BJP, but say the Left or some other party which was not based on any religion-based agenda (even if it were say casteist), Muslims could have voted tactically to ensure their progress. Instead, today they have to waste their votes (like in my state MP), towards ensuring their own security. All thanks to BJP and their activities. 

4) You are stating there is so-called discrimination against Muslims. If you want, you can go to Gujarat, in the city of Ahmedabad. My relatives live there, and so do a couple of my friends. You would be sad to know that on one hand, we have the Hindu-dominated areas, where there are banks, schools (both public and private functioning properly by and large), municipal offices, and other facilities expected of a modern city. Go to the Muslim ghettoes, and there are none. You may say people are poor, so they don't go to schools or other areas. 

Then let me remind you that in 2007, India finally accepted the duty of educating children from 5 to 14 years of age, with primary education free of cost. What is happening to this particular idea in these areas? Here, teachers don't attend schools, and students come back after some time as no teachers are there. No banks are established even to give micro-credit, something for which none other than Mohammed Yunus, won the Nobel Prize for Peace. 

These Muslims, even if rich, are not allowed to buy houses in certain areas of Ahmedabad where Hindus live. People are threatened if they give houses in rent to Muslims. Is this the way to go? I can understand the criteria of vegetarian and non-vegetarian, but this alone is not what makes people go against Muslims. 

Let me go ahead and say this. If we are so insecure about our own daughters and wives that we feel that they would run away with Muslims, we should stop marrying and live alone. That way would still be better. And is it better to marry off our daughters to people who are bad but Hindu, rather than someone they love but is a Muslim? 

5) Finally, who shows sympathies towards Bangladeshis or Pakistanis? Never has any of this 'secular folk' has stated that they want Bangladeshis to vote in elections. Neither have they made any statement in favor of Pakistan. Instead, you interpret any statement made by them for Muslims, as one supporting Pakistan. 

Because for you, Indian Muslim = Pakistan. 

And it's this which I say is wrong, simply because it has been unproven. For actions of a few Muslims, they can't be branded anti-nationals. And all those who actually feel for Pakistan, need not be necessarily anti-India. They may be simply pro human, who would want both India and Pakistan to prosper side by side. 

Finally, for the fact you can't forgive. Then what should we do? Cut Muslims to pieces? Would that give you some satisfaction? And if you get killed then? Should we continue with this blood bath till one community gets vanquished?

Regards

Rakesh



Get rid of Add-Ons in your email ID. Get yourname at rocketmail.com. Sign up now!


      Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Go to http://in.webmessenger.yahoo.com/