Of sleeping dogs and Indian Muslims

This is a response to a gentleman's kind listing of Muslim ‘contribution’ to India I read about. Had he talked about some kinds of Muslims, one would have accepted it and let it pass. Now, since this is a general tarring of IMs, listen up…

His list:

1. Demolishing 2000 Hindu temples.

2. Aurangzeb

3. Jazia

4. Partition

5. Terroism

Then, rather sweetly, he asks, “Am I missing anything?”

It doesn't matter. You are missing the wood for the woodpecker. If you want to move on, then why keep pecking on the same old tree?

1. Yes, Hindu temples were demolished. How many Jain and Buddhist temples did the Hindus destroy? Oh, but that does not count, because Hindus consider Jains and Buddhists as their own.

2. Yes, you had Aurangzeb...and Akbar, Jehangir, Shahjehan...they performed a puja at the Taj Mahal recently, just because they felt like it. I mean, how many Muslims go to temples as tourists and fall on their feet to offer the namaaz because they were there and just felt like it? Oh, but Mussalmans are like the British, everything time-to-time, as we Gujjus say.

3. Yes, Jiziya...Mughals levied tax on Hindus. What can I do about that? It was wrong but they had come as conquerors and not democrats, na? And don’t you put money in McCain's and Obama's chanda boxes so that your future is safe in America and you can get that French kiss from the statue of liberty symbol?

4. Yes, Partition was a Muslim contribution. They made it easy for us to have another country to blame. India was made up of so many principalities with nabobs and maharajahs living in those palaces which had pink chandeliers and vomit-yellow carpets. The departing Muslims left you with these to get dollahs from tourists to peep through some stupid filigree.

5. Yes, terrorism...our ‘contribution’ is that we too sat and took it. Now, as one report says, car bombs have made their “debut”...so IMs were virgins until just the other day, right?

And then the gentleman says:

"We could have let sleeping dogs lie after partition. Wasn't that the point of partition?"

The Partition wasn't about letting sleeping dogs lie, get it? It was a response to the behaviour of Gandhi-Nehru-Jinnah separately and for different political reasons.

"Yet these bastards chose to keep on occupying our land, agitating for their own laws and rules, and explode bombs."

Your land? The Bay Area, SF? IMs are 'occupying' the land we were born in and tilled. Get that in your head. Now. Yes, some are agitating for separate personal laws because the politicians like playing ball with them and they like playing ball with the politicos. But, don't the Hindus have their own civil laws? The Parsis, the Christians? I am for a Uniform Civil Code, but it has to be based on secular ideas, not the idea of the majority community. No way. Yes, some Muslim organisations explode bombs. How many IMs support them?

"What the fukk do they want?"

That you learn to spell correctly without fear. After all, you have not studied in some madrassa where they shake their heads, right?

"For the flag of Islam to fly on Red Fort?"

No, I don't think IMs want the flag of Islam on the Red Fort; they are happy enough with Delhi Darbar and Karim's.

"Every few years we need a fucking pogrom just to keep them in line. Haraami kee aulad saaley, they wan't nothing in life but to die and kill."

I can feel your pain. And really sorry about all the trouble you guys have to undergo to organise those orgiastic pogroms, get saffron bandanas, and write all those slogans (hey, you did not take SRK to task for misusing your religion with ‘Om Shanti Om’? Isn’t he too a "haraamee ki aulaad"? Oh, I forgot, he pays lotsa jiziya to the IT department...)

"In any case, this is between Indian Hindus and Muslims who live in India. Its not really a Pakistani issue is it?"

Interestingly, now you are not blaming the Pakistanis. Why? One more Dunkin' Donuts trip being planned? Or that Sufi dance at the Daata Ganj Baksh in a ganja trance?

As Pooh would say, tell me how it was…

Now time for a siesta…yeah, let the sleeping bitch lie…


  1. FV,

    I think it may be a bit premature for IMs to get on the defensive about this. There isn't any evidence to their involvement, and never has been in other similar incidents except perhaps SIMIs in the Bombay Trains.

    Quoted from a blog:

    The terrorists also attempt to emphasize that they are Indian Muslims which still cannot be verified. Either they might be genuine or this might be an attempt to incite further communal violence.

    Significantly, the email also takes great pains to emphasize the alleged local origin of the gang that attacked Ahmedabad on Saturday.

    "We the terrorists of India - the Indian Mujahideen - the militia of Islam whose each and every Mujahid belongs to this very soil of India, have returned to execute the compulsion of Allah".

    Source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com

    Which terrorist calls himself a terrorist? And why the clumsy attempt to convince of being local?

  2. Zeemax:

    IMs have no choice. Zabardasti defensive par daal dete hai...

    Thanks for sharing that other info...

  3. FV:

    Don't lend credence to any of these idiots by responding to such crap. They don't deserve to be dignified with a response.

    And you should be the last person to be put on the defensive. Come on, not you...

    These guys don't speak for the vast majority of hindus, just a lunatic fringe.

  4. I agree with Pune S...But its not rally easy to keep quiet..
    I'm a secular Hindu..but I hate all these fundamentalist bastards who think this country is for hindus..
    This country is for Human beings with a capital H...not for hindus not for muslims..for Human beings.. for Indians..

  5. "I agree with Pune S...But its not rally easy to keep quiet..
    I'm a secular Hindu..but I hate all these fundamentalist bastards who think this country is for hindus..
    This country is for Human beings with a capital H...not for hindus not for muslims..for Human beings.. for Indians.."

    Wah tiger saab. so next time put your money where your mouth is and take the side of Muslims next time there is a riot.

  6. Have suspected it for some time, and your use of the term here is confirmation- 'gentlemen' are extinct.

  7. I dont think Jiziya was wrong.... Muslims were already paying their zakaat under Sharia Law and Hindus were not obliged to do so... so I think it was a fair tax. What is unfair is the tax saving HUF that hindus have today...which IMs dont.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.