To be of the South Asian persuasion means there are several cultural observations you must oblige to, ideally without much verbal protest: spicy foods, a severe lack of emphasis on the virtue of the outdoors, engineering/medicine, being felt up and checked out by very investigative mothers of single young men at dinner parties. The most cherished and simultaneously cringed upon of these cultural observations, growing up, was the presence of pirated Bollywood films in the comfort of your family room every Friday and Saturday night. While you would sometimes groan in response to your mother beckoning you to join her in the latest love story starring Salman Khan and Madhuri Dixit, you secretly loved every moment of it. There was something familiar, something calming and something genuinely fun about the often ridiculous, the sometimes sincerely intimate and touching and the always entertaining – in both a negative and positive way – stories you’d be forced to stomach for a little over three hours.
Being a Pakistani Muslim brought with it a different perspective to Indian cinema. The anti-Pakistani storylines, references, and the demonization of Muslims always were and still are noticeable – be the movie about war, about a historical period or just a simple unrequited love story. While India comprises of the third largest Muslim population in the world, the portrayal of Muslims on the big screen has been less than anything pleasant for the most part. Extremism, betrayal to the country, Qawwali song sequences almost tokenizingly laced with images of questionable Sufi mysticism are but a few of the various characteristics given to Muslims in Indian cinema films. This is certainly, however, not to deny the positive Muslim characters and storylines which have also been represented – but these, unfortunately, have been few and far in between.
My Name is Khan is the story of a brilliant young Indian Muslim man, afflicted with Asperger’s syndrome and a commitment to goodness, seeking to reclaim his faith and his love in a post-9/11 America.
Rizvan Khan, played by Shahrukh Khan, is brought to America by virtue of being sponsored for citizenship by his younger brother, a successful businessman. Inspired by the love and encouragement given to him by his mother throughout his life, Khan does not allow his condition – or really anything else – to serve as an impediment to living a fulfilling life. Part of this fulfillment is Mandira, a young Indian woman living and working at a hair salon in San Francisco, played by Kajol. A brief moment of somewhat rare sincerity and kindness expressed by Mandira towards Khan sparks a friendship rooted deeply in love for the latter.
Mandira is a divorcee with a young son, and after initial hesitation and much persistence on the part of Khan, comes to love him and the two marry. The three – Mandira, Khan and their son Sameer – lead a loving life, despite the fact that Mandira is a practicing Hindu, holding both religious and historical significance and conflict for the two Indians. However, given a lesson taught to Khan as a child by his mother, he believes strongly that only truly two types of people exist in this world – those who are good and do good deeds and those who are bad and do bad deeds. This simple piece of advice comes to completely encompass Khan’s outlook on humanity and relations and is at the core of the message of the film. When tragedy strikes the family, Khan sets out to fulfill an almost impossible promise and along the way inspires millions to believe in that a person must be judged by the deeds that s/he does – be they good or bad, big or small.
The film is a refreshing breakaway from mainstream Indian cinema productions. Often times, taboo subjects or socially-conscious films are reserved for the more independent, low-budget filmmakers or production companies (the only other example from the top of my head is the recent film New York which also explores discrimination against Muslims in a post-9/11 America). Very rarely does
a mainstream director and producer the calibre of Karan Johar create a film that challenges misconceptions and traditions. Thus, MNIK comes as a rather major shock to those well-acquainted with Indian cinema. It is not the subject of the film which proves to be surprising but rather the content. Aside from the few groan-inducing Bollywood-esque instances here and there throughout the film, it is remarkably well done. The film tackles several taboo and socially conscious subjects – autism, interreligious marriage, Hindu-Muslim relations, terrorism, journalistic selectivism, torture, homegrown extremism, the hijab and Islamophobia – surprisingly without much tokenization.
Each issue is carefully discussed beyond a superfluous level but done so in a manner which isn’t necessarily on the nose. Instead, all the issues are laced together and tied back to the core message of the film which is a zygote of the holy union of the Golden Rule and karma. The portrayal of Islam and Muslim life in the states strikes a chord in particular, especially for those who are Muslim. There is an earnest and sincere depiction of and silent discussion on the everyday life and struggle of the American Muslim in his/her interspersed life of faith and of public. Perhaps one of the most touching scenes in the film shows Khan sitting, in a diner, across a Muslim couple he has met during his travels, casually chatting. All of sudden, he breaks conversation and begins to grab his things. The couple asks him why he is rushing as there is still time before they are called back onto the bus. Khan mentions how it is time to pray, to which the husband replies that while it certainly may be time to pray, it is important to take into consideration the people and place around which one finds himself. Khan responds by simply stating that prayer is not dependent on others or on place – only on belief. He goes on to pray in public, drawing much attention and confusion from his fellow passengers, who have begun returning to the bus. Instances such as these, as well as another memorable scene in a mosque where there is a discussion on the meaning of the story of Abraham and his attempted sacrifice of Ishmael and stereotype-breaking characters such as Khan’s hijab-clad sister-in-law, provide an unprecedented perspective in Indian cinema – or almost anywhere else.
Of course, the release of this film hasn’t been without controversy and backlash. Hindu nationalist group, Shiv Sena, responded to the film with angry threats and vandalism in the province of Maharashtra. Despite this, however, movie-goers flooded the cinemas and the film has become a blockbuster internationally and at home:
Moviegoers across the country made sure they dropped all plans to watch the new Shahrukh Khan flick – My Name is Khan, which is directed by Karan Johar grossed an astounding Rs 250 million on the opening day alone, breaking all kinds of box office records. The worldwide gross of $5.5 million is among the highest ever recorded for a Bollywood film.
The film is only expected to rake in more [money] over the next two months as it expands to more international markets. Next week Bollywood fans in Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Oman and Lebanon get to watch the movie. In the US, ‘My Name is Khan’ distributed by Fox Searchlight and by 20th Century Fox International in other countries across the globe. The film grossed $9,727 in New Zealand and made 50 percent more money than any other Bollywood film in the Middle East. In the UK, MNIK scored $193,000 in just paid previews, which is another opening day record. However the film opened at the 11th spot all time stats in Australia.
MNIK isn’t The Autobiography of Malcolm X. It isn’t Rainman. It isn’t I am Sam. It isn’t Crash. It’s not going to change your outlook on life or open your eyes to unrecognized discrimination or inspire you to be a better person. But it will evoke emotion and thought given the almost universality in its approach and message. And if there is anything that this film should be recognized and be seen for it is the positive road towards which it takes Indian cinema, a film industry with vast reach and influence over millions within and beyond the borders of the religious and ethnic conflict ridden Sub-continent. In country like India, where Hindu-Muslim tensions still run wild as indicated by the 2002 Gujarat pogrom and the attacks in Mumbai last year, MNIK humanizes an overwhelming and integral minority. If we can find this sort of attempt in Indian cinema, renowned within the region for its usual negative tokenizing, marginalizing and propagandistic portrayal of Islam and Muslims (as well as Pakistanis), as well as even instances in Pakistani cinema with films such as 2007′s controversial Khuda Ke Liye (which addresses issues of extremism), perhaps it is not completely idealistic to hold on to some hope.
Just a little.
[The film is playing in various cinemas around North America and while it is primarily in Hindi, it is available with subtitles. For more information please visit the official site]
Related posts:
- Damascus Film Festival
- “The Kingdom”: Film Review
- Caramel: A Film Review
- Danny Glover, Daniel Pearl’s Wife, and Kareem Abdul Jabar Also Disagree with Me
- A Palestine film festival in Ann Arbor
I agree. The movie wasn't a cinematic triumph, but it was a wonderful and brave film in regards to Indian film making. I enjoyed the movie very much, and there was a packed audience when I saw it a few days after it opened.
I have to say, though, that I found it interesting Sharukh Khan could make this movie after making skin bleaching cream commericals.
Posted by Miriam | February 25, 2010, 2:50 pmWell, the light skin love affair is so highly naturalized in south asian culture that really no one ever questions it.
plus… discrimination at the hands of others > discrimination by the self
Posted by SanaKF | February 26, 2010, 9:05 amAs always awesome post.
Posted by Super Sayyin | February 26, 2010, 1:43 amSana, thank you, I would have missed looking forward to this one if you hadn't mentioned it.
Posted by kinzi | February 26, 2010, 8:18 amDid you guys watch Tropic Thunder by any chance? remember simple jack, the desperate effort by a superstar tobe taken seriously? Even Tropic Thunder is prophetic these days, thanks to Shah Rukh Khan…
Posted by InfidelRudy | February 26, 2010, 3:00 pmIt was interesting to read your movie review; so many things to agree with and yet some to disagree.
"something familiar, something calming and something genuinely fun about the often ridiculous, the sometimes sincerely intimate and touching and the always entertaining – in both a negative and positive way – stories you’d be forced to stomach for a little over three hours" is absolutely bulls' eye
1) Shiv Sena had no issues with the movie or its contents per se; their threats and vandalism have been directed at the movie because of its objection to something SRK said and has absolutely nothing to do with the movie. Anyway, their actions got the movie publicity that money could not have bought and the movie-goers have booed the Shiv Sena by making the movie a BO hit.
-contd
Posted by Guest | February 27, 2010, 1:28 am2) "the portrayal of Muslims on the big screen has been less than anything pleasant for the most part. Extremism, betrayal to the country, Qawwali song sequences almost tokenizingly laced with images of questionable Sufi mysticism are but a few of the various characteristics given to Muslims in Indian cinema films." – This is true to a very limited extent. There have been numerous exceptions to this rule, if this is a rule. Here are some movies, new and old, which have had fairly good storylines and characterizations
Chak De – the protagonist had to clear unfair prejudices levelled against him
Dhoka – a Muslim police officer in Mumbai who finds nothing in common with suicide bombers from his own community but is faced by the same questions that bog many
Haqeeqat – Hindu and Muslims soldiers fighting the common enemy
Amar, Akbar Anthony – undying harmony and affection amongst Hindus, Muslims and Christians (Muslim friends accepted prasad from the Hindu hero's mother and allowed their sisters to tie rakhis on their wrists)
Bombay – had a strong message for communal harmony even as it showed the protagonist a Muslim girl eloping with a Hindu boy
Posted by Guest | February 27, 2010, 1:29 amWednesday – says a superb message that terrorism has no religion
Fiza – story of a young Muslim woman who, after her brother leaves home to join a rebel group, searches the country to bring him back.
Mission Kashmir – a young Kashmiri Muslim man, who after losing his family as a child, joins a local rebel force to help him find and exact revenge on those who killed his family.
Zubeidaa, Mammo and Sardari Begum – a strong Muslim female character whose Muslim identity rarely played a role in the storyline and who did not fit neatly into a stereotype.
Have you heard the sixties song 'Tu Hindu banega na Musalman Banega, Insan ki Aulad hai Insan Bega'?
Anyway here's to hoping for more of such movies in the future!
Posted by Guest | February 27, 2010, 1:29 amOh, some great reminders! I had completely forgotten some of these films. Chak De's great, Dhoka and Haqeeqat I have never heard of. Amar/Akbar/Anthony – that's a good one, had forgotten about it. Bombay, can't remember it well but it came from the South Indian film industry which produces far more interesting topics than "Bollywood North."
Wednesday was a weird film – because it ends and you're like "whoa, awesome!" ..until you actually reflect upon it. The terrorists who were portrayed in the film – were Muslim. India's terrorist problems extend far beyond Muslim groups (i.e. Maoist, Hindu nationalists, etc). The movie was not really saying "terrorism has no religion" – because in the film it does. Angry vigilance and the VICTIMS of terror – they are every day people, Muslims, Hindus etc etc. Man, I remember loving the film until I thoroughly dissected it after wards with my cousin.
Fiza and Mission Kashmir are both about a young man falling into terrorism – not even just 'rebel groups.' There was nothing really positive in either.
Zubeidaa – yes (although I haven't seen the other two) – but it really doesn't fit in what I'm saying. There have been a lot of positive Muslim characters or just Muslim characters in Indian films, but very few and never have they been portrayed in the manner that they are in MNIK. Plus, these are only a handful of movies in a pool of thousands, and the negative unfortunately outweigh the positive. But like you said, here's definitely hoping for more!
Additionally, from what I heard Shiv Sena was upset about the film as well as the comments made by SRK regarding Pakistani cricketeers.
Posted by SanaKF | February 27, 2010, 6:32 am"…these are only a handful of movies in a pool of thousands, and the negative unfortunately outweigh the positive" — give an example where an Indian Muslim is portrayed negatively without any justification and all the Hindus are shown positively in the same film. There are several films where it is shown that both Hindus and Muslims are hateful to each other.
"Fiza and Mission Kashmir are both about a young man falling into terrorism – not even just 'rebel groups.' " as if that doesnt happen? And Fiza was made by Khalid Mohammed, a Muslim and a respected film journalist and critic.
Mission Kashmir – You conveniently ignore the character of the muslim police officer(Sanjay Dutt) who saves a hindu temple from being destroyed by the terrorists who also brings the young man back to the mainstream life from terrorism. That is a negative portrayal in your standard, off course.
A Wednesday is an anti-Muslim film? Please elaborate.
Now let me give you a perfect film to criticize India. "Qurbaan", which released last year starring Saif Ali Khan and Kareena Kapoor, has nothing but gross negative portrayals of Muslims. And yes, it was made by the beloved Karan Johar, who made MNIK. Now, happy bashing.
Posted by InfidelRudy | February 27, 2010, 4:11 pm"Gazans receive only the bare essentials from UNRWA." –
Most babies are fed, clothed, vaccinated and educated by UNRWA
"this does not change the fact that these people are in fact refugees. They were forced off their land by Israelis" –
UNRWA perpetuates the Palestinian problem by classifying as refugees not only those who originally fled their homes, but all of their descendents as well
"Israel as occupier of the Gaza Strip" –
Israel withdrew from Gaza. Israel's unilateral disengagement plan was a proposal by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, adopted by the government on June 6, 2004 and enacted in August 2005, to evict all Israelis from the Gaza Strip and from four settlements in the northern West Bank. Those Israeli citizens that refused to accept government compensation packages and voluntarily vacate their homes prior to the August 15, 2005 deadline, were evicted by Israeli security forces over a period of several days. The eviction of all residents, demolition of the residential buildings and evacuation of associated security personnel from the Gaza Strip was completed by September 12, 2005. The eviction and dismantlement of the four settlements in the northern West Bank was completed ten days later.
"blockade" –
The blockade of Gaza was put in place by Egypt and Israel after Hamas won Palestinian-wide elections in 2006. The siege was tightened in 2007 when the militants took control of Gaza in a bloody rout of its rival Palestinian faction, Fatah.
In internal Palestinian fighting in the Gaza Strip, armed Palestinian groups committed serious violations of international humanitarian law, in some cases amounting to war crimes.
The Gaza War ended in January 2009. That war began when Hamas resumed launching rockets at Israel in late 2008. Israel responded with a 23-day assault because it was not willing to tolerate more rocket fire.
"What military hardware are you referring to?" –
Mahmoud Mabhouh was a middleman who moved Iranian antiaircraft missiles and other weapons into the Gaza Strip and Lebanon. Mabhouh was a Hamas military commander slain in a Dubai hotel room played a key role in smuggling antiaircraft missiles and other weapons into the Gaza Strip.
He was suspected of helping to route smuggled arms through Sudan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. One of the arms convoys was bombed in Sudan last year, reportedly by Israeli aircraft.
"Anyway, I’m sorry that the fact that Brown people are having Brown babies disgusts you so much." –
Let's try to stay rational here, and not hurl insults. We both know that isn't true. The same goes for all your "racist" claims.
The problem with your rhetoric is that it pretends the Palestinians have no culpability in what has happened.
Posted by Word (of reality) | February 28, 2010, 5:19 amthats a great list. Unfortunately, Pakistanis like Sana will always try to spread the propaganda that Muslims are thoroughly hated in India by the majority Hindus, although most of the movies listed by guest above, many of them mainstream, commercial movies, are made by Hindu fimmakers. Off course, this is not surprising at all as they need to prove that secularism failed in India which justifies the creation of their state.
Posted by InfidelRudy | February 27, 2010, 5:51 amThat's a bit unfair to Sana – although it's not true that Muslims are hated throughout India, anti-Muslim / anti-Christian bigotry is rife in some areas of the country. I would say thoigh, Bollywood has done a lot to change attitudes.
Easing up on the Pakistan-bashing may be a good step forward. The Shiv-Sena hoo haa was all about an angry backlash to comments made by SRK about Pakistani players not being picked to play in the IPL (I know, shocking – how DARE he ask his country to be welcoming to everyone). Even though I'm an anti-partitionist, I accept that those who wanted a separate state did have some legitimate concerns.
P.S. Pakistan was also meant to become a secular state.
————-
Me, I liked the movie, It wasn't a blockbuster – I think the storyline had holes in some places and was too simplistic in other places. I do give it bonus points for having Gujaratis in it (and one of them was Surti too – awesome!).
Three Idiots, I think, is the real star movie – fun, energetic, little cringe and a storyline kind of relevant to all Indian/Pakistani parents
Posted by Shafiq | February 27, 2010, 8:04 amSo Pakistani films portray the Indians in a saintly way, I presume? And torture of minority Hindu and Sikh in Pakistan is also a non-issue, I suppose? India bashing is a national pasttime in Pakistan and India is a convenient scapegoat to be blamed for all of their problems. The country has been obsessed with india since its creation and simply cannot digest the fact that success and development achieved by India since independence surpasses pakistan by miles.
My point is simple. I really dont care about Karan Johar, Shah Rukh Khan or the crappy films they make. Neither do I care about Shiv Sena and other Hindu fundamentalists who are nothing but cheap attention grabbers. In fact, Shiv Sena also opposes people from North India and opposed South Indian immigration to Mumbai in the past and the majority of the immigrants were Hindu. Their stupidity is strangely secular. What I dont like is the way India bashing is done in this article behind the veil of a film
review in a very biased way. Instead of critical analysis and facts, there are sweeping statements and conclusions. This is more pathetic than karan Johar films.
Posted by InfidelRudy | February 27, 2010, 3:51 pmSo Pakistani films portray the Indians in a saintly way, I presume? And torture of minority Hindu and Sikh in Pakistan is also a non-issue, I suppose? India bashing is a national pasttime in Pakistan and India is a convenient scapegoat to be blamed for all of their problems. The country has been obsessed with india since its creation and simply cannot digest the fact that success and development achieved by India since independence surpasses pakistan by miles.
It's not a non-issue, nor did I claim it was. The post was mainly about Indian cinema with the odd reference to the Pakistani Lollywood – the latter having almost no reach outside of Pakistan. If you've read the author's previous posts, you'd know that she is as harsh on Pakistan. I hardly call the above India-bashing – I came across a lot worse in reviews of MNIK in the likes of the Guardian.
You rightly accuse the Pakistanis of having an obsession about India, but I'd add that many Indians share the same obsession (if not Pakistan, then China). Yes, India's human rights record and tolerance is far better than Pakistan's, but that;s not saying much. It can do a lot better, especially when you have many Mumbai landlords refusing to let Black people and Muslims rent their properties.
P.S. Most Karan Johar films are awesome
Posted by Shafiq | February 27, 2010, 5:25 pmDo you know many Mumbai Hindu landlords refuse non-vegetarian Hindus? Also Single man/woman of any religion? In Mumbai, each community tries to stick to their kind in their residential area. This is a disturbing trend and refusing tenants on the grounds of religion/culture/private life should be strictly illegal. This is hardly a Hindu-Muslim issue.
I agree that many Indians are similarly obsessed with Pakistan but if you look into the political pattern in India, the Pakistan-obsessed faction comprises of Siv Sena, RSS, MNS and VHP, who do not enjoy much support beyond their respective pockets. Even BJP, the Hindutva party, are distancing themselves from religion based politics after suffering defeat in back-to-back elections. People of India made it clear in various elections that they do not want communal politics and voted for development.
"Yes, India's human rights record and tolerance is far better than Pakistan's, but that;s not saying much." far better and not saying much? Make up your mind.
I am not implying India is a perfect country. There are a lot of problems and many stems from the so called strength of India, the diversity. A multifarious society like India is bound to have power struggle and communal tension among its various sects. Yet India has emerged to be an important economic power in the world, with contributions from many parts of the society. It is ridiculous to compare India as a state with Pakistan, in all respects.
Posted by InfidelRudy | February 27, 2010, 8:46 pmDo you know many Mumbai Hindu landlords refuse non-vegetarian Hindus? Also Single man/woman of any religion?
But neither is as pervasive as the anti-Muslim and anti-Black prejudice. It's not only a lower class thing. Remember Emraan Hashmi being advised to buy a house in his wife's name? It's not a Hindu-Muslim issue, which is why I specifically made reference to the racial prejudice in addition to the anti-Muslim one.
"Yes, India's human rights record and tolerance is far better than Pakistan's, but that;s not saying much." far better and not saying much? Make up your mind.
India's human rights record being better than Pakistan's is not saying much, seeing as Pakistan's is almost non-existent. Like I said, it can do better.
As for Karan Johar, I was talking mainly about his masterpieces such as KKKG amongst others. My Name is Khan, in my opinion, could have been better. Thanks for the references to the other movies though, especially Parzania – how can I pass off a movie that has Gujarati in?
Posted by Shafiq | February 28, 2010, 9:22 pmKaran Johar awesome?? Please. Watch "Firaq" , "Mr and Mrs Iyer" and "Parzania".
Posted by InfidelRudy | February 27, 2010, 8:50 pmI do not know how far this movie will go on to tame the blood lust of Indians who are hell bent on perpetrating the worst atrocity on Muslims so far on the planet in a single day. Indians can be proud of the record they hold for Muslim genocide with the fastest kill rate. 2500 Muslims dead. 200, 00 fled their homes. Till now 50,000 languish in refugee camps in their own country, too afraid to return home. All this in February 28, 2002. Not 1940!
All this while the main perpetrator Narendra Modi, still goes to office. With his security guards. Working tirelessly as the Governor of Gujrat state to provide his people. Unfortunately Muslims do not constitute as people.
To him and the Indian establishment (who till now turn a blind eye to the genocide) : ‘Muslims, They Don't Deserve To Live’. Yet the world still does business with them. We still watch their trashy movies. We still admire their 'democratic' credentials!
Whenever i think India; I think about that day on February 28, 2002.
Posted by OooKhalid | February 28, 2010, 5:50 amGujrat pogrom is the one of the worst incident ever happened in independent India. But where did you find 2500 Muslims dead? Give your sources. And the violence was a perpetreted by both sides and ultimately resulted in a riot. Here is a link from HRW about how the Hindus suffered in the violence:
http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2002/india/Indi…
OooKhalid, your silence in the torture and killing of minority Hindu and Sikhs in Pakistan and other Muslim states clearly displays your bigotry. You still do business with them, dont you? You are perfectly alright doing business with Saudi Arabia which is as good as Israel as long as minority rights are concerned?
But this is normal for you guys. The Abrahamic religions, particularly Christianity and Islam, has invaded, looted, tortured and forcibly converted the indegenious people around the world accusing them of being Pagan/Idol Worshipper/Polytheist to establish their power. From South America to Africa, from North America to South Asia, they took up the responsibility to "civilize" these people by forcibly converting them, destroying their ancient culture and heritage and using propaganda to make all these things look like "they were asking for it". They have fought countless wars among themselves and killed millions over the years. The violence in post-independence India pales in comparison to their bloody history.
"Blood Lust of Indians". Really?
Posted by InfidelRudy | February 28, 2010, 4:34 pmgreat comment
Posted by OooKumshot | March 1, 2010, 8:43 amREAALLEEE?? 2500 Hindus were murdered by Muslims in where?
You are delusional! It's disgusting how you try to justify genocide by claiming you are not the only one.
Yes, you can be proud! India is in the select group of nations where state sponsored genocide were carried out with the likes of Rwanda, Serbia and Germany.
Put that on your Visit India television adverts!
Posted by OooKhalid | March 2, 2010, 4:46 amare you moron? cant you read? where did I claim 2500 Hindus were killed? i am not justifying any genocide. But we wont be lectured about genocide from then people who has written proud history based on their genocidal and imperialist invasion in the land they never owned. If you can, refute me with logic against what i said before.
I have mentioned before and mentioning it here again, it is a terrible incident and the perpetrators should be brought to justice. Gujarat Violence was news because it was an unprecedented incident in the history of India. But the people who exposed the government corruption were Indian, and mostly Hindu journalists and activists, risking their life and career. In a country of One Billion, there will always be some rogue elements. But I will accept that shortcoming. I wont claim that everybody is great and it is all a western conspiracy.
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 2, 2010, 2:01 pm//are you moron? cant you read? where did I claim 2500 Hindus were killed?//
thank you for conversing in such a civilized manner :I However i never stated that u claimed 2500 Hindus were killed by Muslims. When i asked you : "2500 Hindus were murdered by Muslims in where?" ; it was a rhetorical question
Do you understand rhetoric?
What i meant was that Muslim atrocities you mentioned pales in comparison to the Indian state-sponsored genocide of its Muslim citizens….
I'm sure you are an intelligent person. But it seems you will need a translator just to understand what we say.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 2, 2010, 3:49 pm"What i meant was that Muslim atrocities you mentioned pales in comparison to the Indian state-sponsored genocide of its Muslim citizens…. " — can you substantiate this claim? Do you have any idea how many Hindus were killed by the Muslim invaders throughout history?
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 2, 2010, 6:48 pm//Do you have any idea how many Hindus were killed by the Muslim invaders throughout history? //
There you go whining again, justifying genocide..
"Waaaaa….if ddeeeyyyyy can ddo eeit, yyeeei can't weeeeeeee."
Posted by OooKhalid | March 5, 2010, 8:09 amSeeing your grasp on Muslim history, it is sad to see how the Indian educational system has systematically brainwashed the youth to despise and hate the Muslim minority. Instead of teaching kids on Hindu-Muslim harmony, the school curricula focuses on the periods of strife and war between the two communities.
The school curricula contain incorrect data on the Islamic history of the country, citing the example of the negative depiction of past Muslim leaders as destroyers of Hindu temples, whereas in reality Muslim leaders donated lands for the building of temples, and provided yearly endowments for the temples' upkeep.
And have you asked this question? If the Muslims forced all Indians to become Muslims, then how is it that you are not a Muslim. You, along with 90% of the Indian population.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 2, 2010, 5:23 am"The school curricula contain incorrect data on the Islamic history of the country, citing the example of the negative depiction of past Muslim leaders as destroyers of Hindu temples, whereas in reality Muslim leaders donated lands for the building of temples, and provided yearly endowments for the temples' upkeep. " — Do you have any idea what you are talking about? I studied in Indian school system. I can show you textbook containing favorable depiction of the Mughal rulers. Please get your facts straight. Also, do you mean that Hindu temples were never destroyed?
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 2, 2010, 6:46 pmoff course I am in favor of Hindu-Muslim harmony in my country and I have many muslim friends, right from my days in school and college. But that doesnt mean we have to forget history. The muslims were invaders. As simple as that. They were not tourists. They came to invade, loot and establish their religion. These invasions were a common occurance in those days and are perfectly normal. But I dont like the way these facts are sugar-coated and presented to make these invasions look like a cutesy love affair. Nobody likes invader. It is preposterous to suggest that the indegenious population received the invading force with open arms who were going to take away their land and rights. That doesnt happen bro. Countless Hindus were killed and tortured by many Muslims rulers. These are facts.
I never claimed that Muslims forced all Indians to become Muslims. I am talking about intentions. The same intention which got rid of the zoroastrian faith and established Islam in Iran. Anyway, that is a difficult task in a fairly large and geographically varied place like Indian subcontinent. Also, There were plenty of Hindu kingdoms in pockets which fought the Muslim rulers and even had prolonged periods of peace treaties.
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 2, 2010, 6:46 pm//The muslims were invaders. As simple as that…..Countless Hindus were killed and tortured by many Muslims rulers. These are facts. //
Does your school curricula depict the Aryans, who colonized and subsequently annihilated the vibrant native Dravidian civilizations (Indus civilization), as INVADERS? Not only that but kept the natives who survived the genocide as slaves and who are to this day forced to act as modern day slaves in the form of the caste system (see: Dalits).
No?
Muslims are depicted as invaders while the Aryan invaders are seen as part and parcel of the Indian history. But why?
This type of education only fosters animosity and hatred between the two communities. This is the education your country provides its citizens. To hate and kill.
//I never claimed that Muslims forced all Indians to become Muslims. I am talking about intentions.//
Really? You make me laugh!! So now you have psychic abilities, and can read people's minds?
So Xavier, put on your psychic helmet and tell me what i am thinking right now! XD XD
Posted by OooKhalid | March 5, 2010, 6:22 amMost of the Indian movies are trashy. I agree with you on that.
Posted by InfidelRudy | February 28, 2010, 4:45 pmNot only Hindus, but Christians also, hand in hand with their Hindu brethren joined in the party. It's a party where ever Muslims are burnt, raped and murdered.
Log on to:
http://www.tehelka.com/story_main35.asp?filename=…
for an account of the scale of the massacre, and the subsequent cover up by Indian governments which came and went within the 8 years that have passed after the pogrom; including an interview with a Christian, Richard, who was an accused in the pogrom.
Posted by OooKhalid | February 28, 2010, 7:53 am'Muslims have enjoyed Indian democracy for the last 60 yrs'
Pakistani Textbooks Teach Hate for Hindu Minority
Not a Single Islamic Country in Top 30 Development Index
The Human Development Index (HDI) was developed by the Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq.
and finally…
95 percent of Pak truckers ‘indulge in sex with `boy helpers’
drivers prefer young boys, as they are easily available and are cheaper as compared to women
LOL!
Posted by uh-oh | February 28, 2010, 10:55 am'Muslims have enjoyed Indian democracy for the last 60 yrs'
Pakistani Textbooks Teach Hate for Hindu Minority
Not a Single Islamic Country in Top 30 Development Index
The Human Development Index (HDI) was developed by the Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq.
and finally…
95 percent of Pak truckers ‘indulge in sex with `boy helpers’
drivers prefer young boys, as they are easily available and are cheaper as compared to women
LOL!
Posted by uh-oh | February 28, 2010, 10:52 amYou only quote from Indian newspapers. We can't expect them to keep a neutral position with respect to their enemy, now can we?
Quote me from any respectable newspaper or news org., then i'd be forced to change my view.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 2, 2010, 4:29 amOooKhalid when you were a boy, did you have sex with Muslim truck-drivers? What did you do with the money?
Posted by tickle-me-elmo | March 2, 2010, 4:42 pmHe gave it to your mom. And that's the story of how your dad was born!
Posted by Ooo | March 5, 2010, 6:28 amIndia Muslims begged to live / Hate-filled Hindu mob turned house into furnace
Kill the Muslims," they chanted. "Kill the Muslims."
Posted by horrible | February 28, 2010, 11:09 amIndia has many faults but it is one of the more secular and tolerant places I have been to.
Yes what happened in Godhra is probably an eternal blot on its secularism and freedom and democracy but it is not right to judge the plight of Indian Muslims just on the basis of that one event. There have been numerous attacks and bombings by Muslims (by and/or with the help of Indian Muslims) as well and it is silly and futile to play a game of counting attacks by each group against the other.
-contd
Posted by Guest | February 28, 2010, 6:08 pmCommon men and women, in India, live in fairly high religious tolerance, freedom and openness esp in semi-urban and urban areas, where people help out each other irrespective of their religion (eg. people reaching out and helping stranded strangers, regardless of their name, background and religion, giving them food and shelter, during the 2006 train bombings in Bombay was abs mind-blowingly phenomenal)
Yes, numerous killings, bombings happen on the basis of religion but sadly most of these have been incited and amplified by either priests and/or politicians of all relgions (NGOs working clandestinely to convert to tribal people to Christianity, Malegaon blast etc) Yes each group has a set of complaints and prejudices – some real and well-founded but many misplaced and blown way out of proportion by 'politicians and priets' for their personal profits. Hopefully, the layman will learn not to get swayed by these 'p&p' and let their natural inclination towards religious harmony prevail.
Posted by Guest | February 28, 2010, 6:08 pmWhy are Muslims so racist against Hindus?
The Muslims are always in violent conflict with their neighbors, whether its Hindus or Jews or anyone else.
Posted by strange | March 1, 2010, 7:51 amGodhra 2002
February 27: A train carrying Hindu activists traveling from the temple town of Ayodhya was attacked and set on fire just outside the station, in a Muslim-dominated area of the western state of Gujarat, by a mob who hurled bottles filled with gasoline and set fire to four cars.
The train pulled into the western town of Godhra shortly after dawn, where a group of local Muslims was waiting. As the engine gathered speed leaving Godhra, someone pulled the emergency brake chain and attackers stormed the passenger cars. They hurled bottles filled with gasoline, setting coaches aflame. Able-bodied men managed to escape the conflagration; 40 of the 58 deaths were of women and children charred on board.
The following days, it was the Hindus' turn.
February 28: Mobs rampaged through Ahmadabad in revenge for the train attack of the day before.
March 1: Indian Hindus riot in the smoke-shrouded streets of Ahmedabad, the main city in the western Indian state of Gujarat. Police used gunfire and tear gas to control hundreds of Hindus targeting Muslim-owned shops and sparking a running street battle with police and Muslim residents.
Posted by Godhra | March 1, 2010, 8:47 amhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4180885.stm
This is a BBC report dated 17 January 2005, where it has been stated :
"An Indian train fire that killed 59 Hindus and provoked deadly religious riots in 2002 was started by accident, a government inquiry has said.
Evidence suggests the fire began inside the train, not that it was fire-bombed, an investigating judge decided. "
Which year are you living in?
Posted by OooKhalid | March 1, 2010, 3:55 pmThe investigating judge mentioned above was a political position influenced by the opposition party Congress who were trying to get some political browny points over BJP, the main accused party for the riots. There has been many investigations about the incident and each outcome has been influenced by the either Congress or BJP favouring their own political agenda.
It is unfortunate that the political games in India has shrouded the real truth behind the train burning and the riots.
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 1, 2010, 5:48 pmYes, it's true there are conflicting reports on that day. And maybe you carried out your own investigation, and came to the conclusion that 2500 innocent Muslims must pay the price with their lives. That's the Indian spirit!
India is sure is a scary place with people like you around.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 2, 2010, 4:38 amaround 790 Muslims and 250 Hindus perished in the riot. It wasnt a one way violence. But for bigots, its different.
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 2, 2010, 1:22 pmBoo-hoo…murderous Hindus were killed by Muslims who were trying to defend themselves from a state sponsored pogrom.
The New York Times' Celia Dugger reported that witnesses were "dismayed by the lack of intervention from local police", who often "watched the events taking place and took no action against the attacks on Muslims and their property".
Human Rights Watch reported that in some cases members of the state police force led rioting mobs, "aiming and firing at every Muslim who got in the way", or instead of offering assistance "led the victims directly into the hands of their killers."Calls for assistance to the police, fire brigades, and even ambulance services generally proved futile.
RB Sreekumar, who served as Gujarat's intelligence chief during the riots, alleged that the state government issued "unconstitutional directives", with officials asking him to kill Muslims involved in rioting or disrupting a Hindu religious event.
Defending the Modi administration in the Rajya Sabha against charges of genocide, BJP spokesman V K Malhotra said that the official toll of 254 Hindus, killed mostly in police firing, indicates how the state authorities took effective steps to curb the violence.
What are you a BJP fundamentalist? You a Shiv Shena bastard? You jack off to videos of the pogroms you taped?
Sicko.
People like you mourn the Germans who died murdering Jews in WWII. Serbs who were killed in the line of duty exterminating Muslims. Hutus who unfortunately died killing Tutsis.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 2, 2010, 4:02 pmWhy are you so racist against Hindus?
Posted by Браузер | March 2, 2010, 4:34 pmHey i never murdered any Hindu ok.
All i want is justice. Is that too much to ask? And i am appealing to all you Indians to support justice and not cook up justifications for genocide. I want all you Indians to rise up for your fellow citizens, for justice. Why should a father mourn his childern, a child his parents; while the murderer is still free…
When a murderer is celebrated and the victim accused of bigotry, it is a symptom of the moral bankruptcy of the society.
The Prophet (pbuh) said : A nation can become great on godlessness, but it cannot survive if it ignores justice.
For the sake of your nation; strive for justice.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 2, 2010, 5:44 pmYou never murdered any Hindu? Well, I never murdered any Muslim. How convincing is that? Before giving us these holier than thou lectures on justice and "bankruptcy" of society, do something to change your mindset which has nothing but hatred towards the pagans and idol worshippers.
Nobody is justfying genocide. Check out the reports and find out the names of the journalists and activists who have exposed the government and still fighting the cases in the court of Law. Almost all of them are Hindus. They are fighting for their fellow muslim citizens in spite of the historic injustice done to them by the muslim invaders. It is not an easy task to set this mindset.
If you continue to focus on an aberrational, unprecedented issue and overlook the long history of mutual respect and tolerance between the Hindus and Muslims in India, then definitely you are showing your prejudices.
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 3, 2010, 3:37 pmAfter Palestine, the worst place for a Muslim to be is in India.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 5, 2010, 6:25 amstop stupid rhetorism and counter my logic. You dont live in India and have no idea what you are talking about. Most of the Indian Muslims dont care for the opinions of outsiders like you.
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 5, 2010, 4:50 pm//Most of the Indian Muslims dont care for the opinions of outsiders like you. //
Who died and made you Grand Mufti ?
Posted by OooKhalid | March 6, 2010, 2:45 pm//Most of the Indian Muslims dont care for the opinions of outsiders like you. //
Who died and made you Grand Mufti?
Posted by OooKhalid | March 6, 2010, 2:46 pm//Most of the Indian Muslims dont care for the opinions of outsiders like you. //
Who died and made you Grand Mufti?
Posted by Ooo | March 6, 2010, 2:57 pm"What are you a BJP fundamentalist? You a Shiv Shena bastard? You jack off to videos of the pogroms you taped? "
– Thats a compelling argument, I must accept. Get well soon.
Posted by InfidelRudy | March 2, 2010, 5:36 pmHutus who unfortunately died while killing Tutsis.
Speaking of…
France arrests Rwandan President's widow, accused in Rwanda genocide
Paris – French authorities on Tuesday arrested former Rwandan President's widow, Agathe Habyarimana, at her home outside Paris.
Ms. Habyarimana the most senior Hutu figure associated with the Rwanda genocide living abroad and the widow of former Rwandan president Juvenal Habyarimana, who was killed when his plane was shot down in 1994, triggering four months of mass killings.
Posted by Abdul Alhazred | March 3, 2010, 3:58 pmMuslims are always in violent conflict, with Hindus and Jews and each other.
The Muslims attack and then complain about the retaliations. It's the same thing in Palestine. They attack and then whine about the consequences.
They tried their best to destroy Israel in 1948, but they were defeated. Then they still constantly attacked, even though they couldn't win. The Palestinian Fedeyeen and others plagued Israel, with the support of surrounding Arab neighbors.
From 1949 to 1956 the armed truce between Israel and the Arabs, enforced in part by the UN forces, was punctuated by raids and reprisals. That means the truce was constantly violated by Palestinian attacks and Israeli reprisals.
In 1956 there was war, and as usual the Arabs got their asses kicked.
Then in 1967 the surrounding Arab states wanted to destroy Israel, but again they got their asses kicked and lost more land. Israel captured the Sinai peninsula from Egypt, the Golan Heights from Syria and the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan. They gave the Sinai Peninsula back to Egypt as part of the 1979 peace deal with Israel.
But still the Palestinians attacked! And whined about the consequences!
The Arabs states attacked Israel again in 1973, and got their asses kicked again.
And still the Palestinians attacked!
In 1978 Palestinian guerrillas, from their base in Lebanon, launched an air raid on Israel; in retaliation, Israel sent troops into S Lebanon to occupy a strip 4–6 mi (6–10 km) deep and thus protect Israel’s border.
In 1982 Israel launched a massive attack to destroy all military bases of the Palestine Liberation Organization in S Lebanon and, after a 10-week siege of the Muslim sector of West Beirut, a PLO stronghold, forced the Palestinians to accept a U.S.-sponsored plan whereby the PLO guerrillas would evacuate Beirut and go to several Arab countries that had agreed to accept them.
And still the Palestinians attacked!
1987 there was the First Intifada.
The intifada had rallied the Palestinian people but the PLO also realised that both this method of opposing the Israelis and its own armed struggle would not be enough to bring political benefits. The Oslo Agreement was signed on the White House lawn in September 1993 in the presence of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. It was followed by a peace treaty with Jordan in 1994.
But still the Palestinians attacked!
Then there was the infamous second intifada in 2000. Opposition to the Oslo Agreement was led on the Palestinian side by the Islamic militant group Hamas and the deadly phenonenom of the suicide bomber emerged, in which dozens of Israeli civilians were killed. Israeli counter-strikes killed many Palestinians By 2000, a second intifada was being openly fought and Israel re-occupied the West Bank. Oh damn, attacked and got occupied again. But it's not the attackers fault! Allah said so!
In 2005 Israel withdrew from Gaza. But still the Palestinians attack, shooting rockets until their asses get owned in a three-week military conflict that took place in the Gaza Strip during the winter of 2008–2009 – Operation Cast Lead.
But still the Palestinians attack! When will they ever learn?
Palestinian groups that support and carry out acts of political violence include Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Abu Nidal Organization.
Posted by inconvenient | March 2, 2010, 5:06 pmSEE THIS
From Human Rights Watch
The ongoing violence in Gujarat was triggered by a Muslim mobs' torching of two train cars carrying Hindu activists on February 27, 2002.
From your own link at BBC
Most accounts from the time and since said a Muslim mob threw petrol bombs at the train, starting the blaze.
Since the train fire, state police have arrested more than 100 Muslims in connection with the incident.
Gujarat's state authorities say Muslims torched the train.
Both Gujarat's inspector-general of police and India's main opposition Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were swift to dismiss the inquiry findings.
The BJP, which was in power nationally and in Gujarat at the time of the riots, said the inquiry findings were "politically motivated".
Calling the report a disgrace, a spokesman said it was an unfortunate attempt to trivialise what he called one of the worst crimes in India.
Gujarat's inspector-general of police, Rakesh Asthana, also challenged the inquiry report
He told the BBC the fire was an act of conspiracy and that at least 60 litres of petrol had been poured inside the compartment before burning rags were thrown in from outside.
He said forensic scientists in Gujarat backed the police findings.
Sorry, OooKhalid. "Most accounts from the time and since said a Muslim mob threw petrol bombs at the train, starting the blaze. " Retired Supreme Court judge Umesh Chandra Banerjee, who is led the government inquiry, was a tired old fart who was making a political finding.
Posted by truth-kabob'er | March 2, 2010, 4:16 pmThe HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH link
Posted by correction | March 2, 2010, 4:19 pmFrom Human Rights Watch
The ongoing violence in Gujarat was triggered by a Muslim mobs' torching of two train cars carrying Hindu activists on February 27, 2002.
Posted by truth-kabob'er | March 2, 2010, 4:18 pmEagle, no matter how many accounts you make/post under, it doesn't make your arguments sound.
Posted by SanaKF | March 3, 2010, 6:53 amSana,
Shooting rockets, suicide bombers, militancy = FAIL.
Do u agree?
Posted by Obvious | March 6, 2010, 3:58 pmIt was not simply the number of lives lost, though the number — perhaps 2,500 — is not insignificant. It was the cold-blooded manner in which they were taken. It was not simply that 19 of Gujarat’s 25 districts burned while Neros watched, fiddled and smirked but the sinister similarity in the way they were set alight. Militias were armed with deadly training, weapons, technology and equipment; with a lethal brew of deadly intent, inspired by constructed tales of hate, using the February 28, 2002 edition of a leading Gujarati daily that urged revenge; all combined with a deadly white chemical powder that seared to burn and destroy already killed bodies. And, of course, truckloads of gas cylinders, in short supply for cooking, were used instead to blast mosques and homes. Mobile phones and motorcycles made communications easy and movement swift.
Part of the plan was to humiliate, destroy and then kill. Another was to economically cripple. But at heart the desire was to construct a reality whereby a whole ten per cent of the population lives (and a few even prosper) as carefully whipped into shape, second-class citizens. Most incidents that racked the state, except the famed Best Bakery incident, took place in the glare of the day, not the stealth of the night. Critical to the plan to mutilate and humiliate was to subject women and girls to the worst kind of sexual violence. Tehelka’s “Operation Kalank” records victorious testimonies of rapists and murderers who claim to have received personal approbations from the man at the helm. Over 1,200 highway hotels were destroyed, more than 23,000 homes gutted, 350 large businesses seriously damaged (and are still unable to recover) and 12,000 street businesses demolished.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 5, 2010, 8:21 amGenocide is about economic crippling as much as death and humiliation. The Concerned Citizens Tribunal — Crimes Against Humanity 2002 called the happenings in Gujarat a genocide, because of the systematic singling out of a group through widely distributed hate writing and demonisation, the economic destruction, the sexual violence and also because over 270 masjids and dargahs were razed to the ground. The bandh calls on February 28 and March 1 by rabid outfits and supported by the party in power enabled mobs free access to the streets while successfully warding off the ordinary citizen.
Eight years on, it is this level and extent of complicity that is under high-level scrutiny. The involvement of high functionaries of the state in Gujarat did not begin, and has not stopped, with the violence. It has extended to destruction of evidence that continues until today, the faulty registration of criminal complaints, the deliberate exclusion of powerful accused and, worst of all, the utter and complete subversion of the criminal justice system by appointment of public prosecutors who were not wedded to fair play, justice and the Constitution — but were and are lapdogs of the ruling party and its raid affiliates. The proceedings in the Best Bakery case in the Supreme Court and the judgment of April 12, 2004 strips the legal system, especially lawyers, of the dignity of their office.
Posted by OooKhalid | March 5, 2010, 8:21 amThe hasty granting of bail to those involved in the post-Godhra carnage remains a scandal. While over seven dozen of those accused of the Godhra train arson have been in jail, without bail for eight years — and today face trial within the precincts of the Sabarmati jail — powerful men, patronised by the state’s political hierarchy who are accused of multiple rapes and murders roam free in “vibrant Gujarat” even as the trials have resumed. The few that are in jail — ten of the 64 accused in the Gulberg society carnage, eight of the 64 accused in Naroda Patia massacre, two of the 89 in the Naroda Gaam killing, eight of the 73 in the Sardroura massacres (all the 84 accused of the massacre at Deepda Darwaza roam free on bail) are those with no political godfathers. A vast majority have lived in freedom even after committing unspeakable crimes. All this and more is being investigated under the orders of our apex court on a petition filed by Zakia Ahsan Jafri and the Citizens for Justice and Peace. For the first time in India's history criminal conspiracy and mass murder are the charges, the chief minister and 61 others the accused. Will the wealth of evidence be matched by the rigour of investigation? Will the will to prosecute surmount political considerations? Will the Indian system throw a spotlight on what surely must be its darkest hour?
Posted by OooKhalid | March 5, 2010, 8:23 am