10-03-2003, 10:49 AM
Secularists(with the exception of a few candle wallahs) also believe that Pakistan is jihadi, milito/mullahcracy, terrorist, cannot be trusted etc.etc. and needs to be destroyed. Where they differ from 'am janta' like us is that they feel that there are magical forces at work in the terrorist state that make it unique from the rest of the ummah. But the rationalist Hindu believes that such behavior is not unique to the terrorist state and is inherent in the software and the madrassah programming and there certainly are more examples than Pakistan namely KSA, Egypt, Chechnya,certain regions and localities of India, Indonesia, Algeria. It is simply the case that the terrorist state is more brazen because of its demographics and size relative to other states.
The secularist propensity to view the terrorist state as unique among the ummah stems also from a Indo centric perspective and lack of knowledge about Islamic History. It is the exception rather than the rule to find periods in world history where jihadi activity against the Dar ul harb has not been pursued with complete vigor by Muslim sultans.
After all the acts of terrorism today are global and occur in any given year over a half a dozen different locales throughout the planet the only common factor being they are conducted for the most part by Muslims. As for the commonality and universality in viewpoints re. Pakistan , my comment is that the instinct of self preservation (fight or flight syndrome) has a wonderfully clarifying and salutory effect on the mind and has a propensity to remove all wishy washy cobwebs from the mind. of course such tomtoming about Pakistan and the ubiquitous calls for its destruction are never referred to as the acts of a jingo or that of a nationalist, when espoused by a secularwadi.
This is where the point of difference lies between secularists and the rationalist Hindus, namely in the degree of uniqueness of the terrorist infrastructure that is au courant in Pakistan . This is why i am not surprised at the complete study that Sridhar has done. But ask a secularist to do a similar demographic analysis of the growth of Muslims in India and he will tie himself in knots trying to explain that is a non problem, because he doesnt have the gumption to ask the IM to control the number of children as Hindus are already doing.
Apropos of Scot levi, he had sent me a hard copy of a 20 page paper on the central asian slave trade in Indians more than a year ago. At that time he did not want me to publish it on the net even with acreditation because the paper was still under review and had not been published it. Since then he must have published it and so there is no reason to hold back and i need to see how to put it on the net.
The secularist propensity to view the terrorist state as unique among the ummah stems also from a Indo centric perspective and lack of knowledge about Islamic History. It is the exception rather than the rule to find periods in world history where jihadi activity against the Dar ul harb has not been pursued with complete vigor by Muslim sultans.
After all the acts of terrorism today are global and occur in any given year over a half a dozen different locales throughout the planet the only common factor being they are conducted for the most part by Muslims. As for the commonality and universality in viewpoints re. Pakistan , my comment is that the instinct of self preservation (fight or flight syndrome) has a wonderfully clarifying and salutory effect on the mind and has a propensity to remove all wishy washy cobwebs from the mind. of course such tomtoming about Pakistan and the ubiquitous calls for its destruction are never referred to as the acts of a jingo or that of a nationalist, when espoused by a secularwadi.
This is where the point of difference lies between secularists and the rationalist Hindus, namely in the degree of uniqueness of the terrorist infrastructure that is au courant in Pakistan . This is why i am not surprised at the complete study that Sridhar has done. But ask a secularist to do a similar demographic analysis of the growth of Muslims in India and he will tie himself in knots trying to explain that is a non problem, because he doesnt have the gumption to ask the IM to control the number of children as Hindus are already doing.
Apropos of Scot levi, he had sent me a hard copy of a 20 page paper on the central asian slave trade in Indians more than a year ago. At that time he did not want me to publish it on the net even with acreditation because the paper was still under review and had not been published it. Since then he must have published it and so there is no reason to hold back and i need to see how to put it on the net.