RE:TRUTH ABOUT THE HINDUISM
by pranat on Apr 01, 2007 06:20 PM Permalink
Mike, the differnece between you and others is that, others accept that humans make mistakes and there could be fault in their religion.
You deny it all and in the most foolish way.
I being hindu and so do many others, will say that there are problems in our religion.We wish to undo the wrongs and embrace change.
On the other hand you will never be able to do this as you will be then undoing your religion. You were doomed the day you stopped thinking and stopped evolving.
RE:RE:TRUTH ABOUT THE HINDUISM
by pranat on Apr 02, 2007 11:38 PM Permalink
Great, its a relief that you dont follow fatwas. Just follow Islam the right way, respect others, be humble and have faith in Allah. Also love your motherland and its poople. Love diversity and diverse culture, languages and religions. There is much we can learn from each other my fried.
I declare that i learn universal brotherhood from Islam, being liberal and forgiving from christianity, devotion from Sikhism and Non Violence from Buddhism.
Can u say what you can learn from Hinduism or Buddhism or Sikhism or Christinaity?
If most Muslim rulers allowed their armies to loot, rape, take hostage and salve and convert by millions... I am sure that our dear Mike and other 150 million brothers and sisters woudl be sharing his genetic pool with some of the Indians. This really makes us brothers and sisters. Some resisted conversion but suffered and they are on one side. Some were forced and raped and slaved and suffered and they are on the other side. But all of us suffered in that history, thats the truth about Aurangzeb.
Now lets stop this discussion and let the Tyrant rest in his F****** grave.
Muslims should not behave as if they are in pakistan or saudi arabia. If they dont respect the democracy views of this country then they should leave this country and go to the country where it is ruled by a king and not by commoners. Vande mataram
RE:Muslims should know there limits in india
by pranat on Apr 01, 2007 04:47 PM Permalink
True. They should be happy that they are in India. If they were in Iraq, they would have been dead by now. killed by own brothers.
Similar will be the fate in other countries around there.
But this you can tell to people who have eyes to see and ears to hear. Our bothers here have none. As long as they look at the world with the bias of Islam, they cant see anything. Its very unfortunate indeed.
Aurangzeb wasn't the choosen king. He forcefully grabbed the throne. In order to do so he needed the services of some of the Hindu generals. These Hindu Rajput generals had a large following of Military under them. Most of these Hindu Rajput Generals Grandpa's had been working under Akbar. Aurangzeb knew that he needed the support of these powerful Rajput Generals in order to establish himself as a king. Most of these Rajput Generals worked for Akbar who had established marital relations with these Traitors.
Once firmly established as a king - the methods he used to finish off these Generals is pretty well known.
RE:orrible Islam
by on Apr 01, 2007 04:45 PM Permalink
Yes like your barbaric saints of europe who destroyed the native indians of america. and your helpless c****T who was not able to save himself.
RE:orrible Islam
by pranat on Apr 01, 2007 05:09 PM Permalink
Great Appraoch Mike, for all problems in the world there are always kafirs available to blame. Otherwise all good things belong to Islam.
I see that very craftfully you have used a cristian first name and hindu second name when being a fundamentalist muslim.
There are many people like you from Pakistan in UK and US and these days they say they are Indians. Very convenient... shift borders when required, change religions when required.
Never belong to one nation, never participate in nation building. Jis thalee mein khaoo usee mien cheed kaaro. Who taught you this?
RE:RE:orrible Islam
by Perv Sharma on Apr 02, 2007 12:49 PM Permalink
But the Pandavas didn't ask anyone to convert to a particular religion or force anybody to convert.
RE:THE TRUTH ABOUT THE GREAT EMPEROR AURANGZEB
by raghav bhatt on Apr 01, 2007 04:14 PM Permalink
For God's(Allah's) sake at least write some thing new.You have told these lies at least 15 times now. You should know that no body will bother even to read if you repeat the same thing. & people are smart enough not to belive the lies whtever nos of times you repeat.
I could see how even fair-minded individuals like Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen may have been deceived by the deadly venoms of dishonest, prejudiced historians whose sole aim has been to smear Muslim history. Such intellectual dishonesty by historians is dangerous - more explosive and more damaging than nuclear bombs. We have already seen its hideous effect with the destruction of Muslim historic sites (including the Babri Mosque) and recent riots in India that killed thousands of Muslims. Let us not fall into the trap set by those who want to "neatly divide our world." Let truth vanquish falsehood.
1 For example, see Shri Binoy Ghosh%u2019s Bharatjaner Etihash (Bengali for: History of Indian People), Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
2 Quoted in Chepe Rakha Itihash (The History %u2013 Hushed Up) by G. A. Murtaza, Barddhaman, India.
3 He demonstrated his vast knowledge of Persian-language (the official language during the Mughal period) sources. However, he was a Euro-centric historian and thus, not flawless in historical accounts. He served as the Vice Chancellor of the University of Calcutta (1926-28
RE:THE TRUTH ABOUT THE GREAT EMPEROR AURANGZEB
by raghav bhatt on Apr 01, 2007 04:18 PM Permalink
what you are telling here? those who wrote things which are pleasing you people are the good histoians others are bad. comeon man have some sense & accept the truth(Aurangazeb was a anti-Hindu & temple destroyer)
All Standard reference books agree that the name 'Hindu Kush' of the mountain range in Eastern Afganistan means 'Hindu Slaughter' or 'Hindu Killer'. History also reveals that until 1000 A.D. the area of Hindu Kush was a full part of Hindu cradle. More likely, the mountain range was deliberately named as 'Hindu Slaughter' by the Moslem conquerors, as a lesson to the future generations of Indians. However Indians in general, and Hindus in particular are completely oblivious to this tragic genocide. This article also looks into the reasons behind this ignorance.
History of Hindu Kush and Punjab shows that two major kingdoms of Gandhaar & Vaahic Pradesh (Balkh of Bactria) had their borders extending far beyond the Hindu Kush. Legend has it that the kingdom of Gandhaar was established by Taksha, grandson of Bharat of Ayodhya (6). Gandhaar's borders extended from Takshashila to Tashkent (corruption of 'Taksha Khand') in the present day Uzbekistan.
of the following must have happened:
a) original residents of Hindu Kush converted to Islam, or
b) they were slaughtered and the conquerors took over, or
c) they were driven out.
Encyclopedia Britannica (3) already informs us above about the resistance to conversion and frequent revolt against to the Moslem conqueror's rule from 8 th thru 11 th Century AD. The name 'Hindu Kush' itself tells us about the fate of the original residents of Gandhaar and Vaahic Pradesh during the later period of Moslem conquests, because HINDU KUSH in Persian MEANS HINDU SLAUGHTER (13) (as per Koenraad Elst in his book 'Ayodhya and After'). Let us look into what other standard references say about Hindu Kush.
Persian-English dictionary (14) indicates that the word 'Kush' is derived from the verb Kushtar - to slaughter or carnage. Kush is probably also related to the verb Koshtan meaning to kill. In Urdu, the word Khud-kushi means act of killing oneself (khud - self, Kushi- act of killing).
It is evident that Hindus from ancient India's (Hindustan's) border states such as Gandhaar and Vaahic Pradesh were massacred or taken as slaves by the Moslem invaders who named the region as Hindu Kush (or Hindu Slaughter,or Hindu Killer) to teach a lesson to the future Hindu generations of India. Unfortunately Hindus are not aware of this tragic history. The Indian government does not want the true history of Hindu Moslem conflicts during the medieval ages to be taught in schools. This policy of negationism is the cause behind the ignorance of Hindus about the Hindu Kush and the Hindu genocide.
RE:What does Hindu Kush Mean
by pranat on Apr 01, 2007 06:52 PM Permalink
Is that true Mike. I didnt know all these details. Thanks for educating me.
But a reminder, you also didnt come from the heaven. Abey tuuu bheee ishee hindustani kush kee padayesh hein, haan usss kush kaa bhee jawab nahee jahan see tuu paida hua hein.
RE:What does Hindu Kush Mean
by Perv Sharma on Apr 02, 2007 12:54 PM Permalink
And Mike came out of Arse. most probably that's the place all these mus.. come out from.
RE:What does Hindu Kush Mean
by raghav bhatt on Apr 01, 2007 04:20 PM Permalink
Are yar, they are not converted. Ask Mr Mike Gandhi, he may give evidence that they embraced the only peaceful religon of this world Islam on their own, no body were forced to convert(bcz, Islam is against convrsion)
I would also like to state here that before the advent of Islam in India, Rajputs living in western India used to collect a similar form of Jizya or war tax which they called "Fix" tax. (Ref: Early History of India by Vincent Smith) War tax was not a sole monopoly among the Indian or Muslim rulers. Historian Dr. Tripathy mentions a number of countries in Europe where war-tax was practiced. (Ref: Some Aspects of Muslim Administration by Sri Tripathy)
Let us now return to Aurangzeb. In his book "Mughal Administration," Sir Jadunath Sarkar3, foremost historian on the Mughal dynasty, mentions that during Aurangzeb%u2019s reign in power, nearly 65 types of taxes were abolished, which resulted in a yearly revenue loss of 50 million Rupees from the state treasury. It is also worth mentioning here that Aurangzeb did not impose Jizya in the beginning of his reign but introduced it after 16 years during which 80 types of taxes were abolished. Other historians stated that when Aurangzeb abolished eighty taxes no one thanked him for his generosity. But when he imposed only one, and not heavy at all, people began to show their displeasure. (Ref: Vindication of Aurangzeb
