I really feel very sorry for rediffmail to allow such a hatred and biased type of article to be written on your webside.
Please try to avoid such things in future so that hatred will not spread among different communities living harmoniousely in Indian subcontinent. Otherwise people will start considering you as a biased webside.
RE:About this article on Aurugzeb Rh.
by Secular Indian on Feb 26, 2007 12:52 PM Permalink
Are you suggesting they should tell lies, because a particular community doesn't have the stomach to face the facts ?
RE:RE:About this article on Aurugzeb Rh.
by on Feb 26, 2007 11:27 PM Permalink
A particular community doesnt have the stomach to face the facts. Huh, that sounds so preachy! Gautier's article is the "fact" and volumes of historical books written by scholars with perspective and years of research are dismissed as leftist trash. Now, calling a spade a spade is supposed to be the fashion; and when riots break out on the streets, desktop analysts like you feel safe. How convenient!
RE:RE:RE:About this article on Aurugzeb Rh.
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:48 AM Permalink
So what do consider a fact, opinions of historians or Aurangzeb's own court records, I would suggest you read the records and make up your own mind. It's easier that way ? I don't deny that it's little bit uncomfortable stirring the pot but your claim that it will lead to strife, by whom ?
RE:RE:RE:RE:About this article on Aurugzeb Rh.
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 01:43 PM Permalink
I wish you had gone through records of all those post-independence riots and face the facts. If the potential for strife in repeated nostalgic digging of the past doesn't seem apparent to you, try reading the newspapers for a start. Consider India's sociological reality, its poverty stricken masses so vulnerable to hearsay and half-baked, half-researched works which could just be another trigger in waiting. This is no desktop conjecture, but earned from watching ground reality in riot-prone areas for over a decade.
It might be comforting to win an argument based on court records culled out selectively to justify a 1000 word article. Now, I would give more credence to a seasoned historian with years of research than the views of a columnist tailormade for a blogwar!
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:About this article on Aurugzeb Rh.
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 02:17 PM Permalink
Selective court records or not, how is that relevant to the destruction of temples and killing and conversion of Hindus. All you are suggesting is that by keeping quiet we can delay the inevitable. With Bangladesh radicalized along with Pakistan the looming clash is unfortunately going to be framed in Hindu vs Muslim. Otherwise we wouldn't have Pakistan or Bangladesh in the first place. You want to live in your fantasy world fine by me.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:About this article on Aurugzeb Rh.
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 05:22 PM Permalink
I can't get your argument. Could you be more simplistic in suggestion a solution to avoid India going the Pakistan Bangladesh way. Don't you see the difference between a purely Islamic state like Pakistan and a democracy like India.
The inevitable: whats that, I fail to understand. You seem to imply that Muslims are still killing Hindus, converting them, destroying temples. Aren't you satisfied with the role reversal of the last 50 years of independence. The inevitable, provided scare-mongers are consistent in whipping up dead horses, is scenarios of more Gujarats. I am not accustomed to living in fantasies, I live in the real world with real problems. You can continue to feed your anti-Islamic appetite with liberal dosage of Aurangazeb and Tipu.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:About this article on Aurugzeb Rh.
by Secular Indian on Feb 28, 2007 09:24 AM Permalink
First the inevitable. Islam has had only one aim since it landed on our shores in the form of bin Qasim. The arrival of Islam, last 1000 or so years have brought nothing but misery and death to this country with the aim of destroying this once great civilization (I think it's still great but that's a different matter). All in the name of Islam and it's teaching of "you are with us or against us". It has not stopped. Pakistan and Bangladesh were carved out not for any other reason but that they were Muslims. They have not stopped their activities till date. They want nothing more than to convert the rest of India to Islam, this is why history is important. This struggle against Islam and the inevitable are framed in civilizational terms not some divine pre-ordained prophecy.
Muslims are still killing Hindus in Kashmir, their forced conversions have stopped in India, you must remember they don't rule India anymore. Where they do rule Pakistan and Bangladesh, they carried on after partition and are still doing it today. I can post links to Pakistan Newspapers for your perusal, because of course, Indian newspapers are not trustworthy they are owned by Hindus.
Role reversal, are you blind to what the Muslims have done to the Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh. They are modern day examples of what happens to non-muslimss in Muslim countries, the same thing that happened to Hindus under Aurangzeb and Tipu Sultan. That is what history teaches us. It doesn't take much effort to draw the conclusion that where muslims are in majority and power they will do exactly what they did to us in the past.
RE:About this article on Aurugzeb Rh.
by biju nair on Feb 28, 2007 02:10 AM Permalink
Hi Syed Zakir Husain,
This is not hatred. It is open discussion. Infact your religious books are spreading hatred in Islamic Minds against non-believers(Kaffirs). Can you show any other religious books hating other religions or beleifs?
Firstly, I am seeing that a lot of us educated brothers are arguing non-stop on issues in which we have no control. Let us see how our experience is first with any God and then decide. Let us not completely go by belief. But that said, I am sad that Muslims and Christians (who belong originally to this land but were converted) are turning against the Hindus. I am sure that Jesus or Mohammed would not have advocated doing injustice to one's own land and faith. Let us tolerate and respect all paths as leading to the same God. It is said that "Ekam Sath Vipra Bahuda Vadanthi" meaning "Truth is One, Wise men call it by different means". Let us not forget that God is very difficult to attain. We should restrain anger, lust and greed so say all the scriptures.
Praying that all of us live in peace and harmony and in mutual respect for each of our traditions and give each other enough space to practice our own beliefs in this sacred land of Bharath, where women are given the altar of the Gods and where the Mother is considered supreme.
RE:Let us use our experience and not our belief
by on Feb 26, 2007 02:19 AM Permalink
such wise thoughts would come only from an rational hindu and never from fanatic muslim. In many of the previous comments, they have called their critics narrow minded, but please note because muslims are namrrow minded and don't want to change they are behaving so conservative in all the ages. Pls guys the once who are open minded, kindly raise your voice against the fanatics and help this world to be more peacefull. We want to see the oppposition to this fanatic evil from the muslims themselves , who are more open,believe in peace , doesn't want to be victims of hatred from their own faith and other faiths.
When this happens in a big way, even other religion people would believe muslims can do something rational and are not fanatic most of the time.
RE:RE:Let us use our experience and not our belief
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 26, 2007 11:48 PM Permalink
If I were to make a comment that the concept of liberalism, that you and the West so willingly adopt as your creations, had much to do with early Islamic scientific inquiry and thought, will you believe it. No, because you have already decided that it is hard for a Muslim to be rational. Come on, we live in a nation where the so-called muslim fanatic's role is quite apparently taken by the majority communalists.
RE:RE:RE:Let us use our experience and not our belief
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 08:39 AM Permalink
Early Islam scientific enquiry is another Myth. The supposed golden period of Islam rests on claims of greatness not as a result of any Islamic catalyst or some inherent openness of Islam, it came from the conquered people the Byzantinians and the Persians. The culture that fostered such learning existed before Islam arrived there. Islam did not create it. Islam played the role of a bee cross fertilizing the cultures of what was then the near East with the West of Europe. Islams "liberalism" can only be claimed in contrast to the state of Christian Europe. I've admittedly over-stated my case but that was in response to your claim of Islams mythical "liberalism". In the case of India you just have to read Al-Beruni or the letters to Qasim from the Caliph in Baghdad to get an idea of their barbarity. In fact I would go so far as to claim that Islam would not have been able to hold a candle to the liberal Indians (who in the NW of India were mainly Buddhists at that time) of the same period.
RE:RE:RE:Let us use our experience and not our belief
by Indu on Feb 28, 2007 12:44 AM Permalink
please note my words 'not fanatic most of the time' it does not mean 'all the time'. Today, we all non muslims are asking our open, liberal , and peace loving muslim brothers n sisters to join us to put an end to this havoc or terror or fanatism for islam that has spread throught the world. Many innocent civilians are lost or impaired.My point is, irrespective of caste, religion, gender we all humans have great potential to change our world in small or big way, then why waste our precious time and energy in unconstructive behaviour. Everyone understands this, but not much is done about it. Please my muslims and non muslim friends if you guys really love peace and want we all n future gens to live for bettercause, we must protest against these so called jihadis or fanatics, Iam sure , people of our thoughts would definitely out number them.
It is also in a way a challenge or big task for open minded muslims to prove they are not supporting this fantisism madness and want peace and better living for themselves and others. It would not be an easy task , but definitely feseable with lot of patience and continous efforts.
Jai Bharath and ultimately leading to Jai peacefull World!!
Great attrocities has been done throughout by muslim rulers, Nehru , we all know the indian saint, a person with the holisticclothes with hidden evil and their congresse empire has always created a false figure, they tried to make people ignorant and keep up their rule.
Conversion by force has been prevalent in religions except Hindus. Let god give them good brains to do good better work...
RE:Indus valley - Tamil connection... May be there is some truth to the Aryan Invasion theory
by VIJAYA BUDDHIRAJU on Feb 26, 2007 06:08 AM Permalink
What has the aryan invasion bull brought about by Max Muller to kill Hinduism by attacking brahmins in some form to with aurengazeb's monstrosity? As the invadors failed to kill hinsuism by temple destrtucion, murder, rape and plunder alone, they resorted to burining the books etc. Even when that failed, they found out that it has to kill itself by internal strife. The kingpin is Brahminsm which needs to be shown as foreign. The DK of south, like idiots believe it. If Brahmins are from north west, these DKs are from Africa is't it? Total rubbish. All the Indians are from the same continent. due to weather conditions our compexion changes. Some like to preach and some like to teach. The only foreigners are those Muslims who calim to have decended from Mohamad.
RE:RE:Indus valley - Tamil connection... May be there is some truth to the Aryan Invasion theory
by Secular Indian on Feb 26, 2007 06:56 AM Permalink
Spot on, this artificial North/South divide has done India much harm. The "Aryan Invasion Bullshit" has landed a blow at the roots of the Indian civilization. It has undermined the confidence of Indians and till something is not ratified by the West it seems it's not an opinion worthy of respect. Not only that it's made Indians aliens in their own land. Someone should setup detox camps to help Indians get rid of this deadly malaise.
RE:RE:RE:Indus valley - Tamil connection... May be there is some truth to the Aryan Invasion theory
by sanjeet kaila on Feb 26, 2007 09:43 PM Permalink
BULLSEYE" both vijay n sec.indian......all this crap was thought of by britishers when they cudn't do to indian hindus what they did it in latin America in 15-16th century...burning their scriptures....for they realised to their horror that hinduism scriptures or teachings were by word of mouth of generations n generations of brahmins. so to destroy the brahmins they cooked up this cock and bull story about Aryan invasion theory(AIT).
RE:Indus valley - Tamil connection... May be there is some truth to the Aryan Invasion theory
by Secular Indian on Feb 25, 2007 11:39 AM Permalink
Interesting, but how does it explain the Aryan Invasion conjecture ? Why can't it explain that there were trade and cultural links between the NW and S of India ?
His arguments are straw-man arguments and childish secondly he is after all preaching to the converted.
Let me provide the context that Dr. Zakir Naiks claims is missing when people quote the given suras:
Islam divides the world into Dar-ul-Harb and Dar-ul-Islam . Islam is at perpetual war to bring Dar-ul-Harb into the fold of Islam and make it Dar-ul-Islam. This is not in dispute but is conveniently ignored when Muslims go into defensive mode. Given the context please read the suras again. Now his example regarding the Vietnam war, first he slyly drops the word "soldiers" in his second use of the Presidents order, second it is different from the surah where it says kill all kafirs, which is equivalent to the President instructing his soldiers to kill all non-Americans. Context or no context now it means exactly the same thing "kill the kafirs where you find them" since Islam is at perpetual war with kafirs. The rest is just more of his typical illogical drivel. Now let me quote a true scholar of Islam, Ayatollah Khomeini not some intellectual fraud that can impress people that lack the courage to critically examine their own dogma or his arguments, but someone who knew Islam better than Dr. Zakir Naik and for that matter most Muslims in the world.
"Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of countries so that writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world.
But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world ... Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says 'Kill all the unbelievers' just as they would kill you all! ... People can't be made obedient except wit h the sword .. There are hundreds of other [Koranic] psalms and Hadiths urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war ? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim."
I don't think I need to add to such a clear and well articulated understanding of the Islamic religion. This clear exposition is a dictionary doctrine of Jihad. If the Koran is the word of God as Muslims believe then who is being more logical Khomeini or the Muslims that pretend otherwise.
Please don't assume that we are living in the 7th century, people have advanced sufficiently to spot a con job when the see on (though after reading some post s that may not be 100% true).
RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 24, 2007 10:04 AM Permalink
Secular Indian or whatever your name is,
You did not understand the simple english that I wrote regarding launching pad theory. All I said was if Mohammed(pbuh) had to marry khadija(RA) for lanching pad, then how come he waited for 15 years then declared himself prophet? Since Khadija(RA) was rich lady and he would have got enough resources to launch his project as a prophet, he would have rather declare himself a prophet immediately after marriage or may be after 2 years or 3years or 4 years or 5years. Why he waited till 15 years to declare himself as prophet. You could not understand that simple english, now it's difficult for me to continue further. Either I'm very week in expaling things to you or you are very stupid that you cannot understand the simple english. So I feel it's waste time continuing the conversation. If you really want to debate, then i guess you need contact some islamic scholor like Dr.Zakir Naik. I know you will tell Dr.Zakir Naiks arguments insane blah..blah. But there is difference between debating with him and writing big comments about his articles in this forum.
RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 24, 2007 01:10 PM Permalink
She was rich and he saw an opportunity, his fortunes changed after he married Khadija and as I claimed earlier he used this as a launching pad. I can't see how you've refuted what I've said. In order to get people to follow him and listen to his lunatic ravings and incredible claims (he after all claimed he was specially chosen by Mr. God and was handed his exclusive franchise certificate in secret in a cave). A little digression if I may, someone making these sort of claims, will have the guys in white coats at his doorstep. Now, given that he was making his claims ~1400 years ago it is quite valid to assume that the Arabs weren't that stupid to fall for it straight away. (a) He would have had to first be sure about not being taken for a loony. (b) He had a mental disorder that kicked in at 40, hearing voices in his head. There again your claims haven't refuted anything, there are alternate explanations which may or may not be true but which are equally valid, like your claims. This is what you people miss.
RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 26, 2007 10:16 AM Permalink
Mr.Secular,
Sorry for the late response. Becuase I do have full time job and I write my comments only in spare time unlike you as your full time job is writing comments here :)
Now coming back to your reply, do you really read what I reply to you? If you read, do you really understand my simple english? In my earlier reply I had clearly replied you that he was already called by the arabs as "Al-Amin" i.e trustworthy even before his prophethood. He had won their trust completely. He didn't need any more time after his marriage with Khadija(RA) to win Arabs trust. And this is the fact. Nobody has denied that. Just because you are not ready to accept it, it does not mean that fact will change. That's why I told you are like a revolving object which does not change it axis. I hope this time you will not try to pretend as stupid and keep on repeating your baseless claims about the prophet(pbuh). Also, where did u get this claim that he had mental disorder at 40? Are you insane?? Do you have any proof for this claim? Try to be realistic. Don't you think these are your own imaginary views just to defame Islam and prophet(pbuh)?
Anyways, below are answers for you other questions that you posted in your later comments
Once again please provide the proof that 1. There is a GOD The proof of God is achieved through using your own logic. I will give an example. If you were walking in the middle of the desert, and come across a beautiful watch, and the watch has the exact time displayed, just because you don't see anybody around in the desert, you cannot say that something as accurate and flawless as this watch doesn't have a creator. You know that somebody made it. Similarly, if you look around you, the solar system, and how it works flawlessly and perfectly to the second, the ecological system, and how perfectly it works in sync with each other, so much so that if you abuse one part of it, you are damaging the rest of the system, when you see these things, but don't see a creator, you still know that something so perfectly made HAS to have a creator, just like that watch!
2. it is a HE In Islam, we don't believe God has a gender. The word He is used because there are only two forms in Arabic, male or female, we have to use either one.
3. There are angels If we believe from the above example that there is a creator, then we must believe what the creator tells us, and he tells us there are angels, so we believe it.
4. Koran was "Gods" word dictated to Muhammad. The Quran itself challenges people to prove otherwise! It is a flawless book, with no contradictions. Even if you believe that there are contradictions, those seeming contradictions have a very logical explanation. Nothing in the Quran goes against modern scientific theory. Amazing considering it is 1400 years old, and presented to us by someone who couldn't read or write!
5. That Islam doesn't divide the world into Dar-ul-Islam and Dar-ul-Harb and that it is the duty of every Muslim to bring Dar-ul-Harb into the fold of Dar-ul-Islam, with explicit instructions of using any means possible and killing mentioned explicitly.
Actually there are three distributions. DarulIslam, Darul-Harb, and Darul-Aman. DarulIslam=Islamic rule. DarulHarb means that society or government that is striving to eliminate Islam, Muslims are obliged to raise arms against them. DarulAman means that place where Muslims are allowed to live peacefully under non-Muslim rule, they must live according to the rules and regulations and laws of that country. This simple distribution of DarulKufr and DarulIslam is incorrect, otherwise Muslims would be fighting in every single country that they lived!
RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 26, 2007 01:49 PM Permalink
For a refutation of the watch maker argument, I will refer you to this refutation:
The rest of your claims unfortunately depend on the analogy of the watch which is refuted above and so there is no point in bothering to refute your subsequent claims.
Regarding your Dar-ul-* arguments, did you read Mr. Khomeini's explanation. I believe he is more qualified than I am. Muslims are always fighting in every single country they have lived. I think it was Huntington who said "Islam has bloody borders".
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 05:33 AM Permalink
"This argument is a circular argument. It assumes that the universe, black holes, stars, planets, snowflakes, life etc are created. Actually physics, chaos theory and evolutionary theory tell us how most complex things in the world could have evolved on their own, without any help from any "watchmaker". "
That's the text I can find in that link (http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/nogod/watchmak.htm) that you specified. So it cleary says that evolution theory creates complex things in the world. That's my point there. I hope u understood.
Regarding khomeni, do u understand the basics of Sunni & shia. If you would have understood, you would not have brought such crappy argument about khomini just to prove your point. All you are doing is search in internet some negetive views and just paste it here. So, you got khomemi comment from some where and you posted on your comment. This shows your again aweful and appalling arguements just to prove your own imaginary views. Muslim do not follow khomeni. In fact Muslim umma do not have any leader as such except our prophet(pbuh). We have ulemas that is set of scholors. Your comments are very bizzare! just as I said before like revolving object.
Regarding your youtube videos, don't come with all those stupid videos just to prove your point. Those people are extremist. Even I can show you Hindu, christians extremist videos. These videos and your crappy khomeini stuff does not refute anything. Go and do some more research before doing copy/paste here...
Now your comment "Secondly, how many evolutionists have burned down churches and mosques and killed the creationists in the name of evolution, Zero, because the very idea is absurd. How man Christians & Muslims have killed non-believers for simply having an alternative view of life and the universe, millions."
What do u mean by that. Who has killed non-believers, do u have any proof for that?? Killing has happen in all wars. So even Indian kings like harsha vardhan have spread their kingdom by wars. Does not prove anything. I think day by day your are becoming insane just to prove your points your bringing up new crapy stuff..
And what are comments "on finally you are agreed on fact." Did you read my complete comment. I was just trying to prove that arabs during prophet's(pbuh) time believed him as turstworthy even before his marriage. Are you a confused man. Really tell me, I think you need stop responding to other's comments as you are getting confused. First try to concentrate on my comments and respond to them instead of responding everybodys comment in this forum. At least you can concentrate better.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 04:21 AM Permalink
Now regarding the theory of evolution defense that you've put forward. It's irrelevant whether it's true or not. I just have to show that your claims and assertions about "God" and "his" exclusive franchise to Islam are false. Perhaps evolution is all wrong and tomorrow some new theory will explains life etc. That is the beauty of the scientific method. It's a self correcting system.
Nothing like a few good books on epistemology to fix your ignorance about what the scientific method really is all about.
Secondly, how many evolutionists have burned down churches and mosques and killed the creationists in the name of evolution, Zero, because the very idea is absurd. How man Christians & Muslims have killed non-believers for simply having an alternative view of life and the universe, millions.
So what's your point ? I'm at a loss now understanding what you are really arguing about.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 03:03 AM Permalink
1. Did yoo actually read the refutation or are you simply criticizing evolution. It is irrelevant whether evolution is true or not. It is an equally valid explanation. What you claim has been clearly refuted. That's at issue.
2. He may be a Shia but the bit on which he is commenting is common to both Shia and Sunni Muslims, so again don't go for and Ad Hominem defense.
3. Name one country where the Muslims haven't or aren't causing mischief. For their modus operandi you are again advised to watch first hand what are Sunni brothers are openly claiming in mosques in he UK. Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MSFbhIG-sk&eurl=
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoi5DWt3b0w&eurl=
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_TjzCcTkE8&eurl=
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 02:32 PM Permalink
1. Since it's beyond your comprehension skills I will now no longer address the God hypothesis.
2. I understand the Shia/Sunni divide better than probably you do. Regarding the comment on the Koran it's the Shia/Sunni distinction is irrelevant.
3. The quote by Khomeini comes from Ibn Warraq's book "Why I'm not a muslim". I' ve done my research. I'm not making things up.
4. For a start Aurangzeb has killed Hindus. Forget the thousands lets stick to Guru Tegh Bahadur. No amount of sophistry or chicanery on your part can gloss over it. He was killed for refusing to convert to Islam. How many evolutionary biol ogists do you know that have gone around killing "Creationists".
5. I can no longer make sense of your incoherent babble. It's gotten to a point where you might as well have a post modernist bullshit generator replying to my refutations. Give it a go: http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo
6. I've read everything you have written and in hindsight wasting time one trying to reason with you has only hardened my opinion about the likes of you.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 26, 2007 10:07 PM Permalink
As per P.w.Atkins theory, basically it believes in Darwin's theory of evolution. So it basically says that universe and all living being on Earth are created by chance and there is no creator. However, there are many scientics, genetics scientist have disproved Darwin's theory evolution as darwin's theory of evolution always remained a theory without any scientific proof. So the link whatever you gave never refutes my claim on God.
Regarding Khomeine's explanation, who told you that Khameini is more qualified or he is leader of whole muslim umma. He is the leader of the Shias who are minorities(10-15%) in the muslim population. So, only 15% of the muslim population follow him. So again your claims never refute my claims on Dar-Ul*
Give an example where muslims have fought in a every country without any reason. Then I'll anser your questions. I'm not aware of any Huntington's qoute that says "Islam has bloody borders". Even if he said that, it does not mean that Islam is bloody, it can also imply that Islamic empire was attached by crusaders, mongols, etc so its border were bloody (I hope u r aware of ruthless crusaders, mongol's invasion on muslim empire) So, again u have not refuted anything ..
RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 26, 2007 01:52 PM Permalink
Now the Al-Amin claim, I actually wrote a much longer refutation but it was reported as an abuse alert. Here is attempt # 2.
Given that he spent his early life as a shepherd and an attendant of caravans, it doesn't make sense for the Arab chiefs seeking his advice. So your claim is a dubious.
Now for the epilepsy attack argument. If you had bothered to read what I said, I said that my explanation was as good as yours irrespective of whether it was true or not. This is point you miss.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 26, 2007 03:07 PM Permalink
Regarding your claim of "facts", for your education:
Just because you "believe" and the people around you "believe" it, it doesn't make it a "fact". And the same applies to my case. Which is why no one, repeat no one can claim the absolute truth to be on their side. Unfortunately the Koran preaches the exact opposite and when people disagree with the Koran the prescribed punishment is death.
Fact and Opinion (Provable statements or thoughts and feelings)
To see if something is a fact, ask yourself, %u201CCan this statement be proved?
To check for opinions, ask yourself, %u201CDoes this tell a thought or feeling?%u201D %u201CWould the statement be true all of the time?%u201D
Look for clue words such as feel, believe, always, never, none, most, least, best, and worst
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 12:20 AM Permalink
Fact is nothing to do with what you believe or what I believe. Fact remains fact whether anybody believes or not. For example there is country called "Lesotho" which might be heard by very few people. Just becuase nobody has heard about it, does not mean that that country does not exist.
Now coming back to prophet's (pbuh) trusthworthy topic, Prophet(bpuh) was not only shepherd but later he became a merchant well before his marriage (I hope you do not disagree with this). let me give an example. I donno whether you have purchased any products online. If you purchase online, you can find seller ratings rated by consumers. When we purchase, we usually try to buy products from highest rated seller. Same thing applies to prophet(pbuh) too. If he would have been a cheater or lier (God forbid) in his business deals, then Arabs at that time would have rated him as cheater and a lier and he would not have been qualified as prophet at all. So, this well proves that, he had been rated by Arabs that he was indeed trustworthy. Check out this text from wikipedia
"Born to %u2018Abdu%u2019llah ibn %u2018Abdu%u2019l-Muttalib, Muhammad initially adopted the occupation of a shepherd, and later became a merchant. In his youth, he was called by the nickname "Al-Amin" (Arabic: %u0627%u0644%u0627%u0645%u064A%u0646 ), a common Arab name meaning "faithful, trustworthy" and was sought out as an impartial arbitrator" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad#Overview
So, it's fact that he was trustworthy. This refutes your claim that there is no proof that Arabs at that time called him trustworthy.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 04:12 AM Permalink
I'm glad we've finally agreed on what a fact is, I thought you would never come around to it. Now given that you "believe" that the Koran is the word of God, that doesn't make it a fact. So what right do Muslims have shoving it down peoples throats by force, why this intolerance towards different points of view, because of blind faith.
Mr. Gautier has reminded his readers about the fact, Aurangzeb's religious bigotry and inspiration from the Koran resulted in the killing of Hindus and destruction of their temples along their forced conversion to Islam. In the same way that Aurangzeb believed, like all good muslims, that the Koran is the word of God and the Koran says "kill all the non-believers where you find them", he was merely doing his duty. Whats so hard for you to understand and acknowledge about this. These are facts we are talking about not our beliefs.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 04:42 AM Permalink
Let me now use your own style of argument against you. Since the Hadiths were written well after he died, they were essentially made up to make him look good. It's fortunate for us that Arabs actually recorded Muhammad's pedophilia and we can today see what sort of monster he really was. So what reputation are you talking about, his marriage to Ayesha when she was 6 and his consummation of that marriage when she was 9 is acknowledged by Muslims as some sort of great thing he did and how she was his favorite wife. Not only that he also married his ex daughter-in-law.
Yes, he was his uncles apprentice and they went to Syria etc. to trade but how does that make him successful because he had to go and word for Khadija shortly after returning. To me that is a sign of failure not success. Ahh.. now the 2 2 = 4 therefore he was not a cheater, brilliant.
Even if we go by the Wikipedia entry we can deduce that he wasn't successful when returned from Syria because he had to seek employment with Khadija, he was her sales rep. I can't imagine the Arab chiefs consulting a sales rep. give me a break. It's only when he ended up marrying her that he status increased. Therefore he used her wealth as his launching pad QED.
RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 24, 2007 10:09 AM Permalink
One more thing, neither I can change your views nor you can change my faith. So, I feel it's waste of time continuing further.
RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 24, 2007 10:20 AM Permalink
Regarding changing my views, they are dependent on facts not fairy tales. You will be surprise how easy it is for me to change my views when presented with facts that contradict a previously held view. Of course the same can't be said for dogmatic belief but I understand.
RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 24, 2007 11:02 AM Permalink
I don't think it is easy to change your views even if some one provides facts to u. You are like an object which revolves around a bigger object in an axis and alwyas remains in the same axis and comes back to the same initial position.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 24, 2007 11:22 AM Permalink
Speak for yourself please, I've refuted each and every assertion you have made, the very fact that you have quoted an imbecile like Dr. Zakir Naik shows not only your intransigence but the inability to debate logically and rationally. This is nothing but blind faith!
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by ss gpal on Mar 01, 2007 02:45 PM Permalink
Hey secular indian I shall now be the superman to decide that the qran is indeed a the word of GOD.Just get the corrected lateral inversion of the word Sun revolves around the earth and at the end of the day goes to a far off place and sets in a muddy pond called ?? forget the arabic name for that area. Then courses under the allahs throne and prostrates and begs allah to let it go.Allah lets it out on the other side. My 4 year old daughter laughed when I taught her this stuff. 2.The flat earth like a carpet is stuck with giagantic nails tom prevent it from shaking. 3.Women are half as intelligent as men.This verse made my daughter a bit angry. 4.Ther is cure for many diseases.Drink camel's urine.Cures many diseases. 5.Fly has disease in one wing and cure in the other wing.If you are driking cofee or arabic shai, and fly accidentally falls in it, make sure you immerse it fully in shai and drink it up, for see above. 6.Indian cumin seeds cure all disease except death! 7.The fairer sex should be treated as land tilth land to be specific and u can go in when ever you want even on a camel's back.Please dont go looking for camel, for you need to go a long way. 8.All kafirs are Najis/ unclean. 9.Right hand possessions are women captured in wars and u do not need any one's permission to go in to them. When ever where ever and what ever way you feel like you can go in. Do you need any more to prove that these are the fault less and eternal words of wisdom? You are blind to it and are propogating nothing but hatred, 10..2 2 = 0 allah's logic
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by chaitanya kumar on Feb 25, 2007 02:14 AM Permalink
Shenidh, read something other than Quran sometimes dude. Your sardar jokes are lame. grow up. what is it about the revolving theory? where did you make that up? You are regurgitating same thing and it's boring. RSS is Hindu extremists you call and you keep calling the same and see how many Hindus that don't support the organisation will support it just because it's involvements are unnecessarily exaggerated by jehadis like you. What do you think about Aurangzeb? that the guy is a great islamic patriotic? sure you do.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 25, 2007 06:56 AM Permalink
It is not just an "opinion" but logically argued with facts unlike you, all you have said is that someone told you that Koran is the word of GOD and you believe. I'm surprised you can't see the obvious flaw in your argument. You've consistently attacked me not any of the facts that I've put forward and logically argued from those "axioms". If you keep making the same absurd claims I will keep tearing the same absurd claims down. I have no choice but to follow your lead.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 25, 2007 07:03 AM Permalink
Just because I don't believe that divine origin of Islam and recognize Muhammad as his prophet. That makes me an RSS member ? What tosh! Once again please provide the proof that 1. There is a GOD 2. it is a HE 3. There are angels 4. Koran was "Gods" word dictated to Muhammad. 5. That Islam doesn't divide the world into Dar-ul-Islam and Dar-ul-Harb and that it is the duty of every Muslim to bring Dar-ul-Harb into the fold of Dar-ul-Islam, with explicit instructions of using any means possible and killing mentioned explicitly.
You've not answered any of this questions and I've provided proof from the Quran and the missing context that is used by Muslims to dodge the question of kill all the kafirs.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 25, 2007 12:23 AM Permalink
That is your opinion that u refuted every thing, but the truth is different. You are coming back to the same views that you mentioned in your first response to my first comment in your so called rebuttal. ONly difference I can find is your so called rebuttal has been elongated with new words. Though you claimed yourself to be a secular, after seeing all your comments in this forum (including your responses to others) I did not find any difference between you and any extremist RSS hindus comments.
As I as said u r a revolving object which revolves around a big object in the same axis and comes back to same position. Revolving object is - You Bigger object - your views axis - your thinking
So, even if the revolving object(i.e you) tries to change its axis (i.e your thinking) the big object(your views) will not allow you to change. This looks like some sardar joke that is how do u make sardar fool? ask him to find a corner in circular room.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 25, 2007 12:07 PM Permalink
"As I as said u r a revolving object which revolves around a big object in the same axis and comes back to same position. Revolving object is - You Bigger object - your views axis - your thinking "
More infantile outbursts, again this model doesn't contradict my claim that I will change my views given you come up facts that contradict or prove my axioms (facts) to be wrong. So if you injected new facts into my supposed "view model" it will change. This is to easy looks like Dr. Zakir Naiks "scientific methodology" at work, your claims are getting more and more bizarre. It actually fits in quite well with his 2 2 != 3 therefore you can't have a mosque in Saudi Arabia, hilarious. LOL
RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 24, 2007 10:16 AM Permalink
No one is expecting you to change your faith only acknowledge that Aurangzeb did what he did because of the compulsions of his faith, that is all. You on the other hand went into this tirade about the world blaming Islam and I and other non-muslims were ignorant of the true peaceful nature of Islam blah blah blah ...
And now when your claims have been shown to be bogus you have started this new angle of that I'm trying to change your faith ... nothing could be further from my mind.
RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 24, 2007 10:59 AM Permalink
There is no any new angle here. Whatever claims I made, I gave the proofs too. As I said earlier either your very stupid that u did not understand my simple english or I'm very weak in explaining things to u.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 24, 2007 11:15 AM Permalink
Where are your proofs, you've simply made unsubstantiated assertions ? Please go and look up the meaning of proof before you embarrass yourself further.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 25, 2007 06:52 AM Permalink
Logical argument http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Logical%20Argument noun: the methodical process of logical reasoning; "I can't follow your line of reasoning" [syn: argumentation]
As you've admitted in a previous post, you need to brush up you English skills. You've made claims on the divine origin of the Koran etc., The onus is then on you to "logically argue your case" to prove it. Grow up.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 25, 2007 12:38 AM Permalink
Embarras myself?? what a big joke. Is it possible to have honest convesation with a person who tries to argue. As you only mentioned in one of your comments that if I cannot argue why I'm hiding behind historians/intellectual. I never considered this as an argument rather I was considering it as a conversation. you rightly said that i cannot argue. I can only have honest conversation. However you have masters degree in argument. But whoever wins in argument, it does not mean he has proved anything. It means that he is arrogant and stubborn. Hope this explains u.
RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Shenidh on Feb 24, 2007 10:24 AM Permalink
As I was going thru various comments here I was really amazed to see your comments. You were not only responding to me but all others comments too. I can see your comments every where. I'm really curious r u getting paid for this job. Is this your full time job? I know it's none my business but I'm just curious. If u r not getting paid, then how r u getting so much time to write these comments?
RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuttal to Shenidh's arguments
by Secular Indian on Feb 24, 2007 10:28 AM Permalink
You are quite right I've spent a considerable amount of time replying, in the past week. I was just bored and I'm lucky to be in a position where I can indulge myself :-).
First u get show repect to other people, then ask for respect.
What did u said...that everyone can be bought in india for a Australian dollar.....Try it mate on me or any other real indian !!
I have read somewhere that you are from Sydney, have you forgotton what happened in Cronulla in Dec'2005 and how Aussies cobbled you guys. You all went to Aussie asking for aslyum and now started targeting their culture and life !!!!
Grow up man......I know where do u belong to originally and where ur sympaties lie.
If u understand hindi/hindustani, then read below and understand it fully :
"ABHI BHI WAQT HAI SAMBHAL JAO, NAHIN TO GHAR MAIN GHUS KAR MAARENGE AUR 2 DIN NAHIN LAGENGE TUMHE TUTNE MAIN."
RE:RE:RE:from khan
by chaitanya kumar on Feb 23, 2007 05:19 PM Permalink
the whole point is, Aussies, Brits, Americans, Dutch, and the Indians will not take the morons and their inefficiency for too long. Modern tolerant socieities will not wait for others to catch up if they want to recede to mullah laws. Will be kicked to Saudi Arabia. Better, nuke the Mecca if these nuts keep going on with this attitudes. There would be many counter jehadis waiting if you project these attitudes, who would make no bones about bombing your holylands and they have the acumen and reach to do it. Your all faith will be crushed and demoralized. USA, Europe, China, Japan, Russia, India. Let the oil be replaced for other sources, and see what happens to each of this Jehadis like shah khan.
RE:RE:RE:from khan
by chaitanya kumar on Feb 23, 2007 05:23 PM Permalink
your messages are boring and teenager type. Evident from your ramblings which are repetetive. In any case, you will be admitted to Osama school of Excellence someday. All the freaks like you go there. Good luck.
RE:RE:RE:from khan
by rishi singh on Feb 23, 2007 05:26 PM Permalink
Yes Mr Khan...now u r showing ur true colour.
The country that gives u aslyum, bread and butter, u guys will stab that country in back.
Lesson to be learned...Never trust anyone even remotly associated with Middle-East...Let them rot in the desert and live with camels. Let them always be locked in those countries...LOL
After reading through all your posts & replies, I have formulated a new opinion on muslims like you...I didnt know that people like you harbored such a hatred towards Hindus and all for what? Religious differences? Well, what did you say about Indians being backward? What do you call the Muslims in Pakistan and middle eastern countries who order their women to wear burkhas all the time, aiding and abetting terrorists, etc, etc, all in the name of Islam ?
And you say India is backward!! Ha! Mr.Khan, first of all, get all your facts right and verified before making such baseless comments like these. Oh! one more thing. You call Indians backward? Women are accorded a derogatory position in Islamic religion, not only in daily life, but in every field. What do you say to that? Backward or not??
See, Mr.Khan, you say you have lived in Australia and NZ all your life (like that makes some difference !) and I am surprised that you dont have any manners and are so uncouth! Didnt they teach you good manners in school? To top all that off, you call yourself rich! Like nobody else is richer than you! Gosh, you are such a comedian.Its not good to keep harping about where you live because there are many people who write here and who live in countries like the US and Europe, etc.
Well, to explain these things to people like you would be such a waste of time. Mr.Khan,a small proverb to end it all, specially for people like you!!!
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IGNORANCE AND STUPIDITY..
After reading some of the pearls of wisdom from some of our muslim brothers(??), I am a bit terrified. Are these guys from India? If so, we hindus have our work cut out. Regarding Hindu temples/churches in Saudi Arabia I think we better not build one there if it will be razed and a mosque will be built on it. Frankly, I want India to have a highest living standard wherein our fellow citizens can be happy without having to go and work in the gulf. What this australasian genius is saying is missing one small detail. There are Indians working and contributing to the growth of Middle East in all walks of life depending on their skills and abilities. Incidentally, they also happen to be in Australia and many well placed. This guy looks like is very very frustrated in Australia and New zealand. One good thing is he can continue to stay there since he can read and write english. There are many people whom he would know, will soon be sent back if they can't write in english. At that time, his big house won't count. In anycase, what are these muslims doing in Australia, ruling them or serving them? That amounts to a servants job....
RE:message board is spicy!
by Vikas Backup on Feb 24, 2007 09:58 AM Permalink
>> Regarding Hindu temples/churches in Saudi Arabia I think we better not build one there if it will be razed and a mosque will be built on it.
Haha Mayya! I think you do not know one thing. Non Muslims are do not have ANY place of worship on saudi arabia! It is not allowed there!
RE:Know this man
by Secular Indian on Feb 23, 2007 02:51 AM Permalink
You can add my non-muslim quote there too, Muhammad was extremely successful at what he did, creating the framework of Arab Imperialism and then creating the vehicle of Islam for propagating it. Genius is more the word. Collecting a rag tag bunch of tribesmen, founding a religion which within two centuries was the most powerful force in that part of the world is a very impressive feat by any (Military) standard.
But there is a darker side to all this, he was also a pedophile. He married a woman older than himself (15 years) for her money, which he used as his launching pad. He made up the Koran as he went along, depending on who he was trying to control or appease. The Satanic Verses is a good case in point. I'm not going to elaborate on that here. Islam is a package deal it comes with the baggage of 7th Century Arab culture and practice. It displaces local cultures and supplants its own. It is the success and genius of Muhammad's legacy that has been the bane of the world long after he is gone. A follower can justify plundering and raping non-believers in far too many places in the Koran and the Hadith to warrant another mention here.
At an intellectual level the Koran is a rather shallow document but as a military manual it is a work of genius.
Modus operandi: 1. Claim to have exclusive franchise on truth and the rule book (Koran) to further his agenda.
2. In order to conquer another civilization or country all that is required is God's command to kill the non-believers and destroy their temples.
3. Once conquered, kill all the men of fighting age of the defeated country, take their women as concubines, use them as battery hens to produce the next generation of Islamic soldiers who have no memory of their origin or past civilization. Pakistan & India are a case in point. Muslims there and in India have invented elaborate genealogies with claims to having descended from Arab ancestors. It's embarrassing having to listen to them.
4. If can't be won by force then they are encouraged to breed and once they have the numbers then play their hand. For evidence you are encouraged to watch the Dispatches documentary from last month on Youtube.com.
What Aurangzeb did was fully justified as far as he was concerned, he was following Muhammad's example and orders from his rule book?
Islam and Muhammad were regularly portrayed by 13th-19th century European intellectuals as a role model for their own church. One can only imagine how bad their own church was. It had nothing to do with any "absolute" gentleness in the Islamic religion itself.
RE:RE:Know this man
by Shenidh on Feb 23, 2007 04:17 AM Permalink
I cannot add your quote there because neither you are an historian nor you are an intellectual. You are just a RSS guy filled with hatred against muslims.
I do not have any comments for your comments. Because it's not you who's saying this. It's your RSS mentality. I've read these kind of comments (filled with hatred against muslims) many times from RSS mentality guys like you. In fact it has become very common nowdays attacking Islam for each and everything. If this is what u believe, then i can't help it. Continue with your belief which are contrary to famous historians and intellectuals. May God guide u, Ameen
RE:RE:RE:Know this man
by Secular Indian on Feb 23, 2007 05:02 AM Permalink
I'm neither an RSS guy nor filled with hatred against Muslims, just pointing out the shallowness of your post and a rebuttal to your claim.
You can either refute what I've written and I will have learned something new or keep quiet. But attacking the messenger (Ad Hominem) is the oldest and shallowest form of debate. If you can't argue with evidence admit it, learn and move on, instead of name calling.
Why are you dodging behind a facade of intellectual honesty and attacking me ?
RE:RE:RE:RE:Know this man
by Shenidh on Feb 23, 2007 10:58 PM Permalink
Mr. secular indian,
Since your claiming yourself to be a secular Indian I'm continuing my conversation with you. I would'nt have bother to even reply to you, if you would have been a typical RSS mentality guy. Becuase RSS hindu extremist never listen to others point of view. I some how feel you have the capability to listen to others though you have attacked islam with your own imaginary views. I'm compiling my comments to refute all your allegations, it will take some time as it's gonna be a long one. If you could gimme your email address, I can email to you since this link may be removed in couple days.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Know this man
by Secular Indian on Feb 24, 2007 01:55 AM Permalink
I look forward to your refutations and would prefer that it be done in public. I have no fear of being proven wrong, I will gladly admit it, and like I've said earlier, I will have learned something new.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Know this man
by Shenidh on Feb 24, 2007 02:23 AM Permalink
Yes, as u wish. But, my only worry is someone shud not report that as abuse as my first message has already been reported as abuse..
