More on "the mosque"

Karen Hughes in making one of the most reasonable cases for not building the mosque at Ground-Zero says, "Putting the mosque at a different site would demonstrate the uncommon courtesy sometimes required for us to get along in our free and diverse society". She is right. With almost 70% of America hurt at the thought, shifting the mosque would make the Imam and the Muslims look like considerate, sensitive, mainstream Americans.

And Richard Bernstein says, "There is no significant Muslim population in lower Manhattan, much less one that requires a $100 million community center. Therefore, it stands to reason that the proposed center’s proximity to Ground Zero, where Muslims killed nearly 3,000 people, is the primary impetus for its construction  ...  So what’s the real issue? ... The Islamization of America. The demand for a mosque at Ground Zero is just one of many tests to see how far America will go to accommodate Muslims. As revealed during the Holy Land Foundation trial in 2008, Muslims have a “100-year plan” to gradually destroy us from within ... Moreover, this plan will be implemented incrementally, so Americans will be largely unaware of what’s occurring until it is too late. Such implementation has already begun. Airports in Kansas City, Phoenix, and Indianapolis have already installed foot baths for Muslims. Huge mosques and Islamist schools (madrassas) have been built all over the country. Their goal? To bring Sharia Law--a seventh-century political and legal system that discriminates against non-Muslims, homosexuals and women--to America. Think it can’t happen here? Think again. In 2008, England declared that Sharia law can be enforced in Muslim communities. In Canada and Europe, Sharia family tribunals are already functioning on a limited scale" How do we know that Mr. Bernstein is not right and how do we know that those refuting his facts are not Islamization of America cadres - willing or unknowingly that?

Either way in a democracy majority should prevail and with almost 70% public opinion against it the mosque would be a travesty of the democratic process and irrespective of the liberal rhetoric justifying it a defeat for the American majority.

Imam isn't the issue, its the Mosque location

Feisal Abdul Rauf

Here we go again - the same media that promised us wonderland of prosperity in the name of globalization and which still doesn't see the light despite the dimmed lights in 14 million households of the unemployed is now touting the "need" for the mosque at Ground-Zero, because the Imam and his wife proposing it are moderate Muslims.

But its not about the Imam, or his credentials. It's great that he is a "modernist and a moderate" and terrific that he contributes to the Washington Post blog. Muslims need a leader like him to redeem their reputation and clarify their stand as a people on violence, fundamentalism, rights of Jews and Hindus etc., but that does not give him the right to build a mosque at a site where the Muslims attacked America. That is not healing, it is trivializing an act of war by a terrorist organization against a sovereign nation. It is like Japan building a Pagoda at Pearl Harbor, or Germans building a Church at Auschwitz to say sorry.

To heal, to send a message of peace the Imam and his backers should issue a solid denunciation of Hezbollah, Al-Qiada, L.E.T and other Islamist terrorist organization and build a mosque at a site which is pleasing to all, hurtful to none.

But till exporters of jobs and builders of Mosques at ground-zero have American media supporting them America will always struggle for its security and safety as what do we do when the Trojan-horse is built by us to be used against us.

Happy New Year, Bye Bye Benazir

So its 2008.

Hope it's a very happy one for ya'll - even those who're not reading this.

Benazir's assassination made me really angry with Muslim militants, and I have a big, huge problem with those who oppose freedom of expression, modern education and equal rights for women, so I wish that all those suicidal, murderous types kill themselves at the same time so what's left of Muslims is the peaceful, progressive types who can balance their religion with modern world and emancipation. It'll be very lovely if they (killers) all kill themselves brutally without hurting anyone innocent so the prayer is that they kill themselves in the thick midst of their own kind. If that is not possible then if there were a way to identify murderers publicly so that if the public were not inclined to kill them before the public got killed by them at least the public will know the enemy by name and face.

Benazir you did democracy, women and Islam proud. Rest in peace.

On to the other favorite subject - Indian Press. Thanks to that institution truth gets obscured and obscure stuff becomes news. But it does have its benefits for a few - Ms. Shetty now has an honorary doctorate. And that feels so foolish since for so many years so many of us have slogged through racial discrimination and slurs, and overcome them by the sheer dint of hard work and perseverance. Where was TOI and its ilk and where is it today when in UK someone is called a Paki Bastard or someone is told "go back to your own country"? I know, I know it will be said with this raised awareness of Shilpa Shetty people will be afraid to hurl slurs at Indians. Bullshit. Slurs are hurled at South Indians in the North, and its a matter of education and then persons' merit which helps them get to a point where no slur sticks - Vinod Khosla is an example, as are countless Doctors, Professors, Professionals, and even me. So we have to be excellent not babied to be respected.

Enough of that as I wish to be a press baron myself - yeah, with you all as my board - at least 4 Sulekha friends I have and the other 2890 to follow as shareholders!

Seriously don't you think there should be another paper based on excellence in journalism - research, analysis, unbiased and unafraid reporting, and free of political affiliations, and not into pampering minorities and always painting anyone Hindu as a lout?

Why can't one be fun, open minded, into sports, fashion, travel, fine dining, good living and still be a devout Hindu? Why is a devout Hindu always held suspect of being an ignorant, fanatical, genocidal being? When Shahrukh Khan says his religion is the best he is applauded. When I say that I am condemned?

I don't - repeat DON'T - want to destroy mosques. I just don't want temples destroyed. What's wrong with that? I don't want to attack a Muslim's house, I also don't want trains and the Indian Parliament bombed. What's wrong with wanting to defend India? My issue is with those who preach hatred, what's wrong with hating hate mongers? It'd be nice to evolve to a point of not caring but then that's also shunning responsibility.

My Hindutva is my mukut (crown), my kavach (shield), my identity since the blood flowing in my veins and my DNA is Hindu from at least a 400 years. Same with Nidhi. It is also my place to be in times happy and sad, as that's my solace and celebration. It should only alarm those who wish to tread on me for my faith because I am not using it as arms, only spiritual armour.

Being a Hindu shouldn't be a cross to bear and a stance to defend. In Amsterdam and in London there are churches from 1600's which are now bars and clubs. Because many people are not into Christianity any more. If Hindus wish to follow that route that's their individual call and we can at some time in History talk of an ancient religion that once flourished from the time of Mohenjodaro till 2008 and then petered out because it was viewed as being un-hip at a time when Islam was flourishing, so Hindus packed and left. However I shan't be packing and leaving because my wife would leave me were I to leave Hinduism, besides despite years away the way Krishna and Hanuman resonate within me nothing does, and I find the Geeta to be a fantastic management guide - relevant in day to day tough situations, especially in negotiating and /or communicating.

On to the subject of the declining dollar. Rumor has it it will fall to Rs. 32! This per my CPA who has an offshore practice to process US tax returns in India. Declining dollar has hurt his business as he is now more expensive than he was, therefore less competitive. At 32 bucks he'll be even less desirably priced. So will that hurt Shining India? Before rushing into Indian economy is indestructible let's soberly look at Japan and also India's foreign reserves and plan a plan if those foreign reserves decline. And no EU isn't the US so can't offset US related losses totally - that's why I think and defer to your opinion.

Welcome was very funny, and I stick totally to that opinion. Nana Patekar stole the show, especially in that one scene when he swings around a pole with a love lorn look in his eyes. I'd say it's a must see.

Once again a Very Happy New Year to you and yours and hope this one will see yours. ours, my dreams become working and profitable realities.

SRK - A blog that rediff would not publish

Back in August, on the 13th to be exact, I wrote the following blog on rediff.com. A maelstrom ensued and within 12 hours the blog was deleted. Muslims were up in arms because I dared ask one of theirs if India or Islam came first, and liberal Hindus were aghast that I asked a Muslim such a question and because I asked I was branded a RSS/ VHP/ Hindu hardliner. A handful said "Go, man", but they too were shouted down. And many were just shocked that I dared question a super star.

NO ONE, repeat NO ONE, touched upon the interview that prompted the blog to start with. I haven't touched rediff since, as I have trouble handling loud mouth ignorants - one of whom definitely is that Thapar fella on TV.

Sulekha seems a much more refined crowd, so here it is again, with an assurance that I do not hate Muslims, just as I do not love Hindus - I just can't stand terrorists and their implicit and explicit backers.
—------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 13, 2007. Vancouver

Yesterday we thought about watching Chak De. Being in the USA/ Canada Bollywod films are one of our main connections with India.

Checking for movie reviews online we came across Shahrukh Khan's interview with Rajeev Masand in which Shahrukh Khan said that " I believe in the educated Islamic sect, I belong to it and educated Muslim people are the nicest people in the world. That is my religion and I would like to propagate that through my film without shoving it down your throat"

That made us curious about his general leanings, and especially since an Indian recently attacked Glasgow Airport in an Islamic terrorist attack India needs to know what does her leading Star think of Indians' involvement in Islamic Jihad.

Then we wondered since the extremist Mullahs are recruiting impressionable Muslims in the Netherlands, and France, UK, Pakistan and India preaching hate and violence under the garb of "Islam under threat" rhetoric, what does Shahrukh Khan have to say about India that has allowed him and other Muslims like Azim Premji, Aamir Khan, Salman Khan, Zakir Hussein, Dilip Kumar, Mansoor Ali Khan Patuadi, Vice President Ansari immense success? Why does he not tell the world that Islam is not under threat and that Muslims' talent and hard work is rewarded - even in a Hindu majority country.

Shahrukh Khan says he likes to propagate messages then why not propagate the message about leaving the walled cities, and coming out in to the open to seek modern education and be a part of a progressive society? Why not use his immense star appeal to propagate value of reason, objectivity, hard work, peace and emancipation to those vulnerable and in the clutches of criminal terrorist breeders?

As a public figure who owes his fame and wealth to his fans, majority of whom are Hindu - simply because his fan base is Indian and India is a Hindu majority country - he needs to clarify his stand on India and Islam, lest the Islamic hate mongers take his statement as support for their acts of terror and death to the innocent. And Hindus need to know how Shahrukh Khan balances his religion and patriotism so our questions are:

1. What is Shahrukh Khan's (SRK's) stand on and definition of Islamic Jihad
2. Why has SRK not used his image and immense reach to dispel lies about Islam under threat by telling the Muslim world about his own and the successes of other hard working Muslims in India and abroad.
3. What is SRK's position on destruction of Hindu temples by Muslim terrorists - at what point is there a justification to destroy a temple,
4. Why has SRK not taken a public stand against attacks on Indian Parliament and recent Mumbai Train blasts, and since he has not, in the event of an Al Qaeda attack against India or a war with Pakistan will he be a Muslim or an Indian first - simply put will he be for India or with India's Muslim enemies
5. Does Shahrukh Khan support India's demand for extradition of Dawood Ibrahim and does he also support India's stand on Kashmir

We as Indians and we as Hindus demand answers from him not only as a man who owes all he has to the Indian public but also to understand the mind of a member of the educated Islamic sect, as he calls himself.

And if SRK refuses to answer then we say that India and Hindus boycott his Films, Stage and TV shows until he tells us who he is as a man, Indian and Muslim.

We did. We have not gone for Chak De, and shan't spend our money or time till we know who we are spending our time and money on.