Monday, November 16, 2009



[first published at the original "Islamic Danger" on October 4, 2007]

[If you want insight into happenings on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, in the "tribal areas" of Waziristan, in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and in India-Pakistan relations, you will find reading this post and more views in the forum itself ( link right above) worthwhile.]

This comes from a forum. Although I have not checked the speaker's facts, they ring true and can be related to current events and those described in

. . . phindko and saraiki are languages not ethnic groups or a race of people. there are pakhtuns who speak hindko and saraiki and punjabis also. hindko and saraiki are punjabi dialects of pakistan but have a lot of pashto and farsi words. how many times am i going to tell u that i am not an afghan or pakhtun but a mughal (sunni mughal) kaum from dera ismail khan. there are jats rajputs pakhtun, qureshi, mughals, bolochis, afghan refugees etc all living in dera ismail khan. the afghan pakhtuns are friendly with their brothers of nwfp and the tribal areas who are also pakhtuns. and are related and families living on both sides of the durrand line. it's only the tajiks and uzbeks and hazaras who hate pakhtuns and pakistanis. and anyway tajiks and uzbeks all these people are not afghans anyway because their are decendents of turks mongols and are not the sons of afghana the pakhtuns are the true afghans the sons of afghana. i'm a mughal that means that i am a decendent of the mughals who were a mix of turk/persian/afghan - pakhtun and since we invaded pakistan/india there is a good chance i also have rajput concubine maternal genes. but my blood is pure from hindu man. but never the less my family/clan and kaum are always mistaken as pakhtuns and don't look like indians u can easily tell the afghan and central asian ancestory. the mughal and pakhtuns (waziris) were known to take hindu (rajput) women away. sahar u are an indian, there are afghan refugees tajiks uzbeks living in dera ismail khan and many have become settled opened shops and do business carpets jewellery etc. and regarding pakhtuns whether from pakistan or afghanistan they have nothing against the pakistan people. i should know because we live with these people and have had disputes tribal warfare with these people and also have done business with them. most of the construction work and truck haulage in our area of pakistan is done by us mughal/pakhtuns and we regularly see afghan refugees and do business with them. regarding indian origin yes the punjabis and sindhis do have indian blood but mughal, awans, qureshi, abbasi, sheikhs, ghoris, etc are not of the indian stock but the decendants of the muslim invaders. i know u being an indian that u want to associate with your former rulers and masters. i will say one thing my forefathers timur lang and babar remember the mound of skulls in dehli. i hope that helps. and there is no region called afghania in pakistan it is known as FATA or NWFP but we call it pakhtoonkhwa or pakhtunistan. and it is pakhtun not pathan by u indians and british least call these lion people by the correct name.

There's more back-and-forth about this subject at the forum website given immediately above . Insults fly, and insight is given into inter-ethnic-racial relations in the Pakistan-Afghanistan-Hindu/Indian sphere.

. . AND . . .


Ironically the Pashton/Pathan/Pashto people mentioned by the mughal-descended speaker above have preponderous evidence of being descendants of two or more of the ten "Lost Tribes" of Ancient Israel. Although today Pashtuns are thoroughly Islamicised, and because of that not to be trusted to be friendly towards today's Israelis and Jews, like all peoples that have fallen victim to Islam, there is evidence to point to the veracity of the widely-held belief of Pashtun origins.

Here is a good place to get started looking at this phenomenon. Although the Pashtuns are not the only people of (supposedly) Jewish origins that have been Islamicised to such a degree that their koranic Jew-hatred equals or exceeds that of the Islamic Arabs--the Jewish Berber tribes of North Africa come to mind--the Pashtuns apparently can be distinguished that they (like the Christian descendants of Spanish Jews) keep some Judaic traditions--whether aware of their origins or not.

"I love Israel, for my forefathers were most probably Israelites"

…Says Pashtun-historian from India Dr. Navras Jaat Aafreedi

By Alexander Maistrovoy

40 years ago, in triumphant nation of Israel of 1967, in the Jewish community of India occurred an extraordinary event: the President of India Dr. Zakir Hussain made a highly surprising visit to the Ohel David Synagogue of Pune, Maharashtra, which was celebrating its centenary. The significance of the event and the title of the guest were incommensurable and caused a lot of surprise. Why?

Dr. Navras Jaat Aafreedi has his own explanation. Dr. Zakir Hussain, one of the most famous sons of India, honored with the India's highest civilian award, the Bharat Ratna, was a member of a Pathan/Pakhtun/Pashtun tribe – the Afridi. And the Afridi tribe is identified with the lost tribe of Ephraim, one of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel.

Navras Jaat Aafreedi is an Indian citizen, a representative of the Afridi tribe too, and an historian. He isn’t 30 yet but he has Ph.D. on Medieval & Modern Indian History, and his research topic was: "The Indian Jewry and the Self-Professed ‘Lost Tribes of Israel’ in India". His book of the same title is the third serious major work ever by a Gentile (non-Jew) on this subject. Now he is doing his Post-Doctoral Research at Tel Aviv University.

Navras began his research of the connection between Afridi Pathans/Pakhtuns from Malihabad in Lucknow district (state Uttar Pradesh) and the Ephraim tribe. Pakhtuns settled here in the mid XVIII century and they are about 1200 today. It is a drop in the ocean compared to about 45 million Pashtuns of the world. Pathans/Pakhtuns/Pashtuns mainly live in the highlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan and are divided into 60 tribes and 400 clans.

* * *
Afridi tribe is one of the largest (about three million) and very martial. They controlled the famous Khyber and the Kohat passes, collected tribute from caravans and became famous for their fearlessness and selflessness in the battles with everyone who tried to conquer Afghanistan: from Mughal troops in the XVI and XVII centuries to Britons in the XIX and Russians in the XX century.

For hundreds of years Afridis have called themselves Bani Israel (Pushto for the Hebrew B'nei Yisrael meaning Children of Israel) and believe that they originated from the Ephraim tribe. Lately, the hatred of Jews in the Islamic world made the young generation of Pashtuns give up their beliefs. But Navras quotes a number of Jewish immigrants from Afghanistan who testify to the prevalence of many Jewish rituals and customs among the Afridi Pathans, e.g., the lighting of candles on Shabbat, keeping long side locks, wearing shawls resembling the tallith, circumcision on the eighth day after birth, and Levirate.

He refers to great Jewish writers like Saadia Ga’on and Moses Ibn Ezra, who mention Afghanistan and the Pathan territories in Pakistan as the home of Jews descended from the lost tribes, and to a number of medieval Arabic and Farsi texts. In the XIX century some British travelers and officers, like Sir Alexander Brunes and J.P.Ferrier, wrote about the Israelite origin of Afghan tribes.

. . . Continued at

There's a lot more there, if this intrigues you, as it does me. lw.

More links to this can be found at:;wap2

AND more yet from

GOOGLE Search for Pashtun Afridis Ephraim

should you be research-minded.

Monday, October 26, 2009

Dhimmi Approach to Studying Hinduism by American Academics

From Political Islam

19 October

Hinduism Studies and Dhimmitude in the American Academy
Posted in Book Reviews, HomePage, Newsletter / Make a Comment /

M. Lal GoelProfessor Emeritus of Political Science,

Pro-Islamic and anti-Hindu mindset known as dhimmitude (described more fully later) is prevalent in sections of the American academy. The case in point is the recent book by Dr. Wendy Doniger [1] , The Hindus: An Alternative History, The Penguin Press, 2009.

Doniger’s 779-page tome is laced with personal editorials, folksy turn of the phrase and funky wordplays. She has a large repertoire of Hindu mythological stories. She often narrates the most damning mythical story—Vedic, Puranic, folk, oral, vernacular—to demean, damage and disparage Hinduism. After building a caricature, she laments that fundamentalist Hindus (how many and how powerful are they?) are destroying the pluralistic, tolerant Hindu tradition. Why save such a vile, violent religion, as painted by the eminent professor? There is a contradiction here.

This review focuses on Doniger’s discussion of Islamic incursions into India. Islam entered south India in the 7th Century with Arab merchants and traders. This was peaceful Islam. Later, Islam came to India as a predatory and a conquering force. Mohammad bin Qasim ravaged Sindh in 712. Mahmud Ghazni pillaged, looted and destroyed numerous Hindu temples around 1000 AD, but did not stay to rule. The Muslim rule begins with the Delhi Sultanate, approximately 1201 to 1526. The Sultanate gave place to the Mughal Empire, 1526-1707. Doniger makes the following dubious points regarding the Muslim imperial rule in India (1201-1707).

Muslims marauders destroyed some Hindu temples, not many.

Temple destruction was a long-standing Indian tradition. Hindus destroyed Buddhist and Jain stupas and rival Hindu temples and built upon the destroyed sites.

Muslim invaders looted and destroyed Hindu temples because they had the power to do so. If Hindus had the power, they would do the same in reverse.

The Jizya—the Muslim tax on non-Muslims—was for Hindu protection and a substitute for military service.

Hindu “megalomania” for temple building in the Middle Ages was a positive result of Muslim demolition of some Hindu temples.

The Hindu founders of the Vijayanagara Empire double-crossed their Muslim master in Delhi who had deputed them to secure the South.

Hindus want Muslims and Christians to leave India for Hindustan is only for Hindus.
Let us take each point in turn to examine Doniger’s mistaken views.

Muslim invaders beginning with Mahmud Ghazni in 1000 CE looted, pillaged and destroyed not few but many Hindu and Buddhist temples. Muslim chroniclers describe the humiliation and utter desolation wrought by the Muslims on the kafirs (unbelievers). Alberuni, the Muslim scholar who accompanied Mahmud to India, describes one such event: “Mathura, the holy city of Krishna, was the next victim. In the middle of the city there was a temple larger and finer than the rest, which can neither be described nor painted. The Sultan was of the opinion that 200 years would have been required to build it. The idols included 'five of red gold, each five yards high,' with eyes formed of priceless jewels. . . The Sultan gave orders that all the temples should be burnt with naphtha and fire, and leveled with the ground. Thus perished works of art which must have been among the noblest monuments of ancient India.” [2]

At the destruction of another temple, Somnath, it is estimated that 50,000 were massacred. The fabulous booty of gold, women and children was divided according to Islamic tradition--the Sultan getting the royal fifth, the cavalry man getting twice as much as the foot soldier. Hundreds of Hindu and Buddhist shrines were destroyed.

Dr. Doniger asserts that Hindus too persecuted minority Jain and Buddhist religions and destroyed their shrines. She narrates the now discarded story about the impaling of Jains at the hands of Hindu rulers in the Tamil country. Then she says that “there is no evidence that any of this actually happened, other than the story.” (p 365). Then why narrate the story? Hindu sectarian violence pales in comparison to what happened either in Europe or in the Middle East.

The truth is that both Jainism and Buddhism were integrated into Hinduism’s pluralistic tradition. The Buddha is accepted as one of the Hindu Avatars (God in human form). Exquisite Jain temples at Mt Abu at the border of Gujarat and Rajasthan built around 1000 CE survive in the region dominated by Hindu Rajput rulers, falsifying notions of Hindu carnage of Jain temples.
Doniger says that Hindus would do the same to Muslims if they had the power to do so. Hindus did come to power after the death of Emperor Aurangzeb in 1707, when the Mughal rule rapidly declined. The Marathas were the strongest power in Western and Southern India in the 18th and 19th centuries, as the Sikhs were in North India. There is no account of large scale demolition and looting of Muslim places of worship either by the Marathas or the Sikhs. If a copy of the Quran fell into the hands of Maharaja Shivaji during a campaign, the same would be passed on to a Muslim rather than being burned.

Contrary to what Doniger says, Jizya is a long held Muslim tradition. It was levied to begin with on the defeated Christians and Jews, the People of the Book, as a price for the cessation of Jihad. Hindus, not being one of the People of the Book, did not deserve to live by paying the special tax. If defeated in battle, their only option was Islam or death. This was the position taken by the Islamic clergy. Unlike the clergy, however, the Muslim governors were practical men. If they had killed the Hindus en masse for failing to adopt Islam, who would build their palaces, fill their harems, cut their wood and hue their water? [3]

Doniger argues that Hindu ‘megalomania’ for temple building resulted from Muslim destruction of some Hindu temples. In other words, because the Muslims destroyed some of the Hindu temples, the Hindus went on a building spree. If Doniger’s argument is accepted, Hindus should thank Islamic marauders for looting and desecrating their shrines. The truth is that in northern India which experienced 500 years of Islamic rule (1201-1707), few historical temples of any beauty remain. In contrast, temple architecture of some beauty does survive in southern India, the region that escaped long Muslim occupation.

That the Hindu founders of the Vijayanagara dynasty in the South double-crossed their Muslim master in Delhi is one among the innumerable editorial negative portrayal of Hindu character. One may ask: why wouldn’t a slave double cross his oppressor?

The view that Muslims and Christians should leave India is not one held by most Hindus, only by a small minority on the extreme fringes. Muslim population has increased in India from about 9 percent at the time of Independence to about 13 percent now (1947-2009). In contrast, in Pakistan, Hindu population has declined and now constitutes less than one percent. In Muslim Bangladesh in the same period the Hindu population has declined from 29 percent to less than 10 percent. Muslims hold important positions in government and business in contemporary India, which is 83 pct Hindu. The richest person in India has been a Muslim, Premji; the most popular film stars are Muslim; Christian and Muslim chief ministers and governors head several of the states. The single most important leader in India is an Italian-born woman Sonya Gandhi and the Prime Minister is a Sikh, Dr. Manmohan Singh. The past President APJ Kalam was a Muslim and before that K R Narayanan, a lower caste. In Federal and State civil service, 50 percent of the jobs are reserved for backward classes and Untouchable, in order to compensate for past discrimination. India has moved.

Let us look more closely. Doniger describes the invasion of Sindh by Arab soldier of fortune Muhammad bin Qasim as follows:

Qasim invaded Sindh in 713. The terms of surrender included a promise of guarantee of the safety of Hindu and Buddhist establishments. “Hindus and Buddhists were allowed to govern themselves in matters of religion and law.” Qasim “kept his promises.” The non-Muslims were not treated as kafirs. Jizya was imposed but only as a substitute for military service for their “protection.” He brought Muslim teachers and mosques into the subcontinent. (paraphrased)

From Doniger’s assessment, Qasim should be regarded as a blessing. Contrast Doniger’s description with that written by Andrew Bostom in “The Legacy of Islamic Jihad in India.” [4]

The Muslim chroniclers al-Baladhuri (in Kitab Futuh al-Buldan) and al-Kufi (in the Chachnama) include enough isolated details to establish the overall nature of the conquest of Sindh by Muhammad b. Qasim in 712 C.E. . . . Baladhuri, for example, records that following the capture of Debal, Muhammad b. Qasim earmarked a section of the city exclusively for Muslims, constructed a mosque, and established four thousand colonists there. The conquest of Debal had been a brutal affair. . . Despite appeals for mercy from the besieged Indians (who opened their gates after the Muslims scaled the fort walls), Muhammad b. Qasim declared that he had no orders (i.e., from his superior al-Hajjaj, the Governor of Iraq) to spare the inhabitants, and thus for three days a ruthless and indiscriminate slaughter ensued. In the aftermath, the local temple was defiled, and “700 beautiful females who had sought for shelter there, were all captured.”

Distinguished historian R. C. Majumdar describes the capture of the royal Fort and its tragic outcome:

Muhammad massacred 6,000 fighting men who were found in the fort, and their followers and dependents, as well as their women and children were taken prisoners. Sixty thousand slaves, including 30 young ladies of royal blood, were sent to Hajjaj, along with the head of Dahar [the Hindu ruler]. We can now well understand why the capture of a fort by the Muslim forces was followed by the terrible jauhar ceremony (in which females threw themselves in fire kindled by themselves), the earliest recorded instance of which is found in the Chachnama. Cited in Bostom.
Doniger extensively footnotes Romila Thapar, John Keay, Anne Schimmel and A. K. Ramanujan as her sources for Islamic history, providing an impression of meticulous scholarship. Missing are works of the distinguished historians: Jadunath Sarkar, R. C. Majumdar, A. L. Srivastava, Vincent Smith, and Ram Swarup.

Doniger writes at page 458: when Muslim royal women first came to India, they did not rigidly keep to purdah (the veiling and seclusion of women). They picked the more strict form of purdah from contact with the Hindu Rajput women. Doniger finds much to praise in Muslim women during this period: some knew several languages; others wrote poetry; some managed vast estates; others set up “feminist” republics within female quarters (harems); some debated fine points on religion; some even joined in drinking parties (chapters 16, 20). Such descriptions are patently negated by distinguished historians. See The Mughal Harem (1988) by K S Lal, available free on the Internet.

If Hinduism is the source of strict purdah among Muslim women, as Doniger contends, how does one explain the strict veiling of women in the Middle East, a region far removed from Hindu influence? Or, the absence of it in southern India, a region that escaped Islamic domination?

Doniger writes at page 627, “the Vedic reverence for violence flowered in the slaughters that followed Partition.” And, Gandhi’s nonviolence succeeded against the British. But it failed against the tenaciously held Hindu ideal of violence that had grip on the real emotions of the masses.

What is one to make of these weighty pronouncements uttered in all seriousness by the author? These are an expression of the hurt feelings on the part of a scholar. While discussing the Hindu epic Ramayana in London in 2003, Doniger put forth her usual gloss: that Lakshman had the hots for his brother Rama’s wife Sita, and that sexually-charged Sita reciprocated these feelings. An irate Hindu threw an egg at her and conveniently missed it. This incident is her cause célèbre.


Doniger’s uncritical review of the Islamic marauding raids in India (712-1200) and later the Islamic empire (1201-1707) suggests dhimmitude. The concepts of dhimmi and dhimmitude were developed by the Egyptian born Jewish woman writer, Bat Ye’or (Daughter of the Nile), who fled Egypt in 1958 in the wake of Jewish persecution following the Suez Canal crisis. Her meticulous research puts to rest the myth of peaceful expansion of Islamic power in the countries of Middle East and Eastern Europe. [5]

Dhimmitude is a state of fear and insecurity on the part of infidels who are required to accept a condition of humiliation. It is characterized by the victim’s siding with his oppressors, by the moral justification the victim provides for his oppressors’ hateful behavior. The Dhimmi loses the possibility of revolt because revolt arises from a sense of injustice. He loathes himself in order to praise his oppressors. Dhimmis lived under some 20 disabilities. Dhimmis were prohibited to build new places of worship, to ring church bells or take out processions, to ride horses or camels (they could ride donkeys), to marry a Muslim woman, to wear decorative clothing, to own a Muslim as a slave or to testify against a Muslim in a court of law.

Ye’or believes that the dhimmi condition can only be understood in the context of Jihad. Jihad embodies all the Islamic laws and customs applied over a millennium on the vanquished population, Jews and Christians, in the countries conquered by jihad and therefore Islamized. She believes that dhimmitude was once the attribute of defeated Christian and Jewish communities under Islam. Now it is a feature of much of the Western world, Europe and America. Her theory of dhimmitude applies to many Hindus in India. Whereas dhimmitude in previous centuries resulted from real-life powerlessness and humiliation, modern dhimmi syndrome results from some combination of the following.

The corrupting power of oil money to influence think tanks, lobbyists and academic institutions.
De-Christianizing of Europe. It is now also happening in the U.S. See Pew research reports.
Guilt feelings in the West on account of the Crusades to liberate the Holy Land (1095-1291).
Multiculturalism: the belief that all cultural practices and ways of life are equally valid.
Violence by radical Muslims is on account of being poor and exploited by colonial hegemony.
Islam provided the West its basis for advancement in math and science.
The rising number of Muslim populations in Europe and America.
The rising level of alienation from one’s own culture in the West.

Doniger’s inflammatory book on the Hindus makes sense only in the light of a larger global trend—a trend that seeks to re-package Islamic history as a force for tolerance and progress. Doniger is not alone in holding such views. Dhimmi attitudes of subservience have entered the Western academy, and from there into journalism, school textbooks and political discourse. One must not criticize Islam. For, to do so would offend the multiculturalist ethos that prevails everywhere today. To do so would endanger chances for peace and rapprochement between civilizations all too ready to clash. See,

The field of Middle East Studies in the U.S. is now controlled by pro-Middle East professors, according to Martin Kramer, editor of the Middle Eastern Quarterly. “The crucial turning point occurred in the late 1970s when Middle East studies centers, under /Edward/ Said's influence, began to show a preference for ideology over empirical fact and, fearing the taint of the ‘orientalist’ bias, began to prefer academic appointments of native-born Middle Easterners over qualified Western-born students,” contends Kramer. The book is summarized at:

In contrast, the field of Hinduism studies is controlled by non-Hindus and anti-Hindus, with some notable exceptions of course. Hindu gods and goddesses are lampooned and denigrated. Hindu saints are described as sexual perverts and India in danger of being run over by Hindu fundamentalists. In these portrayals, Doniger is joined by Martha Nussbaum, Paul Courtright, Jeffrey Kripal, Sarah Caldwell, Stanley Kurtz, to name a few of the leading academicians. For a critique of the American academy, see Rajiv Malhotra at, and a 2007 book titled, Invading the Sacred. [6]

Doniger is quite harsh on the British record in India (1757-1947). She compares the British argument that they brought trains and drains to India to Hitler’s argument that he built the Autobahn in Germany (p. 583). Censuring Britain and giving a pass to the more draconian Islamic imperialism in India fits with the dhimmi attitude that I have described.

Consequently, attitudes of concession and appeasement are on the rise.

A reversal of language occurs. Jihad is called ‘struggle within’ or struggle for liberation. Dhimmitude is called tolerance. Jizya is called protection. Tony Blair declares Islam is a religion of peace and that the terrorists are not real Muslims. Parts of London have been ceded to the control of radical mullahs. Sharia arbitration courts are now part of the British legal system. Melanie Phillips tells that London is becoming Londonistan. [7] Anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe. The destruction of life and property caused by Islamic extremists in the last thirty years is simply horrendous. Of course, distinction must be made between moderate Muslims and radicals who wish to bring back the 7th century version of Islam.

The British helped abolish the horrible practice of Suttee (widow burning) in India in the 19th century. At its peak in the 19th century, the practice of Suttee claimed the lives of 500 to 600 women a year in India. The honor killing of women, genital mutilation, and the caning of girls for minor sexual impropriety raises only a limited protest in the 21st century. Amid the rising level of alienation, multiculturalism and the feelings of guilt in the West, the moral compass has been lost.

[1] Dr. Wendy Doniger is a distinguished professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago. She has written some 30 books, several dealing negatively with Hinduism. Her writing has been described as “rude, crude and very lewd” by the BBC.
[2] Vincent Smith, The Oxford History of India, Delhi, 1981, pp. 207-08. Smith derives his account of Mahmud’s raids from the account written by Alberuni, the Islamic scholar who traveled with Sultan Mahmud to India.
[3] See Ram Swarup’s Hindu View of Christianity and Islam, 1992. And, Andrew Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, 2005, at:
[4] Published in 2005 in the American Thinker by Andrew Bostom and available at:
[5] Bat Ye’or’s writings include: Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2001. The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996. Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2005.
[6] Krishnan Ramaswamy; Antonio de Nicolas; Aditi Banerjee ed. Invading the Sacred: An Analysis of Hinduism Studies in America, Rupa and Co., Delhi, 2007.
[7] Phillips, Melanie, Londonistan: How Britain is creating a terror state within, Encounter Books, 2006. See summary at:


copyright (c) CBSX, LLC

Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009


. . . after 1947, however, relations between India and the US took a downward turn. The downward turn continued for nearly half-a-century. The reasons lie in the failed policies of India's first Prime minister, Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, and in the narrow view of the world held by the then Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles.
Indo-American relations reached a low point during the 1971 Bangladesh war. India supported Bangladesh's struggle for freedom from Pakistani war of genocide. America "tilted" to the side of Pakistan.

Indo-American relations improved a bit in the 1980s during the Reagan presidency (1980-88). The upward movement in relations continued during both the Bush presidency (1988-92) and the early years of the Clinton presidency. The two countries engaged in a dialog to redefine their "strategic relationship."  Then Pokharan I and II happened in May 1998. India test- exploded its nuclear devices. This derailed the burgeoning Indo-American relations.

The United States government took a hard stand against India becoming a Nuclear power. I believe America's opposition to India's minimum nuclear deterrence is indefensible. It ignores India's legitimate security needs against rival China and unstable Pakistan.
--Dr. Madan Lal Goel

Dr. Madan Lal Goel
University of West Florida

No two countries are as misunderstood by each other as the United States and India. The misunderstanding goes back to a period after WWII, to a period when India achieved its independence from colonial rule and the United States emerged as one of the two global superpowers. Partly this is due to the relative lack of historical contact between India and the U.S. This lack of historical contact between India and the United States is in contrast to America=s much longer contact with two other Asian civilizations: China and Japan.

Indians generally misperceive the history of Indo-American relations. Many people in India have heard about the Boston Tea Party, and some believe that goods imported into the colonies from India were a major cause of the American Revolution. This is not so. All that happened was that tea that originated from India was dumped into the Boston Harbor by American freedom fighters to protest the British monarch=s policies of mercantilism.

Lord Cornwallis, Governor General of India from 1786 to 1793, provides another minor footnote to history. Before being sent to India, Cornwallis was the British General deputed to deal with the American revolutionaries. He was defeated at Yorktown in 1781 by American freedom fighters, thus sealing the fate of British power in North America. After his defeat, Cornwallis was sent to India as the Governor General of the East India Company. This development did not lead to any meaningful relations between India and the U.S.

It is interesting to note however that the British colonial yoke was imposed on the people of India just as it was lifted off the backs of the people in America. Along with Robert Clive and . . .
Continue at

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Is the Problem of Afghanistan centered in Pakistan?

Where lies the The Gordian knot* that is Afghanistan?

See Afghanistan: The Gordian Knot of Asia -- how do you unravel it?

For  the answer . . .  and what must be done to--about--Pakistan and its jihadist ISI?

and What part could India play in this development for stopping Islamic terrorism in Asia?

A possible answer can be found at The Apparently Insoluble Problem that is Afghanistan

Alexander of Macedon invaded India but although . . .
From a Macedonian source somes this account of Alexander's end in India:
One of the villages in which the army stopped belonged to the Malli, who were said to be one of the most warlike of the Indian tribes. Alexander was wounded several times in this attack, most seriously when an arrow pierced his breastplate and his ribcage. The Macedonian officers rescued him in a narrow escape from the village. Alexander and his army reached the mouth of the Indus in July 325 BC and turned westward for home.
Copyright © 1996-2000, All Rights Reserved.

From Indian sources (or absence of much ado about Alexander in ancient sources there), comes a different account of the Macedonian's exploits in India:

Alexander’s Indian campaign was a great blunder on his part and it certainly scripted the fall of this much celebrated conqueror.

Alexander's Defeat in India
*A knot in Gordium that no one could unravel and that legend has it Alexander of Macedon solved the problem of by cutting it open with his sword.  (A replica of Alexander of Macedon's sword is shown above)

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

the Hindu-Killers of Kandahar - Continued

Continued from

The popular notion that India fell an easy prey to the Musalmans is opposed to the historical facts. Muhammadan rule in India consists of a series of invasions and partial conquests, during eleven centuries, from Usman's raid, circ.647, to Ahmad Shah's tempest of invasion in 1761 A.D.

At no time was Islam triumphant throughout the whole of India. Hindu dynasties always ruled over large areas. At the height of the Muhammadan power, the hindu princes paid tribute, and sent agents to the Imperial court. But even this modified supremacy of Delhi lasted for little over a century (1578-1707). Before the end of that brief period the Hindus had begun the work of reconquest. The native chivalry of Rajputana was closing in upon Delhi from the south; the religious confederation of the Sikhs was growing into a military power on the north-west. The Marathas had combined the fighting powers of the low-castes with the statesmen ship of the Brahmans, and were subjecting the Muhammadan kingdoms throughout all India to tribute. So far as can now be estimated, the advance of the English power at the beginning of the present century alone saved the Mughal Empire from passing to the Hindus.

Partial list of Rajputs who fought the invaders

Bappa Rawal

The Chittorgarh fort in Rajasthan was the site of several battles between the Rajputs and the Islamic invaders.

Muslims started attacking India within a few decades of the birth of Islam. For a few hundred years they had no success. Mohammed Bin Qasim was able to defeat Dahir in Sindh but was routed by Bappa Rawal. Qasim attacked Chittore, which was ruled by Mori Rajputs, via Mathura. Bappa, of guhilote dynasty, was a commander in Mori army and so was Dahir's son. Bappa defeated and pursued Bin Qasim through Saurashtra and back to Sindh. After this resounding defeat of the caliphate at the hands of Bappa, for next few hundred years there were no more Islamic incursions into India. (note Muslim historians rarely recorded the defeats of their kings).

When Muhammad al-Qasim* conquered Multan, he quickly discovered that it was this temple which was one of the main reasons for the great wealth of the town. He 'made captives of the custodians of the budd, numbering 6000' and confiscated its wealth, but not the idol itself – which was made of wood, covered with red leather and two red rubies for its eyes and wearing a crown of gold inlaid with gems --, 'thinking it best to leave the idol where it was, but hanging a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery'. AI-Qasim built his mosque in the same place, in the most crowded bazaar in the center of the town. The possession of the sun-temple -- rather than the mosque -- is what in later times the geographers see as the reason why the local governors or rulers could hold out against the neighboring Hindu powers. Whenever an 'infidel king' marched against Multan and the Muslims found it difficult to offer adequate resistance, they threatened to break the idol or mutilate it, and this, allegedly, made the enemy withdraw. In the late tenth century however the Isma'ilis who occupied Multan broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests. A new mosque was then erected on its site…”12

शूरबाहूषु लोकोऽयं लम्बते पुत्रवत् सदा ।तस्मात् सर्वास्ववस्थासु शूरः सम्मानमर्हित।।न िह शौर्यात् परं िकंचित् ित्रलोकेषु िवधते।शूरः सर्वं पालयित सर्वं शूरे पर्ितिष्ठतम् ।।

Arms of the brave (kshatriya) always support and sustain the people like (a father his) son.

A brave (kshatriya) is, for this reason, honoured by all, in all situations.

There is nothing in all the three worlds, which is beyond (the reach of) bravery.

Brave (kshatriya) sustains all, and all depend upon the brave.
(Mahabharata, Shanti Parva, 99. 17-18)

Rajput, (Sanskrit: raja-putra: "son of a king") is a hindu kshatriya caste. The Rajputs trace their origins to the ancient Kshatriya dynasties of India. It is estimated that currently there are 12 million Rajputs.

The Original, first part, of Hindu-Killers of Kandahar is at

Friday, September 11, 2009

The Historic Hindu Struggle Against Moslem Tyranny


The invasion of India by the Muslims saw a fierce Hindu-Muslim warfare for 600 years, from the year 715 C.E. up to 1326 C.E., during which period the Muslim invaders gradually occupied parts of India. The next 400 years from 1326 C.E. up to 1720 C.E., saw the relentless struggle for independence by Hindus against Muslim tyranny. Muslim power as the major power in India, effectively ended in 1720 C.E., when the Marathas defeated the Mughal forces near Delhi - the city where the Occupation forces of the Muslims had established their capital from 1206 up to 1720. From 1720 onwards, it was the Marathas who were the real movers behind the Mughal power, although the Muslims continued to be the titular rulers from Delhi till they were formally ousted in 1857 by the British.

What is Hindutva?
(click to read)

Hindu History

The Rajput Resistance to the Muslim Aggression

By Sudheer Birodkar

Table of Contents

This site
has been selected by Encyclopedia Britannica "as one of the best on the Internet, when reviewed for quality, accuracy of content, presentation and usability".

In the last chapter, we saw how the Muslim rule of the Ghaznivids was established in Kabul, Paktoonistan and in the land of the five rivers - Punjab. Thus after Sindh in 715; Kabul Paktoonistan and Punjab became the next Indian provinces which went under Muslim domination in the period 980 C.E. to 1020 C.E.

The refusal of the two Rajput Kingdoms of the Chauhans and the Rathods (Gahadwalas) to unite in face of the Muslim invasion led to the Fall of Delhi and Kannauj to the Muslims and led to the establishment of Muslim Rule in India.

Continue reading at (scroll down the page)

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Sikhs and Hindus in the UK

British defence leagues against Islamic takeover of the UK and Sikhs and Hindus in the British Isles
[Last I checked this is a dead link. You can check at from time to time to see whether any new defence leagues exist]
British Defence Leagues
English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish Defence Leagues


Our Sikh support is growing
This is what Sikhs are saying to us......

Good to hear from you.

I do not represent an organisation or have any power to gather groups of Sikhs and Hindus at the moment - but am in touch with a few like-minded Sikhs and Hindus who agree with your organisation.

You may have heard that some Sikhs and Hindus even have started to support and liaise with the BNP - but this always done undercover and with total anonymity.

I think many of us in the Sikh and Hindu community are still a little afraid of media perceptions and reactions from our own communities if they did stand with you guys in public against Islamic extremism - even though we whole-heartedly agree with your stand and indeed had to live under minority Islamic Extremist rule in India for over 600 years (Until the Sikhs through guerrilla warfare were able to defeat the Muslims in India in the late 1700s - and stop the forced conversions taking place in India at this time).

I will pass the word that you guys are coming to Harrow on the 29th - in an attempt to get a possible separate but similar demonstration of like -minded Hindus / Sikhs to protest about the same issue - but I do not think I will be holding my breath - since many in our community only seem to react when they are physically attacked or in the aftermath of an atrocity committed against the community.

In my humble and personal opinion I would suggest that in order to get the media to appreciate the fact that your organisation is multi racial and includes black and mixed race members - these Black members are in prominent positions towards the front of the crowd - so that any media photos / films clearly shows that both Black and White are uniting against Islamic extremism.
Below is a link to a tape made by the BNP a few years back with a Sikh and a Hindu - which highlights and discusses various verses in the Muslim holy book (The Quran) - that incite Muslims to commit murder and harm to non-believers.

Another link below also discusses various verses form ther Quran - and highlights the fact that various verses in that book actually proves that this is the greatest threat to World peace at the moment.

Any Sikhs wanting more info about joining . . .

[end of quote]

[Last I checked this is a dead link. You can check at from time to time to see whether any new defence leagues exist]

September 7, 2009
English Defence League supporters and Moslems clash
Birmingham Moslems told to confront peaceful protest against extremists
Full article: Moslems urged to confront protest

Monday, August 10, 2009

IS Islam different from Every other World-View System?

Yes, Islam IS different!

Posted by Dharmaveer at

I am tired of people who know nothing about any religion state, almost as a self-evident axiom, that "All religions are the same." No they're not!

Islam is VERY different from Hindu Dharma. Let's talk statistics for a while, shall we? Can you guys guess what percentage of the verses in the Kuran speak of Kafirs? 63%! In other words, more than half the Kuran is simply hate speech about Kafirs. More than half! There is not one good thing Muhammad had to say about Kafirs. The Sira (his biography and collection of quotes and anecdotes) is more than 85% about his battles with Kafirs.

Islam IS about Kafirs. Get that right - Islam as a religion is about one topic alone - Kafirs. And we are all Kafirs. Yes, that's right. We are what Islam is about. The only problem is that Islam does not say "Love these guys." It says "hate them, kill them, behead them, humiliate them, "subdue" them, make them pay taxes, convert them..." Islam is all about "them" - the "them" being us Kafirs.

Islam is not a religion that focuses on itself and its people. It focuses on Kafirs. Isn't that strange - that a religion should focus not on itself but on those who are not in it? Islam is all about "the evil others - the Kafirs." The Kafirs who allowed Muhammad to do his thing when they could have killed him. But they showed great tolerance and let him mock and abuse them. But when he became powerful, he simply killed them or forcibly converted them to Islam.

Read the Upanishads (which form the spiritual core of Hindu Dharma). They don't even talk about "us" or "them." They simply discuss how the Atman (roughly translated to 'soul') is related to the unity underlying all creation (called the 'brahman'). There is absolutely no sectarian language there. No wonder Hindus, to this day, are unable to fully fathom this hateful ideology called Islam.

The Kuran is a manual of hatred and violence which seeks to divide humanity into "muslims" and "kafirs" and recommends permanent warfare between them. No wonder muslims are unable to live peacefully with any other community, anywhere. Because their religion only speaks of cultivating hatred towards others.

The world must no longer keep silent about this ideology. We must call it for what it is. Enough of the political correctness. Enough of the deafening silence. Islam declared war on us 1400 years ago. It is time we at least asked "Why?" Why are you killing us? What have we done? Just because an arab man 1400 years ago said you must kill us? Is that reason enough to abandon all humanity, all rationality?

Saturday, July 18, 2009

Secularism, Communalism, and Pakistan

Friday, June 5, 2009
The Original Lawyer's Movement
By Supna Zaidi

"Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state."

If we polled Pakistanis today, what are the odds that anyone polled would be able to recognize that the above quote came from their nation's founder, Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Secularism in the Muslim world has evolved into a dirty word, indicative not of "individual conscious", but selfish dictatorship. Religious parties across the region realize that the people are taken care of by their governments and so, selfishly make a grab for power by offering what civil society fails to. Take Egypt for example, the Muslim Brotherhood has sought to indoctrinate Egyptians into its militant anti-colonial Islamist rhetoric by operating hospitals, schools and other charities.

In Pakistan, the greatest void is in the area of education. In a country where the majority of its budget is reserved for the military, countless children (and now adults) remain illiterate and uneducated for decades. Foreign money, mostly Saudi filled the gap with Islamist madrassas that indoctrinated the youth with the same militant anti-colonial rhetoric that the Muslim Brotherhood prescribe in the Arab world.

Today, democratic institutions are not overthrown by Islamists, but undermined through the system. Arguing falsely that secularism is anti-religion, and anti-Muslim, Islamists are pushing for a paradigm shift in the Muslim world toward Islamism that never found success in Pakistan.
Minus the period of Islamic history ending with four "rightly guided caliphs", Muslims always gave lip service to their adherence to Sharia, but never lived under governmental and societal systems that were founded on it. Rather, institutions varied from Byzantine, Mongol to latter European adaptations. The severity of a life under complete Sharia was romanticized, but never realized. Even in post British India, the Khilafate movement stirred emotions, but never a majority following. Jinnah was a secular constitutionalist who married a Parsi, and whose daughter later married a Parsi.

The most critical mistake Jinnah made was concede "Islamic" in the name of Pakistan to quiet the religious clerics. Thus, the "Islamic nation of Pakistan" was born, and the subsequent identity politics it fostered continues today. But, without any quality education for the masses, the majority of Pakistanis do not even know the history of the subcontinent up till partition and the goals of its founder. Yet, they know Islam. Or think they do. Pakistani human rights activist, Asma Jahangir quipped that she found it amazing (in a negative way) that her children, upon a visit to India, realized that she had Hindu friends. But, unfortunately, they feel very confident in enforcing their Wahhabi inspired fanaticism.

Last month, I heard about a poor girl in Lahore who went to a tailor shop to get some clothes mended. She was wearing a sleeveless top and wore no headscarf. As of today, the hijab is still not the norm in Pakistan. A fourteen year old boy with a hot iron burned her on one of her bare arms for "not dressing modestly" and ran off. The tailor watched silently as the girl wailed for someone to do something. The tailor's sad response went a little like this, "If I retaliated against the boy, he and all his friend's would burn down my shop at night."

This is the law and order situation in Pakistan today. Pakistanis are either confident Islamists, or stuttering cowards who are too afraid to get involved. As of the "2008 elections, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), an alliance of religious parties that ruled the NWFP from 2002-07,won 10 of 100 seats in the NWFP Legislature. In Sindh province, religious parties failed to get even one of 130 seats, while in Baluchistan, the alliance took seven of 51 seats, and in Punjab, one seat out of 297."

But with Islamists gaining influence within the Obama administration, and Secretary Gates inviting Saudi Arabia to "help" Pakistan negotiate with the Taliban, religious parties just might seem reasonable to Pakistanis who never would have thought so before.

A history lesson would do Pakistanis good. The original lawyer's movement did not begin post-Musharaff, but with its own founder.

(Supna Zaidi is assistant director of Islamist Watch, a project at the Middle East Forum and editor of Muslim World Today.)

Member of the Internet Link Exchange

Front Page Editorials South Asia Media Arab Media Focus Archives Subscribe to Muslim World Today Advertise on Muslim World Today

Copyright © 2009 Muslim World Today

Sunday, June 28, 2009

The Hindu-Killers of Kandahar

From How 'Gandhara' became 'Kandahar'

'Kandahar', made infamous by the Taliban. The earlier name of the city was 'Quandhar', derived from the name of the region of Gandhara. Erstwhile home to Al-Qaeda today, it was always a strategic site, being on main Persian routes to Central Asia and India. Hence, it has a long history of conquests. Kandahar was taken by Alexander in 329 B.C.E., was surrendered by the Greek to Chandragupta in 305 B.C.E., and is dignified by a rock inscription of Asoka. It fell under Arab rule in the 7th century C.E., and under the Ghaznavids in the 10th. Kandahar was destroyed by Genghis Khan and again by the Turkic conqueror Timur, after which it was held by the Mughals. Mughal Emperor Babur built 40 giant steps up a hill, cut out of the solid limestone, leading to inscriptions recording details of his proud conquests. In 1747 it became the first capital of a unified Afghanistan.


Gandhara was the trade crossroad and cultural meeting place between India, Central Asia, and the Middle East. Buddhist writings mention Gandhara (which included Peshawar, Swat and Kabul Valleys) as one of the 16 major states of northern India at the time. It was a province of the Persian king Darius I in the fifth century B.C.E. After conquering it in the 4th century B.C.E., Alexander encountered the vast army of the Nandas in the Punjab, and his soldiers mutinied causing him to leave India.


[Killing Hindus for "Allah"]

Genocide Part 1: The Conquest of Sind

. . . Asia's civilization, changed forever with the bloody plunder of Sind by the Arabs starting in the 7th century:

“In 653-4, …a force of 6000 Arabs penetrated… To the shrine of Zun. The general broke off a hand from the idol and plucked out the rubies which were its eyes… The Arabs were now able to mount frequent plunder and slave expeditions as far as Ghazna, Kabul and Bamiyan… Arab raiding continued and was aimed at exacting tribute, plunder and slaves …Slaves and beasts remained the principal booty of the raids, and these were sent to the caliphate court in a steady stream.”10

Andre Wink describes that this aspiration to conquer India had existed since the time of the Prophet, as is evidenced by the sacred texts:

“… in the hadith collections the prophet Muhammad himself is credited with the aspiration of conquering India. Participants in the holy war against al-Hind [the Hindus] are promised to be saved from hell-fire… Thus also an eschatological work which is called the Kitab al-Fitan ('Book of Trials') credits Muhammad with saying that God will forgive the sins of the members of the Muslim army which will attack al-Hind, and give them victory.”11

The plunder was also achieved by an ingenious system of leaving the prosperous population alone, so that they would continue to bring donations to the temples, and then the Muslims would loot these temples. In order to save their temple from destruction, many Hindu warriors refused to fight:

“An even greater part of the revenue of these rulers was derived from the gifts donated by pilgrims who came from all over Sind and Hind to the great idol (sanam) of the sun-temple at Multan… When Muhammad al-Qasim* conquered Multan, he quickly discovered that it was this temple which was one of the main reasons for the great wealth of the town. He 'made captives of the custodians of the budd, numbering 6000' and confiscated its wealth, but not the idol itself – which was made of wood, covered with red leather and two red rubies for its eyes and wearing a crown of gold inlaid with gems --, 'thinking it best to leave the idol where it was, but hanging a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery'. AI-Qasim built his mosque in the same place, in the most crowded bazaar in the center of the town. The possession of the sun-temple -- rather than the mosque -- is what in later times the geographers see as the reason why the local governors or rulers could hold out against the neighboring Hindu powers. Whenever an 'infidel king' marched against Multan and the Muslims found it difficult to offer adequate resistance, they threatened to break the idol or mutilate it, and this, allegedly, made the enemy withdraw. In the late tenth century however the Isma'ilis who occupied Multan broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests. A new mosque was then erected on its site…”12

Genocide Part 2: Mahmud of Ghazni

The founder of the Ghaznavid dynasty was a former Turkish slave, recognized by the Iranian Muslims as governor of Ghazni (a town near Kandahar). His son Mahmud (ruled in 998-1030) expanded the empire further into India. A devout Muslim, Mahmud converted the Ghaznavids into Islam, thus bringing Islam into the sub-continent's local population. In the 11th century, he made Ghazni the capital of the vast empire of the Ghaznavids, Afghanistan's first Muslim dynasty. The atrocities by Mahmud of Ghazni makes the Taliban look benign by comparison. Will Durant explains:13

“The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within… For four hundred years (600-1000 A.D.) India invited conquest; and at last it came.”

“In the year 997 a Turkish chieftain by the name of Mahmud became sultan of the little state of Ghazni, in eastern Afghanistan. Mahmud knew that his throne was young and poor, and saw that India, across the border, was old and rich; the conclusion was obvious. Pretending a holy zeal for destroying Hindu idolatry across the frontier with a force inspired by a pious aspiration for booty. He met the unprepared Hindus at Bhimnagar, slaughtered them, pillaged their cities, destroyed their temples, and carried away the accumulated treasures of centuries. Returning to Ghazni he astonished the ambassadors of foreign powers by displaying “jewels and un-bored pearls and rubies shinning like sparks, or like wine congealed with ice, and emeralds like fresh sprigs of myrtle, and diamonds in size and weight like pomegranates.””

“Each winter Mahmud descended into India, filled his treasure chest with spoils, and amused his men with full freedom to pillage and kill; each spring he returned to his capital richer than before. At Mathura (on the Jumna) he took from the temple its statues of gold encrusted with precious stones, and emptied it coffers of a vast quantity of gold, silver and jewelry; he expressed his admiration for the architecture of the great shrine, judged that its duplication would cost one hundred million dinars and the labor of two hundred years, and then ordered it to be soaked with naptha and burnt to the ground. Six years later he sacked another opulent city of northern India, Somnath, killed all its fifty thousand inhabitants, and dragged its wealth to Ghazni. In the end he became, perhaps, the richest king that history has ever known.”

“Sometimes he spared the population of the ravaged cities, and took them home to be sold as slaves; but so great was the number of such captives that after some years no one could be found to offer more than a few schillings for a slave. Before every important engagement Mahmud knelt in prayer, and asked the blessing of God upon his arms. He reigned for a third of a century; and when he died, full of years and honors, Moslem historians ranked him greatest monarch of his time, and one of the greatest sovereigns of any age.”

Genocide Part 3: Post-Ghazni Invaders.

Mahmud of Ghazni set the stage for other Muslim invaders in their orgy of plunder and brutality, as Will Durant explains: 14

“In 1186 the Ghuri, a Turkish tribe of Afghanistan invaded India, captured the city of Delhi destroyed its temples, confiscated its wealth, and settled down in its palaces to establish the Sultanate of Delhi -- an alien despotism fastened upon northern India for three centuries, and checked only by assassination and revolt. The first of these bloody sultans, Kutb-d Din Aibak, was a normal specimen of his kind -- fanatical, ferocious and merciless. His gifts as the Mohammedan historian tells us, “were bestowed by hundreds of thousands and his slaughters likewise were by hundreds of thousands.” In one victory of this warrior (who had been purchased as a slave), “fifty thousand men came under the collar of slavery, and the plain became black as pitch with Hindus.””

“Another sultan, Balban, punished rebels and brigands by casting them under the feet of elephants, or removing their skins, stuffing these with straw, and hanging them from the gates of Delhi.”

“When some Mongol inhabitants who had settled in Delhi, and had been converted to Islam, attempted a rising, Sultan Alau-d-din (the conquerer of Chitor) had all the males -- from fifteen to thirty thousand of them -- slaughtered in one day.”

“Sultan Muhammad bin Tughlak acquired the throne by murdering his father, became a great scholar and an elegant writer, dabbled in mathematics, physics and Greek philosophy, surpassed his predecessors in bloodshed and brutality, fed the flesh of a rebel nephew to the rebel's wife and children, ruined the country with reckless inflation, and laid it waste with pillage and murder till the inhabitants fled to the jungle. He killed so many Hindus that, in the words of a Moslem historian, “there was constantly in front of his royal pavilion and his Civil Court a mound of dead bodies and a heap of corpses, while the sweepers and executioners were weaned out by their work of dragging” the victims “and putting them to death in crowds.” In order to found a new capital at Daulatabad he drove every inhabitant from Delhi and left it a desert…."”

“Firoz Shah invaded Bengal, offered a reward for every Hindu head, paid for 180,000 of them, raided Hindu villages for slaves, and died at the ripe age or eighty. Sultan Ahmad Shah feasted for three days whenever the number of defenseless Hindus slain in his territories in one day reached twenty thousand.”

“These rulers… were armed with a religion militaristic in operation… [and made] the public exercise of the Hindu religions illegal, and thereby driving them more deeply into the Hindu soul. Some of these thirsty despots had culture as well as ability; they patronized the arts, and engaged artists and artisans -- usually of Hindu origin -- to build for them magnificent mosques and tombs: some of them were scholars, and delighted in converse historians, poets and scientists.”

“The Sultans drew from the people every rupee of tribute that could be exacted by the ancient art of taxation, as well as by straight-forward robbery…”

“The usual policy of the Sultans was clearly sketched by Alau-d-din, who required his advisers to draw up "rules and regulations for grinding down the Hindus, and for depriving them of that wealth and property which fosters disaffection and rebellion." Half of the gross produce of the soil was collected by the government; native rulers had taken one-sixth. “No Hindu,” says a Moslem historian, “could hold up his head, and in their houses no sign of gold or silver… or of any superfluity was to be seen… Blows, confinement in the stocks, imprisonment and chains, were all employed to enforce payment.”"

“…Timur-i-lang -- a Turk who had accepted Islam as an admirable weapon… feeling the need of more gold, it dawned upon him that India was still full of infidels… Mullahs learned in the Koran decided the matter by quoting an inspiring verse: “Oh Prophet, make war upon infidels and unbelievers, and treat them with severity.” Thereupon, Timur crossed the Indus in 1398, massacred or enslaved such of the inhabitants as could not flee from him, defeated the forces of Sultan Mahmud Tughlak, occupied Delhi, slew a hundred thousand prisoners in cold blood, plundered the city of all the wealth that the Afghan dynasty had gathered there, and carried it off to Samarkand with multitude of women and slaves, leaving anarchy, famine and pestilence in his wake,”

“This is the secret of the political history of modern India. Weakened by division, it succumbed to invaders; impoverished by invaders, it lost all power of resistance, and took refuge in supernatural consolations… The bitter lesson that may be drawn from this tragedy is that eternal vigilance is the price of civilization. A nation must love peace, but keep its powder dry.”

During these genocides for centuries, a certain portion of the fleeing Hindus reached Europe. Today's Roma people of Europe (popularly called the 'gypsies', a term that they regard as a pejorative) are of Indian origin and have lived as wanderers in Europe for nearly a thousand years. It is believed that they originated in Northwest India, in a region including Gandhara, Punjab, and Rajasthan. In Europe, they survived by being musicians and performers, because European society did not assimilate them even after a thousand years. They have accepted their plight as street people without a 'home' as such. Their history in Europe is filled with attempts to eradicate them in various ways.15 (There is much justified criticism of India's caste system as a way by which diverse ethnicities dealt with each other. However, I have yet to see a comparison with the fact that Europeans dealt with non-European ethnicities using genocide (as in America), or by attempted genocide as in the case of the Roma.)

These are excerpts--read the whole thing at

* How Islam came to India and why now it needs to go from India -2
This reference relates how Muhammad al-Qasim was recalled by the Caliph:

Muhammad bin Qasim remained in Sind for a little over three years after which Islamic chroniclers say he was suddenly recalled and summarily executed, probably by being sewn in an animal hide and then pierced with iron nails, on the charge of deflowering two Sindhi princesses meant for the bed of the Caliph. [The overzealous among Muslim ranks can remember the other famous instances such as the early Islamic commanders in Spain. It is also interesting to note that the story comes from Islamic pens, which explicitly describes how the Caliph, the supposed spiritual leader of all Islam is murderously concerned about the virginity of maidens he wants to bed himself - an indication of the generic insecurity of Islam's roots whose core religious texts show an overwhelming concern with womens' sexual purity and the predilection towards consummating marriages with child-brides]

After Qasim’s departure the Arab power in Sind declined rapidly with a majority of the newly converted returned back to their former religions. According to Denison Ross after the recall of Muhammad bin Qasim, the Muslims retained some foothold on the west bank of the river Indus, but they were in such small number that they gradually merged into Hindu population. In Mansura (the Muslim capital of Sind) they actually adopted Hinduism

Another version has it

circa 731 A.D. when Mohammed Bin Kasim (Muhammad al-Qasim) attacked Chittor. Bappa Rawal defeated the Arabs and drove them out of the country.

Bappa Rawal played an important role in the Battle of Rajasthan, a series of wars fought in the 8th century AD between the regional rulers of North-Western India and the Arabs of Sindh, where the latters had a sounding defeat.In order to face of Muslim invasions across the western borders of Rajputana, Bappa united the smaller states of Ajmer and Jaisalmer to repel the invaders. During the next 800 years, Chittor becomes the symbol of Hindu resistance in western India.

Besides being a brave warrior who lead his army to great victories, Bappa Rawal was also known to be a just ruler. After having ruled his kingdom for a long time he abdicated the throne in favour of his son he himself turned into Siva upasaka ( worshiper of Shiva ) and became a Yati ( an ascetic who has full control over his passions ).

Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan; or the Central and Western Rajput States (Hardcover) by James Tod. Edited by William Crooke. 3 volumes, hardcover. Publisher: Trans-Atl (1994) ISBN 81-7069-128-1
Guru Gorkhanath had a Rajput Prince-disciple, the legendary Bappa Rawal, born Prince Kalbhoj/Prince Shailadhish, founder of the Royal house of Mewar, who became the first Gurkha (Gorkha The word Gorkha is derived from the prakrit words "go rakkha" (Sanskrit gau-rakṣa, literally "cow-protector"). This was used by Guru Gorakhnath, the spiritual leader of the Gorkhas, the name given to his disciples. ) and is said to be the ancestor of the present Royal family of Nepal. Bappa Rawal, became a disciple of warrior-saint Guru Gorakhnath Later descendants of Bappa Rawal moved further east to found the house of Gorkha, which in turn founded the Kingdom of Nepal. Gorkha is one of the 75 districts of modern Nepal.

[edit] See also
List of Rajputs
Jay Chittod - A Gujarati novel exploring lifespan and works of Bappa Rawal
The Gorkha war cry is "Jai Mahakali, Ayo Gorkhali" which literally translates to "Glory be to the Goddess of War, here come the Gorkhas!"
Retrieved from ""

Bappa Rawal had an arrogant streak, and the nobles didn’t see eye to eye with him. So they decided to desert him and form their own fiefs. But that was not to be, for now invaders appeared from Afghanistan, forcing the Rajputs to ally themselves to retain their lands and their honour. Who exactly was the commander of the Afghan army is a bit mysterious, but in the battle he was certainly defeated. Driven by this victory Bappa Rawal proceeded to his old home in Gajni and overthrew Salim, the Muslim ruler. This went down very well with the nobles who were disgruntled earlier and they lent Bappa their support in taking Chittor from the Mori ruler.

The legend states that Bappa Rawal was a teenager in hiding, when he came upon the warrior saint while on a hunting expedition with friends in the jungles of Rajasthan. Bappa Rawal chose to stay behind, and care for the warrior saint, who was in deep meditation. When Guru Gorkhanath awoke, he was pleased with the devotion of Bappa Rawal. The Guru gave him the Kukri (Khukuri) knife, the famous curved blade of the present day Gurkhas.[6] The legend continues that he told Bappa that he and his people would henceforth be called Gurkhas, the disciples of the Guru Gorkhanath, and their bravery would become world famous. He then instructed Bappa Rawal, and his Gorkhas to stop the advance of the Muslims, who were invading Afghanistan (which at that time was a Hindu/Buddhist nation). Bappa Rawal took his Gurkhas and liberated Afghanistan – originally named Gandhara, from which the present day Kandahar derives its name. He and his Gorkhas stopped the initial Islamic advance of the 8th century in the Indian subcontinent.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Heroes of India – Hind ki Chador: Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji

Heroes of India – Hind ki Chador: Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji
click on above for original website
Human Rights Abuses


Islam conquered many countries in a very short period of time. Most of the great nations and civilizations that came under Islamic rule end up being Muslim nations such as Persia, Egypt and Mesopotamia. India was something new in the history of Islam’s territorial expansion. For the first time, the majority of the conquered population did not convert to Islam. How come this happened in spite of the fact that majority of the country was being ruled by Muslim rulers for 800 years? Many people give different reasons for this. Many Pakistani Muslims love to claim that this was due to the tolerance of Muslim rulers who practiced secularism. This is a false claim. Muslim rulers tried every possible way to erase Hinduism from Indian scene. The only reason the majority of India did not convert is the dedication of the Indian men, women and even children towards their faith and honour of their country. The greatness of Indian civilization lied in its strong emphasis on religious freedom and even attaining martyrdom to preserve it. Many Indian men and women chose to die over giving up their faith or being dishonoured by the enemy.

Following is the story of Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji, the ninth Guru of the Sikhism, who gave up his life in order to preserve Hinduism in India. He was given the title of ‘Hind ki Chador’ (Shield of India) by people of India for his great sacrifice to preserve their religion and culture.

During the reign of Muslim Emperor Aurangzeb in India, Hindus, Sikhs and Sufis were subjected to many atrocities and discrimination. In 1675 CE, the Delhi’s emperor cherished the ambition to convert entire India into Islam. Aurangzeb decided to begin his evil mission from the beautiful Kashmir, as Kashmiri Hindus were known to be the most highly learned and orthodox of the Hindu leadership. Hindus Kashmiris were known as Pundits, which means scholars or learnt people. Aurangzeb felt that if they could be converted the entire Hindu India will easily follow them. Therefore, he placed the orders on the Governor of Kashmir, Iftikhar Khan to carry out the policy to convert all the non Muslims by force. Iftikhar Khan gave an ultimatum to Hindus of Kashmir, embrace Islam or die.

Given the ultimatum, a large delegation of 500 Kashmiri Pundits decided to go to Anandpur Sahib (a city in Northern India) to seek the help of Guru Tegh Bahadur. This delegation was led by Pundit Kirpa Ram Dutt, who eventually joined the Sikh Army later in his life and became a martyr. The Pundits met the Guru and explained to him their dire predicament to the Guru and requested him to find a solution to their problem. As the Guru was pondering over this issue his ten year old son Gobind Rai walked into the room. He noticed the gloomy mood of his father and thus began the famous conversation between a father and his son which changed the future of India.

Gobind Rai: ‘Guruji, I see the acutely sad faces of the Sangat (Congregation) and you are silent in a deep thought. What is the problem?’

Guru Tegh Bahadur: ‘Son, this is a Sangat from Kashmir. The emperor Aurangzeb has given them ultimatum, of a choice between Islam and death. Unless a holy man lies down his head for the sake of these Hindus, there is no hope for their escape from imperial tyranny.’

Gobind Rai: ‘For that great sacrifice, O Father, who can be worthier than you?’

Pundits were delighted that a solution was found and duly informed Emperor Aurangzeb of their decision. They told the Emperor, that Guru Tegh Bahadur is our leader and guide, first make him a Muslim and then we shall follow. Therefore, Aurangzeb ordered his officers to arrest the Guru and bring him to Delhi. On 27th July, 1675 CE Guru was arrested along with his three companions, Bhai Mati Das, Bhai Sati Das and Bhai Dyal Das. Guru and his companions were tortured. Guru himself was chained and was kept in a cage. In order to terrorize him further into submission, his companions were tortured to death. The Qazi (Muslim priest) told Bhai Mati Das to embrace Islam “Brother, embrace Islam and enjoy the pleasures provided by the government. Moreover when you die as a Muslim, you will go to heaven where there will be streams of milk, many kinds of wine to drink and beautiful women to enjoy. If you do not embrace Islam, your body will be sewn into two.” Bhai Mati Dass replied, “I can sacrifice hundreds of such heavens for my faith. I don’t need women or wine. I see all the happiness in the path of my faith.” After his refusal, by the order of the Qazis, the executioners sawed Bhai Mati Das in two on the 8th November, 1675 CE. On the 9th of November, Bhai Dayal Das was boiled alive. On the 10th November, Bhai Sati Das was wrapped in cotton wool and was burnt alive.

Finally, on 11TH November, 1675 CE, the Guru himself was taken into the famous public spot, the Chandni Chowk of Delhi. Under imperial charge that he was preventing the spread of Islam in India, he was beheaded.

In this carnage, India saw the rise of a new nation of heroes. The martyrdom of Guru and his companions evoked the conscience of India. It was realized that there could be no understanding between brutal imperial power and a proud people wedded to a life with peace with honour. The sacrifice roused the Hindus, Sikhs and even Sufi Muslims from their passive silence and gave them the fortitude to understand the power that comes from self respect and sacrifice. In order to honour the Guru, they gave him the title of Hind ki Chador, Shield of India.

Following is a verse of poetry written by Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji in Punjabi.

Bah Jinahn di pakariye / Give up your head
Sar dije bah na chhoriye / but forsake not those whom you have undertaken to protect.
Tegh Bahadur bolya / Says Tegh Bahadur, sacrifice your life, but
Dhar payae dharma na chhoriye / relinquish not your faith

Jai Hind!

written by Ananta - The Infinity

2 Responses to “Heroes of India – Hind ki Chador: Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji”

1. a_comment Says:

June 16th, 2009 at 8:19 am
I bow my head in reverence to the Sikh Gurus.
Let me add this, initially the 10th Guru, Guru Govind Singhji asked only for the eldest son of the family to be given to the panth for the protection of Hindus. Only the eldest son carried the 5 symbols of Sikhism at that time. This eldest son in turn was supposed to give only his eldest son upon reaching maturity and so on. These Sikhs were normal Hindus following a saintly tradition started by Guru Nanakji. No wonder you can find Ram’s name 100s of time in the “Guru Granth Sahib” the holy book of Sikhs.

2. kenmirzz Says:

June 16th, 2009 at 8:43 am

Nice article.

I heard that Sikhism is a mixture of Hinduism and Sufistic Islam, is this true?

I read about the mughal emporer compelling Teg Bahadur to accept islam but the latter refused and then was executed. When i read this story around 15 years ago, i was yet a muslim and did not see the biasness and prejudice exercised by the conquerer.

This prove the myth of peaceful Islam, the religion never was a tolerant one.

Humanity is but one family.


Sunday, June 21, 2009

Pakistan: the Army wants presidency and money

Bahman Aghai Diba, PhD International Law - Persian Journal

The victory of Pakistani Taliban to capture an area not far from the capital of Pakistan has alarmed many sources including the USA. The alarm however is not limited to the West; the regional countries are all worried. At the same time what is happening in Pakistan is not at all transparent. The whole issue of recent victories of Taliban is a scene of theater written, orchestrated and played by the Pakistani army and intelligence forces for getting the political power and money. Taliban are product of Pakistani Army and intelligence service and they are not able to take one step without the orders from the masters in the Pakistani army and intelligence apparatus.

The Pakistani army and intelligence services want to get the post of presidency back and also they want the US and other continue to pay money to them in order to pretend that they are fighting Taliban. Taliban have captured the new area under the order from the army and security forces. The powerful Pakistani army and security forces also very well capable of crushing the ragtag army of Taliban in a blink of eye if there are elements among the Taliban that have not got the message.

The Pakistani army and intelligence apparatus do not see Taliban as threat. They are allies of Pakistan in Afghanistan, India and other places. The Taliban terrorists and their allies (Al-Qaida) after all have succeeded to do many things that the Pakistani army has failed to do in India and especially Kashmir. So the army wants to pretend that it is involved in a "manly" and real war with the old enemy i.e. India ( After all they have fought and failed several times and have been defeated and humiliated by the Indians time and again) and they have not time to attend such trivial matters as Taliban getting a piece of land.

Pakistani army and security services are using Pakistani Taliban as tools for bribing the people of Pakistan whose majority have no sympathy for the Taliban. In this level, they want to push the people to beg the army to take the control and save the country from the Taliban savages.

The Pakistani army is also putting the pressure on the West to pay the money and provide it arms to fight the Taliban who are so powerful that can get the capital with another military operation and therefore control the nuclear weapons.

They must be reminded of the consequences of such dangerous games. They must learn how Mullahs of Iran deceived and misused the Iranians, including their army during the so-called Islamic Revolution in Iran.

Bahman Aghai Diba, Washington based Iran analyst, is a former Iranian diplomat and currently a consultant to the World Resources Company

[first published on] May 4, 2009

Top of Page
Page One > Articles

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Islamic Terrorism in India

Islamic Terrorism in India
Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims — Islamic terrorists have carried out more than 12,000 deadly attacks since 9/11/
About Islam
Top Clicks……………………
1. Must Read Articles
- I did not speak out (On Islamic Terrorism)
–(1)–The March of Islam - from 1% to 100%: How Islam strangles liberal societies
–(2)– India: Islam’s other victim
–(3)– The Magnitude of Muslim Atrocities in India
–(3)–The saga of Islamic atrocities in Ahmedabad
–(4)–Destruction of Hindu Temples by Aurangzeb from Islamic sources
–(5)–Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims
–(6)–Godhra carnage vs pundits exodus
–(7)–How ‘Gandhara’ became ‘Kandahar’
–(8)–How to be an intellectual in India?
–(9)–Prophet Muhammad on holy war against India (al-hind)
–The myth and truth of Godhra
2. Islamic Aggression Websites/Blogs
Daniel Pipes
Faith Freedom
Gujarat Riots — Busting the 12 myths
Kashmir Information Network
3. Christian Aggression Websites/Blogs
Christian Aggression in India
Christian Conversion Agenda in India
Christian Watch India
5. Naxalite/Marxist Watch
Naxalite Watch
7. Other Recommended Websites/Blogs
Offstumped National Interest
Shadow Warrior
Vivekajyoti Blog
Voice of Dharma
8. Nationalist/Hindu News
Hindu Jagruti
Sarve Samachar
The Pioneer
Pseudo secularism
All About Pseudo Secularism In India
Recent Comments
jagoindia on Muslim villages in Kerala fly …
Deepesh on Online Muslim jihadists congra…
Nishant Singh on Muslim villages in Kerala fly …
Jagannath on MY RESPONSE: Why Hindus are an…
Tahir on Zakir Naik’s Influence l…
adil ahmed on Prophet Muhammad on Holy War A…

Lashkar-e-Toiba Prep… on Online Muslim jihadists congra…
sarika yadav on About Islam
sarika yadav on About Islam
amit on The Greater Bangladesh Dr…
Tariq on MY RESPONSE: Why Hindus are an…

MB on The Islamic siege of Indi…
Eye's Wide Open on UK Muslim preacher Anjem Choud…
jagoindia on About Islam
AR on Standard Pakistani response te…
December 2008 (49)
November 2008 (90)
October 2008 (106)
September 2008 (134)
August 2008 (183)
July 2008 (110)
June 2008 (90)
May 2008 (111)
April 2008 (46)
March 2008 (1)
January 2008 (1)
December 2007 (3)
November 2007 (13)
October 2007 (6)
Blog Stats
198,050 hits
Afghanistan (23)
Ahmadiya (1)
Akshardham (1)
Al taqiyya (7)
Al-Qaeda (9)
Anti Terrorism Squad (3)
Appeasement (40)
Arabs (7)
Aurangzeb (1)
Australia (2)
Ayatollah Khomeini (2)
Babri Masjid (3)
Bali (3)
Bangladesh (66)
BJP (4)
Bollywood (3)
Britain (16)
Buddhists (1)
CAIR (4)
Canada (1)
Charity (2)
Chennai (2)
China (3)
Christianity (12)
Cow slaughter (1)
Dawood Ibrahim (3)
delusion (4)
Denial (4)
Deoband (4)
Discrimination (1)
Egypt (1)
Europe (10)
Fatwa (9)
Financial terrorism (21)
Grievances (8)
Gulf (1)
Haj (7)
Hamas (1)
Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (2)
Himachal Pradesh (1)
Hindu Festival (1)
Hindu fundametalists (1)
Hindu terror (3)
Hindus (125)
Hindutva (7)
home grown terrorists (26)
HUJI (24)
Humor (2)
Hurriyat (1)
Independence Movement (1)
India (208)
Indian Mujahideen (53)
Indian Muslims (265)
Indonesia (3)
Intelligence Agencies (38)
Iran (4)
ISI (46)
Islam (265)
Islamization (22)
Islamofascism (602)
Islamophobia (1)
Israel (11)
JeM (4)
Jews (9)
Jihad (84)
Kabul (3)
kafirs (3)
Kashmir Pandits (9)
Khalistan (3)
kidnapping (1)
LeT (26)
M F Husain (1)
M.F. Husain (1)
Madarsas (1)
Madina verses (1)
Mahatma Gandhi (5)
Malaysia (6)
Maldives (1)
Mangalore (3)
Maoists/naxalites (6)
Marad (1)
Marxists/Communists (12)
Media (10)
Meerut (1)
Meghalaya (1)
Migrants (21)
Minorities (3)
Mob (2)
Moderate Muslims/Islam (8)
Modi (2)
Mosque (10)
Muhammad (10)
Muslim countries (7)
Muslim fantasy (1)
Muslim League (4)
Muslims (73)
Must read article (76)
National Development Front (1)
Nazism/Hitler (1)
Nepal (3)
Non-Muslims (17)
NRIs (2)
Pakistan (154)
Palestine (1)
Patriot Act (1)
Pilgrims (3)
police (5)
Pseudo secularism (21)
qattal (1)
Quran (22)
Rape (3)
Riots/clash (1)
Russia/Soviet Union (1)
Sachar Report (1)
Saudi Arabia (10)
Secularism (2)
Shaheen Force (3)
Sharia (8)
Sikhs (2)
SIMI (111)
Somalia (3)
South India (5)
Sri Aurobindo (1)
State (465)
Andhra Pradesh (26)
Hyderabad (18)
Assam (29)
Bihar (1)
Delhi (33)
Delhi (8)
Goa (6)
Gujarat (84)
Ahmedabad (58)
Godhra (8)
Gujarat riots - 2002 (4)
Surat (11)
Jammu (16)
Karnataka (39)
Bangalore (20)
Belgaum (4)
Kashmir (78)
Amarnath (15)
Kargil (2)
Kerala (35)
Malappuram (4)
Madhya Pradesh (6)
Maharashtra (76)
Mumbai (54)
Nagpur (1)
Pune (3)
Manipur (2)
Nagaland (1)
North East (5)
Orissa (2)
Punjab (3)
Rajasthan (29)
Bharatpur (1)
Jaipur (21)
Tamil Nadu (19)
Coimbatore (2)
Vellore (2)
Tripura (5)
Uttar Pradesh (34)
Azamgarh (7)
Varanasi (2)
West Bengal (24)
Kolkota (10)
Stupid Hindu (2)
Taliban (6)
Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam (4)
Temples (16)
Terrorism (584)
Thailand (1)
torture (1)
Tribals (4)
Turkey (1)
ULFA (1)
Uncategorized (183)
United States of America (44)
UPA (11)
Video (9)
wahhabi (1)
Waziristan (1)
West (3)
Women (13)
Zakir Naik (2)

Recent Posts
Online Muslim jihadists congratulate Lashkar-e-Toiba on Mumbai massacre, now target US, UK and Israel
Complete account of Mumbai terror by Ajmal Amir Qasab
Ajmal Amir Kasab:- I am Pakistani and a terrorist, I am the biggest sinner, I have killed so many innocent people, may God forgive me
UK Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary brands Christmas as evil, pathway to hellfire
Torture in the Arab world versus resort living in Guantanamo
Irfan Husain:- Everywhere I go, I am asked why Pakistan is focus of Islamic extremism and terrorism
Standard Pakistani response template - must read
No houses for Muslims: Surat real estate agents
India should take 12 steps to screw up Pakistan’s economy
Mumbai terror: Jews get killed, but Muslims feel vulnerable! — must read
Terrorist attacks in J & K increased from 7 in 1988 to 3,920 in 1992 due to LET
Pakistan to ban LeT front organisation Jamaat-ud-Dawa
Muslim cleric urges Obama to convert to Islam and be saved
Muslim villages in Kerala fly Pakistani flags
The Jihadi Massacre in Mumbai — India pays the price for Muslim appeasement
Top Posts
Ajmal Amir Kasab:- I am Pakistani and a terrorist, I am the biggest sinner, I have killed so many innocent people, may God forgive me
Online Muslim jihadists congratulate Lashkar-e-Toiba on Mumbai massacre, now target US, UK and Israel
Complete account of Mumbai terror by Ajmal Amir Qasab
No houses for Muslims: Surat real estate agents
Prophet Muhammad on Holy War Against Al-Hind (India)
UK Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary brands Christmas as evil, pathway to hellfire
About Islam
Standard Pakistani response template - must read
Explosive Muslim Population Growth Rate in India
Torture in the Arab world versus resort living in Guantanamo
Muslim villages in Kerala fly Pakistani flags
India should take 12 steps to screw up Pakistan's economy
Entries (RSS)
Comments (RSS)
Category Cloud
Ahmedabad Appeasement Assam Bangladesh Delhi Gujarat Hindus India Indian Mujahideen Indian Muslims Intelligence Agencies ISI Islam Islamofascism Jihad Karnataka Kashmir Kerala Maharashtra Mumbai Muslims Must read article Pakistan Rajasthan SIMI State Terrorism Uncategorized United States of America Uttar Pradesh

November 2008
« Oct

Dec »

« Serial bomb attacks from Muslim terrorists forces India’s youth to turn to terrorism insurance
Acid attack on Afghan girls blinds 1, hundreds of schoolgirls frightened to attend school »