Muslims in India (not for those who cant handle the truth)

__ruby · September 17th, 2004, 06:24 PM

The Muslims entered Sind, India, in 711 C.E., the same year they entered Spain. Their entry in India was prompted by an attempt to free the civilian Muslim hostages whose ship was taken by sea pirates in the territory of Raja Dahir, King of Sind. After diplomatic attempts failed, Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor in Baghdad, dispatched a 17-year-old commander by the name Muhammad bin Qasim with a small army. Muhammad bin Qasim defeated Raja Dahir at what is now Hyderabad in Pakistan. In pursuing the remnant of Dahir's army and his son?s supporters (Indian kings), Muhammad bin Qasim fought at Nirun, Rawar, Bahrore, Brahmanabad, Aror, Dipalpur and Multan. By 713 C.E., he established his control in Sind and parts of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir. A major part of what is now Pakistan came under Muslim control in 713 C.E. and remained so throughout the centuries until some years after the fall of the Mughal Empire in 1857.
Muhammad bin Qasim?s treatment of the Indian population was so just that when he was called back to Baghdad the civilians were greatly disheartened and gave him farewell in tears. There was a Muslim community in Malabar, southwest India as early as 618 C.E. as a result of King Chakrawati Farmas accepting Islam at the hands of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Muslim presence as rulers in India dates from 711 C.E. Since then, different Muslim rulers (Turks of Central Asia, Afghans, and the descendants of the Mongol - the Mughals) entered India, primarily fought their fellow Muslim rulers, and established their rule under various dynastic names. By the eleventh century, the Muslims had established their capital at Delhi, which remained the principal seat of power until the last ruler of Mughal Dynasty, Bahadur Shah Zafar, was deposed in 1857 by the British. A few British visitors were given permission by Akbar to stay in Eastern India more than two centuries before. The British abused that privilege, and within a few decades the British began to collaborate with Rajas and Nawabs in military expeditions against the Mughals and Muslim rulers of the east, southeast and south India. After two centuries of fighting, the British succeeded in abolishing the Mughal rule in 1857.

Muslims were a minority when they ruled major parts of India for nearly a thousand years. They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions. In their days as rulers, the Muslims constituted about twenty percent of India's population. Today, Indian Muslims constitute about fifteen percent of India's population, about 150 million, and they are the second largest Muslim community in the world.

The region now part of Pakistan and many other parts of India were predominantly Muslim. After the British takeover in 1857, many of these areas remained under loose control of Muslims. When the British decided to withdraw from India without a clear direction for the future of Muslims (former rulers), a political solution was reached for some of the Muslim majority areas. This resulted in the division of India and the creation of Pakistan in 1947.

Among the famous Muslims scientists, historians and travelers who visited and lived, though briefly, in India were Al-Biruni, Al-Masu'di, and Ibn Battuta. Their writings illuminate us with the Indian society and culture. Al-Biruni stayed in India for twenty years. Ibn Battuta, an Andalusian who was born in Morocco, served as a Magistrate of Delhi (1334-1341) during the reign of Sultan Muhammad Tughluk. It is conceivable that Ibn Battuta?s description of Muslim India inspired Ferdinand and Isabella who had taken over the last Muslim kingdom of Granada, Spain in 1492. That same year Columbus received the permission in the Alhambra palace (of Granada) and made his famous voyage bound for India in search of gold and spice but he landed in the Americas.

nestlecrunch · September 17th, 2004, 06:42 PM

LOL, good one.

cyberhacka · September 17th, 2004, 07:14 PM

muslims named bombay. it was recently renamed to mumbai because that fag indian president who cant even speak to a muslim is a racist fag. good thing he is not in power. and for everyone i am an indian muslim who absolutely hated vijpay.

**Tigr** · September 17th, 2004, 07:31 PM

Quote:

They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions.

Bullshit as far ...and respect for freedom to practice religion goes. Should I go into all the temples that were destroyed, Jizya, murder of Sikh gurus etc etc etc. just look at the Islamic countries right now....and these are liberal modern version of Islam.

**LAKERFAN8** · September 17th, 2004, 07:46 PM

Only Muslim emporer that is respected by Sikhs is Akhbar because of his religous and cultural toleration. Every other Mughal ruler was a prick. So ironic they are ancestors of Genghis Khan didnt learn from one of his great accomplishments, religous freedom.

ShivaChrist · September 17th, 2004, 08:22 PM

Wow, those guys did no wrong.

/sarcasm off.

gabroo_shakeen · September 17th, 2004, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAKERFAN8

Only Muslim emporer that is respected by Sikhs is Akhbar because of his religous and cultural toleration. Every other Mughal ruler was a prick. So ironic they are ancestors of Genghis Khan didnt learn from one of his great accomplishments, religous freedom.

True. Akbaar was the only non-racist mughal emperor. Akbaar and the Sikhs got along famously.

gabroo_shakeen · September 17th, 2004, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by __ruby

The Muslims entered Sind, India, in 711 C.E., the same year they entered Spain. Their entry in India was prompted by an attempt to free the civilian Muslim hostages whose ship was taken by sea pirates in the territory of Raja Dahir, King of Sind. After diplomatic attempts failed, Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor in Baghdad, dispatched a 17-year-old commander by the name Muhammad bin Qasim with a small army. Muhammad bin Qasim defeated Raja Dahir at what is now Hyderabad in Pakistan. In pursuing the remnant of Dahir's army and his son?s supporters (Indian kings), Muhammad bin Qasim fought at Nirun, Rawar, Bahrore, Brahmanabad, Aror, Dipalpur and Multan. By 713 C.E., he established his control in Sind and parts of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir. A major part of what is now Pakistan came under Muslim control in 713 C.E. and remained so throughout the centuries until some years after the fall of the Mughal Empire in 1857.
Muhammad bin Qasim?s treatment of the Indian population was so just that when he was called back to Baghdad the civilians were greatly disheartened and gave him farewell in tears. There was a Muslim community in Malabar, southwest India as early as 618 C.E. as a result of King Chakrawati Farmas accepting Islam at the hands of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Muslim presence as rulers in India dates from 711 C.E. Since then, different Muslim rulers (Turks of Central Asia, Afghans, and the descendants of the Mongol - the Mughals) entered India, primarily fought their fellow Muslim rulers, and established their rule under various dynastic names. By the eleventh century, the Muslims had established their capital at Delhi, which remained the principal seat of power until the last ruler of Mughal Dynasty, Bahadur Shah Zafar, was deposed in 1857 by the British. A few British visitors were given permission by Akbar to stay in Eastern India more than two centuries before. The British abused that privilege, and within a few decades the British began to collaborate with Rajas and Nawabs in military expeditions against the Mughals and Muslim rulers of the east, southeast and south India. After two centuries of fighting, the British succeeded in abolishing the Mughal rule in 1857.

Muslims were a minority when they ruled major parts of India for nearly a thousand years. They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions. In their days as rulers, the Muslims constituted about twenty percent of India's population. Today, Indian Muslims constitute about fifteen percent of India's population, about 150 million, and they are the second largest Muslim community in the world.

The region now part of Pakistan and many other parts of India were predominantly Muslim. After the British takeover in 1857, many of these areas remained under loose control of Muslims. When the British decided to withdraw from India without a clear direction for the future of Muslims (former rulers), a political solution was reached for some of the Muslim majority areas. This resulted in the division of India and the creation of Pakistan in 1947.

Among the famous Muslims scientists, historians and travelers who visited and lived, though briefly, in India were Al-Biruni, Al-Masu'di, and Ibn Battuta. Their writings illuminate us with the Indian society and culture. Al-Biruni stayed in India for twenty years. Ibn Battuta, an Andalusian who was born in Morocco, served as a Magistrate of Delhi (1334-1341) during the reign of Sultan Muhammad Tughluk. It is conceivable that Ibn Battuta?s description of Muslim India inspired Ferdinand and Isabella who had taken over the last Muslim kingdom of Granada, Spain in 1492. That same year Columbus received the permission in the Alhambra palace (of Granada) and made his famous voyage bound for India in search of gold and spice but he landed in the Americas.

I'm failing to see the point of this post.

**Cunard** · September 17th, 2004, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gabroo_shakeen

Quote:

Originally Posted by __ruby

The Muslims entered Sind, India, in 711 C.E., the same year they entered Spain. Their entry in India was prompted by an attempt to free the civilian Muslim hostages whose ship was taken by sea pirates in the territory of Raja Dahir, King of Sind. After diplomatic attempts failed, Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor in Baghdad, dispatched a 17-year-old commander by the name Muhammad bin Qasim with a small army. Muhammad bin Qasim defeated Raja Dahir at what is now Hyderabad in Pakistan. In pursuing the remnant of Dahir's army and his son?s supporters (Indian kings), Muhammad bin Qasim fought at Nirun, Rawar, Bahrore, Brahmanabad, Aror, Dipalpur and Multan. By 713 C.E., he established his control in Sind and parts of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir. A major part of what is now Pakistan came under Muslim control in 713 C.E. and remained so throughout the centuries until some years after the fall of the Mughal Empire in 1857.
Muhammad bin Qasim?s treatment of the Indian population was so just that when he was called back to Baghdad the civilians were greatly disheartened and gave him farewell in tears. There was a Muslim community in Malabar, southwest India as early as 618 C.E. as a result of King Chakrawati Farmas accepting Islam at the hands of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Muslim presence as rulers in India dates from 711 C.E. Since then, different Muslim rulers (Turks of Central Asia, Afghans, and the descendants of the Mongol - the Mughals) entered India, primarily fought their fellow Muslim rulers, and established their rule under various dynastic names. By the eleventh century, the Muslims had established their capital at Delhi, which remained the principal seat of power until the last ruler of Mughal Dynasty, Bahadur Shah Zafar, was deposed in 1857 by the British. A few British visitors were given permission by Akbar to stay in Eastern India more than two centuries before. The British abused that privilege, and within a few decades the British began to collaborate with Rajas and Nawabs in military expeditions against the Mughals and Muslim rulers of the east, southeast and south India. After two centuries of fighting, the British succeeded in abolishing the Mughal rule in 1857.

Muslims were a minority when they ruled major parts of India for nearly a thousand years. They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions. In their days as rulers, the Muslims constituted about twenty percent of India's population. Today, Indian Muslims constitute about fifteen percent of India's population, about 150 million, and they are the second largest Muslim community in the world.

The region now part of Pakistan and many other parts of India were predominantly Muslim. After the British takeover in 1857, many of these areas remained under loose control of Muslims. When the British decided to withdraw from India without a clear direction for the future of Muslims (former rulers), a political solution was reached for some of the Muslim majority areas. This resulted in the division of India and the creation of Pakistan in 1947.

Among the famous Muslims scientists, historians and travelers who visited and lived, though briefly, in India were Al-Biruni, Al-Masu'di, and Ibn Battuta. Their writings illuminate us with the Indian society and culture. Al-Biruni stayed in India for twenty years. Ibn Battuta, an Andalusian who was born in Morocco, served as a Magistrate of Delhi (1334-1341) during the reign of Sultan Muhammad Tughluk. It is conceivable that Ibn Battuta?s description of Muslim India inspired Ferdinand and Isabella who had taken over the last Muslim kingdom of Granada, Spain in 1492. That same year Columbus received the permission in the Alhambra palace (of Granada) and made his famous voyage bound for India in search of gold and spice but he landed in the Americas.

I'm failing to see the point of this post.

its another point of view that muslims werent all that bad...the article is bias, cause the sikhs lost there gurus and such (which is not mentioned which makes me wonder what else is missing) but...its another point of view which isnt calling for death or destruction and isnt dissing another faith..so its a good post

nestlecrunch · September 17th, 2004, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Muslims were a minority when they ruled major parts of India for nearly a thousand years. They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice

What is this a joke~? They talk as if all Indians had an election and voted these foreign barbarians to rule their land and destroy their religion. This was clearly written to justify death and destruction.

PunjabiSikh4life · September 17th, 2004, 11:45 PM

hahahahaha this is the funniest thread yet!!! Did u know that Hitler was also like by the Jews for his justice!!!

**Cunard** · September 18th, 2004, 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PunjabiSikh4life

hahahahaha this is the funniest thread yet!!! Did u know that Hitler was also like by the Jews for his justice!!!

did u know people like bhindranwale never ever harmed hindus and that hindus were always welcomed by babber khalsa and ISYF

jattmunda420 · September 18th, 2004, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunard

Quote:

Originally Posted by PunjabiSikh4life

hahahahaha this is the funniest thread yet!!! Did u know that Hitler was also like by the Jews for his justice!!!

did u know people like bhindranwale never ever harmed hindus and that hindus were always welcomed by babber khalsa and ISYF

Khal · September 18th, 2004, 12:38 PM

The Muslims have to accept the fact that their rulers were corrupt. However they were a lot of good Muslims too who spread Islam. And also through them majority converted.

paulie walnuts · September 18th, 2004, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by __ruby

The Muslims entered Sind, India, in 711 C.E., the same year they entered Spain. Their entry in India was prompted by an attempt to free the civilian Muslim hostages whose ship was taken by sea pirates in the territory of Raja Dahir, King of Sind. After diplomatic attempts failed, Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor in Baghdad, dispatched a 17-year-old commander by the name Muhammad bin Qasim with a small army. Muhammad bin Qasim defeated Raja Dahir at what is now Hyderabad in Pakistan. In pursuing the remnant of Dahir's army and his son?s supporters (Indian kings), Muhammad bin Qasim fought at Nirun, Rawar, Bahrore, Brahmanabad, Aror, Dipalpur and Multan. By 713 C.E., he established his control in Sind and parts of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir. A major part of what is now Pakistan came under Muslim control in 713 C.E. and remained so throughout the centuries until some years after the fall of the Mughal Empire in 1857.
Muhammad bin Qasim?s treatment of the Indian population was so just that when he was called back to Baghdad the civilians were greatly disheartened and gave him farewell in tears. There was a Muslim community in Malabar, southwest India as early as 618 C.E. as a result of King Chakrawati Farmas accepting Islam at the hands of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Muslim presence as rulers in India dates from 711 C.E. Since then, different Muslim rulers (Turks of Central Asia, Afghans, and the descendants of the Mongol - the Mughals) entered India, primarily fought their fellow Muslim rulers, and established their rule under various dynastic names. By the eleventh century, the Muslims had established their capital at Delhi, which remained the principal seat of power until the last ruler of Mughal Dynasty, Bahadur Shah Zafar, was deposed in 1857 by the British. A few British visitors were given permission by Akbar to stay in Eastern India more than two centuries before. The British abused that privilege, and within a few decades the British began to collaborate with Rajas and Nawabs in military expeditions against the Mughals and Muslim rulers of the east, southeast and south India. After two centuries of fighting, the British succeeded in abolishing the Mughal rule in 1857.

Muslims were a minority when they ruled major parts of India for nearly a thousand years. They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions. In their days as rulers, the Muslims constituted about twenty percent of India's population. Today, Indian Muslims constitute about fifteen percent of India's population, about 150 million, and they are the second largest Muslim community in the world.

The region now part of Pakistan and many other parts of India were predominantly Muslim. After the British takeover in 1857, many of these areas remained under loose control of Muslims. When the British decided to withdraw from India without a clear direction for the future of Muslims (former rulers), a political solution was reached for some of the Muslim majority areas. This resulted in the division of India and the creation of Pakistan in 1947.

Among the famous Muslims scientists, historians and travelers who visited and lived, though briefly, in India were Al-Biruni, Al-Masu'di, and Ibn Battuta. Their writings illuminate us with the Indian society and culture. Al-Biruni stayed in India for twenty years. Ibn Battuta, an Andalusian who was born in Morocco, served as a Magistrate of Delhi (1334-1341) during the reign of Sultan Muhammad Tughluk. It is conceivable that Ibn Battuta?s description of Muslim India inspired Ferdinand and Isabella who had taken over the last Muslim kingdom of Granada, Spain in 1492. That same year Columbus received the permission in the Alhambra palace (of Granada) and made his famous voyage bound for India in search of gold and spice but he landed in the Americas.

i think the most telling aspect of this post is the fact that you feel the need to prove that Muslims were not oppressive tyrants. why is this the common opinion of both Western and Eastern historians alike? why is there a general consensus of unrivaled barbarism on the part of the Muslim invaders and the Mughals? how was this truth of these saintly Muslims concealed from everyone for so long?

what is the purpose of writing or posting this heavily sanitized Muslim version of history? is it because you hope it really happened, and don't want to believe what every other historic account tells you?

you remind of the people who claim the Holocaust never happened (incidentally, you may actually be one of those people).

Quote:

They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions

LOL...with quotes like this, who will take your "article" seriously?

also, i noticed a profound ABSENCE of any citations or references. why is that?

however, i will note that this is not nearly as nonsensical/laughable as most other Muslim-ized versions of history that you will find on a number of sites (usually Pakistani websites).

**Cunard** · September 18th, 2004, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jattmunda420

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunard

Quote:

Originally Posted by PunjabiSikh4life

hahahahaha this is the funniest thread yet!!! Did u know that Hitler was also like by the Jews for his justice!!!

did u know people like bhindranwale never ever harmed hindus and that hindus were always welcomed by babber khalsa and ISYF

why is the "hindu" guy holding the child wearing a kara then? i thought he was hindu? I do not believe that the pic shows Bhindranwale with hindus.

i have listened to the vids and speechs u posted on the other site where he does say that he doesnt want a khalistan and that hindus are like brothers, but why woould so many of his followers go against his wishes then?

hollisterdesi · September 18th, 2004, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunard

Quote:

Originally Posted by jattmunda420

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunard

Quote:

Originally Posted by PunjabiSikh4life

hahahahaha this is the funniest thread yet!!! Did u know that Hitler was also like by the Jews for his justice!!!

did u know people like bhindranwale never ever harmed hindus and that hindus were always welcomed by babber khalsa and ISYF

why is the "hindu" guy holding the child wearing a kara then? i thought he was hindu? I do not believe that the pic shows Bhindranwale with hindus.

i have listened to the vids and speechs u posted on the other site where he does say that he doesnt want a khalistan and that hindus are like brothers, but why woould so many of his followers go against his wishes then?

Smart guy

gabroo_shakeen · September 18th, 2004, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunard

Quote:

Originally Posted by gabroo_shakeen

Quote:

Originally Posted by __ruby

The Muslims entered Sind, India, in 711 C.E., the same year they entered Spain. Their entry in India was prompted by an attempt to free the civilian Muslim hostages whose ship was taken by sea pirates in the territory of Raja Dahir, King of Sind. After diplomatic attempts failed, Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor in Baghdad, dispatched a 17-year-old commander by the name Muhammad bin Qasim with a small army. Muhammad bin Qasim defeated Raja Dahir at what is now Hyderabad in Pakistan. In pursuing the remnant of Dahir's army and his son?s supporters (Indian kings), Muhammad bin Qasim fought at Nirun, Rawar, Bahrore, Brahmanabad, Aror, Dipalpur and Multan. By 713 C.E., he established his control in Sind and parts of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir. A major part of what is now Pakistan came under Muslim control in 713 C.E. and remained so throughout the centuries until some years after the fall of the Mughal Empire in 1857.
Muhammad bin Qasim?s treatment of the Indian population was so just that when he was called back to Baghdad the civilians were greatly disheartened and gave him farewell in tears. There was a Muslim community in Malabar, southwest India as early as 618 C.E. as a result of King Chakrawati Farmas accepting Islam at the hands of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Muslim presence as rulers in India dates from 711 C.E. Since then, different Muslim rulers (Turks of Central Asia, Afghans, and the descendants of the Mongol - the Mughals) entered India, primarily fought their fellow Muslim rulers, and established their rule under various dynastic names. By the eleventh century, the Muslims had established their capital at Delhi, which remained the principal seat of power until the last ruler of Mughal Dynasty, Bahadur Shah Zafar, was deposed in 1857 by the British. A few British visitors were given permission by Akbar to stay in Eastern India more than two centuries before. The British abused that privilege, and within a few decades the British began to collaborate with Rajas and Nawabs in military expeditions against the Mughals and Muslim rulers of the east, southeast and south India. After two centuries of fighting, the British succeeded in abolishing the Mughal rule in 1857.

Muslims were a minority when they ruled major parts of India for nearly a thousand years. They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions. In their days as rulers, the Muslims constituted about twenty percent of India's population. Today, Indian Muslims constitute about fifteen percent of India's population, about 150 million, and they are the second largest Muslim community in the world.

The region now part of Pakistan and many other parts of India were predominantly Muslim. After the British takeover in 1857, many of these areas remained under loose control of Muslims. When the British decided to withdraw from India without a clear direction for the future of Muslims (former rulers), a political solution was reached for some of the Muslim majority areas. This resulted in the division of India and the creation of Pakistan in 1947.

Among the famous Muslims scientists, historians and travelers who visited and lived, though briefly, in India were Al-Biruni, Al-Masu'di, and Ibn Battuta. Their writings illuminate us with the Indian society and culture. Al-Biruni stayed in India for twenty years. Ibn Battuta, an Andalusian who was born in Morocco, served as a Magistrate of Delhi (1334-1341) during the reign of Sultan Muhammad Tughluk. It is conceivable that Ibn Battuta?s description of Muslim India inspired Ferdinand and Isabella who had taken over the last Muslim kingdom of Granada, Spain in 1492. That same year Columbus received the permission in the Alhambra palace (of Granada) and made his famous voyage bound for India in search of gold and spice but he landed in the Americas.

I'm failing to see the point of this post.

its another point of view that muslims werent all that bad...the article is bias, cause the sikhs lost there gurus and such (which is not mentioned which makes me wonder what else is missing) but...its another point of view which isnt calling for death or destruction and isnt dissing another faith..so its a good post

Obviously biased. Yea Cunard I agree a LOT was left out. But ok point taken.

**Cunard** · September 18th, 2004, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hollisterdesi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunard

Quote:

Originally Posted by jattmunda420

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunard

Quote:

Originally Posted by PunjabiSikh4life

hahahahaha this is the funniest thread yet!!! Did u know that Hitler was also like by the Jews for his justice!!!

did u know people like bhindranwale never ever harmed hindus and that hindus were always welcomed by babber khalsa and ISYF

why is the "hindu" guy holding the child wearing a kara then? i thought he was hindu? I do not believe that the pic shows Bhindranwale with hindus.

i have listened to the vids and speechs u posted on the other site where he does say that he doesnt want a khalistan and that hindus are like brothers, but why woould so many of his followers go against his wishes then?

Smart guy

all people are brothers and sisters to sikhs as long as they acknowledge sikhi is a distinct and seperate religion. one of the demands that Bhindranwale had with the indian constitution, which claims to seculer, but places sikhs under hindu laws and concepts

hollisterdesi · September 18th, 2004, 02:44 PM

I consider it a seperate religion, its fuckin obvious when you guys have your own scripture and house of worship. But I still won't stop looking at Sikhs the way I currently do, where I equate them with Hindus, cuz they are one and the same to me. Hence the brotherhood factor. And no Ruby u dumb bitch, I'm not waging a war against Islam and getting allies or w/e nonsense you dish out. I truly do love Sikhs as my own people. My best friend is a Sikh.

With regards to having Sikhs under the same laws as Hindus, I got a Q for you Cunard. Would you rather have Sikhs be placed under a different set of laws, one where they wouldn't necessarily benefit as much? Jw. Cuz personally, If I was in India, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if they put me under Buddhist or Sikh laws or w/e, as long as I'm allowed to practice my own religion.

Khal · September 18th, 2004, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hollisterdesi

.
With regards to having Sikhs under the same laws as Hindus, I got a Q for you Cunard. Would you rather have Sikhs be placed under a different set of laws, one where they wouldn't necessarily benefit as much? Jw. Cuz personally, If I was in India, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if they put me under Buddhist or Sikh laws or w/e, as long as I'm allowed to practice my own religion.

Then why are they conflicts in Sri Lanka btwn the Buddhist and the Hindus then?

**Cunard** · September 18th, 2004, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hollisterdesi

I consider it a seperate religion, its fuckin obvious when you guys have your own scripture and house of worship. But I still won't stop looking at Sikhs the way I currently do, where I equate them with Hindus, cuz they are one and the same to me. Hence the brotherhood factor. And no Ruby u dumb bitch, I'm not waging a war against Islam and getting allies or w/e nonsense you dish out. I truly do love Sikhs as my own people. My best friend is a Sikh.

With regards to having Sikhs under the same laws as Hindus, I got a Q for you Cunard. Would you rather have Sikhs be placed under a different set of laws, one where they wouldn't necessarily benefit as much? Jw. Cuz personally, If I was in India, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if they put me under Buddhist or Sikh laws or w/e, as long as I'm allowed to practice my own religion.

"I consider it a seperate religion, its fuckin obvious when you guys have your own scripture and house of worship. But I still won't stop looking at Sikhs the way I currently do, where I equate them with Hindus, cuz they are one and the same to me "

k, u contradict yourself there.

as for sikhs in India, they are called hindus under the constitution, sikhs have no problem with being under Indian laws, they have a problem being under hindu law, hindu control, and the failed recognition under the indian constituion that sikhs are seperate

hollisterdesi · September 18th, 2004, 02:51 PM

What does that have to do with my willingness to live under Buddhist or Sikh laws?

The conflict in Lanka isn't necessarily a religion based one. Its more of a cultural thing. Cuz you got one side thats of Tamil descent and one of Lanka descent. If you're having a hard time comprehending this, imagine this: Andhra Pradesh ppl in Punjab want to control the government of Punjab and "dethrone" Captain Amrinder Singh because they are Telugu ppl and the others are Punjabi ppl.

**Cunard** · September 18th, 2004, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hollisterdesi

What does that have to do with my willingness to live under Buddhist or Sikh laws?

The conflict in Lanka isn't necessarily a religion based one. Its more of a cultural thing. Cuz you got one side thats of Tamil descent and one of Lanka descent. If you're having a hard time comprehending this, imagine this: Andhra Pradesh ppl in Punjab want to control the government of Punjab and "dethrone" Captain Amrinder Singh because they are Telugu ppl and the others are Punjabi ppl.

your too thickheaded to get it...nevermind, u have failed to see what i said in my previous 10 posts which say the same thing over and over again, sikhs want a seperate distinction and protection under the constitution that hindus, muslims, and christians enjoy

__ruby · September 18th, 2004, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hollisterdesi

I consider it a seperate religion, its fuckin obvious when you guys have your own scripture and house of worship. But I still won't stop looking at Sikhs the way I currently do, where I equate them with Hindus, cuz they are one and the same to me. Hence the brotherhood factor. And no Ruby u dumb bitch, I'm not waging a war against Islam and getting allies or w/e nonsense you dish out. I truly do love Sikhs as my own people. My best friend is a Sikh.

With regards to having Sikhs under the same laws as Hindus, I got a Q for you Cunard. Would you rather have Sikhs be placed under a different set of laws, one where they wouldn't necessarily benefit as much? Jw. Cuz personally, If I was in India, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if they put me under Buddhist or Sikh laws or w/e, as long as I'm allowed to practice my own religion.

i'm a bitch

ok little boy..... Sikhs should be able to live in their own autonomous region and live under their own laws..of course they would benefit from it. You wouldn't care if you lived under buddhist or sikh laws but what about islamic or christian laws. the way cunard sees hinduism is different from the way you want to portray it to him.. He sees distinct differences in Hindu and Sikh laws.

September 17th, 2004, 06:24 PM	#1
__ruby Regular Poster Join Date: Jul 24 2004 Location: erehw ym hctib ta Posts: 1,287 Reputation: 0 --> Rep Power: 26 Casino cash: $1000	Muslims in India (not for those who cant handle the truth) The Muslims entered Sind, India, in 711 C.E., the same year they entered Spain. Their entry in India was prompted by an attempt to free the civilian Muslim hostages whose ship was taken by sea pirates in the territory of Raja Dahir, King of Sind. After diplomatic attempts failed, Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor in Baghdad, dispatched a 17-year-old commander by the name Muhammad bin Qasim with a small army. Muhammad bin Qasim defeated Raja Dahir at what is now Hyderabad in Pakistan. In pursuing the remnant of Dahir's army and his son?s supporters (Indian kings), Muhammad bin Qasim fought at Nirun, Rawar, Bahrore, Brahmanabad, Aror, Dipalpur and Multan. By 713 C.E., he established his control in Sind and parts of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir. A major part of what is now Pakistan came under Muslim control in 713 C.E. and remained so throughout the centuries until some years after the fall of the Mughal Empire in 1857. Muhammad bin Qasim?s treatment of the Indian population was so just that when he was called back to Baghdad the civilians were greatly disheartened and gave him farewell in tears. There was a Muslim community in Malabar, southwest India as early as 618 C.E. as a result of King Chakrawati Farmas accepting Islam at the hands of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Muslim presence as rulers in India dates from 711 C.E. Since then, different Muslim rulers (Turks of Central Asia, Afghans, and the descendants of the Mongol - the Mughals) entered India, primarily fought their fellow Muslim rulers, and established their rule under various dynastic names. By the eleventh century, the Muslims had established their capital at Delhi, which remained the principal seat of power until the last ruler of Mughal Dynasty, Bahadur Shah Zafar, was deposed in 1857 by the British. A few British visitors were given permission by Akbar to stay in Eastern India more than two centuries before. The British abused that privilege, and within a few decades the British began to collaborate with Rajas and Nawabs in military expeditions against the Mughals and Muslim rulers of the east, southeast and south India. After two centuries of fighting, the British succeeded in abolishing the Mughal rule in 1857. Muslims were a minority when they ruled major parts of India for nearly a thousand years. They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions. In their days as rulers, the Muslims constituted about twenty percent of India's population. Today, Indian Muslims constitute about fifteen percent of India's population, about 150 million, and they are the second largest Muslim community in the world. The region now part of Pakistan and many other parts of India were predominantly Muslim. After the British takeover in 1857, many of these areas remained under loose control of Muslims. When the British decided to withdraw from India without a clear direction for the future of Muslims (former rulers), a political solution was reached for some of the Muslim majority areas. This resulted in the division of India and the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Among the famous Muslims scientists, historians and travelers who visited and lived, though briefly, in India were Al-Biruni, Al-Masu'di, and Ibn Battuta. Their writings illuminate us with the Indian society and culture. Al-Biruni stayed in India for twenty years. Ibn Battuta, an Andalusian who was born in Morocco, served as a Magistrate of Delhi (1334-1341) during the reign of Sultan Muhammad Tughluk. It is conceivable that Ibn Battuta?s description of Muslim India inspired Ferdinand and Isabella who had taken over the last Muslim kingdom of Granada, Spain in 1492. That same year Columbus received the permission in the Alhambra palace (of Granada) and made his famous voyage bound for India in search of gold and spice but he landed in the Americas.

September 17th, 2004, 07:46 PM	#5
LAKERFAN8 VIP Member Join Date: Jul 21 2004 Posts: 19,657 Reputation: 94688271 --> Rep Power: 9468926 Casino cash: $30263	Only Muslim emporer that is respected by Sikhs is Akhbar because of his religous and cultural toleration. Every other Mughal ruler was a prick. So ironic they are ancestors of Genghis Khan didnt learn from one of his great accomplishments, religous freedom. __________________ HELLO

September 17th, 2004, 06:42 PM	#2
nestlecrunch Banned Join Date: Aug 17 2004 Posts: 239 Reputation: 0 --> Rep Power: 0 Casino cash: $1000	LOL, good one.

September 17th, 2004, 07:14 PM	#3
cyberhacka Still a Newb Join Date: Sep 15 2004 Location: Old Bridge, NJ / Newark, NJ / Uptown NYC at the Haze spots all day Posts: 151 Reputation: 0 --> Rep Power: 20 Casino cash: $1000	muslims named bombay. it was recently renamed to mumbai because that fag indian president who cant even speak to a muslim is a racist fag. good thing he is not in power. and for everyone i am an indian muslim who absolutely hated vijpay.

September 17th, 2004, 08:22 PM	#6
ShivaChrist Should I Consider Retiring??? Join Date: Mar 17 2004 Location: Virginia Posts: 10,236 Reputation: 195982 --> Rep Power: 19660 Casino cash: $1241	Wow, those guys did no wrong. /sarcasm off.

September 17th, 2004, 11:45 PM	#11
PunjabiSikh4life Banned Join Date: Sep 3 2004 Posts: 47 Reputation: 0 --> Rep Power: 0 Casino cash: $1000	hahahahaha this is the funniest thread yet!!! Did u know that Hitler was also like by the Jews for his justice!!!

September 18th, 2004, 12:38 PM	#14
Khal Still a Newb Join Date: Sep 16 2004 Posts: 183 Reputation: 0 --> Rep Power: 20 Casino cash: $1000	The Muslims have to accept the fact that their rulers were corrupt. However they were a lot of good Muslims too who spread Islam. And also through them majority converted.

September 18th, 2004, 02:44 PM	#20
hollisterdesi Banned Join Date: Jul 8 2004 Location: Schaumburg, IL (Near Chi-Town) Posts: 2,477 Reputation: 0 --> Rep Power: 0 Casino cash: $1000	I consider it a seperate religion, its fuckin obvious when you guys have your own scripture and house of worship. But I still won't stop looking at Sikhs the way I currently do, where I equate them with Hindus, cuz they are one and the same to me. Hence the brotherhood factor. And no Ruby u dumb bitch, I'm not waging a war against Islam and getting allies or w/e nonsense you dish out. I truly do love Sikhs as my own people. My best friend is a Sikh. With regards to having Sikhs under the same laws as Hindus, I got a Q for you Cunard. Would you rather have Sikhs be placed under a different set of laws, one where they wouldn't necessarily benefit as much? Jw. Cuz personally, If I was in India, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if they put me under Buddhist or Sikh laws or w/e, as long as I'm allowed to practice my own religion.

September 18th, 2004, 02:51 PM	#23
hollisterdesi Banned Join Date: Jul 8 2004 Location: Schaumburg, IL (Near Chi-Town) Posts: 2,477 Reputation: 0 --> Rep Power: 0 Casino cash: $1000	What does that have to do with my willingness to live under Buddhist or Sikh laws? The conflict in Lanka isn't necessarily a religion based one. Its more of a cultural thing. Cuz you got one side thats of Tamil descent and one of Lanka descent. If you're having a hard time comprehending this, imagine this: Andhra Pradesh ppl in Punjab want to control the government of Punjab and "dethrone" Captain Amrinder Singh because they are Telugu ppl and the others are Punjabi ppl.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)