sparks for a muslim pradesh

[Akshay]

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/004200607200312.htm

I have been misquoted: Azam Khan

Lucknow, July 20. (PTI): Under attack from different quarters, including his own partymen, for his reported demand for a "Muslim Pradesh", Uttar Pradesh Minister for Urban Development Mohammad Azam Khan on Wednesday, denied having made any such statement.



"I have been misquoted on this count. Separation is the root of all the ills. From 1947 to the creation of Uttaranchal separation has only resulted in loss," the Samajwadi Party leader said in a statement here.



Khan, while reacting to the demand for a separate "Harit Pradesh" by the Rashtriya Lok Dal, had reportedly said in Ghaziabad on July 16 that instead of creating a "Harit Pradesh", a "Muslim Pradesh" should be formed carving out districts of western U P.



In an obvious reference to his party colleague and MP Rashid Masood's criticism of his demand on Wednesday, Khan said "people should not react without first ascertaining the veracity of any statement."

[KK]

Gud idea

[radha]

what rubbish..

can u imagine it in india.

may be he is the nexi zinnah,wanting another pakistan in india.

may be he is right bcos as u know there r lot of pakistanis in india bcos of whom incidentd like 7/11,parliament,akshardham,ayodhya and what not happens.so may be he is demanding a separate state for them .



SHAME ON U AZMI>>>

vande mataram.

[Why not]

what rubbish..
can u imagine it in india.
may be he is the nexi zinnah,wanting another pakistan in india.
may be he is right bcos as u know there r lot of pakistanis in india bcos of whom incidentd like 7/11,parliament,akshardham,ayodhya and what not happens.so may be he is demanding a separate state for them .

SHAME ON U AZMI>>>
vande mataram.

Why not they being equal citizens of India , they have every right to have a seperate state with in the constitution , now are we gonna decide on the basis of the religion what one can demand and what one can't .Shame on you for considering yourself to be more mor equal than others.



As long as that claim can be realized ina democratic way I dont see any issue with that, but we also need to note that the person in question is claiming to be misquoted, even then he has every right to say so if he said that.

[sahid]

no no not at all..

we dont want a separate state for us.

we r happy to be called indians and proud to say vande mataram

though i m a muslim,i strongly felt that we should not encourage such kind of statements or activity.

we r very happy being a citizen of hindustan.

we should not forget that our ancestors were hindus and more of all this country is ours though we changed religion.

long live india....

[tfb]

no no not at all..
we dont want a separate state for us.
we r happy to be called indians and proud to say vande mataram
though i m a muslim,i strongly felt that we should not encourage such kind of statements or activity.
we r very happy being a citizen of hindustan.
we should not forget that our ancestors were hindus and more of all this country is ours though we changed religion.
long live india....

Radha -> Shahid was a very pretty fast transformation, yes you are right being a citizen guarantees every one the rights with in the constitution , I am not saying its would be a good idea to have a seperate state with in the consitution, (which would still mean citizen of Bharat), but the only thing being that whenever some demand by Muslims within the constitution is made , the immature condescending behaviour of Hindu fundamnetalits is on display with full fervour,thats what smacks of double standards.

[Hindu Fundamentalist]

Radha -> Shahid was a very pretty fast transformation, yes you are right being a citizen guarantees every one the rights with in the constitution , I am not saying its would be a good idea to have a seperate state with in the consitution, (which would still mean citizen of Bharat), but the only thing being that whenever some demand by Muslims within the constitution is made , the immature condescending behaviour of Hindu fundamnetalits is on display with full fervour,thats what smacks of double standards.

Macha, u do realise that within the democratic setup a hindu nationalist party can come to power in any of the states thanks to overwhelming hindu majority and then make each and every state HINDU state and throw all the muslims out? Be careful what you wish for! If you try to have muslim pradesh in India, then the whole country will become hindu and you will be thrown into sea when you can continue your jihad.

[ok]

what is double standard.

so what if demands like this are fulfilled,a muslim state for muslims only,a christian state for christians only and what not.

have u heard a country being divided on the basis of religion,the

only example is india and pakistan and what we got after 50 years of independence.

blame game ,hatred,wars,terrorism and what not.

that was a historical blunder and this one too.

by supporting such type of nuisance whatever the reason be ,we are only heading for a face to face confrontation between two communities.

nothing else

so lets agree to disagree and think like indians not like a hindu and a muslim.

and proudly say



maa tujhe salam/maa tujhe pranam.

jai hind.

[tfb]

Radha -> Shahid was a very pretty fast transformation, yes you are right being a citizen guarantees every one the rights with in the constitution , I am not saying its would be a good idea to have a seperate state with in the consitution, (which would still mean citizen of Bharat), but the only thing being that whenever some demand by Muslims within the constitution is made , the immature condescending behaviour of Hindu fundamnetalits is on display with full fervour,thats what smacks of double standards.

Macha, u do realise that within the democratic setup a hindu nationalist party can come to power in any of the states thanks to overwhelming hindu majority and then make each and every state HINDU state and throw all the muslims out? Be careful what you wish for! If you try to have muslim pradesh in India, then the whole country will become hindu and you will be thrown into sea when you can continue your jihad.

That will be anti contitutional for the Hindu terrorists to decimate the Muslilm Christian and the Sikh poulation in India, I am not saying that there cant be a Hindu state in India if it allows for equal rights to all irrespective of their religion.



Are you suggesting that Hindu state by default means the murder of Muslims and Christians like in the defacto Hindu state Gujarat , please elaborate.I was thinking it would be Hindu or Muslim only in the name , but the constituion would still be Indian.



Are you suggesting that a Hindu state cant be an Indian state ??



Give reasons why a Hindu state cant be equally Indian and guarantee the rights of religious minorities like Muslims and Christians???

[Mayavi Morpheus]

Give reasons why a Hindu state cant be equally Indian and guarantee the rights of religious minorities like Muslims and Christians???

hehehhee, how innocent! so you do not know what a religious state encompasses? If a soverein territory has a state religion, it usually means that other religions do not have the same rights as that of the state religion. If all citizens have the same rights in a religious state, what is the purpose of having a state religion?

So we have in pakistan, an islamic country, Hindus and Christians do not have same rights as muslims. This resulted in atrocities against minorities which is why the percentage of hindu population in pakistan fell from 17% in 1947 to 2% by 1971. They were either killed, driven away or converted. If a Pakistani Hindu insults Islam, intented or not, he will be tried for blasphemy, but if a muslim insults hindu religion, he is to be respected. So in 1992 when Babri Masjid in India was demolished, pakistanis raged down 100's of Hindu temples under official patronage.



Same with bangladesh which had 25% Hindu population before 1971 and after it became independant and Islamic, the hindu population dropped to 14%. Look at the plight of Hindus in Bangladesh.



In Malaysia, an Islamic state even though only 60% of pop is muslim, no non-muslim can marry a muslim and courts follow sharia.



In Afghanistan, sikhs who form the highest minority have to pay jajiya so that they can practice their faith.



In Saudi Arabia no kafir religion can be practiced. Heck, you cant even carry religious books during transit through the airport.



Same is the case with 30 or so Islamic countries in this world where sharia is followed for civil and criminal cases which automatically means that Islam is being enforced on the minorities.



Similarly in Nepal, Hindus have more rights than muslims.



So you see my madarassa educated friend, a seperate muslim pradesh will only mean that the rights of other religions would be trampled upon. Same will happen with a Hindu State. This is the reason why the forefathers of this country chose to have a secular India rather than a Hindu India even though majority of muslims seceded.

[Arch]

As is so most often, another informative post, MM