MovieChat Forums > Partition (2007) Discussion > Muslim Girl+Hindu/Sikh Boy

Muslim Girl+Hindu/Sikh Boy


Whats up with all these partition movies with the girl always being Muslim? Why can't the gut ever be a Muslim, with the girl trying to escape a repressive Hindu/Sikh family? U know, Muslims actually treated their women equally as fair as the Sikhs and Hindus. Films like Veer Zaara are insulting to Muslim culture. They imply that Muslim women are degraded and want to escape to the more acceptable Hindu/Sikh culture, which is simply not true. We were the same nation for over a thousand years, and women in India actually had more rights under the Islamic Mughals than the Hindu empires before them.

reply

[deleted]

is'nt sunny deol a sikh? he made gadar did'nt he? Pinjar was crappy, and it made Muslims look like the instigators of violence.

reply

[deleted]

fret not....perhaps you have seen Train to Pakistan by Khuswant Singh....yes, its once again muslim gal and a sikh guy....BUT he creates no polarization on "evil deeds' being done - the movies' bad guy & his gang... and the eventual good guy are all sikhs.

reply

Its not Hindu/Sikh. They are not the same religion and should not be grouped together. And if you consider fear of being raped and converted more rights, then I suppose you're correct. And actually, there was a movie where the guy was Muslim, actually based on the classic story, "Pinjar". The female was Sikh, and the male had kidnapped her. I think you're missing the point of these films, its not to illustrate that one group is more suppressive than the other, but that regardless of their background they're inherently the same and capable of loving one another. Your ideas just perpetuate this notion of repression by trying to blame one group over the other.

reply

thats completly not true. wat, u call burning a widow with her husband or casting her off from society more rights? atleast under Islamic rulers they could inherit property, do buisness, divorce, re-marry, in other words be a human being.

thats not the point in ne of these films. look at gadar, veer-zaara. they portay muslims as the hateful people against "love". its shows hindus as being welcoming of other faiths and fair to all other people. i dont think wat they did to muslims in gujurat was very "welcoming" then there's always the issue of terrorism, which is funny since there r sikh and hindu terrorists in India too.

If u really want to show that we're all the same ppl inside, make a story that goes beyond the typical stereotypes against ppl, learn about their custom and their religion, then go out and teach other ppl about peace and humanity.

reply

Have you seen the movie? If not, it may be wiser to hold the social commentry until later, and not take the story's perspective so personally. There are many views - and those wanting to portray another can go ahead and make a film that displays their vision in all its glory. "Others" can't effectively display a culture in a poor light - at least with any credence - if there wasn't at least a modicum of truth to the tale. I'd start with the Muslim community itself to rid itself of those who have hijacked their faith and have given them the international reputation of being violent, intolerant, and anti-women's rights - this is a 180 change from being - at least at one point and time - a faith of the intellect and the socially progressive. Unfortunately, such a notion is not exactly synonymous with Islam currently.

reply

you people forget bollywood is run by muslims. btw who cares, hindu/muslim/sikh we are all the same.

reply

[deleted]

I think it is something unique to Indian culture/outlook that their identity as Indians is more binding then whatever religion they may come from. I think it (India) is the most religiously divergent country on this planet - because it seems to accommodate spirituality in whatever form it may fall. Therefore the average Indian Muslim probably has more in common with his Indian Sikh or Hindu neighbour then he does with a Pakastani Muslim - which is definitely a good thing. Something quite unfortunate has fallen upon the cerebral openness of those stuck on the other side of the border.

reply


Good one Shirin. Let me add to this "debate" by saying that the ancient Indian-Vedic-Hindu-Sanskritic culture is the shared heritage of all Indians, regardless of what "religion" they are affiliated with. The problem with a large number of Moslems and Christians( not all, of course) is that they try to distance themselves from the wider Indian culture ,as if it were something alien to them. How ridiculous can you be? The Vedas, Upanishads, Mahabharata, the dramas of Kalidasa, the Kama Sutra, the achievements in mathematics and astronomy by Aryabhata, Brahmagupta and Bhaskara are things all Indians should cherish. I realise this is off topic, but the partition violence had a lot to do with a huge section of the population simply not empathising and indentifying with the Indian Hindu heritage.

reply

not true varun. muslims in india trace their history back through the persian and arab invaders. they consider themslves to be more muslim than indian. They rather point to the Arab and Persian achievements as displays of their culture. the Sanskrit- Mahabarta culture u refer 2 is native to the Hindus in the country since its a major part of their religion. Most Muslims in India do not relate their culture to the Hindu civilization, however advanced it may have been, that existed before the coming of the Muslim invaders. Our history comes more from the Mughal era and the sultanates of the Muslim conquerers.

reply



sheema 516, that's an awfully narrow, ignorant and patently dishonest way of looking at history. The cultural entity of India, if not the political, existed long, long before the advent of Islam or the Persian/Arab invaders. Denying this is almost psychotic! Modern Greeks are Christian, yet they have little difficulty in accepting the achievements of ancient, polytheistic, pagan Greeks as their own. What exactly is the problem with Moslems doing the same in India? A narrow, bigoted education and upbringing, perhaps? That would certainly be an explanation.

reply

The Anti-Muslim bias is something to be looked at folks. The ratio of movies with Hindu/Sikh male + muslim girl vs. Muslim male + Hindu/Sikh male is like 100:1....Its almost laughable. And furthermore, they always portray the muslims as the badguys...the pathans etc... There's an obvious double standard here. Even my hindu friends have acknowledged this fact!

Its about time Bollywood stopped being so biased vs the muslim minority in India. The truth is, more Hindus and Sikhs have converted to Islam (and still are) peacefully than the other way around...But yet, the movies always portray muslim women leaving for them???

I feel that this is Bollywood's last ditch effort to irritate muslims; trying to paint the world the way the want to instead of exemplifying exactly what's happening in reality. Bollywood and reality are hardly something you can use in the same sentence.

reply

Proof please.

I'm not saying it's not true, but I would like stats.

reply

"The truth is, more Hindus and Sikhs have converted to Islam (and still are) peacefully than the other way around..."

You don't usually convert to Hinduism. I'm not sure about Sikhism.

reply

The truth is, more Hindus and Sikhs have converted to Islam (and still are) peacefully than the other way around.
You've conveniently left out the fact that Sikhs and Hindus don't try to force their religion onto people or advertise it to get people to convert like Muslims do.

Also, like the other poster said, there is no conversion to Hinduism. Hinduism is an inclusive "religion"; everyone is a Hindu and Hinduism regards other religions as other peoples' paths to God. Shame the Abrahamic religions aren't so tolerant.

reply

Wtf is "Indian culture"? India is an EXTREMELY diverse country. Punjabi culture is different from Gujrati culture. A person from Kashmir, has a different culture than somebody from Maharashtra.

So no, Sikkism, Islam, and Hinduism, is NOT the same. That's like saying, Judaism, Islam, and Chrisitiantiy are the same, just because you can find all of them in Israel.

And when a Muslim is watching a Bollywood movie, of course he feels that Bollywood is prejudice, and making fun of his RELGION, not his culture. Sorry dude, but you realy have to be able to disgintuish the different between the two words.

Other than that, I agree with you that Bollywood makes Islam look like the enemy. That's because you have these script writers, who tend to be Hindu, and they know that making a Muslim look like the mortal enemy will be popular in the box office. Because, the vast majority of India, is Hindu.

Now if they made the a Hindu seem like the enemy, and a Muslim look like the hero, do you think that movie would be successfull at the box office?

reply

[deleted]

hahaha

"imply that muslim women are degraded"

nooo, of course not. the muslims treat their women REALLY fair.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41277000/jpg/_41277837_poll2_ap_203.jpg

(do not mind the obvious sikh bias)

reply

there is a differance between Islam and culture... if her culture is to cover her face then what does Islam has to do with it???
I am Muslim, and allow me to tell you that there are things that unagreed upon between different sectors, and this happened to be one of them

reply

Well in Islam, a Muslim man can marry any woman of his choice who is a "woman of the book" -- meaning any one of the "books", so she can be a Christian or a Jew.

A Muslim woman, however, must marry a Muslim man. I heard this explained by an imam once. He said it is this way because since Muslims believe in all the same prophets of Christianity and Judaism and acknowledge Jesus and Moses as prophets, if a Muslim man married a Christian/Jewish woman, she would not be ridiculed by his family, because of the shared beliefs of the 3 religions. However, if a Muslim woman married a Christian/Jew, their husband would not believe in Mohammed and most of Islam's major beliefs, therefore she would be ridiculed by him and his family.

I don't know, I can't say the explanation totally justified that, but that's the way it is.

Also, generally in the middle east especially, women are under the control of their family/parents more than men are. So it's more believeable that a WOMAN would be restricted with regard to who she can marry, rather than a man.

You say such movies make Muslims look bad, but it seems you didn't know that this is actually true in Islam -- that a Muslim woman is not supposed to marry a non-Muslim, so it's understandable that her family would react that way.

I come from a Muslim family ... I'm not very religious myself, but I just found out about this little distinction between how men and women can choose their spouses in Islam, and thought I'd share it since it's very relevant to your comments about these movies that deal with the Hindu/Muslim conflict.

reply

come on realy now we all know that muslim people back in the day were rapists. How do you think afgan and pakistan become a Islamic nation. Read your history before the crusades Afganistan and Pakistan was all once India then the moghal empire came raped women and childern and told em to change to Islam.

Even in the partitions Hindu and Sikh women were being raped in Punjab, Lahore, Gujarat etc... The women would rather die so they use to cut of there own heads or have the men do it.

You know how that fells to cut off your own mothers, sisters or daughters head cause they asked you to save there religion.

You won Afgan fair enough keep that *beep* but pakistan would not be pakistan if it wasnt for the british remember that *beep* India and Punjab has heart stick that in your crack pipe and smoke it.

Jai hind.


P.S. the crusades against the indus valley has the highest death tolls in war then any other war in history. Muslim peace people my arse.

reply

to the op, the answer to your question is simple

would a muslim man ever fall in love and marry a sikh/hindu girl and tell her she is free to practice her religion? absolutely not, she would be told to convert

now unlike other people on this board, im not trying to be racist or anything but that is the truth!

veer zaara - sikh man, muslim woman
Shaheed E Mohabbat - sikh man, muslim woman

i feel that it is both Muslims and Sikhs that are portrayed unfairly

Muslims mostly seem to be vile
Sikhs mostly seem to be some retarded joker

(with the exception of shaheed udham singh & shaheed bhagat singh)

"If I Was To Let...You Suck My Tongue...Would You Be Grateful?!?" Castor Troy, Face/Off!

reply


well said getemthatsright! India has suffered the most from Islamic terror- forget about ancient history, which was bad enough. Look at what's happened in the last 60 years and also in Kashmir. Then there are the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Varanasi and Bangalore. The amazing thing is that the world barely even acknowledges it.

reply

India has suffered the most from Islamic terror- forget about ancient history, which was bad enough. Look at what's happened in the last 60 years and also in Kashmir. Then there are the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Varanasi and Bangalore. The amazing thing is that the world barely even acknowledges it.


Looks like your education and upbringing is just as narrow and bigoted as any other intolerant hypocrite!! But you're a different kind of breed... the one who vehemently denies being a bigot but has a deep down hatred for anyone whose ideas are different than his !!
How dare you stereotype muslims... take a good look at yourself first before posting your garbage rants !!

reply




How dare you pronounce judgement on my views like that, sidz79! There is a global war on terror going on. The US is leading it, supposedly. India, democratic, pluralistic and secular, one of the major countries of the world, is a huge victim of Islamic terror, and the single largest *democratic* victim. Or do you disagree with this assessment? Do you think the UK, the US or France is a much bigger victim of Islamic terror? And if so, why do you think that? How many lives have they lost in comparison to what India has lost in Mumbai, Delhi( remember that India's parliament building was attacked) Varanasi, Hyderabad and elsewhere. And Kashmiri-Islamic terror would fill an encyclopedia. So I'm not just talking out of my hat. Just because the stupid, idiotic CNN or BBC downplays or ignores Islamic-Al Qaeda-Taliban terror against India, doesn't mean that it is not happening.

reply

[deleted]

The US is leading it, supposedly. India, democratic, pluralistic and secular, one of the major countries of the world, is a huge victim of Islamic terror, and the single largest *democratic* victim.

Sure... whatever helps your bigot a$$ sleep better at night


And Kashmiri-Islamic terror would fill an encyclopedia. So I'm not just talking out of my hat. Just because the stupid, idiotic CNN or BBC downplays or ignores Islamic-Al Qaeda-Taliban terror against India, doesn't mean that it is not happening.


I guess there's another thing the "stupid, idiotic CNN or BBC" ignores... the violence being committed against KASHMIRIS by the INDIAN ARMY on regular basis!!! That alone would be sufficient enough to fill up an encyclopedia, you foolish dogmatist !

reply

...violence committed Kashmiris by the Indian army..

But who brought on that violence? The Kashmiris, with their violent, Islamic ideology and terrorism. Kashmir is a democracy within India's democracy. It is not a colony with a master-race/subject race dichotomy, not a colonial settler state system where Indians from the plains are colonizing the state and displacing the natives( the reason/excuse for Palestinian violence), not a Tibet situation where China has a horrible history of cultural and democratic suppression; not a European style super-exploited imperial possession; not a particularly poor Indian state either.

So yes, it is positively an Islamic terror movement, with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda up to their necks involved.

You are the foolish dogmatist, and probably an Islamic terror sympathiser as well. If alienation and resentment were the cause of the violence, Ladakh in Kashmir's eastern portion would be experiencing it even more. If you look on the map of Kashmir, Ladakh is located farther away from India's capital than Srinagar and the valley. But there hasn't been so much as a shot fired in Ladakh, with its Buddhist majority. So the Kashmiris have no excuse,other than the fact they are Moslems within a non-Moslem majority country. And that's no excuse at all.

reply

While you're at it you can shove that Jai Hind firmly up there too. Idiot.

reply

the man is never muslim because that way they can't portray islam as being a vile oppressive religion that's stopping the poor girl from being free.

I would expect something like this from hollywood, but from canadians? depressing. although I guess vic sarin is indian, so it's to be expected.

together the ants can crush the elephant.

reply

The atrocities associated with the partition of India and Pakistan were committed on both sides.

But whereas today many Moslems continue to live in India, I've not heard of many Hindus and/or Sikhs still residing in Pakistan.

Islam today is considered one of the most repressive and intolerant religions worldwide. Even today you hear of "honor killings" where a brother or father kills his sister-or-daughter because she doesn't want to corform to her family's wishes.

That was certainly true in this particular film, where I had no doubt the girl's two brothers would gladly murder her before allowing her to return to her husband and son.

reply

@Varun:

QUOTE [But who brought on that violence? The Kashmiris, with their violent, Islamic ideology and terrorism. Kashmir is a democracy within India's democracy]

oh u are such a thick skull *beep* u really think so why dont u cut off the part of india that u consider infected ? violence was started by the indian army when kashmiris protested for not conducting the refrendom as they committed...wish u had gone to school.


QUOTE [So the Kashmiris have no excuse,other than the fact they are Moslems within a non-Moslem majority country. And that's no excuse at all.]

talking of excuses and reasons i think u need to lookup the dictionary as they are two entirely different thigns...the answer to all ur lame and pathetic arguement is "go to school n study history and dont be such a blind biased mother&UcK*@


@Dumpington:

QUOTE [But whereas today many Moslems continue to live in India, I've not heard of many Hindus and/or Sikhs still residing in Pakistan]

what u got a buffalo dump in ur skull ? before even coming to an arguement or making a post and wasting rpecious bandwidth and electronic ink u shud know that the areas constituting Pakistan were already almost 100% Mulsim population and hence the ideal place for a sepparate country ... is that so difficult to udnerstand ?

QUOTE [Even today you hear of "honor killings" where a brother or father kills his sister-or-daughter because she doesn't want to corform to her family's wishes]

talking of HONOR KILLINGS (u guys have some obsession with it )...u really should see ther number of honor killings done in india (by non muslims) and u will be shocked to see that probably is more than the whole muslim community of the world.

the fact is ... u guys have no brains at all and believe what u are told by fox news and cnn cuz they know u are so lame and lazy that u wont bother to go out in the world and dig out the facts of ur own,,,,becoz u have a habit of lookin at one side of the picture only.

the sad thing is .... there are no second hand brains on ebay ... or u guys could have used some....i have wasted enuff words on u and i am sure it wont change ur way of thinking ... i wish u guys wake up and look at thigns from various angles before reaching a judgement.



reply

manibhaai --- Why are you getting so angry and insulting?

Yes, the lands that make up Pakistan today were mostly Moslem in 1947. MOSTLY. But your contention that they were "already almost 100% Moslem" makes my point that all non-Moslems were quick to flee their homes and hurry to India before they would have been massacred by their new Pakistani countrymen.

But there remains a very sizeable Moslem population in India today, which suggests to me that the mostly-Hindu Indians were-and-still-are more tolerant that their Moslem neighbors in Pakistan.

Islam is a primitive and intolerant religion straight out of the middle ages.

reply

mr dumpington as far as i can see there are no facts and studies to back ur arguement but some fantasies and speculation that seems like coming straight from starwars and lord of the rings...when we talk about Pakistan at the time of partition then we are talking about the east Pakistan (present Bangladesh) too .. right ? for ur info which i dont know where it is coming from (my best bet is starwars) non muslims were there in quite a sigtnificant ratio... and not all of them moved and plenty of them stayed and played their role pretty darn clever in 1971 (along with he other factors too)

lets talk about west Pakistan (current Pakistan) which is formed of 4 provinces ... Punjab (some non muslim pupulation oh btw ... there are still sikhs living in Punjab of Pakistan) , Sindh (xtremely minor hindu population still living,,, but was higher before partition).... Balochistan (if u say that there were non muslims in Balochistan (which is almost one third of Pakistan) i'd say u are suffering from serious defficiency of iodine... talking about NWFP<north west frontier province> ... non muslim population was only in the city of Peshawar ... no christians or parsi but few hindus (including the famous bollywood kapoor family)..handful will be the right term to give u a vague idea....talking about religions tolerance .. i feel like laughing in ur face and then burping... cuz as far as i recall there are more religious intolerances in INdia than in Pakistan (even to this very modern era) .. intact 100 times more maybe... refering to incident of Gujrat , Khalistan movement and manslaughters and i recall there was incident of church burning too and slaughtering Christian families as well ....,, and talking about massacres..... perhaps u shud look into history and do some study of partition and redcliffe (do some fact finding on ur own) .... so whats left ? u said ALL non muslins left ... well thats surely not true we still have sikhs, hindus and parsis ,,, so what are u talking about i cant understand....and i recall no evidence of religious intolerance against sikhs, Hindus or Prsis in Pakistan .... not in last 27 years atelast.

my request is do some more study and research before reaching an opinion as i said before...honour killign , migrations, religious intolerances... i think i have answered u on all that and i am dead sure u are stuck with what u have been told and programmed .... u are so AUTISTIC.Pakistan+non muslim population

QUOTE [Islam is a primitive and intolerant religion straight out of the middle ages]

lmao... i am sure u have been TOLD this and u never bothered to study Islam yourself ..... u are so ignorant and blind folded like a mule to carry burdens...when people talk about stereotype muslims they dont mention people like u who are also stereotypical in their own place and hatred for Islam and muslims.....and why ? just because mr Bush and CNN told u so ?.. pity upon ur poor soul and brain that God gave u and u decided to take it to next life unused.

reply

manibhaai --- There you go again with the insults. You obviously cannot argue without insulting the person you are arguing with.

Yes, you're right about Bangladesh. The very fact that the Moslems of Bangladesh fought a bloody civil war to separate themselves from more fervently Islamic (western) Pakistan is a good indication that the former "East" Pakistan was more tolerant of its minorities than "Western" Pakistan.

Why do I continue to call Islam primitive and intolerant?

Look at what's going on in Israel and Iraq even today. Parents send out their teenage children strapped with explosives so as to blow up innocent people on busses or in supermarkets. Is this happening in "Star Wars" or "Lord of the Rings?" No, it's happening in modern-day Islamic countries!

When Hitler was murdering the Jews by the tens of thousands in eastern Europe during the Second World War (something that the Islamic government of Iran refuses to acknowledge ever happened), did the Jews respond by strapping explosives around their teenage children and then sending them out to explode on German busses or in German supermarkets to kill innocent German civilians?

No.

But that's exactly what the Palestinians and other radical Islamic parents have done on many occasions to "kill the infidels" in the middle-east. Saddam Hussein even used to pay the families of suicide bombers in Israel a $25,000 fee.

That sounds very primitive to me.

reply

alright ... so now we are switching from indians religious tolerance (which doesn't even exist in the first place) to other directions ? no problem.
as for me being insulting ... i believe if u haD even few ounces of wits u could have understood that i am not insulting you but ur argument which is baseless and mind programmed and no first hand research of yours and hence yeah i insult your arguments and the way u are twisting and running it around because they are childish and ridiculously hilarious and i absolutely cant help it.
i dont believe myself that i am even bothering to change your mind .... in-fact i am not even trying to change your mind i am trying to open it for your own good BUT if it doesn't matter to you i cant be bothered.
talking about iraq...tell me something when some unwanted company gets in your country by force with theexcuse of LIBERATING THE PEOPLE what wud u do ? go on a strike ? do a rally ? well thats one approach too ... if you go MADLY SELF LESS and decide to wipe out (which realistically speaking u can not) u might also be putting a bomb on urself and take them with u to the next world..,i dont believe u are ignorant enough to talk about israel ... perhaps u shud study a bit more to see how israel was created ... one day it was palestine and the next day they decided to make israel in its place ... its a state that is made with FORCE AND VIOLENCE...for ages palestinian tried to make them leave their country and what did they get in reponse from security council and united nation ? SILENCE and TURNING A BLIND eye are the words i am looking for... considering these things there is a famous saying ""NOTHING IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN A PERSON WHO HAS NOTHING TO LOSE"".
for your record muslims are not the first to come up with suicide bombing and terrorism in civil population... first incidents of suicidal attacks were done by japanese on USA forces...i am not sure but i think they were called kamikaze ? or something like that.
and then there were bomb blasts by irish people to (referring to northern ireland conflicts)... to this very day basques (spain ) do bomb blasts in civil population.... my point ... if YOU dont know something or if you are not TOLD AND INFORMED about something it doesnt mean that it doesnt even exist....its not about religion completely ... and u think it is than roman Catholics(irish) and other christians (basque) and jews (israel ) are probably even bigger terrorist and intolerant towards anybody regardless of the religion... so they are intolerant monsters without an excuse ? oh by the way i am not even referring to pre partition incidents of Christian rules of south east asian subcontinent ,, u need to do a bit more digging there.
and now finally coming to the east and west Pakistan issue.
the so called rebel was conducted by indian intelligence agency called RAW (research and analysis wing) by recruiting the mostly non muslim population of east Pakistan .... and hence this issue was more than religious intolerance or anything.
by the way i never said that those incidents happened in starwars of lord of the rings... i said your facts are all mere fantasies and baseless like those... u were right ... jews did not blasts in civilian population of germany for the reason they were too few to retaliate or rebel ... and the 2nd reason they were pretty much well contained by the nazis ... and when they CAN do it like today ? they are doing the same thing... bashing ISlam and muslim has become pretty much a fashion like a snobbish skinny female model saying in an artificial way " i am on strict dieting to stay in this business ,,gucci is my fav designer and oh .. btw i hate muslims and islam .. so cruel they are ".. duh.
talking about Islam being intolerant and primitive have u ever bothered to think how stereotypical you are toward Islam and muslims and intolerant too perhaps without even bothering to to a study of the facts yourself and not just believing what u are told ? i believe not ... thats dripping all from your words.... for you the crow is white no matter who says and how much he says that its black u are just not willing to except it ... maybe its a way of telling urself that u are smart n clever and that doesnt necessarily mean that u are.
this is my last reply to you cuz i am leaving this place for good.....as i have been taught that words are precious and useful and shud not be wasted where they are an absolute wastage..hence i dont care what u think or believe anymore.. everybody is responsible for his own destiny... but perhaps u have decided that mr bush , fox news,and cnn are responsible for yours... have fun and have a good life .
ciao.

reply

The Japanese Kamikaze pilots (suicide bombers) attacked ONLY MILITARY TARGETS! They would have felt it deeply beneath their honor to fly their planes into civilian targets.

Islamic suicide bombers seemingly PREFER to attack innocent, defenceless civilians.

A thousand years ago, Islamic civilization was among the most advanced in the world, both in literature and art, as well as in the sciences (e.g. algebra). But today, they have sadly slipped into becoming barbaric, primitive, and notably intolerant of other cultures and religions.

Maybe they can change that with new democracies emerging like Iraq, as well as in older democracies like modern-day Turkey.

reply

I never said that India was completely tolerant of other religions, only that it is a MUCH MORE TOLERANT nation than Pakistan appears to be. But even Pakistan was more tolerant than Afghanistan under the Taliban government, which actually blew up ancient statues of Bhudda that were thousands of years old because the Moslems extremists making up the Taliban leadership felt they were idolatrous.

India's population today includes many tens-of-thousands of Sikhs and well over a million Moslems, does it not? These are Moslems who chose not to move to Pakistan after independence, and are still free to practice their religion in India today. How many practicing Hindus or Sikhs remain in Pakistan or Bangladesh?

reply

dumpington, good posts. It's amazing how Muslim apologists go on propagating this nonsese about how tolerant Islam is, that too in comparison with other religions! Also, remember that the partition itself was the result of Moslem gangster politics and fanaticism. The perverted idea was/is that Hindus are the real colonisers and aliens to be struggled against- this ideology continues in Kashmir today most violently. The Moslems started riots in Calcutta, then spread them to Punjab and the NWFP. The idea being to terrorise non-Moslems, particularly Hindus, into fleeing and thereby creating a defacto Islamic state and homeland, free of the alien, oppressive, undesirable idolatrous infidels. This is Pakistan's and Kashmir's garbage ideology.

reply

""India's population today includes many tens-of-thousands of Sikhs and well over a million Moslems, does it not? These are Moslems who chose not to move to Pakistan after independence, ""

plenty of them chose not to move to Pakistan for several reasons and i personally know plenty of them who have been told by their fathers and grandfathers that it was "DANGEROUS to stay and it was CERTAIN DEATH if they try to leave and move to Pakistan"

""d are still free to practice their religion in India today""

as i said before u have to look a bit more church burning and mosque demolishing against the will of muslims and christians etc are religious tolerance in ur opinion?

""How many practicing Hindus or Sikhs remain in Pakistan or Bangladesh?""

i think some other guy already rubbed this fact in ur face but u cant understand for some reasons i dont know why. Pakistan was MADE in the region where the non-muslim population was already less then 1% . and all that population were residents of the areas that are eiher ON or CLOSE to the todays's border of Pakistan and inda. Pakistan has extremely small minorities population but have u ever heard that a church has been burned, or that the sikhs who came for pilgrimage have been attacked? or harrassed? or that Pakistan govt decided to demolish their holy place? i dont whats ur assumption based on, some fancy dream of urs mmaybe.
with the limited sikh and hindu population they are all absolutely free to practice their religion
so i can say with 100% certainity that Pakistan is WAY MUCH MORE tolerant than india (and if u wanna continue blabbing let me correct u that its MUSLIM, ur spells are wrong)

"" It's amazing how Muslim apologists go on propagating this nonsese about how tolerant Islam is,""

there are NO muslim apologists. to whome u are refering are just ordinary mulsims like everybody else following what Islam preahces on the contrary the others who decide to blast ur ass into pieces are militants (and they have their reasons for that and some of them are justifiable and some are not but the act of harming urself and innocents as not justifiable on any grounds)

""Also, remember that the partition itself was the result of Moslem gangster politics and fanaticism""

huh ha... i was thinking abt a serious arguement with u but u are a typical mind programmed Pakistan hating indian so instead of arguing with ur or rubbing ur own crap in ur face i'd rather say "*beep* urself u *beep* wanker"


reply

Oh stop putting on airs ISI agent! Hundreds of Hindu temples were destroyed in 1992, after the Ayodhya incident. Hindus have been reduced to a tiny minority in Pakistan through forced conversions, persecution, killings and forced marriages. In Bangladesh too, the Hindu( and Buddhist) population has come down hugely.

And yes, Pakistan was formed through *massive* violence. There was nothing progressive, secular or humanistic about it.

reply


Furthermore ISI agent, India would also seem be much more "tolerant" if it had a tiny, inconsequential minority of Moslems and other minority groups merely coming on a pilgrimmage once a year.

That is, taking your comments on board about Pakistan being more 'tolerant' with its small minorities. A dubious position, at best!

reply

Ayodhya incident? oh you mean the one where HINDU exteremist destroyed a MUSLIM masjid right? So much for religious tolerance.

Also provide the fact where hundreds of hindus temples were destroyed.

reply



Wow, one disputed religious structure demolished, and you start questioning religious tolerance in India. Well, after it was brought down, hundreds of temples, undisputed ones at that, were destroyed in Pakistan, and in Bangladesh.

Pakistan as a country is based on religious hatred, religious fanaticism and religious separatism. That's why is was created, and why it has taken on the character it has. Pakistan should welcome religious riots and displays of intolerance, such as there are, in India. Because without that, Pakistan would be nothing. Pakistan can then always point to those incidents, to say, "Look, it was a good idea to create a separate Moslem homeland"

reply

Yeah Pakistan couldn't even protect the Sri Lankan Cricket team who were the only team willing to even risk playing Cricket in Pakistan (all other countries were not as stupid). Well look what happened, at least 7 SL players injured and 5 Pak police killed. Now there won't be any Cricket in Pakistan for a long time. And Imran Khan was having a go at the Indian team for refusing to play in Pakistan. You know if the Indian team went there, they will kill the whole lot. It's a good thing they didn't listen to that idiot.

And let's not forget that the attack on Mumbai was carried out by Pakistanis, although the Pakistan government made a fool out of itself by trying to deny it. I actually now think bollywood is justified in it's depiction of Pakistani muslim extremists.

reply

""Kamikaze pilots (suicide bombers) attacked ONLY MILITARY TARGETS""

you gotta be kidding me

""hey have sadly slipped into becoming barbaric, primitive, and notably intolerant of other cultures and religions. ""

thats is debatable because judaism and chritians are also becoming intolerant of Islam and muslims and muslims are reacting to the actions of russians in chechania, Israel in palestine, Usa in iraq and afghanistan and if u think that the idea of TAKE NO *beep* AND PUNCH BACK is barbarism and intolerant behaviour then excuse me but u shud be shot to death with all ur weird ideas.
the way u put it , nobody has the right to fight back but to accept the stronger side.

"" only that it is a MUCH MORE TOLERANT nation than Pakistan ""

sorry mate u are absolutely hilarious, i try to keep up with news a bit and travel and explore facts first handedlt rather than listening to fox news, cnn , zee news and what not n what not. i'd rather have authentic news than ALOT OF INFO. but i dont recall any incidents of church burning, mosque demolishing, christian slaughtering and ofcorse the most famous hindu-mulim conflics of gujrat kind of incidents in Pakistan.
hundredds of thousands of sikhs go to Pakistan every year for pilgrimage never heard of anything bad

reply

"Kamikaze pilots (suicide bombers) attacked ONLY MILITARY TARGETS""

isiagent wrote - "you gotta be kidding me"

Nope....He was correct about that.

reply

All of you arguing about religion totally missed the whole point of the film.
Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs alike were all victims of the partition.
The film is just a STORY. It does not represent the COUNTLESS stories of the atrocities of the partition. Naseem's oppressive family does not represent all Muslim families. It is just a STORY. Stop feeling you need to defend Islam.

reply

Even before partition in 1945-46 there were large scale massacre of Hindus and Sikhs in NWFP and western Punjab which had convinced Congressmen of necessity of partition when congress president came and saw a well full of women corpse somewhere in Punjab....

Today the way Taliban treated women or the way Pakistani male murder and kill their women folk in name of honor even in western countries is enough to give one an idea about how these women of enemy would have been treated in those days....

reply

I thought Hindus have honor killing too, mainly because of cast system. One would think an Indian would know better that honor killing is more cultural than religious.

But for evil people to do good things, that takes Islam

reply

What anshul says is correct, though. Moslems were rioting and killing even before the partition of 1947. It was purely anti-Hindu, with a mind to remove as many non-Moslems from the proposed area of Pakistan, as possible. As for the point about 'cultural' vs religious i.e honour killings, it could be true. However, Islam itself is largely, to the extent of 90% or more, ideological and political, not religious and spiritual. It's a means of thought and people control, and traditionally of military expansionism and empire building.

reply