Hindukush = hindu killer
Submitted by G.Vishvas (Germany), Apr 21, 2007 at 05:17
Respected Frahad Navkhod
Good to know a muslim who does not have an Arabic name (I suppose your name is persian). Islam is an instrument of Arabic hegemony. But at least your name (if not your mind) is an exception.
My intention is to expose islam as a fascist totalitarian ideology (pretending to be a good religion) and islam as an instrument of arabic imperialism and arabisation.
I would very much appreciate you correcting me by pointing out what my in-built lies are. I also participated in two muslim web forums and criticised islam and I was immediately accused of "hatred" and kicked out. So much about muslims' open-minded-ness. "Call someone a dog and shoot him" - as they say.
Brahmins are being dubbed alien in India by dalits, dravidian racists, muslims, Marxists etc. The muslim idea is: the Brahmins (brahminism) also came from outside of India like muslims (islam) did so what right do they have to call us alien.
Brahmins were among the many others (many more non-brahmins) who protested against quotas for OBC's (not dalits). It is the creamy layer problem also involved in it. The quotas allotted to OBC's or dalits have been mostly filled by only some castes among the OBC's and dalits and others have gone empty handed. E.g. in Maharastra the dalit quota is mostly bagged by the mahars, the other dalits complained about it. So the mahars did exactly what they accused the high castes of having done. So on it goes.
The muslims are proud of what their ancestors did in terms of aggressions, violent acts, plunderings, rape, abdications, conversions, theft etc. Even in the year 2007 there is no move among the muslims to make a clean break with this past. They teach their children to be proud of the battle of badr (627 AD) but do not wish to be reminded of the ill-deeds of their ancestors which were perpetrated after 627 AD. I reminded you of 2007 only to tell you that kuran is out of date now. Come and live in the 21st century, but let's not forget the good and BAD things done by our ancestors (including also my Brahmin ancestors).
Human beings are neither equal nor equal-valued. They never were and never shall be. If islam tells something else then it is populism, just to attract people to islam. Islam is thus making a promise which it did not, and can not, and will not be able to keep. Why this deceit? To attract people and fool them. At least Brahmins don't issue forth that lie. In return they get vilified. If someone falls from the second floor and breaks his leg then why blame the law of gravity or blame Newton, who merely formulated this law in an algebraic fashion? So it is with inequality. Brahmins do not create inequality, they point out that inequality exists and hence humans will have to be separated and shielded from one another – as groups and as individuals. Hindu religions are the only ones which have the honesty to talk about human inequality. Other religions are deceitful in this respect and make false promises in order to attract people into their fold. As far as skin-colour is concerned you will find many very dark-skinned Brahmins also – never seen any?
Dr. Ambedkar – who has now been made into a god by his followers – was acceptable to the Brahmins as a person but not as leader of a group of people. To what group-dynamism leads to – we have seen that recently in India as the dalits go on a rampage whenever a "holy" statue of Ambedkar is defiled (in Kanpur some drunk dalits did it and they went berserk and burned the Deccan Queen near Mumbai). So the Brahmins were right. In fact one reason why the muslim Jinnah disliked the hindu Gandhi was because Gandhi went in for group actions and Jinnah resented that and warned him about the ill consequences of such group-agitation methods in politics. To what group-actionism in politics leads to – we are seeing the ill-effects of that in the Indian subcontinent. This is called ochlocracy. So Jinnah was right in his warnings in this regard (but not in all matters).
Re.: Dr. Ambedkar. Do take care to read what he writes about islam and why he rejected the idea of converting to islam.
I am not an expert, but I have read a lot about Judaism, christianity and islam and their mutual inherent hatred and rejection. If there was any occasional or regional peace between them in the past then it was a result of ignorance of this ingrained hatred and mutual rejections or a stop-gap arrangement of convenience. Muslims and their rulers often did not take islam seriously and then they brought forth tolerance, science or peace. As soon as islam asserts itself these three disappear.
As muslims become more aware of real islam and its rejective arguments against earlier "abrahamic" religions, this "tolerance" has vanished. A and B had no quarrel in the past does not automatically mean they will not have it in the future. Its is often a question of knowing one's theory better. Once the jews, Christians and muslims come to know each others theological theories then there is no peace between them anywhere.
Often muslims come up with this idea of past muslim (pseudo-)tolerance to suggest that islam is tolerant. With that trick you can fool some naïve guys – but not one who knows the theory and history of islam. Demographic numbers and changes clearly prove that islam is intolerant and causes non-muslims to run way or be exterminated. Iran, Anatolia, Sindhu river basin in Pakistan, Arabia, North Africa etc. – everywhere the non-muslim populations have fallen below 5% from the 100% some 1000-1400 years ago. Any talk of Islamic tolerance is completely cancelled by these numbers.
Islam inherently satisfies several criteria of fascism, totalitarianism and imperialism – because it presents itself as religion of god it can hide these ill characteristics cleverly - something which other "godless" f-t-i ideologies cannot do. Islam knows how to misuse the word "god / allah" for its own deceits and tricks. The very word "god" makes many people loose their intelligence and critical abilities. God is the most misused word in the history of mankind and islam was and is a world-champion in this misuse. And there is an enormous amount of hatred and anger in the kuran against islam-rejecters and ex-muslims.
Hindu religions are free to develop under the leadership of innumerable personalities all over the Indian subcontinent even today. Islam was closed on the day Mohammad died in 632 AD. Islam regards innovation (biddat) as a sin. Therefore islam belongs to Makkah and Madinah of the 7th century and has no relevance today - except for and through violence and manipulation upon those who have no will or ability to resist its falsehoods and intimidations.
The word hindu is not a persian word. It comes from the name "Sindhu" in the achamenean times (6th century BC). The Iranians (not Persians) pronounced the "s" often as "h" (see asura > ahura, soma> haoma etc.). Thus sindhu became hindu. From hindu it became indos / (plural) indoi, since the Greeks could not pronounce "h" and had no "h" and no proper "u". The word "indoi" travelled west to the latin-roman areas and was transformed into "India". (And Columbus transported it to the Americas – the name America itself being derived from the name of the Italian traveller Amerigo Vespucci!). If someone misreads your name as Farad and then changes it to Faraday, then you may be mistaken as a descendant of Michael Faraday. But that does not really make you into a descendant of Michael Faraday.
Hindukush means "hindu killer" from the Persian verb kushtan = to kill. The name of these mountains and how they got this name should remind you of what muslims did to the hindus. Some muslims even tried to change the name to "hindu khush" in order to create the exactly opposite implication and thus try to hide the muslims' ill-deeds. (kafir (in original Arabic) = one who hides or conceals). The word Hindukush came approx. 1500 years after the word hindu came up.
You muslims must develop the habit of reading more and wider than what your muslim leaders and teachers limit upon you. The idea that kuran is the last and best guidance is one of your basic follies. E.g. read the wikipedia (in internet) and you will have more knowledge and intellectual freedoms than what islam can ever give you. And there are many more honest and free sources of knowledge. Islam means submission and that is incompatible with honesty and independent thinking. A god who demands submission is no god. He is a tyrant. And worse still and dangerous are those who speak in the name of such a submission-demanding god.
Read also my comment onhttp://www.danielpipes.org/comments/89909
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (105) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes