#All India Muslim League

[tomorrowwithme]

Are you aware of the recent situation in Assam? If yes, what is your opinion on it?

Hi, thanks for asking. By the recent situation in Assam, I assume, anon is asking about the eviction of over 600 families, most of whom are Bengali speaking Muslims, in the districts of Goalpara and Bongaigaon. It's difficult to answer within a Tumblr ask about such a complicated topic. In order to understand the situation, one needs to study the history of Assam, its districts and ethnic groups, its history (mainly the colonial and post-colonial period), post-partition political scenario, economics, migration patterns and its relation to East Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Let us skip the pre-medieval (cultural flow with the Shungas, Kushanas, Palas etc.) era and medieval period of the Ahoms, Kamarupis, Kochs, Kamatas, Kacharis, Jayantias, Nagas, Chutias, etc. and their conflicts with the Muslim Ghaznavids and the Mughals.

Let us focus on the British East India Company annexing Assam to Bengal province in its empire after the Anglo-Burmese War.

During the British colonial rule, the economic dynamics changed dramatically. Migration to and from the state occurred, and created new ethnic divisions of labour. I highly recommend you read the book Sons of the Soil by Myron Weiner. Then happened the partition of India. The All India Muslim League could not come to agreement with the Indian National Congress, there were of course the Two-Nation Theory which has its roots in the Aligarh Movement, "Ahl-i-Hadith" and "Ahl-i-Quran" movements and, ultimately, Shah Waliullah Dehlawi's ideology.

The bottom line was that the Mohammedans of the Indian subcontinent could not accept a Hindu majority rule, therefore Pakistan was formed. Violent pogroms preluded the partition and equally violent migrations across the newly drawn borders followed. This was a huge tragedy of India. Hindus lost chunks of their holy motherland, and subcontinent's Muslims too were at the crossroads when they lost their previous glory and place in the new world order.

Sylhet referendum, and partition of Bengal, millions of Hindus had to leave East Pakistan, following violent riots (1950s and 1964 anti-Hindu pogroms in East Pakistan were the most notable cases), and many settled in West Bengal as well as in Assam. The latter caused ethnic tensions between the Bengali Hindu refugees and some tribes of Assam, as both had to compete for same jobs and resources.

The situation wasn't helped when many Bengali speaking Muslims migrated to Assam for economic reasons. Under the rule of Muhammed Saadullah, many Bengali speaking Muslims were granted free land. During the rule of B.P Chaliha, the PIP act of 1962 was brought in as there were rising ethnic, religious and political tensions. During the 1964 Hazratbal riots when over 800,000 Hindus were forced to leave their homes and flee to India, this caused enmity in the border regions and deportation demands of Bengali speaking Muslim migrants in Assam. At the time, Pakistan's president condemned India heavily in the UN for attempting to deport Muslim migrants, while Indian representatives were sitting ducks in the UN. This situation kept inflaming tensions, Assam Agitation took place in the 1980s, violent clashes and separatism, Assam Accord by Rajiv Gandhi. Fast forward to this day. There are both ethnic and religious tensions still. Most people, who comment on Assam, believe that this is an anti-Muslim issue fuelled by BJP when it's not. Over the decades, there have been cases like the Silapathar massacre of Bengali Hindu refugees by tribals. Most social justice commentators always see Indian ethnic clashes through the lens that tribals are oppressed and Hindus are bad guys, so this Silapathar case might open up another perspective. Diffusing this complex ethnic conflict is a mammoth task. Assam as a state is extremely volatile, it was only recently (2020) that separatists such as ULFA laid down their weapons, thanks to current central governance.

Now, we come to the recent case. Apparently, mostly Bengali speaking Muslim migrants had encroached land that was not theirs in the first place. It is likely they will be given compensation as this has been the case previously too. The whole situation is of course extremely unfortunate. People suffering due to the long reaching shadow of history.

As a child of Bengali Hindu refugees, though, please don't ask me to feel for Bengali speaking Muslim migrants or support the likes of Maulana Bhashani. This is akin to asking a Congolese to feel for the Belgian refugees during the 1960 Congo crisis.

[galaxymagitech]

Atheism — He has expressed distaste for religion and faith in some media, including animated movies, and the League of Assassins’ cultish loyalty to Ra’s does not leave a lot of room for belief in a higher power.

Agnosticism — Bruce sometimes seems to be agnostic, and Damian could have picked that up from him. He has also been raised with a variety of cultural influences, which could result in him having a general belief in religion but no specific one.

Christianity — Bruce’s father was Christian, and I think Damian has met Santa Claus. He also lives in a predominantly Christian country now, and Arab Christians exist so he could be Christian on his mother’s side as well. Alfred is definitely Christian, and Dick is sometimes implied to be Christian, so those influences are present in his current life.

Jewish — Damian’s father’s mother was Jewish, and at least somewhat practicing. Although Damian wouldn’t be considered Jewish halachically by that alone, if Bruce raises him with Jewish traditions, some sects of Judaism (reform and I believe reconstructionist) would consider him Jewish. Additionally, Arab Jews also exist—he could be Mizrahi on his mother’s side.

Muslim — Damian is Arab on his mother’s side, and while not all Arabs are Muslim, many are. He also spent a lot of time in regions with predominantly Muslim populations, making this the most likely religion for him to have early exposure to.

Buddhist — Damian is Chinese on his mother’s side as well, and Buddhism is one of the most common religions in China.

Taoist or Chinese Folk Religion — Damian is Chinese on his mother’s side, and Taoism and Chinese folk religions are also common in China.

Hinduism — It’s just a very popular world religion. Also, Nanda Parbat is based on Nanga Parbat, which is in a primarily Muslim country but very close to India.

Greek Paganism — Various Ancient Greek religious things are genuine facts in the DC universe, including Greek gods. If Damian is going based off of evidence, he might end up here.

[balrogballs]

Hello, Ms. Balls! When you're feeling up to it, I have a question about your AU. If this was already mentioned in what you've uploaded thus far, I'm sorry, I'm an idiot and I missed it, but when were Elrond and Elros taken back to England? Before independence, after, during the Partition...? What were their experiences like during that time, and what were the Feanorians' experiences like? Asking because I was doing a little reading about the history of Kerala in the 20th Century last night because I wanted to know what the Partition was like in Kerala in terms of any violence, population transfers, etc., that your characters might have dealt with.

Most of what I know about the Partition comes from a class on the experiences of women and girls during ethnic and sectarian violence that I took as an undergrad many, many years ago. We spent a good chunk of the semester learning about violence against women during the Partition and studying survivor narratives, which were then and remain now some of the most horrifying things I've ever read. But we looked mostly at Punjab Province and Rajputana, places that were actively being split between India and Pakistan, and with Kerala being much farther south and on the coast, I'm not sure whether the impact would have been the same. I do know that the king of Travancore wanted to be independent of both Britain and India, but from what I understand your characters are in or near Kozhikode, which was in Malabar District, not Travancore, during British rule, and most of what I found on Google about Malabar during the Partition was either very vague, very confusing, or from sites that didn't seem to be particularly reputable.

If this information is going to be revealed in later chapters, or even if this question would just be more work to answer than you feel like doing, please feel free to ignore!

Hello hello,

And I am LOVING this level of engagement!!!

So the reason Kerala is a bit hit-or-miss online re: Partition narratives is that there wasn’t much of an impact on the state itself. Re: Partition, the vast majority of the violence was between — and this is of course oversimplification, especially as the British Raj were involved — Hindu and Muslim communities, majority in the Northern and “Hindi belt” middle states.

Communal violence between these two communities were easily stoked and all three of the Congress Party (India), the Muslim League (Pakistan) and the British Raj had fanned the flames before freaking out at the fire.

Most of the Southern states were either Hindu-majority states OR territories like Goa, which were majorly Christian and/or occupied by other foreign states, hence again, violence did not carry over too much.

Kerala however, was a bit of an outlier — there was and still remains actually a large Muslim population there, but whilst some communal tension did exist and still does, it escaped major religious violence for two reasons: ‘foreign’ religion being spread in the state across centuries of trade or refugee migration rather than conquest meant it wasn’t susceptible to ‘invader’ narratives. Eg. Parsi communities and Jewish communities had all settled in Kerala at various periods, all primarily through trade or refugee migration. Secondly, the state was almost exclusively controlled by trade unions, Marxists and other left groups.

So essentially, Kerala was relatively peaceful during the time of Partition in that specific context, because the religious communities had lived in (relative) harmony for centuries + the state having a very “leftist” consciousness meant even the religious folk, for the most part, tended to have a secular political outlook. Case in point in fic is of course the Fëanorians, who are culturally Muslim but don’t practice, and their politics have nothing to do with their religion.

(Although, as I mentioned in the fic it’s a very ‘theoretical’ Marxism in that they’re basically just democratic socialists who really like the colour red, nowhete near Soviet-style austere communism or Chinese-style cultural upheaval, it was more — like Maedhros puts it — making sure the bins get picked up and that every child can read — hence why it worked pretty well and continues to do so… the opposition party are centre-left, eg. Hilary Clinton types in a domestic context, and they serve as the ruling party alternatively.)

However, that doesn’t mean political violence doesn’t exist there, far from it, it’s not at all idyllic and to this day the ruling and opposition parties go out and beat each other up for memes… a couple of scraps from the upcoming chapter:

In the sixties and seventies, the political theatre of Kerala consisted of two primary stages: talking and thrashing. This was the kind of teamwork that appealed to the father-son duo of Maedhros and Elros — the latter a debonair, silver-tongued ideologue with an advanced degree in political theory, and the former a six-foot-three powerhouse with a millimetre-long fuse, kilometre-long rap sheet and an advanced degree in battering people he didn’t like.

Maedhros trying to invite the opposition party to a birthday party for a child:

“Oh, yes, you’re right,” Maedhros nodded, before turning back to Elros. “Tell Finrod if he and his people don’t turn up, I’ll break their legs next time I see them, and personally see to it that Dior’s days are numbered. Oh, then stop at the post office and send a telegram to Caranthir and his jungle people, and tell him I’ll break more than his legs if I don’t see him.”

Essentially, this kind of thing was commonplace between the two parties, however in a national context the two (both being ostensibly secular and liberal) tend to team up against the right wing/British Raj. However, Maedhros talking about thrashing people like it’s a yoga class wouldn’t really be off the mark for a party leader in the 50s-70s. It’s also a wink wink nudge about what the British Raj and the postcolonial State considered “violence” in that Maedhros and his buddies breaking legs for breakfast isn’t a problem for them, but a tiny act of resistance to police brutality landed him in prison for 10 years.

But yes - Elrond and Elros had a relatively idyllic childhood because they were very far removed from the violence of Partition — whilst they were found by the brothers in Delhi in around 1937 while Maedhros was at his most, er, revolutionary, said brothers lived in Kerala so until 1952, Elrond and Elros were raised there.

In the fifties, Kerala was also a pain in Nehru’s ass because while everyone else tried to get on with Independence, Kerala went and tried to secede from the union over language politics (tbh they were right but guys, TIMING 😭). Either way, the bulk of the problems within the state were regionally constrained, and whilst violence was commonplace, it was not mass violence but rather political infighting.

However, Elrond’s return comes at the close of Indira Gandhi’s Emergency, which was a whole other kettle of fish re: state oppression — fic itself goes into it later so I won’t expand much here, but essentially Kerala was Not In The Dictatorship’s Good Books, considering the political direction of the state and its ruling parties’ tendency to gang up against the centre, tons of police violence etc.

To this day the state continues to be a pain in the national ass tbh, bless them, considering the central government of India has never shifted further left than “milquetoast centrism”, but as of late they just… pretend it doesn’t exist for the sake of everyone’s mental health. Eg. peacenik cousin with a massive peace dove forehead tattoo in a family of war vets.

Hope this helps!!!

[brownbitchshit]

If you care so much about Bangladesh maybe speak up about the Hindu genocide happening there

Let me clear this up once and for all. There's no 'Hindu Genocide' going on in Bangladesh. There's vandalism and looting happening all over the country because of the lawlessness and the vacuum of power, both Muslims and Hindus both are being affected by it. The targeted attack on Hindus are done because of their political affiliation with the former ruling party of Sheikh Hasina, which is applicable for Muslims as well as Muslim Awami League politicians are being attacked.

India is creating a mass Anti-Bangladesh propaganda to justify their action of giving murderer Hasina shelter and Modi government wants to reinstate her in power as it would benefit them.

Indian police and government officials have already declared that these are false claims. So did credible news source like Al Jazeera. The hindu genocide narrative is completely baseless and untrue. Instead of twitter post or any local Indian news portal, if you can bring foreward any credible proof of a 'Genocide' let me know.

Bangladeshi people are very open minded and secular. Hindu houses are being attacked true, but mostly because of their affiliation with Awami League as Hindus have always been pro awami League. Few other attacks are done by Awami League themselves to create chaos and we have been anticipating them for a while as they wanted to play the religion card to divide the nation to stay in power.

So please please do not listen to propagandas. Instead listen to proper news. If anything Sheikh Hasina committed a genocide. Bangladeshi people are doing their best to stop these attacks but it will take a while unfortunately.

For reference watch 'DeshBhakt's video and Al Jazeera.

[oldgayjew]

The Nation of Israel is only 8,630 square miles in area ...

These are the present members of the Arab League (which was founded in 1945) and they represent an area that stretches from India to the Atlantic Ocean ... the original 6 members created a refugee problem involving 550,000 Arabs who were displaced from Israel while displacing 700,000 Jews from their member nations ... Israel took in all the Jewish refugees, but these clowns refuse to take in any refugees, so they stick them in camps and cry to the world about those poor Palestinians ...

The Arab/Muslim world doesn't give a camel's ass for the problem that they created and the displaced refugees are nothing but public relations gimmick so that they can lie in order to turn the World against Israel ...

If you still support Hamass and Palestine then you will deserve what you'll get when terrorism comes to your town ...

(Grab yer ankles and get ready)

[bajoop-sheeb]

I can't help but notice that all of the people in your anti-colonialism by "marginalized people" book rec list are people who were born and grew up in either the US or, in one or two cases, another white Anglophone country. I.e. the imperial core.

As a non-American I wonder whether, due to the cultural hegemony of the US and other Anglophone countries, the perspectives of people who have spent their whole lives in the Imperial core (even if marginalized in other ways due to their race or some other attribute) can be considered "authentic" depictions of the effects of colonialism in the way that you are presenting them. I find that people from the US, even POC people from the US, are often pretty incapable of understanding non-US perspectives on social justice issues because they're rarely exposed to them and because they grew up brainwashed with media that treats the US as the center of the world, so they overlay the US framework over everything.

I would perhaps have liked to see more recs for authors writing about colonialism who actually grew up in countries that have been affected by colonialism, or at least in countries that aren't as rich and powerful as the US and are therefore heavily dependent on the political whims of powerful Western ones. I'm sure there's a bunch of people in South America writing SF/F, for example, considering their long tradition of awesome magical realism. Or South Africa. Or India (I note that Salman Rushdie is not on your list, for example). I'm not writing this to be pettish, because I don't know enough about it either and would actually like to know, I just feel like perhaps we should all be a bit humbler when talking about this since a strictly US-centric perspective is still a VERY limited one when talking about colonialism (by definition an international, intercultural phenomenon), even when written by POC.

I also wonder about your definition of "marginalized" and if it doesn't fall into the same US-centrism that I talked about in my previous paragraph (even if we assume that "marginalized" means "marginalized as it relates to colonialism" and ignore other forms of marginalization). Is a person from, say, the Balkans, marginalized enough to write about anti-colonialism, or are they exactly the same as a white American in your perspective? Does it matter where from the Balkans? Does it matter if they're Muslim or Christian? How about a Ukrainian person? How about a Ukrainian Jew? Is a person from Bosnia or Ukraine, who went through a war in their lifetime, less qualified to write about war than Kuang, who grew up middle class and went to an Ivy League school (and honestly did a really shitty job of portraying a war in The Poppy Wars), just because they're "Caucasian"?

Also, people are allowed to acknowledge flaws of books written by POC without being automatically labeled as racist, you know. Finding Babel too heavy-handed or on the nose has nothing to do with finding POC characters annoying or unrelatable and sorry but, yeah, IMHO it's really on the nose and annoying about it. It's the writing style that's the problem, not the themes. Also the central metaphor, IMHO, makes it completely useless as a colonialism allegory because if you can destroy colonialism by destroying one magical uberpowerful whatsit, your book is kinda not serious enough about nuanced representation of sociological and political forces to be considered impactful anti-colonialist literature. Saying that as someone who loves Butler and Jemisin. Thea Guanzhon, for example, is a Filipina born and raised in the Philippines and still lives there, which makes her book way more of an "own voices" account of colonialism than Kuang's could ever be in my accounting, but that doesn't mean that her account of colonialism has any particular nuance to it (so far it's just the backdrop for the enemies to lovers romance). So even assuming that Kuang's account is resonant enough with enough people (which I know it is because her book is super popular), who is more deserving of being on your "own voices" list, Kuang or Guanzhon?

I also wonder why white women in particular?

The simple response to all of this is that the post you're referring to broke containment.

I debated replying, because I can't help but feel your message was written in bad faith. But I'm going to try to give you the benefit of the doubt.

You are absolutely right about the limitations of the original list. I truly didn't expect it to reach so many people, and I am not nearly as well-read as I'd like to be when it comes to literature written outside of the West. Please take a look at the reblogs, where a bunch of awesome people have done incredible work filling the gaps I left.

I struggle with the rest of your message. I explicitly stated that I do not expect people to enjoy specific books written by BIPOC authors, simply that I've noticed a very frustrating pattern. And yet you suggest I'm saying that if someone doesn't like Babel or The Hurricane Wars, I'm saying they're racist. Be serious.

Even as a child of multigenerational immigrants, I'll freely admit that I personally have a very US-centric perspective on social issues that I need to work on, but it's wild of you to say that all POC people born in the US are "pretty incapable of understanding" global issues.

When I wrote "marginalized" in the original post, what I really meant was "BIPOC and BIPOC queer people.” I should’ve been more careful about the wording.

Why white women in particular? When it comes to anti-colonial and anti-imperialist fiction (written by Anglophones) the authors that I see most highly and frequently praised are white women. I'd list the specific ones I'm talking about here, but 1. I don't want to be hunted for sport by their fans, 2. I've actually enjoyed some of their work, and 3. they're only a small part of the problem and I think people should be allowed to write whatever they want as long as they can handle the criticism. But I'm sorry, white women. I'll do better next time. I also want to use this moment to apologize to all the dumbasses complaining about my tone/me being "shouty." Reverse racism is real, and we must all stand vigilant hahaha miss me

You telling me to be humble feels a tad hypocritical, but sure, I'll take that under advisement.

[hum-rang-hain]

Indian Elections (Part 2)

Part 2 of the result and campaign opinions is here!

I know I said that Rajasthan was Congress's biggest comeback, well I take it back because INDIA alliance won in Maharashtra with Congress getting 13 seats, Shiv Sena (og one) with 9 and NCP (again, og one) with 8. With BJP getting 9 seats, Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde one) and NCP (new one) getting 7 and 1 seats respectively, NDA lost 28 of its seats. And honestly, what a banger. Sharad Pawar probably deserves credit for this, that man is a shrewd politician. Also, the Congressi responsible for campaigning in Maharashtra also deserves credit, because Congress performed well and beyond the expectations here.

Tamil Nadu my beloved. Major INDIA sweep! DMK (22) and Congress (9) while BJP remained on the zero mark. As expected of the Tamil public. Everyone say thank you to DMK's campaign and BJP's incompetency to get the Tamilians on their side.

Chhattisgarh is an almost BJP sweep, with BJP getting 10 and Congress getting 1. Expected for Congress, given the Vidhaan Sabha results last year.

Another almost BJP (25) sweep is Gujarat, again, as expected. It is, after all BJP's garh, as my mother calls it. Very heavy campaign that paid off for BJP. Hats off to the Congressi who won 1 seat, probably worked very hard on his own.

Things get tricky in Karnataka, where BJP won with 17 seats and Congress got 9. Again, not much familiar with Karnataka politics, but BJP did lose 8 of its seats, so I guess a part of the public is losing trust in the government but it's not a majority yet. A Rajasthan like situation.

TDP shines in Andhra Pradesh with 16 seats, BJP with 4. Congress remained on its zero mark. Chandrababu Naidu come to the INDIA bloc you can be deputy PM

Congress (14), Muslim League (2) and CPIM (1) lead INDIA alliance to an almost sweep in Kerala, BJP getting 1 seat. I'm so glad that Shashi Tharoor won from Thiruvananthapuram, he is a delight to watch.

Things are perfectly balanced as all things should be in Telangana, with both Congress and BJP winning 8 seats each. I guess the public has major divide on issues and opinions.

That's it for this part, I thought this will be done in 2 parts, but guess not.

[drawingtutorialforkids]

How to Draw Pakistan Flag Step by Step | Pakistan Flag Drawing Easy | Pakistan National Flag Drawing

My motto is to show how to draw Pakistan Flag step by step, Pakistan flag drawing easy process or Pakistan national flag drawing. Whatever you want. First learn, how to draw pakistan flag easy method. Pakistan national flag drawing or how to draw national flag of pakistan beautifully is very easy.  Get started on how to draw a beautiful flag of Pakistan. The flag is the national symbol of any country. Even in ancient wars, the battle continued until the flag was torn down, no matter how many rivers of blood flowed. Even in today's world, every country is identified by its national flag. 

When and where was the first flag hoisted in the world? There are no authentic traditions about it, however, the image of a flag has been found on ancient Egyptian vessels. What shape would the first flag have been, and would it have been flown on the edge of a cave or on a boat at sea? One can only speculate. The month of August is underway. Every year, on Independence Day, the spring of national flags comes. Streets, roads, houses and vehicles are decorated with national flags. People express their love for the country by hoisting the national flag. But how did this flag originate? Who designed it and what symbols are associated with it? We know very little about them. Is the national flag taken from the logo of the Ottoman Caliphate? Historically, the national flag of Pakistan has been taken from the flag of the All India Muslim League, which was hoisted in Dhaka on December 30, 1906, at the founding session of the Muslim League. 

The color of this flag was green and there was a white crescent and star in the middle of it. However, it is also surprising that out of the two flags present in the logo of the Ottoman Caliphate, the greatest power of Muslims at that time, one is this flag, which was adopted by the All India Muslim League, and the other flag is the one that is today the national flag of Turkey. It is as if the foundations of the national flag of Pakistan are found in the national logo of the Ottoman Caliphate. Indian Muslims had a deep attachment to the Ottoman Caliphate, so perhaps the All India Muslim League adopted this flag in this regard. When the Turkish Caliphate was threatened, it was the Muslim leadership of India that stood up to protect it. Later, when the time came to create a national flag, the same flag was adopted after minor modifications. 

✅SUBSCRIBE: https://www.youtube.com/c/FarinKhanArtAcademy

#nationalflag #nationalflagdrawing #pakistanflag #flagdrawing

[citruscloudsandmoon]

Hi sis!

As someone who supports Palestine, I think I can share this with you as an Indian. Most of the Indians are saying that India should support Israel because it helped India during dark times. Yes, I appreciate it but how can I even bear to see them destroying a nation? So, should Indians support a a genocide where over 5000 children got killed in the past one month? Does it mean that I should consider someone as a close friend even if they are harming others? Just because they helped another nation, it doesn't give them the right to destroy another.

I'm a Hindu girl, but as a human being it's pathetic to see another nation crumbled regardless of what religion they are.

(Sorry for the long rant 😔).

Hello ❤️

Before religion, comes humanity. So it doesn't matter if you are Hindu or not; right is right and wrong is wrong. And what Israel is doing is beyond wrong; they are basically raising hell by torturing civilians in every way for more than 70 years.

Quoting your words 'Most of the Indians are saying that India should support Israel because it helped India during dark times'. There are different ways of viewing this statement. The political view would be that India should definitely support Israel because it always aided them in times of trouble and havoc. The socioeconomic view would be that India should support Israel because it has all the power and the backing of strong nations hence India supporting them means it will come under the big leagues.

But if looking at the said statement from moral perspective; India shouldn't support Israel because what they are doing is large scale genocide. And considering India's own past who had once been colonised by white rulers for about 89 years….it should know well enough about the pain and the suffering of Palestinians because their own ancestors went through it.

So Hun, don't feel bad. Don't feel guilty for supporting Palestinians. It just shows you value humanity above everything and that you are empathetic and have a very kind heart. And I know a lot of Indians that are supporting Palestinians and they aren't even Muslims. Americans, Latinas, blacks and browns all are supporting Palestinians despite their home nations vocally supporting Israel like US, UK and Canada. Should they be counted as traitors?! Absolutely not!

[tomorrowwithme]

Meet Fatima Bhutto. A columnist who often writes opinion pieces on various western publications, especially about Kashmir. She often calls Indians as Israelis, thusly trying to appeal to her ummah or the pro-palestine crowd. Who is she though? Let's look into her biography.

Fatima is the granddaughter of the former Prime Minister and President of Pakistan Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. In 1963, Bhutto was minister of foreign affairs and put the "Operation Gibraltar" into fruition (which fuelled terrorism in Kashmir). Pakistan's leadership specifically chose this name to draw a parallel to the Muslim conquest of the Iberian peninsula that was launched from Gibraltar. The very next year there was a false flag incident in Kashmir which led to the Pakistan sponsored anti-Hindu genocide in 1964.

He was the President of Pakistan from 1971 to 1973. His party Pakistan People's Party (PPP) lost to East Pakistan's Sheikh Mujibur (Mujib) Rahman's Awami League (AL). Bhutto refused to allow Mujib in the National Assembly as he considered Mujib's 6-point demand as a road to secession. It was under his command that the Operation Searchlight, where Bengali intellectuals were massacred at Dhaka University, both Hindu and Muslim professors and students were killed, took place. At the same time, all the Hindu neighbourhoods in Dhaka were attacked. It was under his presidency that Pakistan committed a genocide in East Pakistan, especially selecting the Hindu minority for their extermination campaign. 

Fatima's aunt Benazir Bhutto held a speech in 1990, which provoked Kashmir, leading into the Kashmiri Pandit genocide.

I am personally the last person to be ethnocentric, however Fatima Bhutto's incessant attacks against India, calling India occupier settler and "Israel of South Asia", is forcing me to point out the fact that over half of her family is from Iran, Afghanistan, etc. She is telling us, Hindus, the only natives of the region, that we are occupiers. Please share this far and wide. Shame these pieces of shits wherever you find them.

[udo0stories]

Sana Shayin, a third-year student studying international relations at King's College London, has been exposed to a lively and thought-provoking atmosphere on a regular basis. Her passions for human rights advocacy and diplomacy have grown throughout this degree. Given the current and rapidly changing political landscape of the region, she is thrilled to be a part of International Relations Today as the Editor for South and Central Asia and contribute to the academic discourse in the field. India is home to about 200 million Muslims, making it one of the world's largest Muslim populations, despite being a minority in the nation that is predominantly Hindi. Despite constitutional protections, Indian Muslims frequently experience violence, intolerance and discrimination since the country’s independence in 1947. Experts claim that anti-Muslim sentiment has surged since Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came to power in 2014 and began promoting a Hindu nationalist agenda. The government has enacted divisive policies that opponents claim will disenfranchise millions of Muslims and blatantly disregard their rights since Modi was reelected in 2019. Since Modi assumed office, there has been a rise in violence against Muslims. The acts have sparked protests in India and drawn criticism from all around the world. According to several analysts covering India, Modi’s reelection in 2024 would probably increase religious conflict in the nation. The Demographics India is a diverse nation in terms of religion, ethnicity, and language. The majority of its Muslims, who identify as Sunnis, make up roughly 15% of the population, making them by far the largest minority group. Hindus make up about 80% of the population. Similar to the Hindu population, the Muslim population in the country is diverse, with differences in caste, ethnicity, language, and access to political and economic power. Partition's Impact on Hindu-Muslim Relations Scholars claim that the animosity between Muslims and Hindus in India stems in part from the 1947 partition of British India and the schisms that happened during the British colonial era. The British decided to abandon the subcontinent after World War II because their economy was destroyed and they could no longer maintain their empire. Before the country was divided, Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi led the Indian National Congress in organizing massive protests and acts of civil disobedience against the British government in an effort to gain independence. Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s political organisation, the All India Muslims League, demanded a separate state for Muslims. In 1947, a British judge arbitrarily drew the boundaries between a Hindu-majority India and a Muslim-majority Pakistan, which included what is now Bangladesh. The Partition resulted in widespread migrations of Muslims to Pakistan and Hindus and Sikhs to India, as well as deadly riots and horrifying intercommunal violence. Survivors remember villages burning to the rubble, dead tossed in the streets, and blood-soaked trains transporting refugees from one nation to another. Historians estimate that between 200,000 and 500,000 people died. It is unclear why groups of people who had lived together for hundreds of years fought one another. The British "divide-and-rule" policy, which gave the Muslim minority—roughly 25% of the population—some electoral advantages, has drawn criticism from some analysts. Others highlight disputes between political movements that organized followers of the Muslim and Hindu faiths. Nearly 35 million Muslims still lived in India after Partition. The Religion Factor  The nation’s 75-year-old constitution upholds egalitarian values such as nondiscrimination and socioeconomic equality. The Constitution does not specifically require the separation of church and state, despite the word "secular" being added to the preamble in 1976. Congress party leaders who fought for

India’s independence promoted a country that treated all its people equally, regardless of their religious beliefs. Gandhi, who championed a unified India free from discrimination, was assassinated by Nathuram Godse, a Hindi nationalist, in 1948. The first prime minister of India, Nehru, considered the greatest threat to the country as those seeking to split the country along religious lines, particularly among Hindu factions. He felt that secularism was necessary to create a harmonious society and prevent another tragedy similar to what happened after Partition. Hindu nationalists contend that since Hindus’ sacred territories are inside India, whereas Christian and Muslim holy territories are outside, Hindus are the “true sons of the soil.” Generally speaking, they support laws meant to convert India into a Hindu state. Even though the majority of Indian Muslims are sprung from Hindus who converted to Islam, many regard them as foreigners. Founded in 1980, the BJP traces its origins to the political wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu nationalist paramilitary volunteer group. The BJP secured a single-party majority in the Lok Sabha—India’s lower house of parliament and most powerful political body—for the first time in 2014, electing party leader Narendra Modi as Prime Minister. In 2019, the party won a majority once more following a contentious campaign packed with anti-Muslim rhetoric. What type of discrimination do Indian Muslims face?  Muslims have faced prejudice in the workplace, in the classroom, and in housing. Many face obstacles in their pursuit of riches, political influence, and limited access to essential services, including healthcare. Furthermore, even with constitutional protections, people frequently have difficulty obtaining justice after being the target of prejudice. Muslims’ presence in parliament has stagnated over the past 20 years; following the 2019 elections, they controlled only 5% of the seats. This is partially because of the BJP’s ascent; by the middle of 2022, the party had zero Muslim Members of Parliament. In the meantime, a 2019 report by the NGO Common Cause, situated in India, discovered that half of the police polled exhibited anti-Muslim prejudice, which decreased their likelihood of stepping in to prevent crimes against Muslims. Analysts have also noted widespread impunity for those who attack Muslims. Recently, state and national courts and government bodies have often reversed convictions or dropped prosecutions against Hindus accused of participating in violence against Muslims. States are passing more and more legislation that limits the religious freedoms of Muslims, such as laws that forbid wearing headscarves in public places and prohibit conversion. Additionally, in a move critics refer to as “bulldozer justice,” authorities have punished Muslims extrajudicially. Authorities in multiple states demolished people’s homes in 2022, claiming the buildings didn’t have the necessary permits. Critics countered that they mainly targeted Muslims, some of whom had recently taken part in demonstrations. Although the practice has persisted, India’s Supreme Court responded by ruling that demolitions “cannot be retaliatory.” What controversial policies has the Modi government imposed on Muslims? The Citizenship Amendment Act was passed by the parliament in December 2019 and signed by Modi. It permits Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan to obtain citizenship more quickly. Critics claim that because the law excludes Muslims and applies a religious standard to citizenship for the first time, it is discriminatory. The Modi government claims that the law was made to protect these three countries' mostly Muslim vulnerable religious minorities from persecution. Simultaneously, the BJP pledged to finish the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in its 2019 election manifesto. The NRC was created in the 1950s

specifically for the state of Assam in order to determine whether the residents of that state were immigrants from what is now Bangladesh's neighbor or Indian citizens. The Assam government revised its registry in 2019, leaving out about two million Bengali Hindus and Muslims. Assume that this process is implemented across the nation. Critics contend that in that scenario, a sizable Muslim population might become stateless because they lack the necessary documentation and are not qualified for the Citizenship Amendment Act's expedited citizenship process. Meanwhile, Jammu and Kashmir, the only Muslim-majority state in India, has seen its political stature eroded under Modi. The state, located in the mountainous border region under dispute with Pakistan, was divided into two parts and its special constitutional authority was taken away by the government in August 2019. Since then, Indian authorities have repressed the people’s rights in the area, frequently in the name of preserving security. In 2021, they detained well-known political figures and activists, harassed and arrested journalists, and shut down the internet 85 times. The government maintains that security has improved, yet since the division, armed groups have killed dozens of civilians.  In December 2023, the Supreme Court, upholding the government’s decision,  ruled that the territory should regain statehood in time for local elections the following year. "Muslims' status will change more the longer Hindu nationalists are in power, and it will be harder to reverse such changes," says Ashutosh Varshney, a Brown University expert on Indian intercommunal conflict. Maintaining India's Secularism Although there is an increase in anti-Muslim sentiment among Hindus, experts say it is wrong to assume that all Hindus and BJP supporters are against Muslims. Muslims and Hindus have resisted the BJP's attempts to weaken secularism in India in the form of activists, law scholars, and students. For instance, following the passage of the Citizenship Amendment Act, some state chief ministers declared they would not carry out the law, and about 2,000 academics and professionals signed a declaration condemning it for violating the spirit of the Constitution. Global Reactions Numerous foreign governments and international organizations have denounced the BJP's discriminatory policies towards Muslims, highlighting specific concerns with the Citizenship Amendment Act, the BJP's actions in Kashmir, and anti-Muslim rhetoric. The UN human rights office described the Citizenship Amendment Act as “fundamentally discriminatory.” Iran, Kuwait, and Qatar were among the Muslim-majority countries to file formal complaints against India in 2022 over public officials’ Islamophobic remarks. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), comprising fifty-seven member states, has demanded that India cease the “systematic practices against Indian Muslims” and the “growing spate of hatred and defamation of Islam.” Nevertheless, Modi has succeeded in deepening India’s relations with the Gulf countries dominated by Muslims, including the United Arab Emirates, where he presided over an event for Indian expats and dedicated a brand-new Hindu temple in Abu Dhabi. Since they have strengthened ties with India, successive U.S. administrations have been hesitant to denounce the country’s atrocities openly. For instance, in February 2020, President Donald Trump visited India and complimented Prime Minister Narendra Modi on his support for religious liberty while remaining silent on the violence that had broken out in Delhi. Instead of openly criticizing the BJP government or Modi, the Joe Biden administration has opted to strengthen the strategic partnership between India and the United States. It is believed that Biden has privately voiced concerns about human rights. India, however, received its lowest ranking of “country of particular concern” in the 2020 report from the independent U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom—a designation it has held since 2004.

The most recent reports have upheld that classification and pushed for the US government to impose sanctions on Indian officials who are accountable for mistreatment. Some members of Congress have also expressed concerns.

[ruminativerabbi]

Rage and Regret

Dear Friends,

One of the surprises Jerusalem offered up to us shortly after we bought our apartment and began to explore the neighborhood was a peaceful cemetery just a few blocks from our street in which are interred 79 Indian soldiers who served with the Egyptian Expeditionary Force during the First World War, as well as the bodies of 290 Turkish prisoners-of-war who died while in British captivity. So it is a strange place, that cemetery: a Hindu burial ground in which are also buried hundreds of Muslims who fell far from home and who had to be buried somewhere. There are no individual graves; the British apparently decided to bury the dead in two mass graves, one for the Hindus and one for the Muslims. Facing stone monuments record the names of the dead.

We’ve walked by many times; Joan’s cousin Rina used to live just down the road. It’s a peaceful place, a quiet place. But it never fails to strike me how strange the whole concept is: hundreds and hundreds of young men who died in a war fought basically over nothing at all in a distant place and who were then shoveled into a common pit (why do I think white soldiers would have been buried in separate graves?) and left to sleep in the earth in a place that none of them would ever have thought to call home.

Walking by that place never fails to re-awaken in me my recollection of Joan’s and my visit to the Beersheva War Cemetery, the resting place of more than 1200 soldiers from the U.K., Australia, New Zealand, and India. It’s also a peaceful place, well-tended, verdant, and well watched over by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. But what is shocking about the place are the stones themselves: row after row after row featuring the graves of young men, some just teenagers, who died on the same horrific day in 1917. It was a terrible day, too. By the beginning of October in 1917, the British forces under the leadership of General Edmund Allenby were well entrenched along the Gaza-Beersheba road with the intention of seizing Beersheva from the Turks. By the end of the month, all was ready. And on October 31, the battle was joined. The attack was led by the 800 men of the 4th Australian Light Horse Brigade, brave souls who leapt on horseback over the Turkish trenches and continued on into Beersheva, while other branches of the army attacked the Turkish legions from the side. In the end, the attack was successful and the Turks were soundly defeated. In many ways, in fact, the tide of war turned against the Ottoman Turks at Beersheva. And, indeed, before a year passed, the war was over and Turkish Palestine, wrested from the Ottomans, was handed over by the League of Nations to the British.

But the cemetery has its own story to tell. Now shady and peaceful, the silence is more ominous than calming as you enter through the shady gate and come across row after row after row of young men who died, all of them, on October 31, 1917. The place is well worth visiting, but what the experience yields, or at least what it yielded in me, was a deep sense of sorrow, of loss, of the true tragedy of war. Young men who should have been planning their lives, their weddings, their careers, their futures…instead dead as part of the incomprehensible madness that was the First World War and planning nothing at all other than an eternity of moldering far from home in someone else’s soil.

That many of the dead at Beersheva were veterans of Gallipoli only makes the story even more tragic and more poignant. (I saw Peter Weir’s film, Gallipoli, when it came out in 1981 and still remember the harrowing effect it had on me. If any readers are still laboring under the delusion that war can be glorious, Gallipoli really is a must-see.)

And that brings me to Gaza. To most, Gaza is a strip of land that has been ruled over by too many different foreigners since its glory days as ancient Philistia. The Romans, the Crusaders, the Mamelukes, the Turks, the Egyptians, and the Israelis all tried their hand at governing the place; I get the sense from my reading that all of the above couldn’t leave fast enough once the opportunity presented itself. (And, yes, I know there are people in Israel now demonstrating in the streets in an attempt to provoke the government into re-establishing Jewish settlements in Gaza. Those people, with all respect, are living in a self-generated dream state fully divorced from reality.)

But Gaza has its own Jewish dead to consider. And I do not mean by that to reference the fallen of the current IDF campaign.

There was a very touching piece in the paper the other day about Israeli troops coming across Jewish graves in Gaza. And, indeed, the Gaza War Cemetery, established in 1920, contains the graves of over 3000 British and Commonwealth soldiers who died in the First, Second, and Third Battles of Gaza. And some of those soldiers were Jewish, which fact was duly recorded on their tombstones. I suppose the idea was that the IDF soldiers felt a sense of kinship with the Jewish soldiers buried in that place, which is almost an ordinary thought, but somehow the story—by Troy O. Fritzhand, which I read in the Algemeiner (click here)—affected me in a less expected way as well.

I understand the logic behind the Israeli war against Hamas. I have no trouble with Israel going to war with the forces of evil, with people whose hatred of Israel and its Jews expressed itself on October 7 with almost unimaginable barbarism and Nazi-style brutality. Nor do I have any trouble with the notion that, when fighting a war against evil, the only true sin is to lose. I hate the thought of civilian casualties. But I also understand that the fact that the hostages have been held now for more than 120 days means that time is running out. All that, I get. But part of me feels the weight of tragedy pressing down as I read the news day after day.

I hate Hamas for having started this war. I grieve daily for the 1200 Israelis murdered, maimed, and raped on October 7. I can’t stop thinking about the 225 IDF soldiers who have died so far in this terrible war. And I think about the Hamas soldiers too—each a victim of his own fanaticism and willingness to die as part of an army of terror, but each also once an innocent babe who could have grown up to live a peaceful, productive life, who could have brought joy instead of unimaginable misery to the world. And, of course, I think also of the civilians of Gaza, people who, yes, put Hamas into power and who are now paying the awful price for that colossal error of judgment, but the large majority of whom could surely not have imagined October 7 and its aftermath.

To know with certainty that you are on the right side of a war does not make the war less tragic. Nor does it make it any less crucial that you win. But the tragedy feels overwhelming. I wasn’t alive when the Allies carpet-bombed Germany, but I think I would have felt the same way about the 600,000+ civilians who died during those bombing campaigns, which number includes about 76,000 children. The Allied leadership did what they perceived to be necessary to win the war, which they did. But my response to the civilian death toll is not censorious outrage, but deep sadness. How can the Germans have made us do that to them? How can the Japanese have created a situation in which Hiroshima was imaginable, let alone actually doable? And how can Hamas have created this situation in which the only way to rescue our hostages is to go in on foot to find them and liberate them from their captors’ control? The civilian deaths in Gaza are, in my opinion, all on Hamas. But that doesn’t make them less tragic.

And those are my emotions this week: weariness (because I am so tired of this burden of worry and anxiety), outrage (because what kind of people can have thrust this upon us?), terrible sadness (because of the children of Gaza, all innocents, who are paying the terrible price for their parents’ bad decisions), resolve (because if not me, then who?), and, despite everything, hope (because the God of Israel neither slumbereth nor sleepeth, and surely, at least eventually, light always wins out over darkness).  I continue to pray, even more fervently than in the past months, for peace, for resolution, and for victory. I’m feeling the burden of it all. I suppose we all are. But the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim, of redeeming those held in captivity, is key here: defeating evil is the means, but bringing the captives home is the goal. And that’s what I’m praying for, day in and day out.

[shahwebseo]

Nawaz Sharif Asks Pak PM Not To Take Aggressive Stance Against India: Report

Islamabad: Three-time Pakistan Prime Minister and founder of the ruling political party, Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N), Nawaz Sharif has advised his younger brother and current Prime Minister, Shehbaz Sharif, to utilise all available diplomatic resources to restore peace with India, insisting that he is against taking an aggressive position. Both brothers met in Lahore on Sunday evening,…

[nijjhar]

Punjabi - Not a single Hindu died in Kashmir, but the tribal people died... Punjabi - Not a single Hindu died in Kashmir, but the tribal people died. Tribal father protects. https://youtu.be/yQsc3xCmPgs Kashmir, the Epicentre of the Sons of Most High Satan Al-Djmar Al-Aksa, inciting people to kill other Kafars. https://youtu.be/2kCAeKolGv4 YouTube Video on this topic:-  https://youtu.be/x2ahcVT-R3M URL :- http://www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/partitn.htm Full description:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/partitn.htm. Punishment for the atrocities committed under the Mughal rule, Mohammedans. We Indians of the farming martial tribes served the British Army faithfully. Still, the British colluded with the people of business tribes and hypocritically divided our homeland, leading us into the sectarian riots and bloodshed that could have been avoided. India is the land of many tribes, and it is our Motherland.  We lived together peacefully and supported the British in the two World Wars.  Jatts, Pathans, Arians, Marhattas, etc., are a few martial tribes worth mentioning.  Now, our tribal homelands are divided on a sectarian basis, and when we fight with each other, the Western shopkeepers sell their arms into our poverty and misery.  For example, the Punjab, Rajasthan, U.P., etc. are the homes of the people of the Jatt tribe, the best soldiers in the British Army and now we are ready to fight against each other under the sectarian banners of Sikh, Hindu and Muslim. Religion brings peace, but when the sons of Satan, the psychic hypocrites, lead the spiritually blind masses, and then it leads to the bloodiest of all the wars.  If you remember that Jesus condemned hypocrisy the most, as it originates from one’s heart rather than moral sins written in the Holy Books, then you would understand the fruit of the evil spirit or hypocrisy that became prevalent during the partition of India. The British are supposed to be the staunch supporters of democracy, and they always send their representatives all over the world to see that the elections are fair and the flag of democracy is upheld. But the British handed over the reign of our country to the Congress Party dominated by the business Lala tribes of India under the banner of Hindus, and to the Muslim League, also dominated by the counterpart business tribes under the banner of Muslims.  Lala Mohandass Karamchand Gandhi, a Baniya by tribe, represented the business tribes on one side and Lala Mohammad Ali Jinnah, a Babla Bhatia, the business tribes on the other side.  There was a third person in the name of Lala Tara Singh Malhotra Khatri who came under the banner of the Sikhs. All such people were the religious representatives of their political organisations, and none of them represented the general secular public as it is done in democratically held elections.  In other words, the British did not hold General Elections to pass on the powers to the democratically elected members of the Parliament, but to their well-groomed stooges to create chaos and bloodshed in the country through sectarian riots.  The British supported their stooges financially and unduly favoured the heads of different religious sects, such as Ahmediya, to support the sectarian divisions among the people.   In a nutshell, the British encouraged the sectarian leaders to create chaos so that they could apply their “Divide and Rule” Policy to hold on to their Indian Empire.  The business tribal people, who fought least during the Wars, benefited most from their policy, whilst the village tribal people who fought bravely during the wars suffered the greatest of all.  The villagers were treated like X-mass pets, and they were deserted and maltreated after they had helped them win the Wars. The "Saltless British" people showed their true colours well. But every cloud has a silver lining.  The demarcation of India, especially of the Punjab, is right between the two great towns, Amritsar, where the Holiest of Holy Temple, Harmandir Sahib and Lahore, the capital of the Punjab, where the crooks of the highest calibre live. Remember that the Holiest of Holy Temple, which used to be in Jerusalem and was destroyed in 70 A.D., is the Hospital for the spiritually sick dishonest people to cleanse their hearts with the Soap of His Word but it became corrupt when the Owner of this House, Satguru (Christ) Tegh Bahadur Ji visited the Place and He was refused the entry and turned away.  Satguru Tegh Bahadur Ji rightly cursed the town by Saying:- “AMRITSARIYAE ANDAR SARRIYAE” That is, the people of Amritsar are dirty-hearted, and this is apparent by the corrupt practices run at this Temple.  What does God have to do with gold but a trap for the once-born devotees?  Thus, we have dirty-hearted people on both sides of the border, and their destruction is inevitable.  Destruction of the other towns would follow the general pattern more dishonest the people, the more destruction. Kashmir used to be the land of the most learned Brahmins, nicknamed "Guru Brahmins", who in this Dark Age   .............

[flash-fresh]

Actor Vijay Draws Criticism from Muslim Clerics Over Iftar Party Invitations

Tamil actor and Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam (TVK) president Thalapathy Vijay has found himself at the center of controversy after a fatwa was issued against him by the All India Muslim Jamat (AIMJ). The fatwa, announced by AIMJ president Maulana Mufti Shahabuddin Razvi Barelvi, advises the Muslim community not to support the actor-turned-politician due to alleged disrespect towards Islamic values and the community.

According to Maulana Razvi, Vijay has previously portrayed Muslims negatively in several of his films, including titles like Kaththi and Beast, where he is accused of associating the community with terrorism. “He has formed a political party and is trying to win over Muslims. But in his films, he showed Muslims as those who spread violence,” Razvi said while addressing the media.

The controversy escalated after Vijay hosted an Iftar party, which is typically a spiritual and community-centered event during the holy month of Ramadan. Maulana Razvi alleged that individuals who were gamblers and alcohol consumers were among the attendees, which he claimed deeply offended Sunni Muslims in Tamil Nadu. “This is not how an Iftar should be conducted. It was disrespectful,” he stated.

Razvi added that the fatwa came in response to appeals from members of the Sunni Muslim community in Tamil Nadu who were upset by Vijay's actions. “As a religious leader, I was asked for guidance, and I issued a fatwa advising Muslims not to support him,” he said, emphasizing that this advisory is rooted in both religious and social concerns.

The timing of the fatwa is notable, as it follows previous reports that Vijay and his party TVK sought Y-category security from the central government due to perceived threats from the Muslim community. Political rivals alleged that the actor feared backlash over his film portrayals and public events.

VCK (Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi) spokesperson Vanniarasu pointed to Vijay’s films as the source of the tension. “In Kaththi and Beast, Muslims were shown in a negative light. That portrayal has caused deep resentment,” he said, suggesting that this may have prompted the request for additional security.

However, TVK and its ally, the Tamil Nadu Muslim League, have strongly denied any wrongdoing. They claim the controversy is politically motivated, with accusations designed to drive a wedge between Vijay and Muslim voters. The parties accused the ruling DMK and its allies of orchestrating a campaign to damage Vijay’s image among minority communities ahead of future elections.

As the issue continues to unfold, the fatwa has sparked widespread debate in Tamil Nadu’s political and social circles. Vijay, a hugely popular figure in the Tamil film industry, has been steadily building his political base. However, incidents like this highlight the challenges he faces in navigating sensitive communal dynamics while transitioning from cinema to full-fledged politics.

Vijay and TVK have not yet issued an official statement in response to the fatwa. Political analysts suggest the party may adopt a cautious approach, focusing on damage control while emphasizing its commitment to inclusive politics.

The fatwa marks a significant moment in Vijay’s political journey, underlining the growing scrutiny he faces as he seeks to reshape his image from film star to people’s leader.

[news365timesindia]

[ad_1] New Delhi: The people like Sonia Gandhi, Jaya Bachchan, Akhilesh Yadav, and others with connections to powers that are active against India, who want to break India into pieces and progress in their own political interests, need to come out. Like you all understand, the time of Ramadan is going on and lots of individuals are going out for star parties. Whether one goes to a star party, that’s your choice. But if individuals like Sonia Gandhi, Jaya Bachchan, Akhilesh Yadav, and others go to a star party whose hands are directly involved in the partition of India—those who desire the partition of India—what do we say about them? Are they still being supportive of those forces that don’t wish for India to be united, those forces that desire a divided India? In a video, Sonia Gandhi and Jaya Bachchan sit together with the spirit of camaraderie and affection. In front, Akhilesh Yadav wearing his red cap is visible. The VIP table is filled with food, 12 dishes, with someone serving food. Jaya Bachchan doesn’t eat but is coughing. They all look enthusiastic to go to the Iftar party. The festival appears to highlight unity and good will, reflecting the Ganga-Jamuni culture. It is the same party, though, the Muslim League, which was responsible for India’s partition—inaugurating the divide between India and Pakistan. The party was organized with the idea of advancing political rights for the Muslims, and it has had a major role to play prior to and subsequent to India’s independence, especially at the time of partition. The question is, when an invitation was issued for the consecration of Lord Ram’s temple, a divine and historical event we have been waiting for centuries, why did these people not attend the event? Why did they wait with bated breath to attend this party of the party which was responsible for the partition of India? This should not be forgotten that whether it is the Congress party or the Samajwadi Party, when the consecration of Lord Ram’s temple was done, invitations were issued to everyone but they all refused them. No one among them, Jaya Bachchan, Sonia Gandhi, or Akhilesh Yadav, showed up at the event. When Mahakumbh was held, the largest religious congregation in the world, when millions of devotees took part, these devotees did not attend, nor did they display any respect towards it. Indeed, Jaya Bachchan defamed the festival by referring to the water of the Ganges at the meeting point (Triveni) as impure. When the pilgrims were invited to the Mahakumbh, they didn’t accept positively, but once things went against the pilgrims, they moved to take advantage of the situation. They converted the Mahakumbh into a tragedy. They are implementing the politics of divide and rule. They do not wish for India to advance. They do not desire peace, harmony, and development for the nation. They are attempting to split the nation into shreds, introduce conflict, and attain power. Prime Minister Modi has made India the 5th largest economy in the world, and we are heading towards being a developed nation. But these people do not want India to become a developed nation. They desire to carry out their divide and rule politics. They are the ones who desire to stop development and peace in the nation. These are the same individuals who backed the Muslim League, the party that was asking for India to be divided. They were there together, dining and having their meal while backing forces that desire to disintegrate the nation. The Muslim League was a party established for purely political purposes to divide India along religious lines, and it’s crucial to know this history. When Hussain Shaheed Suhrawardy was made the Prime Minister of Bengal in 1946, the Hindus were in troubled times, and thousands were killed. Pandit Nehru did nothing against those who had committed violence against Hindus. This is Congress history, aligning with forces that are anti-Hindu and practicing appeasement politics. This is their record. Under British

rule, the Muslim League began distancing themselves from Congress and approached personal favors from the British officers because they wished to gain politically. This is the real nature of theirs. And now, they are acting as if they are symbols of justice while siding with those who desire to partition the nation. This is the same Sonia Gandhi who, when the Supreme Court ruled on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue, was involved in suppressing the issue. Now, when Ram Lalla has finally returned to his rightful place after centuries, they disrespect the temple. These are the same people who sat in meetings with the Muslim League, the party responsible for dividing the country. They are playing the same politics even today. It is to remind everyone about this history, so you know what these political parties and leaders are really doing. You need to tell this to others, so everyone realizes the larger context of what is going on in our nation. The post Behind Closed Doors: The Politicians Who Are Breaking India Apart appeared first on Global Governance News- Asia's First Bilingual News portal for Global News and Updates. [ad_2] Source link