India’s Fantasy of Disloyal Muslims May Come True

By Pankaj Mishra

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is fond of boasting that not one of India’s almost 180 million Muslims has been discovered to be a member of al-Qaeda. He could underscore an even more remarkable fact: None of the foreign jihadists caught fighting alongside the Taliban has turned out to be from the country with the world’s third-largest Muslim population.

Indeed, Indian Muslims haven’t bothered to lend even moral support to the anti-Indian insurgency in Muslim-majority Kashmir that has claimed more than 50,000 lives in the past two decades.

According to New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, this is because Indian Muslims “are the product of and feel empowered by a democratic and pluralistic society.” A more prosaic and less ideological explanation is that Indian Muslims have many of their own problems to deal with, largely stemming from the swift decay of democracy and pluralism. According to a 2012 book, “Muslims in Indian Cities: Trajectories of Marginalisation,” edited by Laurent Gayer and Christophe Jaffrelot, Muslims are as badly off, if not worse, socially and economically, than Dalits (formerly untouchable Hindus) and tribal peoples.

One can only hope that its squalid fantasy about traitorous Indian Muslims doesn’t prove to be self-fulfilling. For the radicalization of even a tiny fraction of 180 million Muslims would not only fatally undermine India’s increasingly unconvincing claims to democracy and secularism. The not-so- reluctant fundamentalists would make the country seem as ungovernable as its neighbor.

www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-19/india-s-fantasy-of-disloyal-muslims-may-come-true.html

 SRK proclaimed himself a "Baadsah", while is not worth a "Sipahi".

He had A GRAND coalition of successful actresses like JUHI Chawla, KAJOL, RANI Mukherjee and PRIETY Jinta; these begams of Film industry has left active role with him.
He is struggling now, and he needs propaganda.

Baadsah without begam and series of flop film has made him seek draw attention which is cheap, easy and keeps him in TV and press, this is how bogus Baadsahs behave, what is surprising ???

I think Hafeej Saeed gave him correct advice, he should go to Pakistan and start JIHAD.

 I don't think India needs some statement from Khan declaring that he is loyal indian as he is a loyal Indian  . Paki dogs are free to bark per habit.

Jaykumar,

Thank you! I was wrong. However unbelievable the remark may sound, it seems Hassan did say it!

44/D-8

http://canindia.com/2013/01/ill-burn-vishwaroops-tamil-version-in-front-of-jayalalithas-office-kamal-haasan/

Take this and enjoy with your brothers of TN...

Shri Shah Rukh Khan is absolutely right in his assessment. But, unfortunately, today’s scenario is far more complicated and is something like this: (a) Terrorist organizations like LeT and Taliban are openly supporting violence in the name of Islam. Saner elements in Muslim nations over the world are not actively contradicting this view of terrorists. (b) The extremists in Muslim communities all over the world are not ready to accommodate a view that is different from theirs and they (extremists) are often proclaiming that non-Muslims have no right to live in this world. (c) More worrying is the fact that saner elements in Muslim communities in our country and elsewhere are being weakened day by day.
Unfortunately, Muslim leaders all over India have refused to see reason and are wasting their energy on agitations of little relevance. They have therefore not succeeded in achieving socio-economic progress of their community.
 

Jayakumar,

Instead of making idiotic and irrelevant arguments, just produce a link which shows that Hassan actually said something as stupid as, "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."  I don't think Hassan ever said that.

Kamal gets support from another lady against death sentence for Rape..

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/Sharmila-Tagore-opposes-capital-punishment-for-rape/articleshow/18315618.cms

Cool!!

All I said was that the report quoting Hassan's alleged words, "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda.

Anwar,

Tamil Nadu's Muslims love for Al Qida was clearly seens when they commemorated a ceremoney for Osama Bin Laden death in Chennai..And people participating this function large number I dont rememebr any other state Muslims have shown there love for Osama openly.

I don't think Hassan ever said that. If you have seen that quote in any newspaper, please post the link.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States

Today you are asking for news paper when same SIT or court says they dont have any evidence against Modi you call them Sanghi Right?

So your source of inspiration is one and only News Paper...You wont trust any one other than this countries News Paper...Is that True?

You know one thing our Indian media wala are so strong that they have guts to write all the things Right? Here is the very good example of it...Ask them why they didnt carried this news and not me.....

Will narrate another incident when whole country was deabting deatch sentence punishment for Delhi rapist this super secular, Aethist said rapist are like my brother so they must be put into life imprisonment and not be given with capital punishment,,

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/kamal-hassan-against-death-penalty-for-rapists/1049516

Our Media walas didn't followed this story then it is there mistake but fact is that he quoted both the sentence from his mouth...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcncfAzs-kc

Next time on Outlook we will accept your thoughts or words if you quote from news paper if other than this it wont carry any face value for us nor for you as you trust only News Paper..

Jaykumar,

All I said was that the report  quoting Hassan's alleged words, "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those," is an internet hoax. I don't think Hassan ever said that. If you have seen that quote in any newspaper, please post the link.

This is a hoax generated on the internet. Not a single newspaper or news agency carries the above comment.

Anwaar
Dallas, United States

This is for your refrence...

http://canindia.com/2013/01/ill-burn-vishwaroops-tamil-version-in-front-of-jayalalithas-office-kamal-haasan/

Pls read Q & A No: - 3 of this interview...

This is the source from where tipical TamBrahmin's true nature and character can be seen..

First of all Kamal is not true that he made Hey Ram focsuing Hindu Terror..Because in that movie he didnt had single sympathy with any of those Hindus killed in Direct Action Day like Godse or any other Hindutva leaders would have had it in those days, but fact is that he wants to take revenge for her girl friends death Rani Mukerjee when she was brutally raped and killed...

Many in TN are talking that KanBrahmin JJ and TamBrahmin KH are doing this to promote KH for international awards...

Maha,

>> "Kamal Hasan : "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

This is a hoax generated on the internet. Not a single newspaper or news agency carries the above comment.

 

Kamal Hasan : "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

Amazing. No wonder we never heard in media what specific thing that was offensive here. We heard lot of comparison between Kamal and MF Hussain. But there is none. Hussain's painting were as offensive as cartoons by Denmark newspaper. 

If this is true, muslims have not helped themselves. They are validating the people who stereotype them.

>> "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

This news is all over the internet, but I doubt Kamal Hassan ever said it. If Muslims  asked for removal of references to Al Qaeda, they can only be called idiots. If Kamal Hassan agreed to remove such references, he would deserve no respect from any of us.

 Kamal Hasan : "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

Does that mean that these Muslim brethren endorse the policies, ideology and activites of Al Qaeda?

Does it mean that the supporters of Al Qaeda have terrorised our governments into acquiesence? 

Does it mean that our Muslim brethern identify themserlves with the perpetrators of 26/11?

Even Saudi Arabia has disowned Al Qaeda, A Pity that our brethren haven't.

Kamal Hasan :  "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

Stunning and damning for both Kamal Hasan and his "muslim brethern".

http://canindia.com/2013/01/ill-burn-vishwaroops-tamil-version-in-front-of-jayalalithas-office-kamal-haasan/

Here are excerpts from his interview to CanIndia

"They forget I made a film on Hindu terrorism – Hey Ram."

Here's how he establishes his credentials as the friend of the Muslims:

"Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

And here's a sexist gem from the devout adherent of the rationalist egalitarian Dravidian movement:

"I have a track record of women spoiling my premiere plans."

watch this Press meet video by Muslim groups seeking ban on Vishwaroopam. This lays the foundation for Kamal's next movie on Hindu Terror- http://www.youtube.com/watch?f...

Pakistani politicians as well as non-state characters have nothing better to do than being intrusive and nosey with all and sundry that is going on in India.

Mr. Khan, some of the significant regional politicians in India have come from the movie industry. Who knows where these musings will take you! You have a right as anyone else to express yourself.
 

"I've lived on either side of the border and can speak how minorities feel under majority. They feel inundated, overwhelmed, and threatened.

The majoritarian view would miss this point and impose their own perception on others, i. .l, minority."

  Probably, but the question is why this majority-minority question is almost always a Hindu-Moslem issue. In a few cases, a Hindu-Christian one, though not frequent.

 There are small or tiny minorities like Parsees, Jews, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs( ignoring the anomalous Khalistan movement for the time being)  who do not raise this 'majoritarian' problem at all, as in never.  These groups do not have a problem with Hindus being in a perpetual majority in India. Nor complain about the essentially Hindu content, character, spirit and ethos of India.

 Moslems and Moslems alone, create a problem and ruckus over it, going to the extent of using extreme violence in 1947, and in Kashmir since 1990.

D.L.Narayan  22/D-50.

I often wondered  why  this Super  Star "Khan"  ends up giving pathetic and unconvincing explanations for  the inanities he utters so pompously, both within and outside the country. For one thing,  he seems to be eternally in love with his surname "Khan". So be it. By itself it is not a such a sin. But why does he mention it so often in his utterances day in day out ?  Is he telling the audiences that he comes from an  elite sect of the Indian Muslims ? 

Mr Sharukh Khan, better learn a lesson or two from the other Khans.  For instnce, look at Ameer ---who personally conducts himself so well in public and the causes he espouses. He is the real darling of the  Indian masses. 

Sanket Biswas,

Your posts are like a breath of fresh air in the midst of a storm of anti-Muslim rhetoric!

 In India there is a rigid caste system since ages, since thousands of years. So, what is important is caste (as and identification for the majority people) and hence someone ruing a fact that he belongs to a minority community does not make much sense, in other words it has very strict limitations.

Minorities as a word denoting a section of people in India has had been changing through the ages. Once upon a time Jains ,Charavakas, Buddhists considered themselves as minorities. In Chanakya's ( Koutilya) book "Arthshastra " ( or Statecraft) he specifically mentions minority community and as to how to treat them. Chanakya was writing about matters of state policy in regard to minorities of those days, which was much before Christ was born or Prophet Mohammed was born.

These communities still retain their identities today in spite of a cultural unity with Hindus. Jain community is an extremely small community for example.

Mr.SRK's explanations are uncalled for and unwanted. He could have better kept silent. He should better concentrate on activities he knows the best and that is lip synching with songs on the screen. He has a very poor talent but works hard. His debut in to "KBC" episode was a sorry episode because he could not conduct himself with dignity required for the job. His celebrity indeed is a quirk of fate. His charisma for some more time in the filed of cinema indeed depends purely on luck.
I wish all the best for him.

 I've lived on either side of the border and can speak how minorities feel under majority. They feel inundated,  overwhelmed, and  threatened.  

The majoritarian view would miss this point and impose their own perception on others, i. .l, minority. At one point of time Bihar had a Mulsim IPS officer as DGP. In Bidhan Sabha, during a discussion on budget for General Administration, Muslim MLAs criticised the government that minorities were neglected in recruiment for police. The Chief Minister, also Home Minister said that the DGP was Muslim and so the allegation was baseless.

The point was countered by the MLAs that they wanted handreds of constables than a solitary DGP.

That makes the point.

Perhaps the  dalit in India can actually appreciate how the minorities feel despite tall claims of the majority being most  liberal, catholic and humanitarian treatment to the minorities.  Both West Bengal and UP have less than 5% Muslims in government jobs, though in both states Chief Ministers claim to champion the minority causes. 

Hundred ways a minority can be trampled or sidetracked, or denied or deprived. SRK's views should be respected. 

On behalf of Lakhs and crores of Indians, I want to say to you SRK(Forgive me for switching my caps lock on in a moment):
WE DON'T GIVE A FLYING FUC* !!

Well, thank you for your time.

He did not speak in support of French action Mali either!

When he gets up in the morning he should scan the newspaper and call a news conference and speak in support of all such issues!

SRK,

Some fights you fight and the rest, you walk away. 

This is the one where you are not going to WIN or LOOSE.

Just my two cents.

  I think, people would appreciate our political representation, if we got the perception, that they don't believe, they will be touched inappropriately, in sentiment, without armed protection. That they make laws for us, is extremely gratifying. I don't know myself, if I might be the cause of any accidental harm to anyone. I am not exactly an admirer of Indian civil liberties, as some might perceive them. In fact, people are not happy, when they go about their activities.

One important fact seems to have escaped notice. SRK is not the only Khan to become a superstar. Right now, there are at least 4 more Khans who can legitimately claim to be superstars: Aamir, Salman, Saif and Irrfan. Then you have the other Khans like Imran, Zayed, Sohail, Arbaaz and many others, too numerous to mention. None of them have been asked to "prove" their patriotism; it is taken for granted that they are as patriotic as you and me and any other Indian. The question that arises is why has SRK been singled out?

The answer lies in the fact that SRK has sometimes been ambivalent in his comments. He subtly seems to hint that Muslims are discriminated against India in his various pronouncements. You cannot compare him to say Aamir or Salman who have always been Indians first.

In 2006, the late Feroz Khan gave a lecture on Indian secularism to an audience of thousands in Lahore. He said, ""India is a secular country," he was quoted by a Pakistani daily as saying. "Muslims there are making a lot of progress. Our President is a Muslim, the PM a Sikh. Pakistan was made in the name of Islam, but look how Muslims are killing each other. I have not come here on my own," he added. "I was invited to come. Our films are so powerful that your government could not stop them for long."

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-05-19/mumbai/27797867_1_feroz-khan-delegation-general-musharraf

After this speech, General Musharraf, the then dictator, banned Feroz from entering Pakistan. One can never expect SRK. for all his patriotism, to emulate Feroz.

The best thing to do would be to simply STFU. He never did learn.

 Mr SRK's response , evades the core point.

The entire issue is caused by LeT chief Hafeez Saeed, volunteering to host and protect SRK.

Mr SRK, in his 1000 words, completely avoides mentioning Hafeez Saeed. SRK should have said "Mr Saeed, you are wanted by Indian courts for the gruesome murder of 166 innocent people in my home town Mumbai.  Instead of offering to host me , you should come over to India so that you could be tried for the murder of 166 people"

 I agree that SRK or any other Indian, need not prove his patriotism.

However, I have an issue with SRK's clarification. This entire dispute started with LeT terrorist and criminal Hafeez Saeed volunteering to host and provide security to SRK, if SRK felt unsafe in India.  No where in his clarification does Mr SRK criticize LeT chief Hafeez Saeed by name. Why ? Why did he not clarify in his remarks about what he thought about Hafeez Saed and LeT ? This silence on the issue of Hafeez Saeed, who masterminded the murder of 166 Indian in his how town Mumbai, is disturbing. It looks like Mr SRK is careful to not offend the LeT terrorist and chief.

SRK has clarified himself,But did he ever say that his identity made him feel unsafe in India.If he did he deserves to apologise.

But if he did not,then all those indulge in adopting dubious positions must withdraw there charges against SRK.

Honestly SRK is best served by minding his business of doing Nautanki  and enjoying his riches.

Nagaraj  asks why SRK  did not condenm the opposotion to Kamals film,SRK did not stand up for Aamir when his movies were banned in Gujrat for making a statement .

So he is no habit of standing up for others(truth).

Kishoredasmunshi, if it makes you feel tough and macho attacking Hindus or the parivar, go ahead and do it. But realise that Hindus are an easy target, because their threshold of tolerance is far higher than Moslems, or Sikhs. Now try taking the same approach you do, with Moslems, and see the result.

 Denouncing Hindus is easy, and safe; it makes the subject feel that he's not a victim of Islamic terror, rather a strong opponent of 'Hindu fundamentalism'. He knows he can do little about Islamic terror, and get away with it. Hindus are a different ball game, altogether.

Choice of parivars TV spokesperson was very curious. It was uma bharti who allegedly made tapes in the run up to Ayodhya fiasco allegedly exhorting the faithful to finish off "outsiders", ofcourse in a very colorful langauage.

Yesterday also she was in similar mood, but as you know it is difficult to retract/deny later, she was a little subdued.

Our own friendly neighbourhood parivars darling TN CM might be allegedly behind Vishwaroopam fiasco. After all it is running in Neighbouring states.

As the controversy over Kamal Haasan's Tamil movie 'Vishwaroopam' continued, DMK chief M Karunanidhi today wondered why Tamil Nadu government had not taken any initiative to resolve the crisis.

"Though the Madras High Court judge has suggested an amicable solution, Tamil Nadu government has not taken any initiative," he said writing in the party organ 'Murasoli'.

Karunanidhi also cited reports suggesting that a TV channel close to AIADMK wanted to buy the film but that the producers had refused saying they had spent over Rs 100 crore.

He also referred to reports that at a function recently, Kamal Hassan wanted a 'dhoti clad' Tamilian to become the Prime Minister', apparently referring to P Chidambaram's potential to occupy the top job.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/vishwaroopam-row-karunanidhi-hints-jayalalithaas-aiadmk-fuelled-controversy/1066869/

Mr. Khan lives a public life. If media criticizes his films, he squarely defended in several occasions. But when public criticizes his opinion about religious views or social views on religion, he defends them in a very strange way. Many times, his social or religious views have turned into very different light and flavor, often redefining patriotism by his own definition. We haven’t seen this occurrence with other film starts practicing and born in a minority religion, nor do they indulge in a kind of persona that Mr. Khan possesses for his profession. Whey is that so? His persona is his private matter but when he operates in a public domain, he must be ready to take a punch on public life. The statements from across the border are political and even a naive can understand but reacting to the press conference in the backdrop of his personal printed opinion is quite strange. It puts a pause and raises a legitimate doubt that some personal ambitions (whatever that may be) have taken hostage of his identity and out-smarted his social views. If you pay attention to his words “What I wrote was actually meant to reiterate that on some occasions my being an Indian Muslim star, is misused by bigots and narrow-minded people who have misplaced religious ideologies for small gains. And ironically, the same has happened through this article, once again,". The simple question arises, what is so special in Mr. Khan that is being misjudged by narrow minded people and is deceptively not in other film stars practicing and born in a minority religion.

------------ We In India Are Extremely Safe And Happy-------------      OF COURSE, more than happy. ---- PAKI MUSLIMS who were "INDIAN MUSLIMS" for more than 800 years till 1947 can now KICK HINDUS in Pakistan while the INDIAN MUSLIMS who stayed back in India in 1947 protests and INDIAN CENSOR BOARD approved "VISHWAROOPAM" is banned by India Courts. Indian Govt granted VISA to Salman Rushdie does not make it possible for him to visit Kolkata. --------------------- Presently in India it is "HEADS MUSLIMS WIN -- TAILS HINDUS LOSE". Where else can anyone have such a HAPPY & SAFE LIFE???  

Well written, sirji. Of course you could have maintained studious silence too, just gone about doing what you do well and enjoy doing.

 Only in a country like India, a country totally devoid of any pride, self-respect and strenght of character, that a publicity seeking and at times India bashing and Paki loving creature like this utter mediocrity SRK, occupies such an elevated position!

Nagaraj,

>> Has SRK condemned the Muslim opposition to Viswaroopam?

Idiotic question.

Well done SRK - nice and simple response and very inclusive. We believe you.

Rehman Malik - you possibly have a lot of terrorists at your disposal, who are now on 'bench' after the US withdrawal from Pakistan - please keep them away from all Indians, not just SRK. We'll be deeply grateful if you can do that.

"Has SRK condemned the Muslim opposition to Viswaroopam?"

Come on Nagaraj, why should he?

"Did he condemn Rahman Malik's interference in Indian affairs?"

He did. 

"Did he not insult Manoj Kumar,maker of many patriotic films,by turning him away for his 'Om Shanti Om'?"

Manoj kumar made idiotic films where he served sex dressed in patriotism. That makes him no more patriot than any other moron!

"Why name his movie as 'My name is Khan' surely a provocative one in US?"

He didnt direct or produce this movie. He merely acted in it. 

"This lengthy write up is only after some Hindu reaction,and that is the fact."

Its a pity that he had to react to it all!!

This is tempest in a tea-pot! We are reacting to the stupidities of Rehman Malik, the moron!!

Salman Khan Rocks!!!

Has SRK condemned the Muslim opposition to Viswaroopam?Did he condemn Rahman Malik's interference in Indian affairs?Did he not insult Manoj Kumar,maker of many patriotic films,by turning him away for his 'Om Shanti Om'?Why name his movie as 'My name is Khan' surely a provocative one in US?This lengthy write up is only after some Hindu reaction,and that is the fact.

 If I am not mistaken, Shah Rukh Grandfather moved from Peshawar to Delhi at the time of partition, because he did not feel safe in Peshawar at partition, as he had opposed the Pakistan movement and belonged to the Unionist Party. The state and the society at large does not  question the patriotism of Shah Rukh or millions others in similar situation.

However the Congress Part itself and its minions like Digvijay and Shinde use communal politics just as VHP does.

Excellent pointsm SRK. But why we need to entertain Pakis anyway ? We donot need these articles, we just need to tell them fxxx off. They donot understand any other language.

Very well said, Shah Rukh!

I personally have more confidence in Shah Rukh Khan's patriotism than I have in Shinde's patriotism. A beautifully written article, straight from the heart.

Thank you, Mr. Khan.

I personally have more confidence in Shah Rukh Khan's patriotism than I have in Shinde's patriotism. A beautifully written article, straight from the heart.

Thank you, Mr. Khan.

Very well said, Shah Rukh!

Excellent pointsm SRK. But why we need to entertain Pakis anyway ? We donot need these articles, we just need to tell them fxxx off. They donot understand any other language.

 If I am not mistaken, Shah Rukh Grandfather moved from Peshawar to Delhi at the time of partition, because he did not feel safe in Peshawar at partition, as he had opposed the Pakistan movement and belonged to the Unionist Party. The state and the society at large does not  question the patriotism of Shah Rukh or millions others in similar situation.

However the Congress Part itself and its minions like Digvijay and Shinde use communal politics just as VHP does.

Has SRK condemned the Muslim opposition to Viswaroopam?Did he condemn Rahman Malik's interference in Indian affairs?Did he not insult Manoj Kumar,maker of many patriotic films,by turning him away for his 'Om Shanti Om'?Why name his movie as 'My name is Khan' surely a provocative one in US?This lengthy write up is only after some Hindu reaction,and that is the fact.

Salman Khan Rocks!!!

This is tempest in a tea-pot! We are reacting to the stupidities of Rehman Malik, the moron!!

"Has SRK condemned the Muslim opposition to Viswaroopam?"

Come on Nagaraj, why should he?

"Did he condemn Rahman Malik's interference in Indian affairs?"

He did. 

"Did he not insult Manoj Kumar,maker of many patriotic films,by turning him away for his 'Om Shanti Om'?"

Manoj kumar made idiotic films where he served sex dressed in patriotism. That makes him no more patriot than any other moron!

"Why name his movie as 'My name is Khan' surely a provocative one in US?"

He didnt direct or produce this movie. He merely acted in it. 

"This lengthy write up is only after some Hindu reaction,and that is the fact."

Its a pity that he had to react to it all!!

Well done SRK - nice and simple response and very inclusive. We believe you.

Rehman Malik - you possibly have a lot of terrorists at your disposal, who are now on 'bench' after the US withdrawal from Pakistan - please keep them away from all Indians, not just SRK. We'll be deeply grateful if you can do that.

Nagaraj,

>> Has SRK condemned the Muslim opposition to Viswaroopam?

Idiotic question.

 Only in a country like India, a country totally devoid of any pride, self-respect and strenght of character, that a publicity seeking and at times India bashing and Paki loving creature like this utter mediocrity SRK, occupies such an elevated position!

Well written, sirji. Of course you could have maintained studious silence too, just gone about doing what you do well and enjoy doing.

------------ We In India Are Extremely Safe And Happy-------------      OF COURSE, more than happy. ---- PAKI MUSLIMS who were "INDIAN MUSLIMS" for more than 800 years till 1947 can now KICK HINDUS in Pakistan while the INDIAN MUSLIMS who stayed back in India in 1947 protests and INDIAN CENSOR BOARD approved "VISHWAROOPAM" is banned by India Courts. Indian Govt granted VISA to Salman Rushdie does not make it possible for him to visit Kolkata. --------------------- Presently in India it is "HEADS MUSLIMS WIN -- TAILS HINDUS LOSE". Where else can anyone have such a HAPPY & SAFE LIFE???  

Mr. Khan lives a public life. If media criticizes his films, he squarely defended in several occasions. But when public criticizes his opinion about religious views or social views on religion, he defends them in a very strange way. Many times, his social or religious views have turned into very different light and flavor, often redefining patriotism by his own definition. We haven’t seen this occurrence with other film starts practicing and born in a minority religion, nor do they indulge in a kind of persona that Mr. Khan possesses for his profession. Whey is that so? His persona is his private matter but when he operates in a public domain, he must be ready to take a punch on public life. The statements from across the border are political and even a naive can understand but reacting to the press conference in the backdrop of his personal printed opinion is quite strange. It puts a pause and raises a legitimate doubt that some personal ambitions (whatever that may be) have taken hostage of his identity and out-smarted his social views. If you pay attention to his words “What I wrote was actually meant to reiterate that on some occasions my being an Indian Muslim star, is misused by bigots and narrow-minded people who have misplaced religious ideologies for small gains. And ironically, the same has happened through this article, once again,". The simple question arises, what is so special in Mr. Khan that is being misjudged by narrow minded people and is deceptively not in other film stars practicing and born in a minority religion.

Our own friendly neighbourhood parivars darling TN CM might be allegedly behind Vishwaroopam fiasco. After all it is running in Neighbouring states.

As the controversy over Kamal Haasan's Tamil movie 'Vishwaroopam' continued, DMK chief M Karunanidhi today wondered why Tamil Nadu government had not taken any initiative to resolve the crisis.

"Though the Madras High Court judge has suggested an amicable solution, Tamil Nadu government has not taken any initiative," he said writing in the party organ 'Murasoli'.

Karunanidhi also cited reports suggesting that a TV channel close to AIADMK wanted to buy the film but that the producers had refused saying they had spent over Rs 100 crore.

He also referred to reports that at a function recently, Kamal Hassan wanted a 'dhoti clad' Tamilian to become the Prime Minister', apparently referring to P Chidambaram's potential to occupy the top job.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/vishwaroopam-row-karunanidhi-hints-jayalalithaas-aiadmk-fuelled-controversy/1066869/

Choice of parivars TV spokesperson was very curious. It was uma bharti who allegedly made tapes in the run up to Ayodhya fiasco allegedly exhorting the faithful to finish off "outsiders", ofcourse in a very colorful langauage.

Yesterday also she was in similar mood, but as you know it is difficult to retract/deny later, she was a little subdued.

Kishoredasmunshi, if it makes you feel tough and macho attacking Hindus or the parivar, go ahead and do it. But realise that Hindus are an easy target, because their threshold of tolerance is far higher than Moslems, or Sikhs. Now try taking the same approach you do, with Moslems, and see the result.

 Denouncing Hindus is easy, and safe; it makes the subject feel that he's not a victim of Islamic terror, rather a strong opponent of 'Hindu fundamentalism'. He knows he can do little about Islamic terror, and get away with it. Hindus are a different ball game, altogether.

SRK has clarified himself,But did he ever say that his identity made him feel unsafe in India.If he did he deserves to apologise.

But if he did not,then all those indulge in adopting dubious positions must withdraw there charges against SRK.

Honestly SRK is best served by minding his business of doing Nautanki  and enjoying his riches.

Nagaraj  asks why SRK  did not condenm the opposotion to Kamals film,SRK did not stand up for Aamir when his movies were banned in Gujrat for making a statement .

So he is no habit of standing up for others(truth).

 I agree that SRK or any other Indian, need not prove his patriotism.

However, I have an issue with SRK's clarification. This entire dispute started with LeT terrorist and criminal Hafeez Saeed volunteering to host and provide security to SRK, if SRK felt unsafe in India.  No where in his clarification does Mr SRK criticize LeT chief Hafeez Saeed by name. Why ? Why did he not clarify in his remarks about what he thought about Hafeez Saed and LeT ? This silence on the issue of Hafeez Saeed, who masterminded the murder of 166 Indian in his how town Mumbai, is disturbing. It looks like Mr SRK is careful to not offend the LeT terrorist and chief.

 Mr SRK's response , evades the core point.

The entire issue is caused by LeT chief Hafeez Saeed, volunteering to host and protect SRK.

Mr SRK, in his 1000 words, completely avoides mentioning Hafeez Saeed. SRK should have said "Mr Saeed, you are wanted by Indian courts for the gruesome murder of 166 innocent people in my home town Mumbai.  Instead of offering to host me , you should come over to India so that you could be tried for the murder of 166 people"

The best thing to do would be to simply STFU. He never did learn.

One important fact seems to have escaped notice. SRK is not the only Khan to become a superstar. Right now, there are at least 4 more Khans who can legitimately claim to be superstars: Aamir, Salman, Saif and Irrfan. Then you have the other Khans like Imran, Zayed, Sohail, Arbaaz and many others, too numerous to mention. None of them have been asked to "prove" their patriotism; it is taken for granted that they are as patriotic as you and me and any other Indian. The question that arises is why has SRK been singled out?

The answer lies in the fact that SRK has sometimes been ambivalent in his comments. He subtly seems to hint that Muslims are discriminated against India in his various pronouncements. You cannot compare him to say Aamir or Salman who have always been Indians first.

In 2006, the late Feroz Khan gave a lecture on Indian secularism to an audience of thousands in Lahore. He said, ""India is a secular country," he was quoted by a Pakistani daily as saying. "Muslims there are making a lot of progress. Our President is a Muslim, the PM a Sikh. Pakistan was made in the name of Islam, but look how Muslims are killing each other. I have not come here on my own," he added. "I was invited to come. Our films are so powerful that your government could not stop them for long."

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-05-19/mumbai/27797867_1_feroz-khan-delegation-general-musharraf

After this speech, General Musharraf, the then dictator, banned Feroz from entering Pakistan. One can never expect SRK. for all his patriotism, to emulate Feroz.

  I think, people would appreciate our political representation, if we got the perception, that they don't believe, they will be touched inappropriately, in sentiment, without armed protection. That they make laws for us, is extremely gratifying. I don't know myself, if I might be the cause of any accidental harm to anyone. I am not exactly an admirer of Indian civil liberties, as some might perceive them. In fact, people are not happy, when they go about their activities.

SRK,

Some fights you fight and the rest, you walk away. 

This is the one where you are not going to WIN or LOOSE.

Just my two cents.

He did not speak in support of French action Mali either!

When he gets up in the morning he should scan the newspaper and call a news conference and speak in support of all such issues!

On behalf of Lakhs and crores of Indians, I want to say to you SRK(Forgive me for switching my caps lock on in a moment):
WE DON'T GIVE A FLYING FUC* !!

Well, thank you for your time.

 I've lived on either side of the border and can speak how minorities feel under majority. They feel inundated,  overwhelmed, and  threatened.  

The majoritarian view would miss this point and impose their own perception on others, i. .l, minority. At one point of time Bihar had a Mulsim IPS officer as DGP. In Bidhan Sabha, during a discussion on budget for General Administration, Muslim MLAs criticised the government that minorities were neglected in recruiment for police. The Chief Minister, also Home Minister said that the DGP was Muslim and so the allegation was baseless.

The point was countered by the MLAs that they wanted handreds of constables than a solitary DGP.

That makes the point.

Perhaps the  dalit in India can actually appreciate how the minorities feel despite tall claims of the majority being most  liberal, catholic and humanitarian treatment to the minorities.  Both West Bengal and UP have less than 5% Muslims in government jobs, though in both states Chief Ministers claim to champion the minority causes. 

Hundred ways a minority can be trampled or sidetracked, or denied or deprived. SRK's views should be respected. 

 In India there is a rigid caste system since ages, since thousands of years. So, what is important is caste (as and identification for the majority people) and hence someone ruing a fact that he belongs to a minority community does not make much sense, in other words it has very strict limitations.

Minorities as a word denoting a section of people in India has had been changing through the ages. Once upon a time Jains ,Charavakas, Buddhists considered themselves as minorities. In Chanakya's ( Koutilya) book "Arthshastra " ( or Statecraft) he specifically mentions minority community and as to how to treat them. Chanakya was writing about matters of state policy in regard to minorities of those days, which was much before Christ was born or Prophet Mohammed was born.

These communities still retain their identities today in spite of a cultural unity with Hindus. Jain community is an extremely small community for example.

Mr.SRK's explanations are uncalled for and unwanted. He could have better kept silent. He should better concentrate on activities he knows the best and that is lip synching with songs on the screen. He has a very poor talent but works hard. His debut in to "KBC" episode was a sorry episode because he could not conduct himself with dignity required for the job. His celebrity indeed is a quirk of fate. His charisma for some more time in the filed of cinema indeed depends purely on luck.
I wish all the best for him.

Sanket Biswas,

Your posts are like a breath of fresh air in the midst of a storm of anti-Muslim rhetoric!

D.L.Narayan  22/D-50.

I often wondered  why  this Super  Star "Khan"  ends up giving pathetic and unconvincing explanations for  the inanities he utters so pompously, both within and outside the country. For one thing,  he seems to be eternally in love with his surname "Khan". So be it. By itself it is not a such a sin. But why does he mention it so often in his utterances day in day out ?  Is he telling the audiences that he comes from an  elite sect of the Indian Muslims ? 

Mr Sharukh Khan, better learn a lesson or two from the other Khans.  For instnce, look at Ameer ---who personally conducts himself so well in public and the causes he espouses. He is the real darling of the  Indian masses. 

"I've lived on either side of the border and can speak how minorities feel under majority. They feel inundated, overwhelmed, and threatened.

The majoritarian view would miss this point and impose their own perception on others, i. .l, minority."

  Probably, but the question is why this majority-minority question is almost always a Hindu-Moslem issue. In a few cases, a Hindu-Christian one, though not frequent.

 There are small or tiny minorities like Parsees, Jews, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs( ignoring the anomalous Khalistan movement for the time being)  who do not raise this 'majoritarian' problem at all, as in never.  These groups do not have a problem with Hindus being in a perpetual majority in India. Nor complain about the essentially Hindu content, character, spirit and ethos of India.

 Moslems and Moslems alone, create a problem and ruckus over it, going to the extent of using extreme violence in 1947, and in Kashmir since 1990.

Pakistani politicians as well as non-state characters have nothing better to do than being intrusive and nosey with all and sundry that is going on in India.

Mr. Khan, some of the significant regional politicians in India have come from the movie industry. Who knows where these musings will take you! You have a right as anyone else to express yourself.
 

http://canindia.com/2013/01/ill-burn-vishwaroops-tamil-version-in-front-of-jayalalithas-office-kamal-haasan/

Here are excerpts from his interview to CanIndia

"They forget I made a film on Hindu terrorism – Hey Ram."

Here's how he establishes his credentials as the friend of the Muslims:

"Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

And here's a sexist gem from the devout adherent of the rationalist egalitarian Dravidian movement:

"I have a track record of women spoiling my premiere plans."

watch this Press meet video by Muslim groups seeking ban on Vishwaroopam. This lays the foundation for Kamal's next movie on Hindu Terror- http://www.youtube.com/watch?f...

Kamal Hasan :  "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

Stunning and damning for both Kamal Hasan and his "muslim brethern".

 Kamal Hasan : "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

Does that mean that these Muslim brethren endorse the policies, ideology and activites of Al Qaeda?

Does it mean that the supporters of Al Qaeda have terrorised our governments into acquiesence? 

Does it mean that our Muslim brethern identify themserlves with the perpetrators of 26/11?

Even Saudi Arabia has disowned Al Qaeda, A Pity that our brethren haven't.

>> "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

This news is all over the internet, but I doubt Kamal Hassan ever said it. If Muslims  asked for removal of references to Al Qaeda, they can only be called idiots. If Kamal Hassan agreed to remove such references, he would deserve no respect from any of us.

Kamal Hasan : "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

Amazing. No wonder we never heard in media what specific thing that was offensive here. We heard lot of comparison between Kamal and MF Hussain. But there is none. Hussain's painting were as offensive as cartoons by Denmark newspaper. 

If this is true, muslims have not helped themselves. They are validating the people who stereotype them.

Maha,

>> "Kamal Hasan : "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."

This is a hoax generated on the internet. Not a single newspaper or news agency carries the above comment.

 

This is a hoax generated on the internet. Not a single newspaper or news agency carries the above comment.

Anwaar
Dallas, United States

This is for your refrence...

http://canindia.com/2013/01/ill-burn-vishwaroops-tamil-version-in-front-of-jayalalithas-office-kamal-haasan/

Pls read Q & A No: - 3 of this interview...

This is the source from where tipical TamBrahmin's true nature and character can be seen..

First of all Kamal is not true that he made Hey Ram focsuing Hindu Terror..Because in that movie he didnt had single sympathy with any of those Hindus killed in Direct Action Day like Godse or any other Hindutva leaders would have had it in those days, but fact is that he wants to take revenge for her girl friends death Rani Mukerjee when she was brutally raped and killed...

Many in TN are talking that KanBrahmin JJ and TamBrahmin KH are doing this to promote KH for international awards...

Jaykumar,

All I said was that the report  quoting Hassan's alleged words, "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those," is an internet hoax. I don't think Hassan ever said that. If you have seen that quote in any newspaper, please post the link.

I don't think Hassan ever said that. If you have seen that quote in any newspaper, please post the link.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States

Today you are asking for news paper when same SIT or court says they dont have any evidence against Modi you call them Sanghi Right?

So your source of inspiration is one and only News Paper...You wont trust any one other than this countries News Paper...Is that True?

You know one thing our Indian media wala are so strong that they have guts to write all the things Right? Here is the very good example of it...Ask them why they didnt carried this news and not me.....

Will narrate another incident when whole country was deabting deatch sentence punishment for Delhi rapist this super secular, Aethist said rapist are like my brother so they must be put into life imprisonment and not be given with capital punishment,,

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/kamal-hassan-against-death-penalty-for-rapists/1049516

Our Media walas didn't followed this story then it is there mistake but fact is that he quoted both the sentence from his mouth...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcncfAzs-kc

Next time on Outlook we will accept your thoughts or words if you quote from news paper if other than this it wont carry any face value for us nor for you as you trust only News Paper..

All I said was that the report quoting Hassan's alleged words, "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda.

Anwar,

Tamil Nadu's Muslims love for Al Qida was clearly seens when they commemorated a ceremoney for Osama Bin Laden death in Chennai..And people participating this function large number I dont rememebr any other state Muslims have shown there love for Osama openly.

Kamal gets support from another lady against death sentence for Rape..

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/Sharmila-Tagore-opposes-capital-punishment-for-rape/articleshow/18315618.cms

Cool!!

Jayakumar,

Instead of making idiotic and irrelevant arguments, just produce a link which shows that Hassan actually said something as stupid as, "Some Muslim brethren objected to references to Al Qaeda. I removed those."  I don't think Hassan ever said that.

Shri Shah Rukh Khan is absolutely right in his assessment. But, unfortunately, today’s scenario is far more complicated and is something like this: (a) Terrorist organizations like LeT and Taliban are openly supporting violence in the name of Islam. Saner elements in Muslim nations over the world are not actively contradicting this view of terrorists. (b) The extremists in Muslim communities all over the world are not ready to accommodate a view that is different from theirs and they (extremists) are often proclaiming that non-Muslims have no right to live in this world. (c) More worrying is the fact that saner elements in Muslim communities in our country and elsewhere are being weakened day by day.
Unfortunately, Muslim leaders all over India have refused to see reason and are wasting their energy on agitations of little relevance. They have therefore not succeeded in achieving socio-economic progress of their community.
 

44/D-8

http://canindia.com/2013/01/ill-burn-vishwaroops-tamil-version-in-front-of-jayalalithas-office-kamal-haasan/

Take this and enjoy with your brothers of TN...

Jaykumar,

Thank you! I was wrong. However unbelievable the remark may sound, it seems Hassan did say it!

 I don't think India needs some statement from Khan declaring that he is loyal indian as he is a loyal Indian  . Paki dogs are free to bark per habit.

 SRK proclaimed himself a "Baadsah", while is not worth a "Sipahi".

He had A GRAND coalition of successful actresses like JUHI Chawla, KAJOL, RANI Mukherjee and PRIETY Jinta; these begams of Film industry has left active role with him.
He is struggling now, and he needs propaganda.

Baadsah without begam and series of flop film has made him seek draw attention which is cheap, easy and keeps him in TV and press, this is how bogus Baadsahs behave, what is surprising ???

I think Hafeej Saeed gave him correct advice, he should go to Pakistan and start JIHAD.

India’s Fantasy of Disloyal Muslims May Come True

By Pankaj Mishra

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is fond of boasting that not one of India’s almost 180 million Muslims has been discovered to be a member of al-Qaeda. He could underscore an even more remarkable fact: None of the foreign jihadists caught fighting alongside the Taliban has turned out to be from the country with the world’s third-largest Muslim population.

Indeed, Indian Muslims haven’t bothered to lend even moral support to the anti-Indian insurgency in Muslim-majority Kashmir that has claimed more than 50,000 lives in the past two decades.

According to New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, this is because Indian Muslims “are the product of and feel empowered by a democratic and pluralistic society.” A more prosaic and less ideological explanation is that Indian Muslims have many of their own problems to deal with, largely stemming from the swift decay of democracy and pluralism. According to a 2012 book, “Muslims in Indian Cities: Trajectories of Marginalisation,” edited by Laurent Gayer and Christophe Jaffrelot, Muslims are as badly off, if not worse, socially and economically, than Dalits (formerly untouchable Hindus) and tribal peoples.

One can only hope that its squalid fantasy about traitorous Indian Muslims doesn’t prove to be self-fulfilling. For the radicalization of even a tiny fraction of 180 million Muslims would not only fatally undermine India’s increasingly unconvincing claims to democracy and secularism. The not-so- reluctant fundamentalists would make the country seem as ungovernable as its neighbor.

www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-19/india-s-fantasy-of-disloyal-muslims-may-come-true.html