To Mohammad Khan

Submitted by G.Bisvas (Germany), Jun 4, 2006 at 06:05

To Mohammad Khan

Your letter shows that muslims are not capable of thinking correctly because of their islamic education and propaganda. You mix up things and don't bother to reply to what I have written. Muslims ruled 1000 years over hindus but did not succeed in converting all hindus – this does not prove that muslims were tolerant, it proves that hindus were tougher than the Christians and Zoroastrians in resisting the lies and violences of islam and muslims. Why you chose to overlook this factor? Because your idiotic muslim teacher told you one particular answer and you never bothered to find out whether that was the whole truth.

I have repeatedly heard this same answer from muslims on all forums. "if islam was intolerant then how come not all hindus became muslims?". The same idiotic argument again and again. The fact is that the muslims actually got scared of the superiority of the hindu ideas and hence they demanded Pakistan. The demand for Pakistan was an admission by the muslims that they were incapable of arguing against and defeating hindu ideas. If islam is superior to hindu ideas and theology then there was no need for Pakistan.

Can you comprehend such arguments? You rather make sounds like an empty drum.

Pakistan is daily proof of the fact that a good human society cannot be founded and maintained on the basis of islam. I read 3 pakistani newspapers every day. (www.dawn.com , www.jang.com.pk , www.dailytimes.com.pk ). I get a lot of my information about islam from these muslim newspapers made by muslims for muslims in a muslim land.

Islam is a fratricidal religion – the muslim concept of brotherhood is very different from the hindu concept. The hindu concept is derived from Ram and Bharat. The muslim concept is illustrated by Dara Shukoh and Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb killed his elder brother Dara Shukoh because Dara was too tolerant towards non-muslims and Aurangzeb wanted the throne of Delhi. The muslim leaders justified this murder with the argument that a muslim state cannot have a tolerant man like Dara at its head. It needs a fanatic muslim like Aurangzeb to lead it. Contrast this to what the Ramayana depicts about Ram and Bharat.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".