Fred Bauder < fredbaud@ctelco.net > wrote:

It is not at One point. The Muslims in India are Indians.

Correct.

Another, I am not an expert on this matter, but it seems everyone jumped to conclusions when the incident was first reported and acted accordingly, with baleful results. It is good to look back and investigate but the evil is in the prejudice on both sides which was triggered by whatever happened. Just what in the hell do you want?, Another partition?

I want to state facts as they are without any Communist Party propaganda that Arvind Narayanan has fallen for. He seems to be a sincere person but either a fool or a 20 year old kid who is carried away by talks of socialist paradise by Communists.

I feel it must be the former because he did not even know Krishna Iyer's background until I taught him.

As for your jingoistic question on partition, an experiment was carried out in 1947 to see what would happen if India was split into two, one piece with a Muslim majority and another with a Hindu majority. Guess what happened? One ended up into a theocracy and an exporter of terrorism while the Hindu majority pice ended up a democracy. It is a FACT that India became a democracy with full liberties only because the majority of population were Hindus.

libertarian

_______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com