Visite Webhosting Latino, el site sobre alojamiento web.
SHIVAJI'S REAL FATHER WAS A MUSLA KHAN BHAI....... - Mombu the Culture Forum
Mombu the Culture Forum sponsored links

Go Back   Mombu the Culture Forum > Culture > SHIVAJI'S REAL FATHER WAS A MUSLA KHAN BHAI.......
User Name
REGISTER NOW! Mark Forums Read

sponsored links

1 4th February 17:42
External User
Posts: 1

The book at the eye of the storm:James Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in
Islamic India

It is unclear who his real father in India, in
Individual's parent-hood is considered more important than the
individual and his acheievements and I certainly do not seek to lower
myself to that level of argument.

But there is a high possibility that his real father might have been
some Pathan wasnt uncommon those days. Why is it that the
Marathas after enduring hundreds of years of Muslim rule suddenly
sprouted a rebel? It is more likely that the "rebel" within Shivaji
was a typical Pathan with his mountain instinct of independence.

Take alook at this picture....Shivaji was a dwarf and Pathans do
produce dwarf variants when their blood is mixed with locals. There
are thousands such in India.

Now Hindu hoodlums have resurrected Shivaji as an icon of Hindu hate
whereas he employed muslim mercenaries and was always on the run,
giving the word backstabbing a totally new meaning. He was not
different in any way from the 1000s of petty muslim rulers and

You can imagine why Hindu hoodlums are calling for author Laine's
blood....but there might be a darker reason. Suppose investigation
into his lineage is conducted and a khan bhai comes up?


Al the Hindu hoodlums will have to give up their Pajero's and reurn to
their rural shitholes.

__________________________________________________ ____________________________

Having purchased and read James Laine's Shivaji: Hindu
King in Islamic India only after it was officially
withdrawn by the publishers, I cannot view the events at
the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) as
totally unjustified.

Then, there is Laine's tasteless allegation that Shivaji
may possibly (whatever that means) be illegitimate,
simply because Jijabai, who bore many children while
living with her husband in the south, gave birth to
Shivaji on her husband's estate near Pune and continued
to live there.

Indeed, every party seems to be getting into the
thuggish act. Shiv Sena, a party based on the pro-Hindu nationalist
image of Shivaji, attacked a leading Shivaji scholar who assisted
Laine and blackened his face as a sign of shame. Another group
ransacked the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) in Pune,
where Laine worked. And now, it is the left- leaning secularist
Congress Party that is calling for Laine's arrest and extradition. In
an election year, it's hip to be hard-line.

The Indian edition was recalled, and India's prime
minister warned Laine not to "play with our national pride." Officials
said they want to extradite the Minnesota author to stand trial for
defamation, and the controversy has become a campaign issue in
upcoming parliamentary elections.
__________________________________________________ _____________________________
  Reply With Quote

  sponsored links

2 4th February 17:43
External User
Posts: 1

Most Indians are product of invasions, invasions has not only brought
superior culture but also superior genes. Facts are not allowed in
India, they are either banned or driven out of the cuntry. Banning J.
Laines book is nothing out of the ordinary.
  Reply With Quote
3 9th February 15:16
External User
Posts: 1

While they are quick to ban books they dont like, they are more than
willing to invite those who thrive on anti-Islamic hate into their Salman Rushdie, who was given VIP protection.

Regarding the invasions, here are several things really worth clearing

1. There is no official record of any forced conversion to Islam;
neither any record of a program of conversion by the Muslim rulers.
The reason is simple; Indian Hindoos were too backward, animalistic,
materialistic and devil oriented to be even considered worthy for

The only conversion carried out by outsiders was by Independent
Muslim Saints like Khawaja Moinuddin chishti whose grave in Gujarat
has been turned into an almost Hindu like shrine by local Muslims.
(Local indian Muslims unfortunately do carry a lot of excess garbage
inherited from Hindoos, such as flim flam ceremonies)

My ancestors were Rajput Hindus who trashed Hinduism for Islam by
their own free will....yet, in our own country India we are treated
more worse by these shitworms than blacks get treated in Us
Confederate states during their civil war.

2. Only a small percentage of Muslims are purely "foreign".I would say
10%...and again they freely intermarry......unlike the Brahmin Aryan
invaders among Hindus.

3. Hindu hatemonger V.S Naupaul writes how "the invasions from 1000
A.D destroyed Indian culture yada yada. Note that he is very specific
to mention 1000 A.D because if he went beyond that, it would include
his Aryan invader ancestors, who inlike Muslims gave nothing but hate
to the country.

My position has always been: Why thw whining now? Why didnt they
fight off the invaders back then if that really mattered? Regarding
the first Muslim invasion, only the Rajput cheiftains bothered to show
up for a fight whereas Naupaul's ancestors were up some tree watching
the tamasha.

Yet again, India isnt a nation of spectators who watch the
tamasha......they do actually loot, **** and kill, but only when you
are without your weapon. It took me a while to understanmd their
pyschology. I realised that they would still hate us even if there
were no invasions whatsoever. In their worldview, anyone who doesnt
have a weapon and on whom you have some official control becomes
liable for being oppressed by it minorities, women,
animals, handicaps, "low castes" etc.

Lets hope the entire shithole gets nuked some day!
  Reply With Quote
4 10th February 21:58
External User
Posts: 1

obviously, after hundred-thousands of generation, there born a muslim
with "mind", who could understand real meaning of filth he was born
in, he must be commended for his efforts to expose real Islam

Were muslims literate enough to record such conversions ?

probably ,your mother was gang-****d by bunch of arabs.

why do you expect to be treated good,when you have so much hatred
towards india ? you are same shitworm ,just forcefully converted to

dude, arayn came to india around 1500 BC,some 2500 years ago shitty
islam was born.

higher cast rajputs converted to islam due to their greed.

what if chienze-made remote control didnt work ? :-). you guys have
no capacity of building your own high-ways or airports, why dream
about nukes ? go buy a toy.

  Reply With Quote
5 10th February 22:01
External User
Posts: 1

Its difficult to understand your agony boy. I dont know why I feel
sympathy towards your anger even after you want me dead. I feel you
are my part, which I lost in the battle, and worst I did not care for
the pain it had to bear due to my negligence. But I had to survive.
You can come back. Do not put your strength against the roots you are
proud off. Not only rajputs but also many Indian social fabrics have
been destroyed in the social mixing. I see the mixing simply as
dissolution of one into other. A change in life style. The way we
speak English unlike our forefathers is a sign of mixing with western
world culture isnt it? Its pleasant till mixing isnot forced. The
religious mixing can never be achieved without force, mind you.
(Islamic) principles are beyond any assessment as any other set of
social principles, let them be western (competitive, individualistic,
self oriented). The trouble is enforcement. I like the love, freedom,
and self-awareness virtues but let me define it for my society!
Westerners cant force a definition which suits their long term goal
(globalize/ breaking of conservative way of living which includes
traditional Islamic societies/Arabs, Chinese, Russian Catholics and my
dear Indian motherland).

You are becoming violent like duryodhan who was deeply hurt. Find a
Exhaust your out of control intensity for what had been done to your
forefathers. Trust me, I share the hurt when you say, the rajputs were
your forefathers. I can see the conflicting feelings you have to
accommodate in your mind, love and hate for India. Just try rising
beyond the conflict and see the perspective of a team loosing some and
retaining some in the event of social war. Still, we have survived it
and will survive it again if any mother****er dares to nuke. He will
be removed from map of world such that his bloodstock will be extinct.

I assure you that.

  Reply With Quote
6 10th February 22:02
External User
Posts: 1

There are many islamic historical accounts that proudly
recount such incidents, e.g. "the captured people were
given a choice to accept Islam, those that refused were
killed on the spot, on that day we killed <large-number>
of kaffirs". That would appear to be a little bit of a
forced conversion, if you see the people 10 feet away
getting their heads chopped off for saying no...

All things get corrupted. At first, when invaders appeared, the
kings would send out spies, gather information, make plans...

After a few hundred years, there was the emergence and dominance
of a hereditary brahmin caste (a greek historical account says
there was a "scholarly" group in India but it was not
hereditary, obviously that changed.)

Now, when invaders appeared, the king would consult the royal
brahmin astrologer. The astrololger would pronounce the correct
time to send out the armies. If that turned out to be a wrong
time, the general could fume and fret, but the "auspicious" time
wouldn't get changed, because the gods had taken over
absolute control.

The king, instead of trusting in his weapons and warriors,
would trust the blessings of the royal priest. If the
priest said "vijayi bhava", that was guarantee of
being victorious. Unfortunately, the power of
such superstitions was only over those who believed
in them. The invaders didn't believe in the nonsense
of the priests, so it mattered little what the
priest said or didn't say. (The priest probably
converted anyway, after getting captured, and
became a maulana instead.)

So what fell, was a very corrupt thing anyway, nothing to mourn over.

It isn't like that, though! Surely Pakistan is much
more oppressive of women and animals... The kindness
to animals instilled in Buddhist times persists in
India, even though mixed in with various superstitions.
Women have traditionally been considered equal, and there
are leading women role models like Durga and Shakti.
The negative impact on women in fact may be because
of the Muslim and British times.

Even minorities in modern India have vast legal rights,
and a very large reservation for government jobs, which
will surely affect the nature of Indian government
over time.

If you research the records, you will find muslims in India
have always had the opportunity to excell
in various fields. To be sure, there is a lot
of friction, but for those that keep out of these
lowly frictions, there are no glass ceilings. But
it does mean that if you were a muslim in a very
publicly visible profession (e.g. a movie star or a
leading politican), you may have had to hide your
muslim origins. Not from your co-workers, but from
the masses.
  Reply With Quote
7 12th February 05:00
External User
Posts: 1

are you some kind of newly resurrected appologist pimp of brahimin
what are you trying to plead? cant you see the historical injustices
perpetrated on shudras of south by brahiminis of north? have you ever
tried to understand agony of a shudra? have ever uttered a single word
of "love, freedom and self awareness for a shudra"? sala selfish
sootiya aadmi!!
  Reply With Quote
8 12th February 05:03
External User
Posts: 1

Caste hierarchy -
Brahmin ( priests)
Kshatriya (Warriors , rulers?)
Vaishya (traders)
Shudra (workers )
Achoot ( untouchables, outcastes)

The achoots have suffered more/most under the Brahminist system.
Nowadays, the shudras consider themselves uppercastes and oppress the achoot.
The achoot are also known as dalits.
  Reply With Quote
9 15th February 13:14
External User
Posts: 1

Take a DietCoke girl, before you vomit your gems. Your unhappiness
with my society isnt anymore valuable. I wasnt mentioning anything
about paki loose lunds living inside my country and perpetrating their
own motherland for some jehadi school under control of CIA.

  Reply With Quote
10 15th February 13:14
External User
Posts: 1

PS: A dramatization of what the parties here could
be thinking, might help to figure out the historical
scenarios better:

1) Priest: He is asked to come up with some time.
He has no clue what is the best time, but he does
have some "procedures" he can utilize to come up
with some auspicious time. So he does this.

Now the general comes up and says, no, that's no good.
The priest is in a dilemma. If he backs down, he
is in danger of having the religious dominance threatened.
But the general could be right.

But the priest hasn't spent any time thinking of
armies and wars, and is bright and slightly
contemptuous of the general anyway. He figures, "Well,
the armies just have to fight. This time is as good
as any other. Why should time make a difference anyway?
I have seen 'malla yuddhas', and the same guy will win
no matter what is the time of the fight. So it is very
clear the general is just plotting to take over the mind
of the king. I better stick to my guns".

2) General: He doesn't understand the subtle interplays
of the royal court as well as the priest, and therefore
comes across as dumb in comparison to the priest. This
is because he has spent his life in other matters. The
rise in ground 5 miles to the west of the capital is
important to him, in a way that nobody else at the
court can relate to. Time, terrain, training, all
these things are important to him.

But he also has been trained to believe in the priest.

So when the "auspicious" time is clearly nuts, he
protests meekly. Left to himself, he could have
devised much better defense plans. But he is
out maneouvered.

3) King: He hears the priest and the general. But
from the time he was born, he has been told about the power
of religion. He knows you can't learn without the
blessing of Saraswati, you can't win wars without
the blessing of Indra...

So he has little choice but to listen to the priest
and issue orders to the general to do as the
priest says.

4) Armies: In an earlier time, their brains would
have been engaged thinking about the enemy. Now,
at least half their minds are engaged thinking about
how to keep gods happy. They are concerned if
the royal "yajna" was performed perfectly or not.
There are debates on whether the coconut slipping
out of the priest's hand signified doom or not.
These debates replace debates on how best to engage
the enemy, and they never really get to focus
their minds on that.

So overall the people are the same as they were
in the times of Alexander, but their thinking
patterns are entirely different.
  Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Copyright 2006 - Dies Mies Jeschet Boenedoesef Douvema Enitemaus -