How stupid and idiotic thing for Shabana Azami to say. It both her and Saif Ali Khan have had a prosperous career in Bollywood(Indian cinema). I wonder if she went to Islamic countries and talked about unfairness she would be stoned to death, not to mention she would have hardly any opportunities as a actress or a politician. Moreover her insight and analysis of Indian democracy is pathetic and ignorant. Looking at her co-religionists who run Pakistan and Bangladesh and the rest of the UMMAH one would feel shame to be a Muslim. But alas we know that their arrogance and the belief that they are better than the Kuffars they live a delusion and unable to see the failure of Islam.

Posted by: savsiv at August 17, 2008 10:42 AM

""I don't think that the Muslim leadership has bothered to clear the air about what Islam actually is."

I think the Muslim leadership is making Islams plans perfectly clear..

Posted by: pulsar182 at August 17, 2008 10:45 AM

"NEW DELHI: Although Muslims are safer in this country than in other parts of the world because they have a stake and space in Indian democracy, Indian democracy is unfair to Muslims, says Shabana Azmi, actor and former MP. "

Why don't you simply move to pakistan shabbo ? I am sure your acting talents will be appreciated in that dar-ul-islam.

"In an interview to a private TV channel, Azmi said, "I think there is not enough understanding of the fact that in a democracy how you treat the security of the minority must be a very important "

Minorities eh ? You know the Parsis, the ones who sought refuge in India when muhammadan mobs were ransacking Persia, are among the minorities of India, as are the Jews. Why don't these people have any problems with the Indian state and democracy ? And have you ever thought about why the majority of muslims are poverty struck shabbo ?

"Shabana Azmi said Indian politics has been unfair to Muslims and despite Indian secularism Muslims are discriminated against. "

Like I said shabbo, move over to pakiland. And take all the rest of your ummah with you. ALL of them.

"She said she couldn't buy a house in Mumbai because she was a Muslim. "I wanted to buy a flat in Bombay and it wasn't given to me because I was a Muslim and I read the same about Saif (Ali Khan).[...]"

Way to go anti dhimmis. Won't sell flats to imitaters of uswa-hasana, al-insan, al-kamil.

"I don't think that the Muslim leadership has bothered to clear the air about what Islam actually is."

What islam actually is :

http://thereligionofpeace.com

And the history.

http://historyofjihad.org

Posted by: arjun.sevak at August 17, 2008 10:49 AM

I think Mohammedans should get their own planet so they can be completely, 100% satisfied with their world. Like, say, Neptune.

Posted by: darcy at August 17, 2008 10:53 AM

Below, link to an article by jihadi taqqiya master m. j. akbar. Toilet paper Of India is printing drivel nowadays.

"Fasadi, not Jihadi"

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Fasadi_not_Jihadi/articleshow/3346781.cms

Posted by: arjun.sevak at August 17, 2008 10:59 AM

And I suppose under some sort of Hindu dictatorship or authoritarian government, things would be better for Muslims than under the current democracy?

That's a brilliant observation. Only other explanation is that Azmi wants Mohammedans to demographically and through illegal Bangladeshi immigration take over India, so that it first becomes an Islamic democracy before becoming an Islamic state.

This Mohammedan verminette is a gutless wonder - several years ago, she did seem to show some spine in speaking up against the way hijabettes are treated, but backed off when Mohammedan organizations - true to form - went postal on her. Since then, she has only championed Leftist and Secular (read anti-Hindu) causes, and thrown in with the likes of Arundhati Roy.

savsiv is right - both she and Saif Ali Khan Pataudi have had successful Bollywood careers, and there are several other leading Mohammedans who are pretty much the very face of Bollywood. I do wish Hindus would boycott Mohammedan stars, but they don't - which is why the dominant stars in Bollywood are Mohammedan, and still coming. All of them are rich enough to buy flats in the most expensive of Mumbai neighborhoods, and not be any worse off. But what fun would it be if she couldn't equate her lot to that of the average Mohammedan losers in India who either believe that everything is stacked against them, or that they are owed something.

And what's this other business about 'Muslims are safer in this country [India] than in other parts of the world'? All over the world, there is dhimmitude all over, with countries in Europe competing on ways to do it, and the US too not much better. While I support the Gujarat riots that took place, when was the last time that such a thing happened anywhere in the West? Even post 9/11, there were no riots against Mohammedans, and in Europe, after 3/11, 7/7, et al, there was nothing like it at all. Obviously, this verminette has been swallowing what her fellow Leftist PCMC travellers are saying - hook, line & sinker.

Combine a Leftist PCMC and a Mohammedan, and this is what one gets

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 17, 2008 11:06 AM

"In an interview to a private TV channel, Azmi said, "I think there is not enough understanding of the fact that in a democracy how you treat the security of the minority must be a very important "

Translation: Muslims treat their dhimmis better.

Posted by: Abscedere at August 17, 2008 11:23 AM

In an interview to a private TV channel, Azmi said, "I think there is not enough understanding of the fact that in a democracy how you treat the security of the minority must be a very important part for the success of a democracy.

Shabana Azmi has to explain several things. How is it, that since Partition, the Hindu population of Pakistan (formerly West Pakistan) has gone down from 15% of the population to less than a tenth that, or 1.4%? What are the reasons? And why is it that Christians in Pakistan live in a state of constant fear, of persecution, humiliation, and even, at times, death sentences imposed either by the state, or by local Muslims taking "Muslim law" into their own hands?

How is it, too, that the same demographic observations can be observed in Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan), where the non-Muslim share of the population has gone down from 34% to 8%?

And finally, Shabana Azmi should be asked how is it that at the time time as there has been a terrific drop in the Hindu populations of Pakistan and Bangladesh, there has been a great rise, both relative and absolute, in the Muslim population of India? And why is it that the Indian government, despite every conceivable provocation by Musilms working either from Pakistan, or Kashmir, or when they can, within India itself, to make life as unpleasant and expensive and dangerous for Hindus (and other non-Muslims) as they possibly can, does so very little except turn, wrongly, the other cheek, and repeat platitudinous pieties designed to keep the peace, but in reality only encouraging the intolerable behavior, not only of the ISI and terrorist groups, but of Muslims who pushed nearly 400,000 Kashmiri Pandits out of Kashmir altogether, who attacked the Parliament of India, who put bombs in Mumbai, and who, everywhere they can, insist that what Muslims built deliberately on top of Hindu sacred sites must remain forever, and Hindu India must, ideally, be returned to the status of humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity that characterized the hundreds of years of Muslim rule?

And why should we stop at India? Why should we not note how the small groups of Jews and Hindus, the ones who used to be involved in the sheep trade in Afghanistan, were driven out of that country, the former before the Taliban arrived, and the latter, when the Taliban insisted that Hindus had to wear identifying orange robes "for their own safety." And what about the Buddhists of southern Thailand, the farmers and teachers routinely attacked and decapitated, by Muslims apparently "unhappy" -- like the whining and sinister Shabana Azmi -- with "democracy" in Thailand that apparently just doesn't give Muslims what they want, and what they want is something that no non-Muslims will every wish to grant, which is total control over the places they live in, and that includes lording it over, as the Shari'a commands, over whatever non-Muslims happen to be there -- and that is only the first step.

What about the behavior of Muslims toward Christians in Indonesia, where schoolgirls have been decapitated, Christians routinely attacked, bombs set off, and thousands of churches destroyed by Muslims, especially in the Moluccas?

And the same kind of thing has gone on for years in the southern Philippines, in the Moro Islands.

So let's leave America and Europe out of it. Let's just ask Shabana Azmi to think about Muslim behavior toward non-Muslims, or toward, where the country is democratic but not Muslim-dominated, the non-Muslim authorities, in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia,

Forget about the "West" altogether, and please explain, Shabana Azmi.

These are the kind of matters that must be raised, by way of forcing such "moderate" or "acceptable" (presumably, as a film star) Muslims to exhibit some modicum of common sense and decency and, above all, a sense of proportion.

One doubts that it will work. But it's worth a try.

Posted by: Hugh at August 17, 2008 11:59 AM

"I don't think that the Muslim leadership has bothered to clear the air about what Islam actually is."

I would not lead with that. Taquiya is much safer.

Posted by: tanstaafl at August 17, 2008 12:53 PM

There still remains no universally accepted definition of democracy in the world, though there are a couple of basic principles. There are some nearly 20 different interpretations of democracy throughout the world. The constitution that the United States follows in its Republic form of democracy has demonstrated itself for the past 230 years to be the best and strongest example of a democracy. There are two principles that any definition of democracy needs to include. The first principle is that all members of the society have equal access to power and the second that all members enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties.

And of course America is still struggling long into the 20th century to follow its own commitment to these principals through the democratic principals built into its Constitution. A democracy in India cannot be reflective in almost anyway as a democracy in America.

Posted by: Mackie at August 17, 2008 1:14 PM

"I don't think that the Muslim leadership has bothered to clear the air about what Islam actually is."

NO! You don't say.

Posted by: poetcomic1 at August 17, 2008 2:47 PM

There still remains no universally accepted definition of democracy in the world, though there are a couple of basic principles.. "

Mackie

But most of us in democratic countries recognise what we are talking about. Democracy is a dynamic and a vibrant living concept with capacity of self correction built-in unlike the others that are "dead" and prone to bloody changes which we often see.

Muslims should come out of madrasas and embrace modern education. They still enjoy the privillege to learn 'Arabic' along with modern education.It is in the same way that Hindus have come out of 'Gurukuls' and are in the modern education system even though they still learn 'Sanskrit'
and some learn it to become teacher or a priest.Beyond this it does not help.

The part problem is that in India arround the time of 1857 learning of English by Muslims was equated to embracing 'Christianity' ,an obscurantist view,and they set up Deoband in UP for its opposition. It is here in Deobands that change or reform should come or else they be closed.Deobands are only playing a second fiddle to Saudi Arabia/Mecca-Medina.

Posted by: Kash225 at August 17, 2008 3:28 PM

Minority moral blackmail, the ultimate weapon of the islamist. Sounds like Britain ever since we beacame a minoritocracy.

Posted by: DaveMate at August 17, 2008 3:51 PM

Muslims decry democracy as being "unfair" to them

"Unfair" meaning, of course, that in a truly democratic system they are denied any special rights to assert and enforce the primacy of Islam over everything and everyone.

Posted by: Eastview at August 17, 2008 4:02 PM

Infidel Pride,

IMO the reason the U.S. didn't have Gujurat style riots after 9/11 is because it stopped there and because of a massive PR offensive by the MSM and Bushco.

Still right after the attacks people were really angry. If Al-Qeada had say decided to pursue more attacks, say like bombing a nuclear power plant or attacking a mall or school. There would have been deadly reprisals against Muslims.

That said, if the Muslims were to say blow up a shopping mall or major chemical refinery that results in thousands killed and injured.

You could bet on violent attacks on Muslims and the radicalization of a large segment of our population against Muslims. Not the gov't or its braindead security apparatus which will not lift a finger in defense of the American people but the people themselves.

Posted by: waltc at August 17, 2008 5:06 PM

Was just showing my kids that Porky Pig (the French Legionnaire)vs. AliBaba (the Mad Dog of the Desert) pre-PC cartoon, where one of the "mad dogs" starts picketing with a sign "This Fort is Unfair to Arabs" after an attack is repelled.
That and "the suicide squad bench", how spot on.
That picketing frame ought to be used whenever the "unfair" complaint is floated.

Posted by: kuchuklambat at August 17, 2008 8:36 PM

Any government that isn't shoving Islam & shariah down people's throats is unfair to them, move to Bengladesh or Pakistan, you miserable cretins/

Posted by: MorrisMinor at August 17, 2008 11:49 PM

Let them move to the Maldives.. see next entry.. INSHALLAHAHA-HA-HA-HA...!!!

And don't come looking in any of our DEMOCRATIC UNFAIR-to-moslem-scum NATIONS!!!

STAY OUT!!!!

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at August 17, 2008 11:56 PM

Muslim in non-Muslim state: "It's *not fair*!! Waaah! Poor little me! I'm being oppressed!!"

Translation: "I don't have any slaves and near-slave dhimmis to kick around and whip whenever I feel like it. It's not fair! Waah! Poor little me! If I don't have any slaves or dhimmis to do all the work for me, I'm OPPRESSED!"

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 18, 2008 3:51 AM

Why don't the Muslims get out of India and go live in Pakistan which they tore out from India for themselves? The Hindu people should send all of them to Pakistan.

Posted by: norman at August 18, 2008 5:42 AM

Mohammedans decry, cry, whine, demand, are outraged and the list is long. Mohammedans irritate, bother and mooch plus a few killings of various sorts. As multiculturalism and cowardice sweep the western world I believe all we who are aware can do is plan and wait. Plan and wait until the mohammedans finally push too far and even the multiculturist and cowards can take it no more. But what a terrible price we pay until then. But I do hope and pray it comes.

I for one would have no problem fighting the mohammedan and his multiculturist and cowardly dhimmi who do not see the light. Let them choose. As far as India is concerned I hope the mohammedans do cause them grief. There is a huge anti-American element in India, both communist and Hindu. Let the mohammedans keep them busy. The spirit of Nehru lives. Let the heathens rage.

Posted by: muslim_watcher at August 18, 2008 6:35 AM

I seem to recall that when India was partitioned in 1947, one of the prime reasons, if not THE reason, was to give the moslems a country of their own that was separate from the land of the Hindus--hence Pakistan. Moslems who are disgruntled in India should move to Pakistan where they will feel more at home. Alternatively, they could move to East Pakistan, AKA Bangladesh since 1971.

Posted by: MadAggie at August 18, 2008 8:11 AM

Can any one explain whats that mossies want from India?

Posted by: muslim_watcher at August 18, 2008 4:46 PM

What a total bunch of horsesh*t.

The whinings of a people whose collective idea of "accomplishment" is the destruction of the WTC sickens me.

They should leave India, the Philippines, Thailand, and other democratic countries and go to the Holy Kingdom, SA. I'm sure they'd have nothing ::rolleyes:: to complain about over there.

Posted by: PorkFatRules at August 18, 2008 6:35 PM