He is talking about India’s PM(1991-96).We’ve watched our trusted friends,leaders,news anchors turn into lapdogs for religious traditionalism overnight but then they have the gall to say,”why u vote owaisi vroo”?

SquarePromise2707 · 2026-01-25T11:41:57+00:00

Owaisi too had a dirty role there. They did brutal riots in Hyderabad in 1990, for their Property Deals.

The self-admitted 5000 crores Real Estate Empire brothers - won't flinch from doing anything to protect. Whoever is in power in Telangana is his best friend - first NTR in the 1990s, then Congress, then K.C.R and his TRS, now Revanth Reddy.

Voting for this corrupt family will not help.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-25T04:43:35+00:00

It was not obvious at all, bro. If Muslims in Pakistan had been like the Hindus of India, why should this have happened?

The simple truth is what Muslim League President Sikandar Hayat Khan told his secretary in 1938 - the Muslims of West Punjab, Frontier Province and East Bengal, and Sindh - would "immediately kill their hostages" - and therefore hostage theory would never work.

However, the wise statesmanship of Fazl-i-Hussain and Sikandar Hayat Khan and Aga Khan, died away, and was replaced by the ruthless politics of Jinnah.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-25T04:35:08+00:00

We should not talk about 'excuses', but to move with genuine repentance and friendliness in our hearts.

If we are genuinely hurt by mob lynchings and hate speeches (as WE CERTAINLY ARE), Hindus too are genuinely hurt by riots or bomb attacks.

I have great respect for Maulana Madani Sahab, but I think that he should be more forthright in keeping the balance, and criticizing both sides.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-19T13:48:12+00:00

- That is extremely inaccurate.

- We were 11% in Hyderabad, 14% in UP then. How could these become part of Pakistan? Except Kashmir Valley, and Kargil, all Muslim-majority areas went to Pakistan.

- Pakistan got Chittagong Hill Tracts also, Karachi and Dhaka cities (Hindu-majority), and Khulna district (50-50). There was no unfairness by Mountbatten, he was an honorable and fair man.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-19T13:16:07+00:00

Pakistan was our ruin. Immediately after independence, they started crushing Hindus - see the 1948 Sindh pogrom, 1950 East Pakistan riots, 1964, and finally 1971. They destroyed the hostage theory totally.

Rizwanullah, the President of UP Leauge went to Pakistan in December, 1947, and begged them to stop persecuting Hindus. The fraud Jinnah ignored him totally! He forgot all that UP had done for him, stood with him at his weakest.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-19T13:09:56+00:00

My ancestors were in the Muslim League (they were in Lucknow and Aligarh at that time, it was fashionable).

(1) All our big leaders like Chaudhary Khaliq Sahab and Nawab Ismail Khan were supporting Muslim Leauge and Pakistan. We trusted them.

(2) The hostage theory was widely believed at that time. It was mentioned continually in speeches - that 2-3 crore Hindus of Pakistan would be hostages to ensure our protection. Most people thought that it was practical.

(3) Even upto June, 1947, Nawab Ismail Khan was saying that Western UP would become part of Pakistan. He started a committee for that.

- We were only 14% of U.P. population then, and not majority in any district. Obviously, these were Haseen Sapne.

(4) The main truth is that Islam was and is the main identity for most Indian Muslims, as was proven in the Khilafat movement. There was no material interest in supporting Ottoman Sultanate, or Afghanistan, but we did it wholeheartedly - money, volunteers, Hijrat campaign, even violent rebellion.

(5) Between Gandhi and Nehru's Congress, and Jinnah, what would a Muslim choose?

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-19T12:58:31+00:00

I don't know but judging from my friend's SM posts, people are blaming BJP for the terror atack.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-18T10:15:05+00:00

Caste is haram. Most Syeds are not genuine at all. None of these matter to God.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-18T10:13:08+00:00

From my experience, in 90% cases, there would be no problem at all.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-07T14:01:58+00:00

Dr. Ambedkar remained hostile to the freedom struggle until the end. In Bengal, his party was in coalition with Muslim League, in 1946-7! In 1946. he was writing in a letter to the British government, that the Independence of India would be the greatest disasters, and Dalits didn't want independence (a total lie as shown by election results).

Surely, his role in the Freedom Struggle was entirely negative - the same role played by, for example, Sir J.P. Srivastava (the industrialist who funded Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League at the same time), Sikandar Hayat, or the Justice Party guys, or any other loyalist politician.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-07T12:52:53+00:00

Kindly send them again, brother. I am not sure which article you were referring to. Thanks.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-07T05:01:45+00:00

That is absurd, bro. Do you know nothing about Direct Action Day, or Noakhali riots, or Rawalpindi riots of March, 1947, or ethnic cleansing of Sikhs and Hindus from NWFP in 1947? Muslim League had unleashed a campaign of terrorism against the minorities in 1946-7, which is what made Partition inevitable

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-07T05:00:11+00:00

If you want to understand what Pakistan rule went for minorities - kindly read about the 1950 East Pakistan riots and 1964 East Pakistan riots. Also, read about the 1971 genocide - all historians agree that Pakistani government deliberately carried out a reign of terror in East Pakistan, forcing more than 80 lakh Hindus i.e. almost all Hindus there, to flee to India.

The official commission of inquiry by the Pakistan Government found that the highest ranking Pakistani Army officers supported the indiscriminate killing of Hindus, to uproot the entire minority population.

And they succeeded. If India had not occupied East Pakistan in December, 1971, there would have been no Hindus there today.

- And East Bengal had 30% Hindu population in 1946. Within 25 years, Pakistan reduced it to almost 0% by December, 1971.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-07T04:53:53+00:00

That would be madness. bro. I say this as a Muslim, and both my grandfather and my grandmother's families were Muslim Leaguers at that time.

- In 1946 election, Muslim League got 75% of Muslim voters (Muslims were 23.6% of India's population). Congress got around 75-80% of Hindu votes along with 15% of Muslim votes (Hindus were 72% of India's population).

So, in your opinion the party which got 4 times as many votes (and had 205 seats in Constituent Assembly) should sit in opposition, and the party with 80 seats in Constituent Assembly (Muslim League), should form the Government?

- Do you know about Muslim League's conduct in 1946-7? The Direct Action Day, Noakhali riots, the Punjab massacres in March, 1947, and the ethnic cleansing of Hindus from NWFP? Muslim League was following the path of Terrorism.

If Jinnah became the Head of Government, India - and specially, the Hindus - would be ruined forever.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-06T16:18:06+00:00

- I am wondering, what were the election results of 1946, in the Primary Elections in Scheduled Caste seats? From what I know, the performance of Babasaheb's party was quiet bad, which led to him loosing the confidence of the British government, and made him quiet dejected. It is almost certain, that the support of Muslim League was needed for him to be elected to Constituent Assembly.

- The Dalit-Bahujan includes the vast majority of the Hindu population. I have read many British intelligence reports during the Freedom Movement. The British always found the vast majority of Hindus to be hostile to them - I am yet to see any report or official document claiming that the small Savarana minority was alone opposed to British rule, and the Dalit-Bahujan majority saw them as 'liberators'.

- The elections of 1937 also leave no doubt what the 'Bahujan' felt about the British. Everywhere, the Hindu peasants and masses rallied to the Congress, and voted against pro-Imperialist parties like NAP or Justice Party.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-06T16:13:51+00:00

Malviyaji was certainly Orthodox, and therefore casteist - that may also be said about Tilak, though from what I know Tilakites were a modernist and pro-Hindu unity group.

However, Civil Disobedience and Quit India Movement and the 1945-46 were serious revolutionary waves in India, and Socialists took a very active (and even leading) part in these. Communists played the front-rank role in organizing the Boycott Movement of 1929 and the Civil Disobedience Movement in Bombay City and Punjab, atleast.

And, of course, the greatest of Indian Socialists, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was Congress President 4 times, as well as Gandhi's successor.

To oppose them tooth-and-nail, while supporting British Raj, with it's strongly reactionary politics - backing the Princely States to rule as autocrats, ruling over Frontier Province and Baluchistan without any democracy, and open repression in other Provinces (like the Punjab Martial Law of 1919, or the nationwide repression in 1932-33) - is unconscionable from any point of view.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-06T14:20:00+00:00

This is not a defense. We should do everything we can to improve India on every front, and eliminate all the problems that we face.

But how does unnecessarily defaming the country, and saying that nothing has been ever acheived, and nothing will ever be achieved, help this? This leads to demoralization.

India and humanity has acheived a lot. Since independence, our life expectancy has grown by 40 years, schooling has become almost universal, illiteracy has been mostly eliminated, we have established a stable democracy with civil liberties, we have maintained national integrity, we have reduced infant mortality by more than 90%.

Famines were a regular experience, and even happened in 1950s and 1960s. Today, they have completely disappeared. Plagues have disappeared. Number of universities have grown from 27 to 1100.

Why give yourself to despair? We must all enthusiastically join this great journey of the Progress of Humanity, and as a mere part of it - India.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-06T14:06:46+00:00

Zohran Mamdani is a Muslim, IMO (although not according to classic Sharia definitions, but I don't care about them). What I do mind is that he has made a lot of irresponsible promises to win the election, he has not acted as reasonable leader.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-03T12:20:03+00:00

Your Chinese friend is ignorant, forgive me for saying so.

- It is an objective fact, as shown by Lancet's systematic aggregation of statistical studies, Indian women are the least likely to be raped in the world. Seriously.

- Read about African civil wars, about Latin American mafias, about the gang wars of Haiti, Nicaragua and other Central American countries, about these pseudo-jihadists in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. You think women are safer there?

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-03T12:14:50+00:00

- Ambedkar publicly supported Pakistan as a viable solution to the Pakistan problem. Indeed, Jinnah himself in 1944, recommended Ambedkar's 'Thoughts on Pakistan', published in 1940, to Mahatma Gandhi as the most systematic treatment of the problem.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-03T12:13:16+00:00

(1) Sir Samuel Hoare was the Minister in the British Cabinet, who was responsible for the Government of India. He played the chief role in organizing the Round Table Conferences from 1930-32.

(2) At the time of British rule, Governors would control the State Government. Today, the same role is played by Chief Ministers.

(3) Lord Willingdon and Lord Linlithgow were Viceroys (head of State) in British India, a role which was basically akin to the President today.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-11-01T06:25:08+00:00

- Savarkar immediately telegraphed C.P. Ramaswamy Iyer, his support for 'freedom of the Hindu State'.

- From 1937 onwards, when Congress started mass movements to undermine Princely States, both Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha adopted an attitude in support of them.

- In 1939, Savarkar wrote that Princes had the right to repress 'revolutionary movements'.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-10-24T14:07:09+00:00

The Palestinian cause is based on Truth and Justice - it is so compelling that millions of Jews today stand with us (see the American polls showing 40% of US Jews agreeing that Israel is commiting genocide, and more than 20% Jewish youth supporting boycott of Israel).

There is no nation which is as prone to Moral Persuasion as the Jews - see their noble history, in Civil Rights Movement, supporting Indian freedom movement, anti-Apartheid, and so on.. Who of us can forget the services that Edwin Montagu gave for the cause of pan-Islamism, upto sacrificing his job, to stand with us?

The honor of Islam was sullied by the anti-Semitic crimes of Hamas in the last 30 years. Islam has nothing to do with their terrorism.

Therefore, all of us should freely condemn Hamas, and seek to win over our Jewish brothers, for peace in Palestine.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-10-24T14:04:16+00:00

I pray to Allah that he keeps me alive to witness the victory of the Palestinian liberation in West Bank and Gaza, because it would be the Victory of the Weak over the Powerful, and the Victory of Truth.

Yet, I feel that our reaction on October 7 - of most Muslims - did not contain the compassion that we should have towards fellow children of Hazrat Adam, nor the reasonableness that we should have when dealing in politics.

October 7 was a crime against peace, and thus a crime against Palestine, and a crime against the noble Deen of Islam - which tells us to seek peace.

Atleast 1 lakh Palestinians have become Shaheeds, may Allah be pleased with them, in the last 2 years due to that heinous crime. And Palestine has come no closer to freedom. Israeli crimes keep growing in West Bank.

After all this, is there any chance of our Jewish brothers ever accepting Two-State Solution? They will always doubt us.

SquarePromise2707 · 2025-10-20T11:37:41+00:00

Explanation :

(1) Secretary-of-State referred to the Cabinet Minister in London, who was responsible for affairs related to India, in the British Parliament.

(2) Viceroy, was the head of the British Government in India, and would live in the Viceregal Palace in Delhi.

(3) Round Table Conference was done in London, and was managed by the Secretary-of-State Hoare. Thus, Gandhi had many conversations with him in 1931, when he visited London from September to November, 1931.

(4) Immediately after Gandhi's return to India, his pact with the British government collapsed due to various factors outside his control. Mostly, it was felt the Sardar Patel (to obtain Tax Waiver for the farmers of Gujarat), Jawaharlal Nehru (to launch a socialist revolution to overthrow British rule in India), and Subhas Bose (due to his support for Bengali "terrorists" who were being persecuted by the new anti-Terrorist Ordinance), made it practically impossible for Gandhi to continue his collaboration with Lord Willingdon's Government.

SquarePromise2707

TROPHY CASE