India vehemently ratifies the two nation theory after 8 decades of denial.

[Contrarian]

Happy to help a Pakistan that still looks to India for its ratification after more than 65 years of independence.

 

[RAMPAGE]

By da way such dialouges are common during elections in India.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

BTW Jaswant Singh would disagree !!!

 

[Joe Shearer]

Jelly - Question mark "?" is there for reason, as i really didn't knew that how many Hindu parties are there with Hindu name, but was sure that there will be 1 or 2 parties. Anyway this is the first result of search List of Hindu political parties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Just one? The Shiv Sena? That's it? Impressive. Must say it proves your point
And of course you did not fail to see the warning,

This article's factual accuracy is disputed. Please help to ensure that disputed statements are reliably sourced. See the relevant discussion on the talk page

Now you are being evasive, dear boy, your usual tactics when caught, which is quite frequently.

You made a statement based on an assumption, which is palpably incorrect. After that, it doesn't matter how many other claims you make; there is a pall over them.

 

[Sugarcane]

Just one? The Shiv Sena? That's it? Impressive. Must say it proves your point
And of course you did not fail to see the warning,



Now you are being evasive, dear boy, your usual tactics when caught, which is quite frequently.

You made a statement based on an assumption, which is palpably incorrect. After that, it doesn't matter how many other claims you make; there is a pall over them.

Young man - It's unfair to discard all the list just because some of the parties are not well known or the source doesn't exist. If you look the history of the page than you will see that the names who were proven wrong are already deleted - the ones marked red are disputed ones but not proven wrong yet because those are registered party names Registered Unrecognised Parties - feel free to correct the page. Anyway other than Shiv Sina

Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Akhil Bharatiya Ram Rajya Parishad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Akhand Hindustan Morcha - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Although - BJP doesn't have Hindu in her name but it's political wing of a Hindu organization.

Now don't come with excuse that name is not heard before, few people registered party - You can do better than making this kind of posts

 

[Joe Shearer]

Young man - It's unfair to discard all the list just because some of the parties are not well known or the source doesn't exist. If you look the history of the page than you will see that the names who were proven wrong are already deleted - the ones marked red are disputed ones but not proven wrong yet because those are registered party names Registered Unrecognised Parties - feel free to correct the page. Anyway other than Shiv Sina

Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Akhil Bharatiya Ram Rajya Parishad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Akhand Hindustan Morcha - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Although - BJP doesn't have Hindu in her name but it's political wing of a Hindu organization.

Now don't come with excuse that name is not heard before, few people registered party - You can do better than making this kind of posts

It is sad to see you scraping the bottom of the barrel to make a point. These are not parties that are represented anywhere. Why not put up a list of Vaguely Threatening Names of Registered Societies Which Haven't Done Anything But Register?

And as for the BJP, I find it ironic that you feel it fit to inform me about its antecedents after six thousand posts which make no bones about my vehement opposition to it. That still doesn't qualify that party for inclusion in your silly description of parties with Hindu in their names. In fact, the BJP got its name from the Jan Sangh (again, no mention of Hindu) merging with several other parties to form a coalition against the Congress, then de-merging itself and retaining part of the coalition name, the Janata part.

I am sorry, but these are utterly puerile points. They do nothing to support your original feeble defence of the Muslim League calling itself Muslim.

 

[Contrarian]

Young man - It's unfair to discard all the list just because some of the parties are not well known or the source doesn't exist. If you look the history of the page than you will see that the names who were proven wrong are already deleted - the ones marked red are disputed ones but not proven wrong yet because those are registered party names Registered Unrecognised Parties - feel free to correct the page. Anyway other than Shiv Sina

Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Akhil Bharatiya Ram Rajya Parishad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Akhand Hindustan Morcha - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Never heard any of these names before.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Never heard any of these names before.

I know.

Having made a smart-alec comment which does not hold water, he is now flailing around trying to justify it.

 

[Sugarcane]

It is sad to see you scraping the bottom of the barrel to make a point. These are not parties that are represented anywhere. Why not put up a list of Vaguely Threatening Names of Registered Societies Which Haven't Done Anything But Register?

I didn't expected intellectual dishonesty at-least from young joe, You first refused the existence of any such party at all, than you discarded all by saying that the article's factual accuracy is disputed but accepted existence of Shiv Sina, now you are coming up with usual excuse that are just register name nothing else.

And as for the BJP, I find it ironic that you feel it fit to inform me about its antecedents after six thousand posts which make no bones about my vehement opposition to it. That still doesn't qualify that party for inclusion in your silly description of parties with Hindu in their names. In fact, the BJP got its name from the Jan Sangh (again, no mention of Hindu) merging with several other parties to form a coalition against the Congress, then de-merging itself and retaining part of the coalition name, the Janata part.

I think you forgot to read after word BJP, sweet Joe why you are in such hurry. This what i wrote

Although - BJP doesn't have Hindu in her name but it's political wing of a Hindu organization.

I am sorry, but these are utterly puerile points. They do nothing to support your original feeble defence of the Muslim League calling itself Muslim.

So, Young & passionate Joe also have joined the pristige league of Indians - who will not bother to understand what's being discussed but will pull trigger. I am not defending Muslim league name here - neither i have any problem with Hindu in name of political party.

I know.

Having made a smart-alec comment which does not hold water, he is now flailing around trying to justify it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I didn't expected intellectual dishonesty at-least from young joe,

That would be the day, when you or anyone else catches me in intellectual dishonesty.

You first refused the existence of any such party at all, than you discarded all by saying that the article's factual accuracy is disputed but accepted existence of Shiv Sina, now you are coming up with usual excuse that are just register name nothing else.

Please re-read the posts, and correct your errors. Assuming, that is, that these are errors, and not debating points falsely made to build a case for yourself.

I first asked you to name a party with Hindu or a Hindu deity in its name. At this point, you started to evade direct questions, and began to slip and slide around, having realised that there might not be any such party after all. You replied, not with any names, but with a diversionary suggestion that I could as well declare that there was no culpable Hindu party at all.

This is such a chicken-hearted avoidance of the issue. You made a statement, you couldn't back it up, you wouldn't admit you couldn't back it up, and started making manoeuvres to avoid being pinned down.

That the article's factual accuracy is disputed is not my statement; it was the statement on that Google page.

And what usual excuse are you referring to? Would you have us believe that you make these charges quite often, and get these responses quite often? Or are you just selecting words that will mislead readers and make them believe that the dismissal of those pathetic fake names are a customary manoeuvre? When has it happened before?

I think you forgot to read after word BJP, sweet Joe why you are in such hurry. This what i wrote

Oh, I read what you wrote.

It is still a fact that you could not produce any counterpart of the Muslim League and its openly exclusivist name and character.

So, Young & passionate Joe also have joined the pristige league of Indians - who will not bother to understand what's being discussed but will pull trigger. I am not defending Muslim league name here - neither i have any problem with Hindu in name of political party.

I belong to no camp. This is well known to anybody, everybody. And I have a keen idea of what you intend to convey.

Keep your allegations to yourself.

 

[Sugarcane]

That would be the day, when you or anyone else catches me in intellectual dishonesty.
You first refused the existence of any such party at all, than you discarded all by saying that the article's factual accuracy is disputed but accepted existence of Shiv Sina, now you are coming up with usual excuse that are just register name nothing else.
Please re-read the posts, and correct your errors. Assuming, that is, that these are errors, and not debating points falsely made to build a case for yourself.
I first asked you to name a party with Hindu or a Hindu deity in its name. At this point, you started to evade direct questions, and began to slip and slide around, having realised that there might not be any such party after all. You replied, not with any names, but with a diversionary suggestion that I could as well declare that there was no culpable Hindu party at all.
This is such a chicken-hearted avoidance of the issue. You made a statement, you couldn't back it up, you wouldn't admit you couldn't back it up, and started making manoeuvres to avoid being pinned down.
That the article's factual accuracy is disputed is not my statement; it was the statement on that Google page.
And what usual excuse are you referring to? Would you have us believe that you make these charges quite often, and get these responses quite often? Or are you just selecting words that will mislead readers and make them believe that the dismissal of those pathetic fake names are a customary manoeuvre? When has it happened before?

Dear Joe - Writing paragraphs will not change the fact that you try to portray as no Hindus political party exists at all who have Hindu or Hindus religious figures in her name. And when list given you refused accept it despite knowing that those name exists - And than you came up with expected excuse that those are mare registered names. Here is another list of Indian Political parties Abbreviations and Full Forms of Political Parties in India - but still feel free to discard this list as well.

Oh, I read what you wrote.
It is still a fact that you could not produce any counterpart of the Muslim League and its openly exclusivist name and character.

haha - again diverting the point. If you have read the post than why you were lecturing that Hindu is not mentioned in BJP's name? But anyway if Muslims make political party and name it Muslim than alleging them for anything you want is legitimate, but same logic can't be applied on other communities - but why i have to be surprised as Indian logic is not new thing.

I belong to no camp. This is well known to anybody, everybody. And I have a keen idea of what you intend to convey.
Keep your allegations to yourself.

The way you acted on Call-A-Friend option used by fallow is typical trait of a particular camp. I can be wrong.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@LoveIcon

I have nothing to add to my posts. The facts are clear for all to see: your unwise challenge, your vain attempts at retreat, your citing silly lists of non-existent parties in an effort to retrieve some fragment of credibility, your allegations when all else failed. The whole sorry mess. Next time you open your mouth, check your facts first, not after. I am putting you on my ignore list, which now consists of you and you alone. The second time I have done this on PDF in five years.

 

[OrionHunter]

This rant by Mr. Aeronaut shows that Pakistanis are always looking to find solace in their existence.

And that article he quoted was so hilarious, I dropped coffee on my keyboard and screwed it up!! Damn!

Secondly, he should know that Pakistan's so called 'Two nation Theory' blew up after Muslims in East Pakistan fought for their freedom from Muslims in West Pakistan!!

So much for this nonsensical theory!

 

[toxic_pus]

I read your brilliant piece, @Aeronaut, and I wholly disagree with it. I haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but wish you to consider two pieces in rebuttal: one is a reaction to the happening, the other is a weak-minded amateur's attempt at analysis.



. What do you have to add, if there is some space still left??

One important aspect that is being missed by our western friends is that 69% have voted against BJP.

 

[Kloitra]

Just one? The Shiv Sena? That's it? Impressive. Must say it proves your point
And of course you did not fail to see the warning,

Shiv Sena is named after a historical figure - Shivaji - and not the Hindu deity.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

@LoveIcon - First and foremost let me assure you that I am a Hindutvavadi/Hindutvadi. And let me add, @Joe Shearer is not one. So if you throw the accusation on him belonging to a particular camp, honestly you are very wrong. I would even go so far as to say that we have had some serious, shall we say ideological debates here as well, which you can find in our archives. Though he hates Hindutva to the core, it does not mean that I would NOT grant him the respect he deserves. I always value his inputs, especially with regards to historical discussions - which I believe is far superior to what both of us combined can offer.

Now coming back to your accusations. It appears you just lost your composure and cool. Rarely have I seen you flare up so dramatically and rapidly to a fiery tempo. In any case it revolves around two points - both of which are in the past and hence easy to point out.

i. The Muslim League's formation was legitimate by the laws of the land. And indeed Muslims wishing to have a party of their own is also justifiable. It's just that a substantial number of people wished to chalk a path separate to the one drawn by the general Indian public (which included Muslims) should give one food for thought. Indeed the initial ML was entirely an elitist pro British group, an attribute they continued to have till the early 40s.

ii. My point regarding communal parties(in a negative sense) was of those before the establishment of the ML. It seemed as if the creation of the ML was expedient after the gaining of strength of a Hindu chauvinist political party. However, history is testament to the fact that such was not the case. All Hindu political parties worth mentioning were established long after the ML was founded. In fact the Hindu parties mushroomed after the disillusionment with Gandhi began, beginning with the Khilafat Movement.

And the Akhand Bharat Morcha? Seriously? Heard it for the first time. And you seriously want to compare that with the All India Muslim League?