"I destroyed the Idols, killed the worshipers" Firuz Shah

[Guest guest]

Francois Gautier

 

The genocide beyond the Hindu Kush

 

The West seems to have suddenly woken up to Muslim fundamentalism in

South Asia when the Taleban demolished the Bamiyan statues, in spite

of frantic appeals from all over the world. But there is a bit of

hypocrisy in the outrage triggered by this destruction.

 

 

Firstly, Islam is very clear about statues: didn't Prophet Mohammad

break the first stone Gods himself? Thereafter, it became a holy duty

for all good Muslims. Firuz Shah Tughlak (1351-1388), who has an

avenue named after him in New Delhi, wrote: 'On the day of a Hindu

festival, I went there myself, ordered the executions of all the

leaders and practitioners of this abomination; I destroyed their

idols and temples to build mosques in their places.' As Belgian

historian Konraad Elst points out, 'Muslim fanatics are merely

faithful executors of Quranic injunctions. It is not the Muslims who

are guilty, but Islam.' Thus, the Taleban, who want to restore the

early purity of Islam, really thought they were performing a

righteous act by destroying the 'heathen' Buddhist statues.

 

Secondly, does the West ever protest when Hindu temples are destroyed

periodically in Bangladesh and Pakistan? The HRCBM, a Santa Clara-

based organisation that investigates and exposes human rights

violations in Bangladesh, has recorded a few outrages against Hindus

in Bangladesh during 2000:

 

On March 29, 2000, Malarani Roy of Karagola village was abducted by

Muslims. She was brutally beaten up and gang-raped. The local police

found her, but refused to register a case. On June 26, a group of

Muslims directed Smriti Rani Saha of Sirajganj town to migrate to

India. When she refused, she was abducted, gang-raped and brutally

murdered. On May 28, Debasish Saha of Poradaha was fatally shot by a

Muslim gang. On June 4, Mayaram Tripura of Balipara was shot dead by

local Muslims. On October 6, 2000, Muslim devotees, after offering

namaaz at the Gajipur Jama Masjid, strolled across to the Hindu Kali

temple, destroyed the puja pandal, smashed the idols, and looted

nearby Hindu-owned shops.

 

Take a look at the figures of the Hindu population of India's Muslims

neighbours: in 1941, in what would become Pakistan, there were

approximately 25 per cent Hindus and 30 per cent in what would later

become Bangladesh; in 1948, only 17 per cent in Pakistan and 25 per

cent in Bangladesh; in 1991, a bare 1.5 per cent remained in Pakistan

and less than 10 per cent in Bangladesh.

 

Thirdly, the West has not yet realised that for the Muslims of South

Asia, Hindus are kafirs by excellence: the Buddhists adore only

Buddha, the Christians only Jesus, but Hindus worship a million gods

and goddesses; and that makes them -- even today -- the number one

enemy of Islam. This is why Kashmir is so important: it is not about

territory, it is about a holy war against Hindu India that has been

going on for 15 centuries and it is only the first step of the

encirclement of India by hostile Muslim neighbours: Pakistan,

Afghanistan, Bangladesh, with soft nations, like Nepal, often lending

them a helping hand.

 

Nothing symbolises more the absoluteness of Muslim belligerence

towards Hindus than the Hindu Kush. Historically, the passes across

the Hindu Kush have been of great military significance, providing

access to the northern plains of India to foreign invaders, starting

from Alexander the Great in 327 BC, to Taimurlane in 1398 AD, and

from Mahmud of Ghazni, in 1001 AD, to Nadar Shah in 1739 AD.

 

As noted by Srinandan Vyas on the Hindu.org web site: 'In Persian,

the word "Kush" is derived from the verb Kushtar -- to slaughter or

carnage, because all Hindus living there were slaughtered.

Encyclopaedia Americana says of Hindu Kush: The name means

literally "Kills the Hindu," a reminder of the days when Hindu slaves

from Indian subcontinent died in harsh Afghan mountains while being

transported to Moslem courts of Central Asia. While Encyclopaedia

Britannica mentions that the name Hindu Kush first appears in 1333 AD

in the writings of Ibn Battutah, the medireview Berber traveller, who

said the name meant "Hindu Killer," a meaning still given by Afghan

mountain dwellers who are traditional enemies of Hindus.'

 

'Unlike the Jewish holocaust,' writes again Vyas, 'the exact toll of

the Hindu genocide suggested by the name Hindu Kush is not available.

However the number is easily likely to be in millions.' A few known

historical figures can be used to justify this estimate.

Encyclopaedia Britannica recalls that in December 1398 AD, Taimurlane

ordered the execution of at least 50,000 captives before the battle

for Delhi; likewise, the number of captives butchered by Taimurlane's

army was about 100,000 .

 

Encyclopaedia Britannica again mentions that Mughal emperor

Akbar 'ordered the massacre of about 30,000 captured Rajput Hindus on

February 24, 1568 AD, after the battle for Chitod, a number confirmed

by Abul Fazl, Akbar's court historian.' Afghan historian Khondamir

records that during one of the many repeated invasions on the city of

Herat in western Afghanistan, which used to be part of the Hindu

Shahiya kingdoms '1,500,000 residents perished.'

 

Why does not the Government of India tell Indian children about the

Hindu Kush genocide? The horrors of the Jewish Holocaust are taught

not only at schools in Israel and USA, but also in Germany. Because

both Germany and Israel consider the Jewish Holocaust a 'dark

chapter' in history. Yet, in 1982, the National Council of

Educational Research and Training issued a directive for the

rewriting of school texts. Among other things it stipulated

that: 'characterisation of the medireview period as a time of

conflict

between Hindus and Moslems is forbidden.' Thus denial of history, or

negationism, has become India's official 'educational' policy.

 

It is high time that the West realises that India is fighting a

lonely battle against Muslim fundamentalism in Asia. The French for

one, who have a definite problem with Muslim terrorism, should

support India more openly.

 

Francois Gautier