Communal purge with in the ranks of indian military is around the corner

[Vapour]

There is not even a single Muslim in RAW. Thats how much they trust Muslims in India.

That's clearly fake news spread by certain outlets to give this impression.

 

[Chakar The Great]

That's clearly fake news spread by certain outlets to give this impression.

What you mean?

 

[Protest_again]

I wonder how does it matter to Pakistanis? Does it make India less of the enemy? I expected @jamahir to be here siding with Pakistanis.

 

[jamahir]

I wonder how does it matter to Pakistanis? Does it make India less of the enemy? I expected @jamahir to be here siding with Pakistanis.

So what are HS Panag, Pravin Sawhney, Arun Prakash and other concerned former Indian military officers doing ?

 

[Protest_again]

So what are HS Panag, Pravin Sawhney, Arun Prakash and other concerned former Indian military officers doing ?

Lol. Opportunistic idiots and possibly anti-national. In the hate of Modi, they lost objectivity.

"In this euphoria, let us never forget that we were largely left alone to fight the pandemic. This does not mean that there cannot be any criticism. However, criticism cannot be at the cost of national dignity. It cannot be at the cost of degrading or destroying the confidence of a nation. It cannot be about dividing the society - else we play right into the hands of those that do not want to see a resurgent India"

Golden words. Learn.

 

[jamahir]

Lol. Opportunistic idiots and possibly anti-national. In the hate of Modi, they lost objectivity.

So anyone anti-Hindutvad is automatically anti-India ?

"In this euphoria, let us never forget that we were largely left alone to fight the pandemic. This does not mean that there cannot be any criticism. However, criticism cannot be at the cost of national dignity. It cannot be at the cost of degrading or destroying the confidence of a nation. It cannot be about dividing the society - else we play right into the hands of those that do not want to see a resurgent India"

Golden words. Learn.

And who spoke these "Golden words" ?

 

[Protest_again]

So anyone anti-Hindutvadi is automatically anti-India ?



And who spoke these "Golden words" ?

India is for people with roots to this land and to its culture. Imported cultures will never be allowed to dictate our policies. Every Indian must be Hindutvadi. Hindutvadi is not about Hinduism but it is about having cultural homogeneity(that our ancestors are native to this land). I couldn't care less about other ideologies. Constituent assembly which framed our constitution got their wisdom from epics and puranas of this land and not imported books.

Along the way, Congress went against it as the family cross mixed itself with outsiders and started importing christian secularism into Indian constitution and administration. It was never the intent of our founding fathers to have such a 'secular' idea placed in our constitution. India's idea of secularism is one that of Hinduism, 'Sarva dharma sama bhava'. Yes, foundational idea of secularism in Indian constitution is one of the Hindutva.

It is stupid of Manmohan to say that country's resources belong to our minorities first. How much fools they take us Hindus for?

You peddle Islamist ideologies in the garb of communism. It is clear for all Indians on this forum. But we the nationalists will make sure that you people lie at the margins of what the idea of India is going to be in the 21st century.

 

[Black Tornado]

So what are HS Panag, Pravin Sawhney, Arun Prakash and other concerned former Indian military officers doing ?

This debate over a 13 year old video is pure BS.

India is for people with roots to this land and to its culture. Imported cultures will never be allowed to dictate our policies. Every Indian must be Hindutvadi. Hindutvadi is not about Hinduism but it is about having cultural homogeneity(that our ancestors are native to this land). I couldn't care less about other ideologies. Constituent assembly which framed our constitution got their wisdom from epics and puranas of this land and not imported books.

Along the way, Congress went against it as the family cross mixed itself with outsiders and started importing christian secularism into Indian constitution and administration. It was never the intent of our founding fathers to have such a 'secular' idea placed in our constitution. India's idea of secularism is one that of Hinduism, 'Sarva dharma sama bhava'. Yes, foundational idea of secularism in Indian constitution is one of the Hindutva.

It is stupid of Manmohan to say that country's resources belong to our minorities first. How much fools they take us Hindus for?

You peddle Islamist ideologies in the garb of communism. It is clear for all Indians on this forum. But we the nationalists will make sure that you people lie at the margins of what the idea of India is going to be in the 21st century.

These are the people who call opindia fake because it covers what liberandus refuse to, muslims committing crimes on Hindus, ask him about Moplah massacre, Mewat, or Kashmir 1989 ethnic cleansing, they’ll come to babri and what-aboutery.

 

[Maula Jatt]

This is not true.

Pakistan and India are heading towards opposite directions. India towards hindu force, Pakistan towards secular force.

I am not too sure but I sincerely hope we're and Mr.Jinnah's dream come true

We have suffered way too much
It's time to change course...

About India, if they stay a functioning democracy they will be alright.... just my opinion

 

[jamahir]

Every Indian must be Hindutvadi. Hindutvadi is not about Hinduism but it is about having cultural homogeneity(that our ancestors are native to this land).

But in essence you mean all Indians must accept Sanatan Dharm / Brahmanvad / Manuvad which is what Hindutvad is about.

Remember the slogan from JNU from 2016 :

​

Bhukhmari se azaadi ( Freedom from hunger )​

Poonjivaad se azaadi ( Freedom from Capitalism )​

Brahmanvaad se azaadi ( Freedom from Brahminical tyranny )​

​

Do you think Kanhaiya Kumar and his Hindu-born comrades in JNU or the late Dalit student Rohith Vemula who committed suicide because of injustice by Upper Caste university and government officials, ever want / wanted to be Hindutvadi ?

I couldn't care less about other ideologies. Constituent assembly which framed our constitution got their wisdom from epics and puranas of this land and not imported books.

1. The main drafter of the Constitution was Bhimrao Ambedkar who in 1956 converted to Buddhism in a public ceremony along with a few hundred thousand of his followers. He rejected those puranas you speak of. He gave a few decades to the regressive among the Upper Castes to change their ways but they didn't so he converted. I must also mention that he considered Islam ( whose ideology is from a "foreign" book ) to convert to before settling on Buddhism.

2. The Constitution also gives right to the citizen to join or form employee unions to protect their right as a worker. I didn't know this when I almost created an employee union in the ITES company I worked in between 2013 and 2014 ( which would have been the first employee union in the Indian IT / ITES industry ). Again this is an imported idea not to be found in the 3000-year-old extremely Capitalist and oppressive socio-economic system declared in the Manusmriti.

3. There is the recent controversy surrounding Alia Bhatt's ad in which she speaks for the Hindu marriage to have "kanyamaan" ( respect for the bride ) instead of "kanyadaan" ( traditional permanent giving away of the bride into the possibly untrustworthy hands of the husband and his family ). The Hindutvadi groups raised hue and cry saying she insulted Hindu traditions. But did they stop and think that it is because of these cruel and oppressive traditions that Hindu women have suffered down the ages and the side-effects like farmer suicides because of wedding arrangement and dowry related indebtedness ? Look at the misogynist, suffocating and oppressive views of Hindutvadi poster boy Yogi Adityanath :

He believes women need male protection from birth to death and their ‘energy/power’ should be regulated or controlled, lest it become worthless and destructive.

He adds the shastras say that a woman is protected in her childhood by her father, by her husband in her youth and by her son in her old age — so that way a woman is not capable of being left free or independent.

These two short sentences shows his his attitude about women and these would be the milder views. If Sati had not been outlawed he would have championed that too. Ask him about widow remarriage. OTOH I will speak of an Indian Christian woman who married an Indian Muslim under Islamic marriage law because that better secured her socio-economic future in case of divorce ( yes, Islam has divorce concept ). I quote from that thread of mine whose OP is that woman's article :

When we examine marriage laws in their historic context, it is interesting to note that the universally accepted notion that marriages are contractual rather than sacramental originates in Muslim law, which was accepted by the French law only in the 1800s and incorporated into the English law in the 1850s and became part of codified Hindu law as late as 1955. Today it appears to be the most practical way of dealing with the institution of marriage. Treating marriage as a sacrament which binds the parties for life has resulted in some of the most discriminatory practices against women such as sati and denial of right to divorce and remarriage, even in the most adverse conditions.

The cornerstone of a Muslim marriage is consent, ejab-o-qubul (proposal and acceptance) and requires the bride to accept the marriage proposal on her own free will. This freedom to consent (or refuse), which was given to Muslim women 1,400 years ago, is still not available under Hindu law since sacramental rituals such as saptapadi and kanya dan (seven steps round the nuptial fire and gifting of the bride to the groom) still form essential ceremonies of a Hindu marriage. Even after the codification of Hindu law, the notion of consent is not built into the marriage ceremonies.

The contract of marriage (nikahnama) allows for negotiated terms and conditions, it can also include the right to a delegated divorce (talaq-e-tafweez) where the woman is delegated the right to divorce her husband if any of the negotiated terms and conditions are violated.

Mehr is another unique concept of Muslim law meant to safeguard the financial future of the wife. It is an obligation, not a choice, and can be in the form of cash, valuables or securities. While there is no ceiling, a minimum amount to provide her security after marriage must be stipulated. This is a more beneficial concept than streedhan which is given by choice and usually by the natal family. In addition to Mehr, at the time of divorce, a Muslim woman has the right to fair and reasonable settlement

Christian Europe too got its progressive laws from a foreign book - Quran - and they accepted. And in turn India's early legal thinkers thought that some of these Islamic laws could be of benefit to Hindu marriages but unfortunately they didn't go far enough which is why decades later Alia Bhatt is being vilified for saying something sensible in her ad.

4. Below is Google result for "Communism" :

Communism is a philosophical, social, political and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of a communist society, namely a socioeconomic order structured upon the ideas of common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state. Wikipedia

What is your objection to such humane and wonderful set of thoughts however non-Hindu it is ? Besides, doesn't Hinduism have that wonderful concept of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam ( The world is one family ) so why shouldn't you accept the good ideas from pan-human ideologies like Communism and Islam ? Accept the best practices.

It is stupid of Manmohan to say that country's resources belong to our minorities first.

I agree, it was stupid of him to say that. The country's resources belong to all its citizens equally.

You peddle Islamist ideologies in the garb of communism. It is clear for all Indians on this forum. But we the nationalists will make sure that you people lie at the margins of what the idea of India is going to be in the 21st century.

Many South Asian members on the forum know that I dislike even the Tablighi Jamaat so I don't know what you mean by "Islamist". I do however speak of Islam being one of the progressive thoughts in history including modern Communism like I outlined above. I will quote a section from a 2016 thread of mine whose OP is an article by the Pakistani journalist Nadeem Paracha about modern Socialist and Communist activism among Muslims since the early 1900s :

During the same period (1920s-30s), another (though lesser known) Islamic scholar in undivided India got smitten by the 1917 Russian revolution and Marxism.

Hafiz Rahman Sihwarwl saw Islam and Marxism sharing five elements in common: (1) prohibition of the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the privileged classes (2) organisation of the economic structure of the state to ensure social welfare (3) equality of opportunity for all human beings (4) priority of collective social interest over individual privilege and (5) prevention of the permanentising of class structure through social revolution.

The motivations for many of these themes he drew from the Qur’an, which he understood as seeking to create an economic order in which the rich pay excessive, though voluntary taxes (Zakat) to minimise differences in living standards.

In the areas that Sihwarwl saw Islam and communism diverge were Islam’s sanction of private ownership within certain limits, and in its refusal to recognise an absolutely classless basis of society.

He suggested that Islam, with its prohibition of the accumulation of wealth, is able to control the class structure through equality of opportunity.

Basically, both Sindhi and Sihwarwl had stumbled upon an Islamic concept of the social democratic welfare state.

 

[jamahir]

This debate over a 13 year old video is pure BS.

Sorry what ?

These are the people who call opindia fake because it covers what liberandus refuse to, muslims committing crimes on Hindus, ask him about Moplah massacre, Mewat, or Kashmir 1989 ethnic cleansing, they’ll come to babri and what-aboutery.

Yes let's talk about the so-called Moplah massacre. Since you are a Keralite you should really be knowing that the event was a rebellion by Muslim peasants against their oppressive feudal lords most of whom just happened to be Hindus. That is all. This was no anti-Hindu genocide like the RSS is trying to present.

Further, I will quote a The Hindu article in full written by a Hindu fellow Keralite of yours who thinks differently than you :

Some personal memories of the Moplah Rebellion of 1921 and why all stories, good and bad, are our stories

This August is the centenary of events known as Mappila Lahala in Malayalam and Moplah Rebellion in British colonial records, which took place in Malabar in 1921. To those who lived through those times, it was a momentous period. Though there are academic histories of these events, relatively few memoirs have survived. To get as close to one as I could, I asked a 92-year-old what she knew about them. She was not born then, and all that she knew had been passed on to her as a child by her elders. And this is what I heard.

The narrator’s family lived in Valakulam village, in the Ernad region of the vast Malabar District of the sprawling Madras Presidency. They were landed gentry, leasing out to mostly Muslim tenants, called Mappilas in local parlance. Her father was the village adhikari, nominated by the colonial administration to collect land revenue, which was considered a hated imposition by foreign rulers on India’s peasantry. The adhikari also doubled up as a mediator in petty disputes among villagers — this meant he was in regular and close contact with the people.

When the Moplah uprising started, a group of Mappilas came to the narrator’s ancestral home late at night, asking to see the adhikari. He was only 25 years old but was already the kaaranavan, the oldest male member, of his thaivazhi, the matrilineal line of succession. The women of the household begged him not to go out to meet the crowd, but he did. Did he do this out of a sense of responsibility as the adhikari or to ensure his family’s safety? Whatever the reason, the encounter surprised him.

Escorted to safety

Addressing him as achcha, or father, the Mappilas told him that they had come to protect his family. He was asked to hand over his rifle. Whether they did so to leave him unarmed or to protect themselves we shall never know. For the next few days they parked themselves in front of the house. Then, one day, they approached the family saying that they had intelligence that a band of hostile Mappilas from outside their desam (area) was approaching and everyone must flee at once.

The tenants escorted the family to a safehouse, the Kottakkal kovilakam (palace),which was the eastern outpost of the Samoothiri, the erstwhile ruler of Malabar. The prescience of the Mappilas was remarkable, for when the family returned after peace was restored, they found that an agricultural labourer who had been left behind had had his hand lopped off.

Then, there is the experience of the family the narrator later married into, who lived in Parappanangadi. The narrator’s father-in-law was a lawyer at the munsif court. It is unlikely that this family had the support of the local population, unlike what her own family had enjoyed. They too, however, took refuge in the Kottakkal kovilakam. We have no idea how they reached that place, which involved a journey of about 25 km. Travelling at snail’s pace in bullock carts, having to cross Tirurangadi town, where the first spark of the revolt had been ignited, they would have been sitting ducks for any attackers. Yet they survived, even prospered on their return. We have reasons to believe that they were assisted in their journey by the Mappilas themselves, for we are told that the narrator’s father-in-law later travelled to Madras to defend some of them who had been charged with sedition by the colonial government. This could only have been a recompense for their role in saving his family.

Finally, there is the story of the narrator’s maternal great-grandmother, who lived in pious seclusion in a country estate near Kottakkal, with only a few retainers for support. As the situation grew tense, local Mappilas rallied around to ensure her safety. Unaware of the gravity of the situation, she is supposed to have told her interlocutors blithely, “Just take me to my son Gopalan”. There is no record of where she was finally taken, but the narrator is sure it was by pallak, a country palanquin! The old lady too lived to tell her tale. In the epicentre of an upheaval, these scattered members of a large family all survived. They were saved by the extraordinary empathy shown by their Mappila tenants.

No rancour

I must now disclose that the narrator is my mother, though this is not important.I was struck by how her elders saw their experience during the cataclysmic events of 1921. They told her a simple story in human terms, of the heroism of their Mappila tenants who risked their lives in saving them, and their pride in the courage of their kaaranavan. There is no rancour in this account nor a call for vendetta nor a whitewashing of the oppressive landlordism of the time.

On the other hand, my parent’s elders saw clearly that ultimately the upheaval that took place was a tragedy for all the people of their land. For the Mappillas, who rose against an oppressive agrarian system and fought bravely with crude weapons against a mighty empire, till they were finally crushed. Many of them died when the British transported the vanquished out of Malabar by rail in a goods wagon. For those Hindus who had nothing to do with the feudal order but yet underwent the trauma of having another faith imposed on them. And, finally, for those who may have escaped the nightmare but had to see their places of worship desecrated, as in 1992, when India’s Muslims had to see the Babri Masjid destroyed by a mob.

Of the events that took place in Malabar in 1921, the stories I heard from my parent had in them humanity and a happy ending, but not all of them do. We must, however, accept all the stories, even the inconvenient ones. Together, they remind us of a shared past and leave us better prepared for a common future.

The writer teaches at Ashoka University, Sonipat, Haryana.

This story is opposite to the one you believe in.

 

[Protest_again]

But in essence you mean all Indians must accept Sanatan Dharm / Brahmanvad / Manuvad which is what Hindutvad is about.

Remember the slogan from JNU from 2016 :

​

Bhukhmari se azaadi ( Freedom from hunger )​

Poonjivaad se azaadi ( Freedom from Capitalism )​

Brahmanvaad se azaadi ( Freedom from Brahminical tyranny )​

​

Do you think Kanhaiya Kumar and his Hindu-born comrades in JNU or the late Dalit student Rohith Vemula who committed suicide because of injustice by Upper Caste university and government officials, ever want / wanted to be Hindutvadi ?



1. The main drafter of the Constitution was Bhimrao Ambedkar who in 1956 converted to Buddhism in a public ceremony along with a few hundred thousand of his followers. He rejected those puranas you speak of. He gave a few decades to the regressive among the Upper Castes to change their ways but they didn't so he converted. I must also mention that he considered Islam ( whose ideology is from a "foreign" book ) to convert to before settling on Buddhism.

2. The Constitution also gives right to the citizen to join or form employee unions to protect their right as a worker. I didn't know this when I almost created an employee union in the ITES company I worked in between 2013 and 2014 ( which would have been the first employee union in the Indian IT / ITES industry ). Again this is an imported idea not to be found in the 3000-year-old extremely Capitalist and oppressive socio-economic system declared in the Manusmriti.

3. There is the recent controversy surrounding Alia Bhatt's ad in which she speaks for the Hindu marriage having "kanyamaan" ( respect for the bride ) instead of "kanyadaan" ( traditional permanent giving away of the bride into the possibly untrustworthy hands of the husband and his family ). The Hindutvadi groups raised hue and cry saying she insulted Hindu traditions. But did they stop and think that it is because of these cruel and oppressive traditions that Hindu women have suffered down the ages and the side-effects like farmer suicides because of wedding arrangement and dowry related indebtedness ? Look at the misogynist, suffocating and oppressive views of Hindutvadi poster boy Yogi Adityanath :


These two short sentences shows his his attitude about women and these would be the milder views. If Sati had not been outlawed he would have championed that too. Ask him about widow remarriage. OTOH I will speak of an Indian Christian woman who married an Indian Muslim under Islamic marriage law because that better secured her socio-economic future in case of divorce ( yes, Islam has divorce concept ). I quote from that thread of mine whose OP is that woman's article :

Christian Europe too got its progressive laws from a foreign book - Quran - and they accepted. And in turn India's early legal thinkers thought that some of these Islamic laws could be of benefit to Hindu marriages but unfortunately they didn't go far enough which is why decades later Alia Bhatt is being vilified for saying something sensible in her ad.

4. Below is Google result for "Communism" :

What is your objection to such humane and wonderful set of thoughts however non-Hindu it is ? Besides, doesn't Hinduism have that wonderful concept of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam ( The world is one family ) so why shouldn't you accept the good ideas from pan-human ideologies like Communism and Islam ? Accept the best practices.



I agree, it was stupid of him to say that. The country's resources belong to all its citizens equally.



Many South Asian members on the forum know that I dislike even the Tablighi Jamaat so I don't know what you mean by "Islamist". I do however speak of Islam being one of the progressive thoughts in history including modern Communism like I outlined above. I will quote a section from a 2016 thread of mine whose OP is an article by the Pakistani journalist Nadeem Paracha about modern Socialist and Communist activism among Muslims since the early 1900s :

I have zero interest in your drivel. Ambedkar had a right idea of Islam and you should read about it. No body cares about how you perceive Islam or communism to be, when we can all see how it is practiced in all Muslim and other communist countries respectively. There is no tradition more open to other ideologies than Hinduism and Islam sets a worst example of it world over. Your impassionate drivel about how good Islam is from only one perspective that of a believer. Other religionists see it as some thing to avoid in the present world.

So stop your stupid sermonizing, you are in no position to stand in judgment of Hinduism or India. India is on it's way to shut up such stupid voices in the country through informed electorate.

Contrary to popular belief original constitutional draft was prepared by Benegal Narsing Rau a Brahmin and Ambedkar only signed off on it by making some political compromises. India is still Bharat per preamble.

 

[jamahir]

Ambedkar had a right idea of Islam and you should read about it.

Please link me to that text.

There is no tradition more open to other ideologies than Hinduism

You say that but you have already said the below :

Imported cultures will never be allowed to dictate our policies. Every Indian must be Hindutvadi. Hindutvadi is not about Hinduism but it is about having cultural homogeneity(that our ancestors are native to this land). I couldn't care less about other ideologies. Constituent assembly which framed our constitution got their wisdom from epics and puranas of this land and not imported books.

Other religionists see it as some thing to avoid in the present world.

Like who ? And I told you about the leftist nature of Islam by linking you to that thread.

India is on it's way to shut up such stupid voices in the country through informed electorate.

This informed electorate should be more concerned with suicides by farmers, students and urban professionals, hunger, homelessness, ill health etc all of which are artificial and avoidable and can be changed through adoption of scientific, rational and harmonious socio-economic and political systems. This can be easily done. It is not like Nature is preventing it from happening.

 

[Protest_again]

Please link me to that text.



You say that but you have already said the below :





Like who ? And I told you about the leftist nature of Islam by linking you to that thread.



This informed electorate should be more concerned with suicides by farmers, students and urban professionals, hunger, homelessness, ill health etc all of which are artificial and avoidable and can be changed through adoption of scientific, rational and harmonious socio-economic and political systems. This can be easily done. It is not like Nature is preventing it from happening.

All of it because of stupid secular policies adopted by congress for 70 years of our country. Had they been forthright with no appeasement and corruption India would have been much more inclusive and developed by now.

India is definitely progressing better under this government than anytime in its life.

Leftist nature of Islam is no where to be seen in any of the Muslim countries. Please fix it there before you start patronizing us.


And yes, India will not allow for appeasement policies. India has a history and a bloody partition with muslims. We don't want to make policies still appeasing them. They will be equal in every respect but if they want to create distinct identity within India, such an attempt will be crushed. India is a Dharmic land and not a seat of Islam. Indian policies and its governance will be Hinduism centric. Don't like it, there are other countries.

Ambedkar wasn't the one who wrote the constitution. The original draft was prepared by sir Bengal Narsing Rau, a brahmin. Ambedkar was allowed to make a final call because he represented the Dalits who were around 20% of Bharat at the time and were most marginalized. For all anti-hindu assertions you ascribe to Ambedkar, he is the one who added India that is Bharat to the preamble. He allowed for cow protection in the directive principles.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...8QFnoECAMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1Vg2cZIyRGFFfO2kHB79Nz

[/URL]

Here is the link to the constitutional assembly debates and it is replete with reference to Hindu puranas and traditions. Ambedkar alone didn't decide on constitution by the way. lol. And he most certainly didn't refer to Quran or communism in any of the debates. He and other founding fathers chose majoritarian democracy for India knowing fully well that it is Hindu who is going to rule this land.

You know why the citizenship act was allowed to be modified with simple majority in parliament with no states involvement, because it is left for future generations to decide whether India wants to be secular or not (as in who is a citizen) and they didn't want to complicate the procedure. This is how much fluid the condition was with the whole partition situation. Now the narrative is that somehow Muslims were given a assurance about India being secular and all. Muslims were never given such assurances. India was also not christian secular, it had secular principles because of its Hindu tradition. Now people talk about as if India had chosen secularism for itself. That is a big No. That was something Indira did to protect herself against raising Janata party.

 

[srshkmr]

There is not even a single Muslim in RAW. Thats how much they trust Muslims in India.

Yes and you have access to RAW employment records