So show me proof where Sonia Gandhi dictated her wish to the then UPA led Government...
And that proof is going to be a video/audio recording of MMS and Sonia Gandhi?? ...having said that i need to understand your stand here first...Are you saying Sonia Gandhi had no/little/hardly any influence on MMS and his govt.??
Now you ask a counter question instead of answering? This is funny...
I asked you to clarify and since you are finding it funny lets drop it from the discussion for good...
I am not sure about the present instance of AAP leaders(clubbing or working), so I won't comment on that. VVIP visits can be nuisance if they throw tantrums around like Indian politicians do. But in other countries, leaders do visit their concerned areas without much fanfare. But as I said earlier, there are instances where technology may not be able to display the whole picture, that is when human intervention is needed. So who better than a wise leader to take stock of the situation.
Nothing wrong with the above comment above...i think it is a fair assessment...lets move on this one as well...
Why do you bring hindu leaders/hindus in here? Where did I mention the term Hindus in here? I clearly termed Congress mobs, though there were instance where Sanghis took part in killings. Oh dear, you speak like you very well know about these events yet fail to present a clear picture(Not sure if that is willful ignorance). 1984 was not about Hindu-Sikh clash but 2002 was definitely a Hindu-muslim issue. So stop being ignorant.
What clear picture I have failed to present?? Any riots that are organized/manufactured are not b/w communities....1984 and 2002 are riots where fault lines were used by politicians and state machinery failed people....If I just go by status Gujrat riot was much better than 84 as unlike Gujrat media was not there in 84 to help...and precisely the reason BJP is communal for many and congress secular...having said that will anything justify mass killings of such level...hell no...but here are couple of links for you..
http://www.firstpost.com/india/not-...munal-riots-before-2002-and-after-688714.html
As summarised here, there were 668, 823, and 644 incidents of communal violence nationwide in the years 2012, 2013, and 2014 respectively, the last three full years for which we have data. In each of these three years, UP recorded 118, 247, and 133 communal incidents, which resulted in 39, 77 and 26 deaths respectively, and, 500, 360 and 374 injuries respectively.
https://www.newslaundry.com/2015/10...al-under-modi-the-numbers-will-disappoint-you
So i repeat...Congress, BJP and likes are equally communal/secular...they are after votes and don't give two hoots about any religion...
So tell me what second class citizen means from your own experience. I am waiting...
Sure...During the dark decade of punjab Order was given more importance than Law...Scores and Scores of innocent people(read youth) were picked from villages and declared terrorist...shot or kept in jail without having a chance to see a magistrate...what was common in all these youth - they were Sikhs...This is the reason you see huge Punjabi diaspora abroad especially in UK and Canada...This happened all under secular govt
lol
...now answer this honestly - were you not aware of any of this??...Anyways does than mean I have resentment with Congress/GOI or for that matter Hindus?? Hell NO...Hate will only burn me...and this is as much my country as any other fellow Indian..Period!!
Stop making assumptions and answer my below questions since you claim to be know more than me. Let me ask you as to why Congress won so many seats? Is it because Hindus all over India hated and wanted Sikhs to be killed, massacred etc and hence rewarded Rajiv for doing so? Or was it because of the sympathy wave generated after IG's death?
I was not making such a claim however based on this para i strongly believe i know more than you...jokes apart...are you even reading your questions?? You are asking me such naive questions...Riots polarize voters...Hindu vote as Hindus, Muslim as Muslims instead of Indians in polarized atmosphere...On one hand you claim that riots help BJP however in this case you seems to completely ignore political benefits of polarization and riots...i wonder why??
I am not sure if you are current with Indian politics. Let me inform you over here that many states(Infact I can state most) have allowed beef(Bulls and other cattle barring Cows) consumption and quite a good number of states also allow Cow slaughter. But after the BJP coming to power in Maharashta and Haryana, they put a blanket ban on other cattle which was legal until then which led to many losing businesses and jobs(most of whom being affected were muslims)
This is Indian Express 2015 article - Please give me your most states...
http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-no-beef-nation/
Also the point was as per you - BJP has intrinsic hatred for Muslims...and they did this to harm Muslims workers...On the map above i see almost whole of India having beef ban and non bjp govt taking similar decisions...no??? So once again depending upon the political scenario all parties have/will act on communal lines...
Since you and many anti-beef campaigners/"activists" bring on this issue, that it was Congress which brought in this legislation of beef-ban, they simply forget to mention about the events that preceded this ban. Congress was against beef ban but was forced to concede because of agitations by Hindu organisations which included the Sadhus attacking the Parliament. So just because BJP as an organisation was never in existence then doesn't mean they have nothing to do with it. Their ideological mentor and Jan Sangh then also agitated for beef-ban and the below is an excerpt from an article
"In the 1966-1967, the RSS used it to build up votes for the Jan Sangh. The slogan during the Jana Sangh election campaign was: ‘vote Jana Sangh to protect the cow’."
Source:
http://beef.sabhlokcity.com/category/for/page/2/
So now your defense is that RSS forced govt. to take those decisions as if Govt. is a kid who was deprived of a candy by big bulky RSS goon
.....Anyways with kind of reasoning I am sorry but would be forced to rest my case...
Ok so just because a loony Bigot says so and brings in a court observation, you state that its perfectly ok to state so... You easily qualify to be Sanghi spokesperson since you debate and present your logic very similar to them.
where did i say it is ok to say so...I merely sharing his defence..it looks like SC has made the remark...I even shared that a FIR is registered against him...so try to use your brain cell before equating me to Sanghi spokesperson..I can call you many names as well...let's try to keep the debate civil....
Anyways moving ahead if using the above argument, if the Hindutva goons or for that matter anyone starts demolishing mosques, will that be justified?
Only a fool can say so...so answer is no...however such an action supported by state will prove beyond doubt that BJP is anti-muslim...wasn't this what we were debating??
I don't really care if you want to jump over this issue or not, if you are ok with that, doesn't mean everyone is. I am not against teaching of Mahabharat or Ramayana and I hope you wouldn't have an issue with Quran being taught, I am against the forcing (be it Quran or Gita), you can keep it optional, why make it compulsory?
No one cares about what you think either...but the larger point is - every single decision is not equivalent of saffronisation...b/w i was just correcting you...when you level charge that they have forced chapters from gita then also say that chapters from Islam and Christianity is also forced...
Are you telling me that Statements won't have much affect? Ok here we go...
I have kept the gist...Two points that we need to keep in mind...a) Law and Order is state subject...b) No where I said such statements means nothing...I am recent with Dr Zakir Nair controversy as well..so hate speeches does polarize and have unfortunate consequences as well...however any policy that is state sponsored has far more reaching effects than these individual stories...it is this aspect that I am arguing with you...
am not sure about your claim of 10th Guru being named as terrorist, so I would want a reference for that. And speaking about NCERT history books, let me remind you that the same books do not speak about Shivaji's plundering of Surat and various other things, they don't speak about violence against Buddhism inflicted by Hindu kings etc. So if we are to start portraying history as it happened, I am not sure if the Kings presently revered by masses will enjoy the same reverence.
That's why I told you it is a very controversial subject...Just look at your bold part...how silly it is to say that I won't teach history as is because people will not like it...this is the statement of a mental state that has been deprived of reasoning/logic...and this is a sad state of affairs...some of issues are mentioned in below link as well...
http://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/its-history-once-again/232236
No they are not but it is being made out nowadays. Are you really unaware of this or just acting naive? Look at the television serials, various web articles, rhetoric from right wing orgs etc...
This is how you want to see...I have also seen movies where Ashoka has merely been shown as a lover boy and Akbar as the best emperor possible...This is mainstream media and has much more impact than anything else you are talking about..However does this impact me...hell no...point is what are we teaching to our kids in Schools...this is where i want an absolute intellectual honesty...
Another mistake you made over here(Or I would rather say parroting the Sanghi version).
[/QUOTE]
So shall i start saying your version as Mullah version?? Let's debate as mature and educated people...please...
Indeed constitution does not allow religious based reservation, but let me tell you that muslims as a whole entity does not get reservation, it is the weaker sections among muslims who get reservation and even the High court of Maharashtra upheld it but BJP as always went against it. So hindu dalits, SC's, OBC's can have reservation but weaker sections among muslims can't get the same benefit? So I ask you, why the double standards? And please don't comeback with "hey but muslims don't have castes", just because we don't have castes inscribed in our religion, doesn't mean we don't have weaker and marginalized sections among muslims.
Check back the Mandal commission days?? Those reservations were opposed tooth and nail in India..Those reservations were also brought in with the view to divide...you are making it sound like people are ok with Dalit, SC/ST reservations...No they are not fine...it caused and still causes deep divide in our society...similarly this 5% reservation for weaker section only belonging to Muslim is bad...As a sikh let me ask you why only weaker sections from hindus and muslims needs reservations...what about Christians, Sikhs, Jains etc etc...Can't you see....There is a Dalit vote, there is SC/ST/Backward class vote, there is Jat vote and similarly there is a Muslim Vote..that is why such reservations keep popping up targeting these groups...if we want to have reservation then why can't we have reservation for Poor?? Wont it cover weaker sections from all across?? Now here is another divisionary politics
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...k-for-friday-prayers/articleshow/56050091.cms
Just because a divisionary political move is favoring muslim so shall i favor it just because I am a Muslim?? Is that fair in secular country?? With that attitude where will state go... and then we want to call BJP and likes communal...
Here is a quote for your reference...
As said it was brought in the last leg of Congress/NCP as a vote bank politics...I have
not done enough research on it however I have already shared my understanding...as far as Maratha reservation is concerned then I am against that as well...but do know that various states have such reservation as well...For example Punjab also brought it in education in 99...I am a Sikh however as per that definition was treated in 15% category...On the other hand my best buddy a Hindu was treated in 85% category...Did I like it no...however the rule didn't differentiate b/w hindu/sikh and was out there to benefit Punjabis as a whole...
Are you telling me that all muslims in Assam are illegal? Whenever the question of illegal migration comes in, there is a rhetoric from Sanghis targeting muslims while forgetting about hindu illegal migration. Assam from times of British rule did have considerable Bengali muslim population who were employed by Brits. So claiming that there is a huge change in demographics because of illegal muslim Bangladeshis is rather idiotic. A few quotes from a news article...
I never said that...however are you saying there is no illegal migration problem in Assam or west bengal or for that matter in India?? of-course not..So we need to send those people back, no??...anyways a decent article to ponder...
http://carnegieindia.org/2016/06/29...india-toward-comprehensive-solution-pub-63931
Common mate even after so many posts, you stick on something which are completely different...
They are different words in English dictionary...hell YES...are they different in political context..hell no...please try to catch the drift...
So tell me how are they the same stuff? If congress has appeased muslims by providing quota to muslims, they have also done the same with others... Whereas BJP is ok providing reservation to Marathas but not to muslims. Does that ring any bells to you?
In general I am against reservations..In this case if Reservation to Marathas don't cover all Hindu's in maharashtra then I am fine with it otherwise this is wrong as well...I didn't get the bold part especially the other part...so please clarify...
Look dude, if Sati, Dowry etc are women rights issues so is Shah Bano case a women rights issue as simple as that, yes passing an ordinance is obviously appeasement but how do you term it communal. How is Shah Bano case affecting the Hindu lot other than ticking off the Sanghi nutcases?
Didn't I say clearly that it affected muslim women?? The problem is you don't want to understand the point...BJP moves(which you call communal) and Congress or Like Party Moves(which is appeasement as per you and thus not communal) are done with only one purpose...to polarize voters on the name of religion...Such moves have caused lot of harms and thus are equally bad....I am not sure about you however i will never say that since shah bano case only effect Muslim women so be it who cares...In my mind this is what being secular means...Just because a particular thing favor my community, my religion, my people it doesn't make it right...for state all women(all citizens) should be equal and so are their rights...All contrary moves(appeasement/communal) are equally wrong because they cause alienation among people and detrimental to state....
Your own upside down reasoning of stop poking your nose is incongruous & an impediment to dialogue.
Revisit your previous illogical & wacky post.
Read those post again and perhaps you will get the drift..
stop poking your nose also had other parts...read them once again...let me help...
This is the problem when people want to
poke their nose into a discussion without giving an iota of thought/effort to research.
Source:
https://defence.pk/threads/rs-2000-...ogue-s-gurumurthy.466519/page-4#ixzz4TJGMsSmG
either share your points or stop poking your nose when two people are discussing...
Source:
https://defence.pk/threads/rs-2000-...ogue-s-gurumurthy.466519/page-6#ixzz4TJGFqeH5
