The Sandhya Jain and Radha Rajan articles posted somewhere above had some interesting comments:
http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...px?id=1970
http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...px?id=1969
If Modi does intend to work for Hindus after all, he may have to let Hindus know. In more than mere words. Working for a Hindu nation means specifically 1. Not remotely encouraging christoislamism and even 2. causing a contraction of christoislamism rather than letting it expand or even allowing it to maintain its current extent.
The following's not an interesting comment, but one by someone who seems to have forgotten that TSP-W's population went from about one quarter Hindu to 1% Hindu since independence (and that is all that the future - and very secular - Indians of Hindu ancestry like "Jitendra Desai" can look forward to from islam):
http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...px?id=1969
http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...px?id=1970
Quote: "Certified Islamphobe"? // Well, here is an example that curiously serves for both his "certified Islamphobia" (certified too by a leading Islamist) as well as his "inclusive development". // "Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj quoted her speech along with the details of a Muslim entrepreneur, who was recommended to Modi by Mehbooba, and got his unit established in half an hour. `Our political opponent and PDP head Mehbooba Mufti praised Modi for allowing a Muslim entrepreneur to set up a factory. Modi not only gave time to the entrepreneur but also roped in all the required officials and cleared the proposal in half an hour'ââ¬Â......(http://www.dailypioneer.com/pioneer-news...mirks.html)......"Mehbooba Mufti, the leader of the PDP, a party opposed to the BJP, said that a Muslim friend of hers wanted to invest in Gujarat and was astonished to be quickly granted an appointment. And when he met Mr. Modi he had a decision in half-an-hour" (Shujaat Bukhari, "War of words between Mehboob, Omar over Sushma's statement", The Hindu, 21-9-11, p.5). // Incidentally, this example serves too to underline why we need a Jan Lokpal especially for the likes of Mr Modi . In his "certified Islamphobia" and "inclusive development", he personally took a decision based on a political recommendation and, prima facie, in violation of the established procedures/rules of business. He exercised his discretion to favour a Muslim recommended by a public servant also a Muslim. It was purely religion-based, and not at all merit-based. No public interest is evident. It is a case of indulging in discrimination, both directly and indirectly. Prima facie it violates ss. 2(1), 2(4, proviso), 2(9)(a), 2(13)(a),(b ),(d) of the Jan Lokpak Bill - http://www.annahazare.org/pdf/Jan%20lokp...0(Eng).pdf // Surely this egregious example of his "certified Islamphobia" and "inclusive development" (aka minorityism, minority appeasement, Nehruvian secularism) well "qualifies him to be the `Prime minister' of [y]our country"? But why does "observer" worry about what happens in "our" country? Let him focus on his own country, whichever it be.
Krishen Kak
21 Sep 2011
What is Narendra Modi's record against Evangelists - how much re-conversion success is there in Gujarat?
Narayani
21 Sep 2011
[color="#800080"](Wasn't Swami Aseemananda active in Gujarat?
BTW, any word about him? Hindus can't protect their own, can they. Hopeless. The ones brave enough to protect/stand up for other Hindoos are always the first targets of christianism: the very innocent Dara Singh, Swami Lakshmananda, and those framed under the "Hindu Terror" christofiction: Swami Aseemananda and the others who have been disappeared.)[/color]
If BJP is now supporting the Ulema Council demand for probe in Batla House, and supporting the Meo Muslims in Bharatpur - it follows that the whole RSS-BJP is on Muslim appeasement policy and fooling the Hindus. The Hindus can only blame themselves if they go along with this bunch of Betrayers.
Sheetal
21 Sep 2011
Another incisive article by Radhaji, backed by painstaking research. First Sandhyaji and now Radhaji has very rightly drawn attention to the flip side of Narendra Modi's approach. [color="#0000FF"]High economic growth, however inclusive, cannot protect the Hindu society from Jihadi violence and missionary mischief.[/color] The fabled wealth of ancient India did not protect it from Muslim marauders. If anythig, it only served to attract more invaders. Modi's single-minded focus on development and studied silence on Hindu-related issues are naturally causing misgivings in the minds of more alert and more observant Hindu nationalists such as Sandhyaji and Radhaji. It was a sad day for Hindus when Narendra Modi also took to parading his Muslim followers, as do Lalu and Mulayam. It is one thing to have backers among Muslims, it is another to flaunt them as one's credentials to a national role. BJP has traversed this road before under Vajpayee. It only cost it credibility and votes among Hindus, without earning a single Muslim vote. Advani tried it by praising Jinnah (of all people) and describing Babri demolition as the saddest day in his life in a desparate bid to win acceptability among the secularists circles. He only succeeded in marginalising himself further. If Modi goes that way, he will also end where his seniors did. He has nothing to gain among Muslims and everything to lose among the Hindus by resorting to such gimmicks. As to winning respect of secularists, it will never happen. The more the BJP leaders bend, the more they will be asked to bend. As Koenraad Elst said, the secularists are like spolt brats of the rich. The sight of beggars crawling and groveling before them only makes them laugh. Virendra Parekh
Virendra Parekh
21 Sep 2011
"He has nothing to gain among Muslims.....As to winning respect of secularists, it will never happen." // Exactly. See http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind...529AA5mSvr or google "Narendra Modi did not stand by and allow the Gujarat riots to happen" to understand the viciousness of this lot and the lies they peddle about him as a "certified Islamphobe".
Krishen Kak
21 Sep 2011
[color="#0000FF"]During pre-independence, when many of the leaders were moving away from Sanatana Dharma or turned blind eyes to Hindu pains, Hindus were told that the focus is only on independence and those who still complained are branded as communal. Now when somebody points out the similar behaviour of so-called-hindu-party-leaders, we are told that the current focus is to throw out Sonia and her cohorts. So the history repeats itself[/color] and only God knows how long the Hindus have to wait before another Krishna appears
Sivakumar 21 Sep 2011
http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...px?id=1969
Quote:did not watch the drama in Gujarat but it was and is my speculation that Modi projecting himself on the national platform will make him bend over backwards to please the Muslims. It is my guess that he will out-congress Congress in his zeal to woo the Muslims in attempt to wean them away from the secularists. Muslims know how to milk the Hindu weakness. The best course for Hindus is a weak Congress rule and a strong BJP opposition. A weak BJP in power is worse than Congress in power.
Vinod 20 Sep 2011
The concept of 'secularism' has been well planned by evangelists as a justification for all their deeds. It is only us hindus who are unable to see the hind side of things and act like dim-witted fools. The secularism of Nepal cost us the only hindu nation left in the world. In Nepal today, the Hindu-Buddhist population is down from 97% to 85% in less than a decade. Also, one must note that all the Abrahamic religions have kept themselves their lands (un-secular). It is only the Hindus who have given up everything in the name of secularism. The problem remains that it is the RSS and the VHP that has been silent and has turned a blind-eye (possibly filled their pockets to keep shut) to the rampant destruction of the Hindu Nation. It remains only the Hindus who are to blame for these activities. In the wake of globalization and world economies, it is the hindus who have forgotten their culture and who are letting these abrahamic religions get their roots further into our culture.
Anonymous 20 Sep 2011
(Wish Hindus would stop reducing their religion to only "culture" or "civilisation". Anyway, that stupidity too will come back to bite people. As it has already. "Van schade en schande leert men.")
I was shocked to see the hitherto unknown Bhaiyu ji Maharaj giving the juice to Narendra Modi. He networked with Anna Hazare also and is close to too many politicians. It would seem that there is a gang of globetrotting sanyasis [self proclaimed] who network across the political spectrum like lobbyists, with god alone knows what what agendas, funders, agencies, even corporates behind them. Modi needs to explain his connection with this man and why he was selected to break his fast.
Vedam 20 Sep 2011
RE .....Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj speech & details of a Muslim entrepreneur recommended to Modi by Mehbooba Mufti & got his unit established in half an hour. (http://www.dailypioneer.com/pioneer-news...mirks.html) + (Shujaat Bukhari, "War of words between Mehboob, Omar over Sushma's statement", The Hindu, 21-9-11, p.5). ### Now, let us see what the Gujarat CM did: [1] He is a public servant. [2] He personally took a decision based on a political recommendation and, prima facie, in violation of the established procedures/rules of business. He exercised his discretion to favour a member of a specific religion recommended by a public servant of the same religion. It was purely religion-based, and not at all merit-based. No public interest is evident. It is a case of indulging in discrimination, both directly and indirectly. Hence, it is a fit case for investigation by a Jan Lokpal.
Krishen Kak 21 Sep 2011
If BJP is now supporting the Ulema Council demand for probe in Batla House, and supporting the Meo Muslims in Bharatpur - it follows that the whole RSS-BJP is on Muslim appeasement policy and fooling the Hindus. The Hindus can only blame themselves if they go along with this bunch of Betrayers.
Sheetal 21 Sep 2011
Sandhyaji has rightly drawn attention to the flip side of Narendra Modi's approach. High economic growth cannot protect Hindu society from Jihadi violence and missionary mischief. The fabled wealth of ancient India did not protect it from Muslim marauders; it only served to attract more invaders. Modi's single-minded focus on development and studied silence on Hindu-related issues are naturally causing misgivings in the minds of more alert and observant Hindu nationalists. It was a sad day for Hindus when Narendra Modi also took to parading Muslim followers, like Lalu and Mulayam. It is one thing to have backers among Muslims, it is another to flaunt them as one's credentials to a national role. BJP has traversed this road before under Vajpayee. It only cost it credibility and votes among Hindus, without earning a single Muslim vote. Advani tried it by praising Jinnah (of all people) and describing Babri demolition as the saddest day in his life in a desperate bid to win acceptability among secularist circles. He only succeeded in marginalising himself further. If Modi goes that way, he will also end where his seniors did. He has nothing to gain among Muslims and everything to lose among Hindus by resorting to such gimmicks. The more the BJP leaders bend, the more they will be asked to bend.
Virender 21 Sep 2011
A very prescient article, Sandhya ji. Now Narendra Modi has raced to the top of the pseudo-secular bandwagon, demanding ââ¬Ërelaxed visasââ¬â¢ for Pakistanis wanting to visit Ajmer Sharif when they come to India to watch cricket matches. He also wants the Centre to give airfare subsidy to people of Indian origin to motivate them to ââ¬Åwitness Kumbh melasââ¬Â. What does ââ¬Ëwitness Kumbhââ¬â¢ mean? Surely Hindus wanting to bathe in the Kumbh can take a visa and come. When he wants PIOs as tourists, does he mean Muslims and Christians should come as voyeurs and trouble Hindu women? Ambition to be PM has made him lose his mind. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/modi-n...er/850578/
Gaurang 23 Sep 2011
If Modi does intend to work for Hindus after all, he may have to let Hindus know. In more than mere words. Working for a Hindu nation means specifically 1. Not remotely encouraging christoislamism and even 2. causing a contraction of christoislamism rather than letting it expand or even allowing it to maintain its current extent.
The following's not an interesting comment, but one by someone who seems to have forgotten that TSP-W's population went from about one quarter Hindu to 1% Hindu since independence (and that is all that the future - and very secular - Indians of Hindu ancestry like "Jitendra Desai" can look forward to from islam):
http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...px?id=1969
Quote:It is wrong to judge him as a person who has CROSSED OVER!.He has not.Is it wrong to have national ambitions?In any case neither NaMo nor BJP are likely to do anything till they have analysed UP election results in 2012. Is it wrong to tell muslims that they haven't got anything from Congress all these years and appeal to them to join mainstream? NaMo can win next elections in Gujarat with or without muslim votes.Similarly BJP can win 200 seats in next Lok sabha without muslim votes.NaMo is trying to reassure the nation about post 2014 scenario of NDA rule with BJP having 200+ seats.In such an event is it not fair to assure the minorities that they will have equal opportunities? Political [color="#0000FF"]Hindutva[/color] will have to be redefined for [color="#0000FF"]new generation of Hindus.[/color]This generation outnumber old Hindus and is demanding much more from Hindu leaders than mere reaffirmation of faith. NaMo is promising better governance to ALL,that iincludes minorities. We need to answer, why we can't go to war with Bangladesh over the issue of illegal immigration. We have gone to Dhaka to donate $1 billion and share waters with them, while we house 2 crores of them in our country. By 2050,we will see a UNITED STATES OF HINDUSTHAN, with 100 crore Hindus and 50 crore muslims from Bangladesh,Pakistan,Sri lanka,Nepal and Afghanistan. New Hindus could be looking at this picture of the future than their bloodied past.NaMo could be the first Hindu leader to take the subcontinent closer to this idea of new HINDUSTHAN.[/color]Good to know there's no need to worry/care about the "new generation of 'Hindus'" (the label is clearly all that will stick): they seem to be just peachy with - and even welcoming of - christoislamism. (Except they don't care to know that it has a bite worse than its bark. But they are free to find out through direct experience rather than bothering to learn from history. The future - belonging to them - will be their problem after all.)
Jitendra Desai 20 Sep 2011