ravishingravi Posted July 29, 2011 Posted July 29, 2011 I am not sure whether a thread has been created before this but there was an article by Swamy on the back of Mumbai Terror attacks which has created a furore How to wipe out Islamic terror The terrorist blast in Mumbai on July 13, 2011, requires decisive soul-searching by the Hindus of India. Hindus cannot accept to be killed in this halal fashion, continuously bleeding every day till the nation finally collapses. Terrorism I define here as the illegal use of force to overawe the civilian population to make it do or not do an act against its will and well-being. Islamic terrorism is India’s number one problem of national security. About this there will be no doubt after 2012. By that year, I expect a Taliban takeover in Pakistan and the Americans to flee Afghanistan. Then, Islam will confront Hinduism to “complete unfinished businessâ€. Already the successor to Osama bin Laden as al-Qaeda leader has declared that India is the priority target for that terrorist organisation and not the USA. Fanatic Muslims consider Hindu-dominated India “an unfinished chapter of Islamic conquestsâ€. All other countries conquered by Islam 100% converted to Islam within two decades of the Islamic invasion. Undivided India in 1947 was 75% Hindu even after 800 years of brutal Islamic rule. That is jarring for the fanatics. In one sense, I do not blame the Muslim fanatics for targeting Hindus. I blame Hindus who have taken their individuality permitted in Sanatan Dharma to the extreme. Millions of Hindus can assemble without state patronage for the Kumbh Mela, completely self-organised, but they all leave for home oblivious of the targeting of Hindus in Kashmir, Mau, Melvisharam and Malappuram and do not lift their little finger to help organise Hindus. If half the Hindus voted together, rising above caste and language, a genuine Hindu party would have a two-thirds majority in Parliament and the assemblies. The first lesson to be learnt from the recent history of Islamic terrorism against India and for tackling terrorism in India is that the Hindu is the target and that Muslims of India are being programmed by a slow reactive process to become radical and thus slide into suicide against Hindus. It is to undermine the Hindu psyche and create the fear of civil war that terror attacks are organised. Hindus must collectively respond as Hindus against the terrorist and not feel individually isolated or, worse, be complacent because he or she is not personally affected. If one Hindu dies merely because he or she was a Hindu, then a bit of every Hindu also dies. This is an essential mental attitude, a necessary part of a virat (committed) Hindu. We need a collective mindset as Hindus to stand against the Islamic terrorist. The Muslims of India can join us if they genuinely feel for the Hindu. That they do I will not believe unless they acknowledge with pride that though they may be Muslims, their ancestors were Hindus. If any Muslim acknowledges his or her Hindu legacy, then we Hindus can accept him or her as a part of the Brihad Hindu Samaj (greater Hindu society) which is Hindustan. India that is Bharat that is Hindustan is a nation of Hindus and others whose ancestors were Hindus. Others, who refuse to acknowledge this, or those foreigners who become Indian citizens by registration, can remain in India but should not have voting rights (which means they cannot be elected representatives). Any policy to combat terrorism must begin with requiring each and every Hindu becoming a virat Hindu. For this, one must have a Hindu mindset that recognises that there is vyaktigat charitra (personal character) and rashtriya charitra (national character). For example, Manmohan Singh has high personal character, but by being a rubber stamp of a semi-literate Sonia Gandhi and waffling on all national issues, he has proved that he has no rashtriya charitra. The second lesson for combating terrorism is that we must never capitulate or concede any demand, as we did in 1989 (freeing five terrorists in exchange for Mufti Mohammed Sayeed’s daughter Rubaiya) and in 1999, freeing three terrorists after the hijack of Indian Airlines flight IC-814. The third lesson is that whatever and however small the terrorist incident, the nation must retaliate massively. For example, when the Ayodhya temple was sought to be attacked, we should have retaliated by re-building the Ram temple at the site. According to bleeding heart liberals, terrorists are born or bred because of illiteracy, poverty, oppression, and discrimination. They argue that instead of eliminating them, the root cause of these four disabilities in society should be removed. This is rubbish. Osama bin laden was a billionaire. In the failed Times Square episode, failed terrorist Shahzad was from a highly placed family in Pakistan and had an MBA from a reputed US university. It is also a ridiculous idea that terrorists cannot be deterred because they are irrational and willing to die. Terrorist masterminds have political goals and a method in their madness. An effective strategy to deter terrorism is to defeat those political goals and to rubbish them by counter-terrorist action.Thus, I advocate the following strategy to negate the political goals of Islamic terrorism in India. Goal 1: Overawe India on Kashmir. Strategy: Remove Article 370 and resettle ex-servicemen in the valley. Create Panun Kashmir for the Hindu Pandit community. Look for or create an opportunity to take over PoK. If Pakistan continues to back terrorists, assist the Baluchis and Sindhis to get their independence. Goal 2: Blast temples, kill Hindu devotees. Strategy: Remove the masjid in Kashi Vishwanath temple and the 300 masjids at other temple sites. Goal 3: Turn India into Darul Islam. Strategy: Implement the uniform civil code, make learning of Sanskrit and singing of Vande Mataram mandatory, and declare India a Hindu Rashtra in which non-Hindus can vote only if they proudly acknowledge that their ancestors were Hindus. Rename India Hindustan as a nation of Hindus and those whose ancestors were Hindus. Goal 4: Change India’s demography by illegal immigration, conversion, and refusal to adopt family planning. Strategy: Enact a national law prohibiting conversion from Hinduism to any other religion. Re-conversion will not be banned. Declare that caste is not based on birth but on code or discipline. Welcome non-Hindus to re-convert to the caste of their choice provided they adhere to the code of discipline. Annex land from Bangladesh in proportion to the illegal migrants from that country staying in India. At present, the northern third from Sylhet to Khulna can be annexed to re-settle illegal migrants. Goal 5: Denigrate Hinduism through vulgar writings and preaching in mosques, madrassas, and churches to create loss of self-respect amongst Hindus and make them fit for capitulation. Strategy: Propagate the development of a Hindu mindset. India can solve its terrorist problem within five years by such a deterrent strategy, but for that we have to learn the four lessons outlined above, and have a Hindu mindset to take bold, risky, and hard decisions to defend the nation. If the Jews could be transformed from lambs walking meekly to the gas chambers to fiery lions in just 10 years, it should not be difficult for Hindus in much better circumstances (after all we are 83% of India), to do so in five years. Guru Gobind Singh showed us how just five fearless persons under spiritual guidance can transform a society. Even if half the Hindu voters are persuaded to collectively vote as Hindus, and for a party sincerely committed to a Hindu agenda, then we can forge an instrument for change. And that is the bottom line in the strategy to deter terrorism in a democratic Hindustan at this moment of truth. http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/comment_analysis-how-to-wipe-out-islamic-terror_1566203-all Now in response to this , Clamour in Harvard for Swamy’s ouster http://www.hindustantimes.com/Clamour-in-Harvard-for-Swamy-s-ouster/Article1-726800.aspx Subramanian Swamy's 'hate' article invites criticism http://ibnlive.in.com/news/subramanian-swamys-article-invites-criticism/171395-3.html Firstly at the outset, I must say I think very highly of Swamy and his stand against the govt. has been vindicated time and time again. So, I have just been taken aback with this piece. I know his general views on hindu state and all being of common origin and they are valid points to an extent, but I really think he went too far here.
Alchemist Posted July 29, 2011 Posted July 29, 2011 I did not know Boss Bhai's name is Subramanyam Swami.
surajmal Posted July 29, 2011 Posted July 29, 2011 I agree with Swamy even though I think he is a kook.
EnterTheVoid Posted July 30, 2011 Posted July 30, 2011 Secular democracy my ****. Not agreeing with him is one thing, silencing him from voicing his views is another.
ravishingravi Posted July 31, 2011 Author Posted July 31, 2011 I am in agreement with parts of the argument but the truth of the matter is that this discussion will get us nowhere. How will it help if some muslims acknowledge their hindu past ? How many generations back was that ? They are well and truly entrenched in their faith and so are other minorities. The truth is even hindus are not a monolith. Hindus cannot be bound by a common ideal like Swamy seems to believe. It is a cultural identity.
ravishingravi Posted August 14, 2011 Author Posted August 14, 2011 First interview after the article with Thapar. I would rather prefer the man in the second half when he is the destroyer the rulers in power than the guy in the first half who is incessantly stressing on the hindu roots of muslims, christians or any other minorities. I am not sure what will solve. Nothing imo. This is brilliant and a strong guy make no mistake about it. I just think he can do a lot more good with targetting the politicians than expressing religious views. Great interview purely as an objective observation for two reasons. 1) Swamy knows it was a poorly written article that was not as clear as he would have liked and probably looked like being a bit of a rant. So inspite of being on defensive, Thappar never gets to him. He is trying hard to incite him, but he doesn't. 2) In the second half, Swamy absolutely dominates without actually saying anything new or concrete. http://ibnlive.in.com/shows/Devil%27s-Advocate.html
ravishingravi Posted August 14, 2011 Author Posted August 14, 2011 People like this dirtbag Karan Thappar are dime a dozen in India. Anybody who understands even rudimentary principles of debating or journalism will tell you that this guy knows nothing about them. These guys are masters of defaming people by virtue of their ability to shout down people using their positions to good effect. Plenty of such samples can be found on this forum right here. But what part of his article was poorly written in your opinion ? I just think clubbing Islam as in all of muslims, when his opinion is different. I also think he assumed everyone is aware of his views. That might not be the case. It is true that he has held these views for all minorities since three decades, but the article comes across as a one point agenda against muslims when I don't think it was intended to be. Yes, the context was mumbai terror attacks but he should have been more clear. Most importantly, I don't think "acceptance" of hindu roots will solve our problems. As I said earlier, I am not sure how accepting my great great great great great great great grandfather was a Hindu will inform my current sentiments. I agree with your thoughts on Thapar here. BUt I think he knows Swamy is right in areas esp. when it comes to Ambedkar
urbestfriend Posted August 15, 2011 Posted August 15, 2011 Just watching his interview on IBN. This guy has the balls of steel.
ravishingravi Posted August 15, 2011 Author Posted August 15, 2011 And he can explain corruption, using mathematics qIdEUo1ycEQ
pinkfreud Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 This article really took me by surprise simply because I didn't expect a guy like Swamy to pen this. I like what he's had to say about the Govt. in the past and comes across as a very knowledgeable person. I don't agree with his views in this article because they are too extreme imo, but I wholeheartedly agree with him on his Kashmir viewpoint. My mother's family are all Kashmiri Pandits, and the tales I've heard about them having to watch their ancestral village being charred to the ground and women being raped and mutilated is simply horrifying. Where was the secularism then? Nobody even cares about the Pandits anymore, how is that fair? I don't freaking understand why people are baying for Swamy's blood when kooks like Asaduddin Owaisi go on anti-Hindu tirades, Ulemas issue fatwas against Vande Mataram, and dips**ts like Gilani openly lend their buttholes to Pakistan while residing in India. Two wrongs may not make a right, but you can't simply allow a group of people to say and do whatever they want and yet relinquish another person's right to do the same. That's not 'secular', it's downright disgusting. The reason sections of the NDA are upping their Hindutva stance is because the Congress is infuriating the majority under the guise of secularism (hurray for Digvijay Singh). The Congress is anything but secular; they conveniently ignore their own wrongdoings against the Sikhs in the past while pretending to be the torchbearers of a united India. What utter tripe.
Ram Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 Before we get into actual article itself (if you can call it that), Its probably a good time for a quick history lesson on the venerable Mr.Swamy. For those outside Tamil Nadu, I am sure you must be wondering who is this guy with a rather polished accent and strident tone and it is also quite possible that you maybe impressed by the fact that he is a professor at Harvard (a credential that he never fails to flaunt). I am sure some of your maybe surprised, but Swamy actually heads a political party. Its called the Janata Party. If the Bangladeshi cricket team were a political party, it would be the Janata Party. Niether he, nor his party, have won a thing in the elections, EVER. For many years, he used to try to be the ultimate political parasite, sucking up to one of the 2 Dravidian parties and forming ‘alliances’ with them. But pretty soon, both of the bigger parties realized that this guy was utterly useless and jettisoned him. Since then, he has been a real-life version of a political pariah. Nobody wants him near them and nobody wants anything to do with him anymore. Given the fact that his now politically completely irrelevant, he now tries to stay in the news by taking pot-shots at those who are. And is there a bigger soft target out there, than Sonia Gandhi. He has made a CAREER out of slandering Mrs. Gandhi, saying some of the most vulgar, obscene things against her. There’s actually a youtube video out there, where he claims (and I kid you not in this), that Sonia Gandhi was born in Italy as a result of her mother sleeping around with other men! And this is the man, we now have to take seriously? So the next time you hear him holler in television, keep in mind who he is and where he comes from. Now, that’s out of the way, let’s get to the article itself. You don’t have to read it in full to realize that it is no anti-terrorism theme in it, as much there is a pro-communal or anti-secular message. What he is essentially asking for is for us to dump our near centuries old secular tradition and turn completely communal. Or to put in simpler terms, Swamy wants us to be the Hindu version of Pakistan (the clean giveaway is where he says the name has to be changed from India to Hindustan..’. ) Now, I am sure most of the posters here are Hindu (including yours truly’s family), but who here actually want to see that happening? Who wants to see an India is overrun by Hindu fundamentalists, just like how Pakistan is flooded by Islamic extremists? And we all know how that turned out. And just look at this appalling attempt at striking the so-called ‘conciliatory’ tone; The Muslims of India can join us if they genuinely feel for the Hindu. That they do I will not believe unless they acknowledge with pride that though they may be Muslims, their ancestors were Hindus. If any Muslim acknowledges his or her Hindu legacy, then we Hindus can accept him or her as a part of the Brihad Hindu Samaj (greater Hindu society) which is Hindustan So what he is essentially saying is, Muslims can stay in India, as long as they acknowledge that they’re Hindus in disguise. :hysterical: There’s a reason why characters at Swamy have been completely marginalized in the Indian society and have been reduced at hooting at the fringes. We are SECULAR people, we are GOOD people. We don’t want people like this to play any role whatsoever, in our governance. Of course, does that mean that there are no unfavorable elements in our population? Of course not. Is it true that a significant proportion of the anti-national group happen to be Muslim? Of course yes. And are there politicians out there, who seek to exploit these insecurities by playing the minority card? Certainly Yes. And I say - To hell with these morons! If you don’t want to sign-up for the idea of one-India, EFF YOU! Whether these characters are Muslims Ulemas spreading anti-India messages or Hindu leaders plotting to bomb places to place the blame on Muslims, The state should seek them, capture them and PUNISH THEM. You have no right to roam freely in the society. However, this shouldn’t preclude us from the fact that the experiment that is India, is a great experiment. It isn’t perfect, but it WORKS. If you don’t buy that, just look around you and its hard to miss the turmoil and turbulence going on in the rest of the world.
ravishingravi Posted August 17, 2011 Author Posted August 17, 2011 I am sure some of your maybe surprised' date=' but Swamy actually heads a political party. Its called the Janata Party. If the Bangladeshi cricket team were a political party, it would be the Janata Party. Niether he, nor his party, have won a thing in the elections, EVER. For many years, he used to try to be the ultimate political parasite, sucking up to one of the 2 Dravidian parties and forming ÃÂlliances with them. But pretty soon, both of the bigger parties realized that this guy was utterly useless and jettisoned him. Since then, he has been a real-life version of a political pariah. Nobody wants him near them and nobody wants anything to do with him anymore.[/quote'] A few questions on the history lesson. How does his political relevance have anything to do with anything ? Laloo, Mayawati, Chautala and even the Jharkand CM have political relevance who has murder charges against him. Your points on him allying with 2 political parties is valid one. But I can remember a certain someone actually supporting Jaylalitha as one of the best cheif minsters notwithstanding the corruption charges to a point where SC said her being CM will set an unhealthy precedent. As for not winning anything EVER, here is some history lesson "After Indira revoked the emergency on January 18, 1977 and announced elections, it was under JP's guidance ( Jayprakash Narayan ) that the Janata Party (a vehicle for the broad spectrum of the anti-Indira Gandhi opposition) was formed. The Janata Party was voted into power, and became the first non-Congress party to form a government at the Centre. On the call of Narayan many youngesters joined the J P movement."
urbestfriend Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 Ram , you need some history lessons man! Are you saying Janata party has never won anything:hysterical: As far as I know, Janata party was main opposition party during emergency and it successfully came to power in late 1970s and Morarjee Desai and Charan singh was PMs from Janata Party. In fact Swamy has been union ministers several times! I understand that the popularity of Janata party was so high during the emergency era that a hardcore tam like Swamy has contested from UP and won several times.
Ram Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 A few questions on the history lesson. How does his political relevance have anything to do with anything ? Laloo' date=' Mayawati, Chautala and even the Jharkand CM have political relevance who has murder charges against him. Your points on him allying with 2 political parties is valid one. But I can remember a certain someone actually supporting Jaylalitha as one of the best cheif minsters notwithstanding the corruption charges to a point where SC said her being CM will set an unhealthy precedent. As for not winning anything EVER, here is some history lesson "After Indira revoked the emergency on January 18, 1977 and announced elections, it was under JP's guidance ( Jayprakash Narayan ) that the Janata Party (a vehicle for the broad spectrum of the anti-Indira Gandhi opposition) was formed. The Janata Party was voted into power, and became the first non-Congress party to form a government at the Centre. On the call of Narayan many youngesters joined the J P movement." [/quote'] His political relevance is important because it will help the audience put in context who this guy is, what he does and why he does what he does. In case anyone here thinks he is a relentless crusader waging a battle against the establishment and corruption, they should know that he is anything BUT that. He tried for many years to be part of the same establishment that he now riles against and failed miserably. People need to know that he is doing what he is doing for a reason and that is to stay in the news and stay relevant. He is nothing but a pot-stirrer who rakes up fabricated controversies to create an illusion of power and relevance around him. And as for the Janata Party, please do not kid yourself. The Janata party that Subramanyam Swamy heads today has little to no genes of the Janata Party of yesteryear. I was speaking purely in the context of the Party that Swamy heads and not the party of old with whom it shares the name. Sure, he may have a few relevant things. I am not denying that. But then again, they are probably more out of his need to stay in the news, than out a want to do good for the society. However, I have quite literally ZERO respect for a man who goes around questioning the integrity of women he does not even know. And please, it is a bit of a polava to claim that the ‘2G scam is entirely in public space due to this man..’ This is NOT communal? What is more communal than saying India is a nation of Hindus and that Muslims must concede that they are nothing but recently converted Hindus? To me, that is DEFINITION of communalism. I am sorry, I strongly object to the term “leftist”. I would like to know - What part of my reply did you find “left-leaning”?
Recommended Posts