"Those who call themselves Hindus only talk about violence, hatred, and untruth; you are not a Hindu at all": Rahul Gandhi

FearlessRoar

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 11, 2023
Runs
16,923

Rahul Gandhi's fiery attack in Lok Sabha: ‘Hinduism not about spreading hatred’​


The Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi launched a scathing critique of the Narendra Modi-led government over what he described as a decade-long systematic attack on the Constitution and the foundational idea of India by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

"I am feeling good that BJP leaders are uttering the word 'Constitution' every 2-3 minutes," Gandhi noted, with a hint of irony. “For the last 10 years, there has been a systematic attack on the Constitution, on the idea of India, and on anybody who resisted the ideas being proposed by the BJP, who resisted the dilution of the Constitution.”

"Many of us were personally attacked. In fact, some of our leaders are still in jail. Not only the opposition, who resisted the idea of concentration of power, of concentration of wealth, of oppression of the poor, Dalits, minorities, and tribals were crushed. People were put in jail, people were threatened, and I myself was attacked by order of the Government of India, by order obviously of the Prime Minister of India," he added.

During his address, Gandhi displayed a poster of Lord Shiva, which prompted an immediate intervention from Speaker Om Birla.

"Rules don't allow the display of placards," Birla said, urging Gandhi to adhere to parliamentary protocols.

Gandhi continued,“Hinduism is not about spreading fear, hatred, and falsehoods.”

“All our great men have spoken about non-violence...But, those who call themselves Hindu only talk about violence, hatred, untruth…Aap Hindu ho hi nahi,” Gandhi added, pointing to the treasury benches.

Gandhi's remarks triggered a huge ruckus in the House, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi accusing the Congress leader of calling the entire Hindu community violent.

“Calling the entire Hindu community violent is a very serious issue,” Modi said.

Gandhi retorted, saying "the BJP and the RSS are not the entire Hindu society".

The Congress leader further stressed that all religions talk about courage, citing Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism to underline the importance of fearlessness.

Union home minister Amit Shah also intervened saying “The Leader of Opposition has categorically said that those who call themselves Hindu talk of violence and do violence.”

“He doesn’t know that crores of people proudly call themselves Hindu. Connecting violence with any religion is wrong. He should apologise,” Shah added.

Rahul Gandhi accused PM Modi of creating an environment of fear not only among citizens of the country but also within the BJP.

 
It's like watching a 1.5 hour long movie with memorable performances from the two leads Rahulg and Modiji. Breathtaking. Modi almost cried :dhoni when he made his accusation. It was total defeat.
 
RaGa is right, BJP has totally altered the definition of a Hindu, a moderate guy would never be deemed as one unless he is violent enough now.
Can you define Hindu?

You have to know the definition of Hindu to even know if the definition is altered.
 
RaGa talking non sense as usual.

Hindu is not just sitting and watching everyone slap you around and you do nothing about it. If RaGa had read Bhagawad Geeta at least once he would know that it is the Dharma aka duty of every warrior to fight Adharma or untruth.

Perhaps RaGa learned his Hinduism from Nehra and Gandhi. They show the other cheek if the bad guy slaps you on one cheek.
 
It's like watching a 1.5 hour long movie with memorable performances from the two leads Rahulg and Modiji. Breathtaking. Modi almost cried :dhoni when he made his accusation. It was total defeat.
Rahulg is equivalent to Jay shah ..two pappus talking as if they know what they are talking about
 

Just finished this.
Biggest grossing blockbuster of the year so far. Something tells me there are gonna be bigger hits though :dhoni
Man fell just short of century after a decade of mediocrity and he is teaching others how to bat. :moyo2
 
RaGa is right, BJP has totally altered the definition of a Hindu, a moderate guy would never be deemed as one unless he is violent enough now.

When did you study Hinduism?

RaGa is a hindu hater and his hatred is again out in the open.

What he and his family want Hindus to be is to be subservient and carry the burden of secularism quietly.

Not Happening.
 
When did you study Hinduism?

RaGa is a hindu hater and his hatred is again out in the open.

What he and his family want Hindus to be is to be subservient and carry the burden of secularism quietly.

Not Happening.

I think this "subservient" Hindu image is pain point for hindus who compare themselves unfavourably with Muslims. I have seen the same arguments raised by Christians who despaired at seeing their own saints and clergy mocked and ridiculed by the atheists, whereas the Muslims would defend the honour of their Prophet (SAW) with their lives.

But hinduism is it's own religion, it aims to be all inclusive and encompassing, so why try to mimic Islam? It would make more sense just to adopt Islam if it's teachings are more favourable to you.
 
I think this "subservient" Hindu image is pain point for hindus who compare themselves unfavourably with Muslims. I have seen the same arguments raised by Christians who despaired at seeing their own saints and clergy mocked and ridiculed by the atheists, whereas the Muslims would defend the honour of their Prophet (SAW) with their lives.

But hinduism is it's own religion, it aims to be all inclusive and encompassing, so why try to mimic Islam? It would make more sense just to adopt Islam if it's teachings are more favourable to you.

This tolerant image of hinduism is because hindus turned their weakness into a virtue.

I tell hindus that get ride of this vegetarianism, learn to eat meat and also acquire the skill of beheading a goat and skinning it ( I have done the beheading but need to learn skinning).
 
This tolerant image of hinduism is because hindus turned their weakness into a virtue.

I tell hindus that get ride of this vegetarianism, learn to eat meat and also acquire the skill of beheading a goat and skinning it ( I have done the beheading but need to learn skinning).
All Polytheist religions are naturally inclusive. One more God to the Pantheon is not going to hurt their religion or beliefs.

This over tolerant image of Hinduism is due to Gandhi and Nehru philosophy. Right from our childhood, at schools and on TV, we are told that there are many ways to reach the Goal, all God(s) of various religions are same blah blah blah... But the reciprocity from others is never received. Islamic faith is total opposite to what Hindus are told and brainwashed since childhood.

While it is your choice to do animal sacrifice, I hate to see an animal beheaded and skinned like its life has no value. I am a bit of hypocrite in this as I do sometimes eat Chicken for health reasons. Red meat is off the table for me.
 
This tolerant image of hinduism is because hindus turned their weakness into a virtue.

I tell hindus that get ride of this vegetarianism, learn to eat meat and also acquire the skill of beheading a goat and skinning it ( I have done the beheading but need to learn skinning).
That’s silly, in the age of robots and political manipulation killing an animal just for the sake of a skill is atrocious to say the least.
 
That’s silly, in the age of robots and political manipulation killing an animal just for the sake of a skill is atrocious to say the least.
Majority of Hindus eat Goat. If the killing is for consumption, then it is their choice. If it is for appeasing some God, then it becomes meaningless and cruel.
 
I think this "subservient" Hindu image is pain point for hindus who compare themselves unfavourably with Muslims. I have seen the same arguments raised by Christians who despaired at seeing their own saints and clergy mocked and ridiculed by the atheists, whereas the Muslims would defend the honour of their Prophet (SAW) with their lives.

But hinduism is it's own religion, it aims to be all inclusive and encompassing, so why try to mimic Islam? It would make more sense just to adopt Islam if it's teachings are more favourable to you.
Why do you think Muslims are more bigoted than Christians? Is it an inherent trait of Islam or something derived through natural social evolution?
 
It was priceless seeing Feku mix up 'hamara mukala' with 'muqabla.' Looks like he is trembling in his boots after this year's election debacle! 😆 :inti
 
Modi: “Teacher came and said why are you distributing sweets? You have not scored 99 out of 100 but 99 out of 543”… yeah Parliament is super interesting this time!

-translated
 
It was priceless seeing Feku mix up 'hamara mukala' with 'muqabla.' Looks like he is trembling in his boots after this year's election debacle! 😆 :inti
This is the happiness you get?

Watch him stumble for words for another 5 years :misbah

Modi will stumble more for words for another decade of Rahul and his cronies cannot cross 100 in the next election too.
 
Why do you think Muslims are more bigoted than Christians? Is it an inherent trait of Islam or something derived through natural social evolution?

That is your interpretation, nothing to do with my words. But since you have gone with that tangent, would you describe hindutva's march towards a more militant form of hinduism as social evolution?
 
Why do you think Muslims are more bigoted than Christians? Is it an inherent trait of Islam or something derived through natural social evolution?
I don't know if they are bigoted, Christianity though it claims it is monotheistic, it still has holy trinity embedded in it. Their lord and savior Jesus also came down to earth as a mere human. Some similarities with Hinduism.

Islam on the other hand has no room for wiggle. It is monotheism on steroids. Entire South and South East Asian culture is Jahiliya and lunacy for them. They put all their eggs in one basket and they firmly believe it is the only one.

We also have to remember that Christianity has lost all its venom in the past 200 years. Science and progressive ideas have dented Church's power a lot in the West. They adopted Modernity. Islam on the other hand to me went backwards. Many Islamic countries have become more religious and want to follow Islam as much as they can. This means they are not going to tolerate Polytheism in their lands that easily. It is a threat to their faith.
 
That’s silly, in the age of robots and political manipulation killing an animal just for the sake of a skill is atrocious to say the least.
The skill is not needed to become a butcher, but to get desensitised to an act which has been passed on by our ancestors till somewhere we decided that we can eat meat but cannot stand the sight of an animal being killed.

I meant this for people who already eat meat, not the ones who are vegetarians.

When I discussed about my wish to kill a goat because I wanted to experience what was a routine act of most humans down the ages, some people (who are meat eaters) said you are being a psycho.

If you don't eat meat, that is fine. But those who eat meat, should be able to kill an animal, or at the very least watch it being killed before eating it.
 
The skill is not needed to become a butcher, but to get desensitised to an act which has been passed on by our ancestors till somewhere we decided that we can eat meat but cannot stand the sight of an animal being killed.

I meant this for people who already eat meat, not the ones who are vegetarians.

When I discussed about my wish to kill a goat because I wanted to experience what was a routine act of most humans down the ages, some people (who are meat eaters) said you are being a psycho.

If you don't eat meat, that is fine. But those who eat meat, should be able to kill an animal, or at the very least watch it being killed before eating it.
I agree on that, eventhough I’m vegetarian I do support hunting and eating as it teaches respect unlike factory farming.
 
That is your interpretation, nothing to do with my words. But since you have gone with that tangent, would you describe hindutva's march towards a more militant form of hinduism as social evolution?
I don't know whether Hinduism has gone more miltant or not,because the idea that West have about Hinduism is very modern, and Hinduism is not that much non- violent in it's pluarality, but if you mean Hinduism's journey to Hindutva, yes it's a social evolution. Now, coming back to my question, I think my interpretation is quiet natural, as reacting so strongly about the perceived mocking about your religious honoured ones that you are ready to die for them would be perceived as bigotry in most modern world views. So, again I repeat my question, Is Islam by its inherent properties more bigoted, or it's a result of socio-economic evolution? Perhaps a lingering for the glorious past in the face of the more bleak present for the followers of the religion may be ?
 
I don't know whether Hinduism has gone more miltant or not,because the idea that West have about Hinduism is very modern, and Hinduism is not that much non- violent in it's pluarality, but if you mean Hinduism's journey to Hindutva, yes it's a social evolution. Now, coming back to my question, I think my interpretation is quiet natural, as reacting so strongly about the perceived mocking about your religious honoured ones that you are ready to die for them would be perceived as bigotry in most modern world views. So, again I repeat my question, Is Islam by its inherent properties more bigoted, or it's a result of socio-economic evolution? Perhaps a lingering for the glorious past in the face of the more bleak present for the followers of the religion may be ?

You are looking at Islam from an atheist's point of view. For the authentic Muslim glorious past or future is neither here nor there. The only goal is to worship Allah SWT and achieve success in the afterlife.
 
I don't know whether Hinduism has gone more miltant or not,because the idea that West have about Hinduism is very modern, and Hinduism is not that much non- violent in it's pluarality, but if you mean Hinduism's journey to Hindutva, yes it's a social evolution. Now, coming back to my question, I think my interpretation is quiet natural, as reacting so strongly about the perceived mocking about your religious honoured ones that you are ready to die for them would be perceived as bigotry in most modern world views. So, again I repeat my question, Is Islam by its inherent properties more bigoted, or it's a result of socio-economic evolution? Perhaps a lingering for the glorious past in the face of the more bleak present for the followers of the religion may be ?
Islam, by its inherent properties, is the most self respecting and practical religion, which fiercely protects its values and its people.

In Surah An-Nisa, Quran says that whoever kills a believer intentionally, will go to Hell for eternity.

And Hinduism, says kill your own if they are on the path of adharma.

Both Hinduism and Buddhism promote detachment, as for them life is full of sorrow and world is an illusion.

But Islam says that God created this world so that you can enjoy it responsibly.

I can't say which religion is best for after life, but Islam is the best religion for the mortal world.
 
Islam, by its inherent properties, is the most self respecting and practical religion, which fiercely protects its values and its people.

In Surah An-Nisa, Quran says that whoever kills a believer intentionally, will go to Hell for eternity.

And Hinduism, says kill your own if they are on the path of adharma.

Both Hinduism and Buddhism promote detachment, as for them life is full of sorrow and world is an illusion.

But Islam says that God created this world so that you can enjoy it responsibly.

I can't say which religion is best for after life, but Islam is the best religion for the mortal world.
What you are basically saying is that Islam is the most boring and simple to follow in the mortal world. " Brahmanda chhilo na jokhon. Mundomala kothai peli? " does Islam have any philosophical counter part to it where you even question your
God?
 
Islam, by its inherent properties, is the most self respecting and practical religion, which fiercely protects its values and its people.

In Surah An-Nisa, Quran says that whoever kills a believer intentionally, will go to Hell for eternity.

And Hinduism, says kill your own if they are on the path of adharma.

Both Hinduism and Buddhism promote detachment, as for them life is full of sorrow and world is an illusion.

But Islam says that God created this world so that you can enjoy it responsibly.

I can't say which religion is best for after life, but Islam is the best religion for the mortal world.
Why don't you convert to Islam then
 
What you are basically saying is that Islam is the most boring and simple to follow in the mortal world. " Brahmanda chhilo na jokhon. Mundomala kothai peli? " does Islam have any philosophical counter part to it where you even question your
God?
The proof of the pudding is in its eating. Since its inception Islam has growing the fastest. Even its competitors for the rule of the world, are its cousin abrahamic religions.

Your exciting and philosophical religions are losing their turf everyday. You have lost Bengal. Rabindra Sangeet could not prevent partition of Bengal. Rabindranath Thakur lost. Suhrawardy won. Whatever is left of bengali hindus is lost to Karl Marx and wokeism. Keep waiting for the end of your civilization pondering over philosophical questions.
 
The proof of the pudding is in its eating. Since its inception Islam has growing the fastest. Even its competitors for the rule of the world, are its cousin abrahamic religions.

Your exciting and philosophical religions are losing their turf everyday. You have lost Bengal. Rabindra Sangeet could not prevent partition of Bengal. Rabindranath Thakur lost. Suhrawardy won. Whatever is left of bengali hindus is lost to Karl Marx and wokeism. Keep waiting for the end of your civilization pondering over philosophical questions.
I keep reading that West Bengal is lost for Hindus. Is there any truth to it?
 
I keep reading that West Bengal is lost for Hindus. Is there any truth to it?
Not any truth. That is the whole truth. Bengali hindus have no homeland of their own. But they have turned their weakness and defeat into a virtue and spend time wondering about philosophy and feeling that their culture is superior.

If bengali hindus and bengali muslims could co exist, why was there a partition of bengal?
If bengali hindus and bengali muslims cannot co exist, then why are bengali hindus living under the veto power of bengali muslims?

But but but rabindra sangeet and philosophy. LOL
 
What makes you think that I care about turf wars between religions? As an atheist my only interest in religion is in the philosophical questions they give rise to. I find Nagarjuna's interpretation of Buddhism even more interesting than Hinduism. Abrahamic religions with its God created the world and gave a code of conduct to live world view simply bores me.
The proof of the pudding is in its eating. Since its inception Islam has growing the fastest. Even its competitors for the rule of the world, are its cousin abrahamic religions.

Your exciting and philosophical religions are losing their turf everyday. You have lost Bengal. Rabindra Sangeet could not prevent partition of Bengal. Rabindranath Thakur lost. Suhrawardy won. Whatever is left of bengali hindus is lost to Karl Marx and wokeism. Keep waiting for the end of your civilization pondering over philosophical questions.
 
What makes you think that I care about turf wars between religions? As an atheist my only interest in religion is in the philosophical questions they give rise to. I find Nagarjuna's interpretation of Buddhism even more interesting than Hinduism. Abrahamic religions with its God created the world and gave a code of conduct to live world view simply bores me.
I know you are not interested. I was mocking your lack of interest as the reason for the downfall of your civilization.

Atheism just means that you don't believe in God. It doesn't mean that you stop believing in your culture, the welfare of your people, your roots, your past and your community's future.

But alas, bong hindus, in their quest for philosophical supremacy, adopted atheism and threw away everything related to their identity. Oh except Rabindra Sangeet and Satyajit Ray and their food to still feel bengali.
 
Not any truth. That is the whole truth. Bengali hindus have no homeland of their own. But they have turned their weakness and defeat into a virtue and spend time wondering about philosophy and feeling that their culture is superior.

If bengali hindus and bengali muslims could co exist, why was there a partition of bengal?
If bengali hindus and bengali muslims cannot co exist, then why are bengali hindus living under the veto power of bengali muslims?

But but but rabindra sangeet and philosophy. LOL
That is depressing and sad.

A quick search shows that Muslims are 30% of West Bengal population. Hindu population is falling each decade by 2%. Is it illegal immigration that BJP cries about or just native Muslims having more kids?

Looks like Mamata Didi will never be dethroned.
 
This is the happiness you get?

Watch him stumble for words for another 5 years :misbah

Modi will stumble more for words for another decade of Rahul and his cronies cannot cross 100 in the next election too.
If this is the kind of entertainment he will provide for the next 5 years, I am all in. It's hilarious to see him with clipped wings and a stifled voice. :inti
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know you are not interested. I was mocking your lack of interest as the reason for the downfall of your civilization.

Atheism just means that you don't believe in God. It doesn't mean that you stop believing in your culture, the welfare of your people, your roots, your past and your community's future.

But alas, bong hindus, in their quest for philosophical supremacy, adopted atheism and threw away everything related to their identity. Oh except Rabindra Sangeet and Satyajit Ray and their food to still feel bengali.
Well, you can't really blame Rabindranath for being superior to most religions, can you?
 
Well, you can't really blame Rabindranath for being superior to most religions, can you?
Superior? Rabi Thakur was a loser, he ended up losing despite his best efforts. He didn't want partition of bengal and asked hindus and muslims to tie rakhi to each other and prove that they are united. But he ended up losing.

Talking about winners, Allama Iqbal was a winner. His ideology of a muslim homeland became true. His ideology still resonated and breathes. Rabindranaths inferior ideology is used only for boring bengali kavi sammelan where they mourn the death of their civilization.

Hindu bengali civilization is dead and buried.
 
Superior? Rabi Thakur was a loser, he ended up losing despite his best efforts. He didn't want partition of bengal and asked hindus and muslims to tie rakhi to each other and prove that they are united. But he ended up losing.

Talking about winners, Allama Iqbal was a winner. His ideology of a muslim homeland became true. His ideology still resonated and breathes. Rabindranaths inferior ideology is used only for boring bengali kavi sammelan where they mourn the death of their civilization.

Hindu bengali civilization is dead and buried.
Well what can you do about being so superior that idiots don't get you.
 
Superior? Rabi Thakur was a loser, he ended up losing despite his best efforts. He didn't want partition of bengal and asked hindus and muslims to tie rakhi to each other and prove that they are united. But he ended up losing.

Talking about winners, Allama Iqbal was a winner. His ideology of a muslim homeland became true. His ideology still resonated and breathes. Rabindranaths inferior ideology is used only for boring bengali kavi sammelan where they mourn the death of their civilization.

Hindu bengali civilization is dead and buried.
From your description of Rabindranath, it looks like he is another pacifist and softie like MK Gandhi. Another one sided love affair with Bengali Muslims.
 
From your description of Rabindranath, it looks like he is another pacifist and softie like MK Gandhi. Another one sided love affair with Bengali Muslims.
I will put him much above Morondas. At least he was a true intellectual and no shameful history like him. But he lived in his ivory tower. Even his literary works have very complex emotions and characters whom only elites can connect with.
 
From your description of Rabindranath, it looks like he is another pacifist and softie like MK Gandhi. Another one sided love affair with Bengali Muslims.

I find this disparaging view of Gandhi quite interesting. In Britain he was much admired and his non-violent protests were often lauded as the driving force behind India's independence. he brought down the British Raj if you believe media portrayals, and he is seen as a paragon of virtue.

But on the other hand, Brits themselves have always hero worshipped warrior PM's themselves, such as Winston Churchill who is seen as defeating Germany, and the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher who trounced Argentina over the Malvinas.

What does that tell you about their love for Mohatma Gandhi? :unsure:
 
I find this disparaging view of Gandhi quite interesting. In Britain he was much admired and his non-violent protests were often lauded as the driving force behind India's independence. he brought down the British Raj if you believe media portrayals, and he is seen as a paragon of virtue.

But on the other hand, Brits themselves have always hero worshipped warrior PM's themselves, such as Winston Churchill who is seen as defeating Germany, and the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher who trounced Argentina over the Malvinas.

What does that tell you about their love for Mohatma Gandhi? :unsure:
Any oppressive power will prefer a weakling like MK Gandhi over someone who fights back like Subhash Bose. Brits will not have to worry about losing their officers and army men when MKG is their opponent.

Gandhi took the credit for India's independence. Its the Congress narrative in India. Reality is, Brits were in position to rule over India after 2nd world war. The independence of India was bound to happen sooner or later.
 
Well well it was only a matter of time.

The issue here isn't Hinduism itself (even though there are many inconsistencies), the issue is optics within India.

Normal Hindus are now being generalised under the banner of Saffron terror, intolerance, and violence - and this is a legitimate concern given Modi is a right-wing nationalist with blood on his hands in the name of Hinduism.

Right-wing nationalism is never peaceful, and India governed by RSS/BGP is no exception.
 
I find this disparaging view of Gandhi quite interesting. In Britain he was much admired and his non-violent protests were often lauded as the driving force behind India's independence. he brought down the British Raj if you believe media portrayals, and he is seen as a paragon of virtue.

But on the other hand, Brits themselves have always hero worshipped warrior PM's themselves, such as Winston Churchill who is seen as defeating Germany, and the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher who trounced Argentina over the Malvinas.

What does that tell you about their love for Mohatma Gandhi? :unsure:
Morondas Ghandy did not bring down the British Raj. Many former colonies got independence without any MK Ghandy. And he was the last to raise demand for independence ( at the young age of 60). Till then he opposed any demand for independence. To put it in contex: Bhagat Singh was demanding independence 10 years ago. MKG was the last entrant to join the demand of independence.

The British loved him because he kept the masses under control. He stopped a non cooperation movement the moment a few policemen were killed ( all policemen were hindus and muslims who were happy to get a job from the British against their own countrymen). He was awarded by the British for his services. He campaigned across India asking indians to fight for the British in both world wars. He was the perfect British stooge. In his own letters he admits that he is a great admirer of the british and want to inculcate loyalty towards the British among every Indian.

I wish I was Godse. Would have slapped him till I was satisfied.
 
Well well it was only a matter of time.

The issue here isn't Hinduism itself (even though there are many inconsistencies), the issue is optics within India.

Normal Hindus are now being generalised under the banner of Saffron terror, intolerance, and violence - and this is a legitimate concern given Modi is a right-wing nationalist with blood on his hands in the name of Hinduism.

Right-wing nationalism is never peaceful, and India governed by RSS/BGP is no exception.
I also want "normal hindus" to get generalized under the banner of "Saffron terror".

Only then they will understand.
 
Morondas Ghandy did not bring down the British Raj. Many former colonies got independence without any MK Ghandy. And he was the last to raise demand for independence ( at the young age of 60). Till then he opposed any demand for independence. To put it in contex: Bhagat Singh was demanding independence 10 years ago. MKG was the last entrant to join the demand of independence.

The British loved him because he kept the masses under control. He stopped a non cooperation movement the moment a few policemen were killed ( all policemen were hindus and muslims who were happy to get a job from the British against their own countrymen). He was awarded by the British for his services. He campaigned across India asking indians to fight for the British in both world wars. He was the perfect British stooge. In his own letters he admits that he is a great admirer of the british and want to inculcate loyalty towards the British among every Indian.

I wish I was Godse. Would have slapped him till I was satisfied.
Bhagat Singh was a bamponthi.
 
Any oppressive power will prefer a weakling like MK Gandhi over someone who fights back like Subhash Bose. Brits will not have to worry about losing their officers and army men when MKG is their opponent.

Gandhi took the credit for India's independence. Its the Congress narrative in India. Reality is, Brits were in position to rule over India after 2nd world war. The independence of India was bound to happen sooner or later.
Always find it funny when Hindu nationalists try to appropriate Bose. Do you know what he thought about Hindu nationalists like Shyamaprasad ?
 
Bhagat Singh was a bamponthi.
When Communism was a new idea, many people were communists. Present day commies should not stake any claim on those people.

They had not seen how even communists were going to become. Communists must be purged.
 
Always find it funny when Hindu nationalists try to appropriate Bose. Do you know what he thought about Hindu nationalists like Shyamaprasad ?
Bose was our Fuhrer. His shaking hands with Hitler, and being called Netaji (hindi for Fuhrer) is very fitting.
 
So you can admire someone ONLY if that person also admires you back?
Just that if Bose was alive today he would be the biggest opponent to Bjp. So don't try to claim him as one of your own. Remember, INA had units named after Gandhi and Nehru, none after Savarkar.
 
Just that if Bose was alive today he would be the biggest opponent to Bjp. So don't try to claim him as one of your own. Remember, INA had units named after Gandhi and Nehru, none after Savarkar.
That is your imagination, based on the assumption that peoples views in 1930s and 1940s would have remained the same despite lots of newer information.

Well if Nehru was alive today, he would be the biggest opponent of Congress. Today's congress is advocating the same things Nehru opposed.
 
Any oppressive power will prefer a weakling like MK Gandhi over someone who fights back like Subhash Bose. Brits will not have to worry about losing their officers and army men when MKG is their opponent.

Gandhi took the credit for India's independence. Its the Congress narrative in India. Reality is, Brits were in position to rule over India after 2nd world war. The independence of India was bound to happen sooner or later.

Brits have always preferred Indians to Pakistanis, hence why they curse the Pakistanis with the well known abbreviation followed by the term for illegitemate children, and praise Indians for their willingness to integrate.
 
Brits have always preferred Indians to Pakistanis, hence why they curse the Pakistanis with the well known abbreviation followed by the term for illegitemate children, and praise Indians for their willingness to integrate.
Because the Indian will do their dishes, take their dog for a walk and clean its poop.
The Pakistani will run away with the Britisher's wife.
 
I find this disparaging view of Gandhi quite interesting. In Britain he was much admired and his non-violent protests were often lauded as the driving force behind India's independence. he brought down the British Raj if you believe media portrayals, and he is seen as a paragon of virtue.

But on the other hand, Brits themselves have always hero worshipped warrior PM's themselves, such as Winston Churchill who is seen as defeating Germany, and the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher who trounced Argentina over the Malvinas.

What does that tell you about their love for Mohatma Gandhi? :unsure:
It says what Indians have realised , he was a pawn to keep Indians meek.

West has most capable defence force and yet lectures on peace and promotes such idea.

Guardian talks about how BCCI is authoritarian but forgets the veto power England had forever.

West has shown where they stand when their interests are not met with Israel Palestine and Russia, no country should listen to them.

Having said that individual rights are unbeatable in the west if you are their citizen irrespective of color.
 
Well well it was only a matter of time.

The issue here isn't Hinduism itself (even though there are many inconsistencies), the issue is optics within India.

Normal Hindus are now being generalised under the banner of Saffron terror, intolerance, and violence - and this is a legitimate concern given Modi is a right-wing nationalist with blood on his hands in the name of Hinduism.

Right-wing nationalism is never peaceful, and India governed by RSS/BGP is no exception.
And that’s ok if they are.. no one cares about west thinks anymore after Israel Palestine hypocrisy.
 
So glad people didn’t give into Raga like they did for Rajiv Indira Nehru.
 
I also want "normal hindus" to get generalized under the banner of "Saffron terror".

Only then they will understand.
The reality is a few bad apples do ruin it for the majority. That's just how the media works.

This is why I want Modi to be in power for as long as possible. The longer he is PM, the longer he exposes Hindutva for what it really is, and how detrimental it is for - secular and plural - India.
 
The reality is a few bad apples do ruin it for the majority. That's just how the media works.

This is why I want Modi to be in power for as long as possible. The longer he is PM, the longer he exposes Hindutva for what it really is, and how detrimental it is for - secular and plural - India.
I want Sanghis like me to give such a bad name to the secular hindus, that they face troubles and get hatred from muslims who will mistake them as bad hindus. I support any muslim who insults secular hindu pajeets thinking they are sanghis.
 
It says what Indians have realised , he was a pawn to keep Indians meek.

West has most capable defence force and yet lectures on peace and promotes such idea.

Guardian talks about how BCCI is authoritarian but forgets the veto power England had forever.

West has shown where they stand when their interests are not met with Israel Palestine and Russia, no country should listen to them.

Having said that individual rights are unbeatable in the west if you are their citizen irrespective of color.

But this is also indicative of the Indian willingness to accept that subservient role, even during my time on this website I saw many Indians mock Pakistanis for their lack of integration and bragging about how well Indians integrated in comparison. But for the British of course integration means you tacitly accept their superiority. Which to be fair, Indians have always done.

Brits themselves of course will never integrate anywhere. Why would they when they believe they are superior? If a Brit goes to India he will wear shorts and his wife will wear a dress, and they will sip martinis or a cold beer. By the time he has left, half of the Indian neighbourhood will be abandoning choori pajamas and saris for jeans and skirts and keeping small dogs as pets.
 
But this is also indicative of the Indian willingness to accept that subservient role, even during my time on this website I saw many Indians mock Pakistanis for their lack of integration and bragging about how well Indians integrated in comparison. But for the British of course integration means you tacitly accept their superiority. Which to be fair, Indians have always done.

Brits themselves of course will never integrate anywhere. Why would they when they believe they are superior? If a Brit goes to India he will wear shorts and his wife will wear a dress, and they will sip martinis or a cold beer. By the time he has left, half of the Indian neighbourhood will be abandoning choori pajamas and saris for jeans and skirts and keeping small dogs as pets.
My point is promotion of pacifism and non violence.
Integration , assimilation are different but who knows you might be right there too.
 
Days after Rahul Gandhi sparked controversy with his first speech as Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, Swami Avimukteshwarananda, the 46th Shankaracharya of Jyotir Math, backed the Congress leader's comments on Sunday

During the debate on the Motion of Thanks for the President's address in Parliament, Rahul Gandhi accused BJP leaders of dividing people along communal lines. Prime Minister Narendra Modi responded by saying that Gandhi had called the "entire Hindu community violent."

Reacting to the controversy, Swami Avimukteshwarananda asserted that Gandhi's speech did not contradict Hinduism. "We heard Rahul Gandhi's entire speech. He is clearly saying that there is no place for violence in Hinduism," he said.

Source: NDTV
 
Always find it funny when Hindu nationalists try to appropriate Bose. Do you know what he thought about Hindu nationalists like Shyamaprasad ?
No Hindu Nationalist calls Bose as a Pro-Hindu guy. We appreciate him for his efforts to get freedom from British.
 
Days after Rahul Gandhi sparked controversy with his first speech as Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, Swami Avimukteshwarananda, the 46th Shankaracharya of Jyotir Math, backed the Congress leader's comments on Sunday

During the debate on the Motion of Thanks for the President's address in Parliament, Rahul Gandhi accused BJP leaders of dividing people along communal lines. Prime Minister Narendra Modi responded by saying that Gandhi had called the "entire Hindu community violent."

Reacting to the controversy, Swami Avimukteshwarananda asserted that Gandhi's speech did not contradict Hinduism. "We heard Rahul Gandhi's entire speech. He is clearly saying that there is no place for violence in Hinduism," he said.

Source: NDTV
Rahul Gandhi and Congress divides Hindus on caste lines. They always pit Upper Caste against Dalits and Lower caste. Almost all Leftie parties does it and they do it openly. But the moment BJP tries to consolidate Hindu vote, they become communal.

The biggest threat to India are these lefties who try to destroy Hindus from within. Not to forget their appeasement for minorities which they have done for almost 60 years.
 
^ Continuing to what this Avimuktesh or whatever his name is, undue violence is not justified. You have to first use peaceful talks to sort out issues. If the bad guys do not understand peace, then you have to do Dharma Yudha(war) to establish the rightful dharma.

Lord Rama did not do Satyagraha near Lanka border to get back Sita. He had to wage a war against Ravana after the peace talks with Vibhishana (Ravana's brother) failed.

Pandavas did not do Satyagraha to get their kingdom back. They had to wage war to get their rightful share of the Empire when peace talks involving Lord Krishna failed.

Seriously man. These religious gurus are a disgrace. They should stick to preaching scriptures. Politics is not their cup of tea.
 
I also want "normal hindus" to get generalized under the banner of "Saffron terror".

Only then they will understand.


Trouble is that many will only point fingers at the conservative right wing Hindus. People like Sai Deepak and Anand Ranganathan are still rare and their reach is limited.
 
RaGa talking non sense as usual.

Hindu is not just sitting and watching everyone slap you around and you do nothing about it. If RaGa had read Bhagawad Geeta at least once he would know that it is the Dharma aka duty of every warrior to fight Adharma or untruth.

Perhaps RaGa learned his Hinduism from Nehra and Gandhi. They show the other cheek if the bad guy slaps you on one cheek.
So Hindus have been sitting around and getting slapped in their own country til Modi came and rescued y”all?
Is that the premise of your defense of Modi? Or the premise for the utter nature of Hindus in their own country? I’m confused
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In a controversial statement on Monday, July 8, Karnataka BJP MLA Bharat Shetty made headlines by suggesting that Leader of the Opposition (LoP) Rahul Gandhi should be locked up and slapped inside the Parliament over his alleged anti-Hindu remarks.

Addressing the issue, Mangalore City North MLA Shetty declared, “LoP Rahul Gandhi should be locked up and slapped inside Parliament. This act will lead to the filing of seven to eight FIRs. If LoP Rahul Gandhi comes to Mangaluru city, we will arrange the same for him.”

Accusing Rahul Gandhi of holding a picture of the Hindu god Shiva, Shetty expressed, “madman does not know that if Lord Shiva opened his third eye, he (LoP) would turn into ashes. They have adopted an anti-Hindu policy. It is evident that LoP Rahul Gandhi is a madman. He thinks that Hindus will quietly listen to whatever he says about them. If he ‘barks’ in Parliament, the local leaders will start wagging their tails here.”

Emphasising BJP's duty to protect Hindu religion and institutions, Shetty warned that the Congress has begun to convey that Hindus and Hindutva are different. He said that Hindus will face danger in the future because of such leaders.

Further alleging that Rahul Gandhi changes his stance based on the region he visits, Shetty claimed, “When he comes to Gujarat, LoP Rahul Gandhi becomes an ardent devotee of Lord Shiva.”

Commenting on Rahul Gandhi's performance in the recent general elections, Shetty remarked, “After getting only 99 Lok Sabha seats in the general election, LoP Rahul Gandhi is claiming to have made a great achievement.”

Source: India TV News
 
What else could one expect in BJP government although Swami Avimukteshwarananda stated earlier that his speech didn't contradict Hinduism.
 
Thankfully it was only a verbal threat. He should be punished for his threats of physical harm. But nothing will happen.

It is quite common in South Indian political circle to make such statements. MLA's routinely call for garlanding their opponents with Chappals and parading them. Threats of shaving opponents head half way to throwing rotten tomatoes and eggs is also very common. It is accepted in political circles.
 
I have seen some South Indians movie in the past they always promote fighting and violent stuff lol.
Thankfully it was only a verbal threat. He should be punished for his threats of physical harm. But nothing will happen.

It is quite common in South Indian political circle to make such statements. MLA's routinely call for garlanding their opponents with Chappals and parading them. Threats of shaving opponents head half way to throwing rotten tomatoes and eggs is also very common. It is accepted in political circles.
 
Addressing the issue, Mangalore City North MLA Shetty declared, “LoP Rahul Gandhi should be locked up and slapped inside Parliament. This act will lead to the filing of seven to eight FIRs. If LoP Rahul Gandhi comes to Mangaluru city, we will arrange the same for him.”

Accusing Rahul Gandhi of holding a picture of the Hindu god Shiva, Shetty expressed, “madman does not know that if Lord Shiva opened his third eye, he (LoP) would turn into ashes. They have adopted an anti-Hindu policy. It is evident that LoP Rahul Gandhi is a madman. He thinks that Hindus will quietly listen to whatever he says about them. If he ‘barks’ in Parliament, the local leaders will start wagging their tails here.”


Source: India TV News
@Bhaag Viru Bhaag in that case how should be BJP members treated like one who who suggest massacres for a cow head carried by a dog
 
Unbelievable..he has been booked for it lol
====
BJP MLA Bharath Shetty has been booked for his alleged comments against Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, police said on Wednesday

At a press conference here, Mangaluru City Police Commissioner Anupam Agarwal said that an FIR has been filed by the police in Kavoor police station over the complaint lodged by K Anil, a Congress corporator of the Mangaluru City Corporation.

In the complaint, the Congress corporator alleged that MLA Bharath Shetty had made a provocative statement taking the name of Rahul Gandhi.

Agarwal said an investigation is on.

Meanwhile, Congress party workers and leaders on Wednesday continued their tirade against Shetty over his remarks against their party leader.

At a gathering in Surathkal on Sunday, the BJP MLA, who represents Mangaluru City North had stated that Gandhi should be "arrested inside Parliament and slapped". This statement had gone viral, and Congress leaders and workers expressed their displeasure over it in the media and on social media.

Addressing a press conference here, Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) Working President Manjunath Bhandary took a dig at the BJP MLA asking, "How will he enter Parliament? Will he carry a weapon to attack the Leader of the Opposition? Is Shetty a terrorist?”

He further said, “I am certain that Bharath Shetty cannot even talk straight to a common worker of the Congress party, let alone confront Rahul Gandhi."

Bhandary attributed the main cause of BJP leaders' and legislators' outburst at Rahul Gandhi to Prime Minister Narendra Modi referring to the Congress leader as ‘balak buddhi’ (childish). This term must be expunged, he added.

He said that due to the behavior of BJP MLAs in Dakshina Kannada district in recent days, "we are ashamed to elect MLAs from the coast". He accused the BJP of plotting riots because they "cannot accept the presence of the Congress government in the state".

Source: Deccan Heralds
 
Back
Top