Narendra Modi - protector of Hindutva?
This is not an anti-Hindu post.
This is not a pro-Muslim post.
This is not a BJP vs Congress post.
This is about Narendra Modi and Hindutva
Please keep that in mind when leaving comments.
Now that I have cleared that, I want to ask all you people who are proud to be Hindu’s, are you also proud of the so called ‘protectors’ of Hinduism via 'hindutva'?
The Tehelka Exposure has left us in no doubt of the Gujrat Goverment's hand in orchestrating the cold blooded massacre in 2002. There is no room for debate on that front anymore.
Members of the VHP, Bajrand Dal and Shiv sena confess with pride their hand in the cold murder of Muslim men, women and children. They raped them, cut their limbs and burnt them. Just an instance: Babu Bajrangi, then VHP leader, current Shiv Sena Leader, brags that he ripped open the stomach of a pregnant woman.
I have grown up with an adequate exposure to the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the Geeta. The amount any regular Hindu is exposed to in this country. I don’t think Hinduism professes cold murder of random people of other religions to retaliate against the acts of a few. Defenitely not in a torturous, brutal manner - rape, cutting limbs.
If the killings in Gujrat, are in accordance with Hinduism, I can’t be proud to be a Hindu.
Thankfully, they are not.
These killings are in accordance with the grotesque philosophies that guide certain politicians and their parties. These philosophies allow them to stoop to any level to suit their agenda. They manipulate facts to generate a hatred and xenophobia which subsequently allows them to kill in the name of God and later justify it.
What is sad is that the killers, blinded by a frenzy for blood, constantly repeated the name of ‘Sriram’. This is, to my eyes, no different from the Taliban. They too impose atrocities in the name of their God.
Any self-respecting Hindu can not possibly support Modi or the above-mentioned parties just like no self-respecting Muslim can support the Taliban or terrorsim. My heart will bleed for this country if Modi is elected to power again. Because he is damn good at polarising the state.
Supporting these parties (that use 'Hindutva' to supposedly protect Hinduism) is equivalent to supporting a pollution of Hinduism itself. Do you see the irony?
Comments
It certainly matters what happened in the history, since as the great writer George Santyana says “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Jihad is always used offensively rather than defensively, I have given enough proof for it…and its not my mistake you have no patience or the intelligent enough to understand it.
As I said you can be a ‘couch’ potato and make idiotic statements in the name freedom of speech. Loss is not mine.
India is a Hindu majority state in spite if Muslim oppression because of Hindutva. People like Shivaji, Rana Pratap Singh and Guru Gobind Singh. It is still a Hindu majority because of Hindutva.
Vote bank politics in the name if Equality and Democracy has made India weak and made Islamic fundamentalism get a nice breeding ground. So what you talk is utter nonsense.
Since, you have become lost in your own make-believe world and sternly refuse to listen to the words of reason…I will not waste anymore time then it is necessary.
So you’re History knowledge is not better than a CBSE history book, I think you have lot to read before writing nonsense bullshit with a limited knowledge.
If you say all the news reports are all true without reservation, than I can only sympathize you’re pathetic state.
The only vagueness is from you, who have nothing substantial to say. It is disgusting to see you do not read any books or literature and rely on nonsense bullshit dished out by TV channels
One of you is making up stuff. I believe CBSE.
You say,
"Jihad is always used offensively rather than defensively, I have given enough proof for it…"
I don't trust your source of information atall. One just needs to watch 10 minutes of "Peace TV" to know what Islam really preaches today.
yes, i watch 2-3 hours of TV everyday. i have no problem if that makes me a couch potato...
You say,
"India continues to remain a hindu majority state thanks to hindutva."
This means that your story about "hindu's sufferering at the hands of muslims for years..." is flawed. We were constatnly retaliating.
However today things have changed.
Islam has nothing to do with offending other religions.
However, both muslims and hindus have realised that many on both sides like to live in the past and never allow the hatred to cease.
Our collective fight is against such fundamentalists on both sides.
From the whole comments posted on the blog I think Shiva has got the message clearly across to everyone and Pooja has accepted she has limited knowledge on History...and her writing is at the best mediocre.
Samurai does not have anything to say but give websites links and articles written by other people. Its a plagiarism of the worst kind.
Shiva, as I said earlier, there is no point talking folks who have no brains or wit to come with something worthwhile....stop wasting your time buddy.
I have repeated around 5 times that i am NOT against Hindusim.
Yet, you continue to comprehend that i am against hinduism.
That explains the reason behind your standpoint. You only see waht you want to see.
Jitender,
I beg to differ.
I think Samurai has a more holistic overview of history than Shiva.
Shiva's view of history is skewed against Islam and limited to only one side of the story
Let alone the past, even with current affairs, Shiva refuses to acknowledge certain facts about the 2002 riots.
"Hindutve and Hinduism are one the same according to Supreme Court judgment"
This would have been your first comment, had it been a TRUE statement.
And here I go for the nth time:
I, POOJA NAIR, AM AGAINST FUNDAMENTALISM - of any kind.
You call the holistic view of history "boristic".
Clearly, you only enjoy the aspect of history that builds your case against muslims and islam. You find any other information a waste of time.
Which is why your knowledge is one-sided and i'm afraid, not good-enough to make oonclusions/judgements.