Sugar and salt are damaging the health of Americans by raising blood pressure and cholesterol -- and regulation may be the only way to help, researchers agree.
Two reports published on Tuesday take aim at the much-loved ingredients and add to a growing body of scientific opinion that Americans won't be able to eat more healthily without help from the food industry.
Americans have been eating more and more sugar and salt in recent decades and most of it is not sprinkled on food. It is in the burgers, sodas and processed foods that are hastily gobbled by adults and children alike, the reports show.
Education efforts to help Americans cut down on salt have not worked and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration should start regulating the industry to help remove it from food, a panel at the Institute of Medicine said.
Regulators and the food industry agree that Americans cannot give up salt cold-turkey and will have to be gradually weaned off it. Sodium adds flavor and texture to food to make it palatable and can extend its shelf life.
In another study Dr. Miriam Vos of Emory School of Medicine in Georgia and colleagues found that the more sugar people ate, the worse their cholesterol levels.
"Just like eating a high-fat diet can increase your levels of triglycerides and high cholesterol, eating sugar can also affect those same lipids," Vos said in a statement.
Studies have shown Americans are eating and drinking far more sugar than in years past. The use of processed sugar products like high fructose corn syrup can be linked directly to diabetes rates.
The food and restaurant industry has been lobbying for self-regulation, arguing that Americans need to control their own eating habits. But the science shows it is difficult to eat a typical American diet without consuming too much salt and sugar.
MANDATORY POLICY
The trend points in one direction: more regulation of food.
While a move to limit sugar is not imminent, Iowa Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut said they would push the FDA to crack down on salt, which clearly contributes to an epidemic of high blood pressure.
"What we're all hoping is this is going to be federal policy so it becomes mandatory. I think slow and steady is the right way to go," Dr. Alice Lichtenstein of the American Heart Association said in a telephone interview.
"If across the board reductions in sodium in our food supply become law, then I think a gradual, stepwise approach is probably best in the long run to ensure that it actually happens and there is acceptance from the people."
New York City, which has banned smoking and artificial trans-fats in restaurants, has pledged to coordinate a nationwide effort to reduce salt in restaurant and packaged foods by 25 percent over five years.
As for sugar, California state Senator Dean Florez introduced legislation in February to tax sodas and other sugar-sweetened drinks and use the proceeds to bankroll programs to fight childhood obesity.
California has also imposed menu-labeling rules and banned trans-fats in restaurants and on soda sales in public schools.
The American Beverage Association, whose members include Coca-Cola (KO.N) and Kraft Foods (KFT.N) have strongly, and successfully, opposed efforts to tax soda.
However the food industry has been more amenable to offering lower-salt foods and the FDA suggests it will work with manufacturers to make the transition painless.
The Obama Administration and Congress have shown strong appetites for regulating the food and restaurant industry. Newhealthcare reform legislation requires large chain restaurants to give calorie counts on menus.
(Additional reporting by Julie Steenhuysen in Chicago; editing by Chris Wilson)
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Terrorists do have a Religion!
The Politicians say Terrorists have no Religion. Bull shit ! Terrorists Do have Religion. Simply see the percentage of terror crimes committed by the followers of a particular Religion. You will find the answer. What you pray daily is deeply inscribed in you which makes you a Human Being or a Terrorist !
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Dr. Harsh Kumar, MD (Radiation Oncology, AIIMS)...No More!
Dear Harsh,
What a shock you have given to all of us, Man ? Only yesterday I had forwarded an email to your entire team regarding Mumbai Attacks not knowing that you are planning to depart from all of us forever leaving all near and dear stunned. What an irreparable loss to your family ( Shalini & your Parents ), friends , society & above all to the Nation as a whole ! What a brilliant person, what a fantastic friend and what a gem amongst human beings ! Our earnest prayers to the Almighty God to send this noble soul again in the service of Nation at the earliest & give strength to the entire family and friends to bear this huge sudden loss !
With Sincerest Condolences,
Warm Regards & Best Wishes,
Dr. Rajesh K. Bhatia,
California, USA. Ph. 408-373-5579
Please visit:
http://akhandbharti.blogspot.com/
( For news & views & your comments )
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504700359&ref=name
http://www.linkedin.com/myprofile?goback=.ail
http://twitter.com/drrajeshbhatia
What a shock you have given to all of us, Man ? Only yesterday I had forwarded an email to your entire team regarding Mumbai Attacks not knowing that you are planning to depart from all of us forever leaving all near and dear stunned. What an irreparable loss to your family ( Shalini & your Parents ), friends , society & above all to the Nation as a whole ! What a brilliant person, what a fantastic friend and what a gem amongst human beings ! Our earnest prayers to the Almighty God to send this noble soul again in the service of Nation at the earliest & give strength to the entire family and friends to bear this huge sudden loss !
With Sincerest Condolences,
Warm Regards & Best Wishes,
Dr. Rajesh K. Bhatia,
California, USA. Ph. 408-373-5579
Please visit:
http://akhandbharti.blogspot.com/
( For news & views & your comments )
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504700359&ref=name
http://www.linkedin.com/myprofile?goback=.ail
http://twitter.com/drrajeshbhatia
Monday, April 12, 2010
Sania Mirza: The disgraced icon !
Sania Mirza is No More an Indian Role Model. She did not care about National Sentiments. She should be divested of all National duties with Immediate Effect. But Impotent and Spineless Indian Leaders will not take any stand for National Honour as usual. They will just weigh this issue in number of plus-minus votes.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Gujrat carnage: the predatory 'intelligentsia'
The events in Gujarat recently have been extremely deplorable. Nobody covered themselves with glory. The murders in Godhra were an outrage, a crime against humanity. The riots that followed were also a crime against humanity. The perpetrators should be found, tried and punished forthwith. And the State failed miserably in its duty and responsibility of protecting its citizens and of dealing with the criminals.
But the self-proclaimed 'intelligentsia' has been equally at fault: it has attempted to mislead the public with its biased and one-sided perorations.
The gullible public has been misled: I have seen several people suggest that they are 'ashamed to be Hindu' or 'ashamed to be Indian'. This is ridiculous: if you are ashamed to be a Hindu because of what happened in Godhra and Gujarat, then you were not a Hindu to begin with. For, otherwise you would be sharing the pain of Hindu pilgrims being burnt alive. Do not blame the religion for your own frailty, lack of self-confidence. In contrast, not a single Muslim (including famous bleeding heart Shabana Azmi) said he/she was 'ashamed to be a Muslim' because of 9/11 or Godhra. All they said was that the attacks were un-Islamic. Okay, so Gujarat's riots are un-Hindu, the rioters are not Hindus, thank you very much, we can all rest easy now.
There is an interesting situation in the Indian media: whenever a single Hindu does anything obnoxious, it is supposed to show how horrible Hinduism is. On the other hand, if any Christian or Muslim anywhere does a single good thing, it is celebrated as proving the goodness of the religion. Why? Aren't these just individual acts?
Those who are 'ashamed to be Hindu' should consider formally converting to the religion of their choice, be it Marxism, Christianity or Islam. Those who are 'ashamed to be Indian' should consider emigrating. Really, nobody made you India's ambassador or anointed representative: you should feel free to seek citizenship in China, Saudi Arabia or America, for instance.
The proximate cause of the Godhra incident, according to the 'intelligentsia', is the effort in Ayodhya to revive the Ram temple. And the proximate cause of the ensuing riots in Gujarat, according to the 'intelligentsia', is the alleged nature of the so-called Hindu fundamentalists, a term that is, in passing, an oxymoron: the fundamentals of Hinduism are tolerance and plurality, so a 'Hindu fundamentalist' is a contradiction in terms.
On the contrary, a very good case can be made that there are several layers of causes: the proximate cause, the preponderant cause, and the root cause.
The proximate cause is general Hindu frustration.
The preponderant cause is endemic Islamic fundamentalism, the deleterious results of which we see everywhere in the world: fuelled by intolerant petro-dollar Wah'abism from Saudi Arabia, Muslims have turned violently intolerant against both minorities and majorities everywhere.
The root cause in India is the decision circa 1947 by the Nehruvian Stalinists to impose apartheid against Hindus, by oppressing them in every conceivable way:
* by looting Hindu temples through control of their finances (and only theirs; while providing largesse for others); wealthy churches and mosques get huge amounts of foreign money for conversion purposes, but this is not even audited;
* by declaring open season for conversion, which is clearly violence against Hindus because only they are victimised and are never the proselytisers;
* by discriminating against them by only allowing non-Hindus to run educational institutions (thus preparing the way for generations of Hindus to be brainwashed and alienated);
* by delegitimising and destroying Sanskrit and Indological studies;
* by creating and assiduously cultivating a negative Marxist interpretation of Hinduism and making it the state-supported official view;
* by continuously insulting Hindu tradition by labelling it primitive and superstitious, whereas it is highly rational and scientific;
* by negating Hindu history itself and brushing under the carpet massive Islamic and Christian damage done to it;
* by ignoring all human rights violations against Hindus;
* by propagating as State ideology something called 'secularism', which in essence means oppression of Hindus.
In effect, there is jaziya, or a Muslim religious tax, on Hindus. The status of Hindus today is roughly what prevailed under the Muslim tyrant Aurangzeb. In 50 years, Jawaharlal Nehru's policies have also created an entire cadre of people who are intellectually colonised, who have built up their careers on Marxist dogma that has been proven utterly wrong everywhere in the world. These children of Marx and Macaulay have nothing but contempt for Hindus.
I would like to ask all those petitioning the Human Rights Commission and the Commission on Minorities about 50,000 Muslim refugees in Gujarat, and ask those august bodies themselves, what about the damage done to Hindus in Jammu & Kashmir? Every day, we hear of a few Hindus murdered there, and they are clearly minorities in J&K. Why aren't the commissions visiting Rajouri and Doda or the refugee camps in Delhi where 700,000 Kashmiri Pandits have lived in pitiful conditions for an entire decade? I will tell you why: Hindu suffering doesn't matter.
The attitude of the 'intelligentsia' can only be explained by assuming that Hindu lives are less valuable than Muslim lives. This, in fact, mirrors what the Saudis believe (see The Wall Street Journal, April 9, 2002), and therefore buttresses the charge of dhimmitude against the Indian 'secular' 'progressives'. In Saudi Arabia, there is the concept of blood money. If a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay blood money or compensation, as follows:
* 100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
* 50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
* 50,000 riyals if a Christian man
* 25,000 riyals if a Christian woman
* 6,666 riyals if a Hindu man
* 3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman
That is, a Muslim man's life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman. This is clearly the view of the Indian 'intelligentsia' as well; for they have made 33,000 times as much noise over the death of even a Muslim rioter in Gujarat as over the torching of a Hindu pilgrim woman in Godhra.
I find this discriminatory valuation of human life deeply offensive to the core. But this is the fact in the Indian media; I wrote about this in a column The value of a human life. The life of each human life should be valued at exactly the same. Why is the life of some Australian missionary considered so much more valuable than the lives of the Hindu priest and Buddhist priest murdered in Bangladesh last week? Have you even heard of this in the Indian media? Of course not!
All this has led to a perception among some sections of Hindus that they have no rights, and that therefore they have no responsibility to, or stake in, civil society. They have begun to perceive what amounts to a gross conspiracy against them, perpetuated by the State and the chatterati. They have a grievance. Gujarat is the result. The 'intelligentsia' who readily accept that Muslims, or Palestinians, or blacks in the US, have legitimate grievances, will not accept that Hindus may have legitimate grievances too.
As the Nehruvians have sown, we reap in Gujarat today.
As the Nehruvians sowed in Punjab, we reaped during the troubles there. It is worth remembering, now that Baisakhi and Jallianwallah Bagh Day have just come and gone, that the same ugly combination of State and media succeeded in converting the most patriotic of Indians, the Sikhs (a section of them, to be precise) into enemies of the nation. See my earlier column, Remember Jallianwallah Bagh! Incidentally, I would like to request that the International Court of Justice be moved to bring charges of war crimes against the British queen for Jallianwallah Bagh.
I received several hundred emails about a previous column Godhra, 'secular' 'progressives' and politics, most of it positive; but a number of people took exception to my suggestion that the Americans would take a very dim view of violence by minorities. I said that if a bunch of Muslims torched a Greyhound bus, they would round up and incarcerate all Muslims in the US in concentration camps.
My correspondents disagreed, suggesting that Muslims killed a lot of people on 9/11, Black Thursday, and that despite this, Americans did not retaliate in general against Muslims. Ah, but they are wrong. The situations aren't entirely comparable. 9/11 was not an attack on Americans by Americans, it was clearly perpetrated by 'others:' foreigners, Arabs, Muslims. Whereas in Godhra it was Indian citizens murdering Indian citizens.
And some ordinary Americans did take revenge on Muslims and others like Sikhs who they thought were Muslims. It is true that this was not widespread, but that was because they had full confidence in the ability of the American State to take revenge. They did not have to resort to acts of individual violence as there would assuredly be revenge. And there was. Can you say the same in India? Is there any chance whatsoever that the perpetrators of Godhra will ever be identified and caught? Absolutely none!
And surely my correspondents must be kidding when they say that Americans did not retaliate. What do you call the 10,000 reportedly killed in Afghanistan by the American-led force? Estimates vary all over the place from 5,000 to 50,000 civilians killed in the brief but bitter Afghan 'War against Terrorism'. What was (is?) going on there is State-sponsored retaliation, overwhelming and punitive force directed by the American state against foreigners, Afghans, Muslims, civilians.
It so happens that the US government will not attack Arabs because of other compulsions, namely, oil; so they went ahead and massacred whichever Muslims were easy prey. And they did so with such good propaganda that the world applauds them. Nobody weeps for the innocent bystanders who perished in the thousands in Afghanistan. So Muslims killed 3,000 in the US, the US killed 10,000 Muslims. This is not retaliation? A kill ratio of 1:3? And they are planning to kill more Muslims in Iraq (not to mention the 500,000 children already murdered there in a decade of sanctions.)
Retaliation is an ugly thing. No one can justify the torching of 58 Hindu pilgrims at Godhra by a Muslim mob; and no one can justify the riots that ensued in retaliation. This is something most sane people would agree on. The suffering of innocents, on both sides of the religious divide, is a blot on civilization. It is also true that the State of Gujarat has appeared to be helpless at best, and predatory at worst.
But there are several points I would like to raise. One is the endemic and brutal unfairness in the media. The media should have a simple criterion: are innocent Indians getting hurt? If so, the media should raise its powerful voice against it. The media should be colour-blind as they say in the US, or religion-blind as the case should be in India. When Hindus are systematically massacred in Jammu & Kashmir or ethnically cleansed in Tripura, when Sikhs are butchered in Delhi, when Muslims are killed in Gujarat, there should be equal vehemence on the part of the media. They should not discriminate.
But they do. They are diabolically one-sided. When I wrote my columns Blaming the Hindu victim, and "Godhra, 'secular' 'progressives' and politics", I simply followed a tactic made infamous by the 'secular' 'progressives' in the media: being one-sided and downplaying the fears and concerns of the other side. For instance, in literally thousands of articles and opinion pieces published by them, they say, "Godhra was deplorable", dismiss the horror with that, and then go on to write thousands of words about what happened in the ensuing riots. This is certainly lip service.
The 'secular' 'progressives' always mouth meaningless platitudes when there is aggression against Hindus. Then why isn't it perfectly legitimate for me, in reverse, to weep for Hindus, and to downplay aggression against Muslims? And I am one of only a pathetic handful of columnists who worry about Hindus at all. I noticed that a few 'secularists' got quite angry with what I said. Can you -- and you know who you are -- see how one-sided your own cherished values are? Do you realize that you have been brainwashed by the prevailing orthodoxy into accepting gross discrimination?
This brainwashing comes across in a series of exhibits I would like to present to you, mostly related to the burning of the Sabarmati Express at Godhra, and one relating to the ensuing riots in Gujarat. I must thank reader Kaleem (a propagandist for Islam) for bringing several of these to my attention. Others too keep sending these to me as if they proved something. In fact, they prove gullibility on the part of the senders. You have been conned, folks, by the unscrupulous media. Even though Varsha Bhosle exposed some of these as fabrications some time ago, new ones have come up, and clearly a lot of people still swear by them as the gospel truth. Stop being so gullible, will you? Think!
In the following, you can see the chain of quotations: how a fabrication from one source is repeated ad nauseam until it becomes the 'truth.' Truly Goebbelsian: say a simple thing again and again until it becomes the truth -- "truth by repeated assertion". Reminds me of the Upanishadic story of dogs forming a circle biting each other's tails.
Arun Shourie recounts the tale of how the leftist chatterati do the same thing often. There was a story of how Aurangzeb allegedly demolished the Kashi Viswanath temple in Benares "on the request of a Hindu Rajput queen". A number of 'eminent historians' asserted this, each quoting another of their tribe, each quote making the story appear more and more solid. The indefatigable Shourie finally located the source: a grey eminence who said he had heard about an old Muslim man who had a parchment which proved this; said grey eminence never saw the document and then the old man died! Pure hearsay, but the story had become an accepted 'truth' meanwhile.
Consider the following exhibits:
Exhibit A: Rajeel Sheikh's report on the Islamic site, ummahnews.org, dated March 2
Exhibit B: The anonymous email purportedly based on a report by Anil Soni, a journalist, undated and unsigned
Exhibit C: Peter Popham's report in The Independent of the UK
Exhibit D: Rajiv Chandrasekharan's report in The Washington Post
Exhibit E: Harsh Mander's article in The Hindustan Times and elsewhere
Exhibit A is from a site meant to rally the Muslim faithful. Here are a few excerpts about what allegedly happened in the Godhra railway station:
The kar sevaks started a quarrel with this stallholder too. While beating him and pulling his beard they are reported to have repeatedly shouted the slogan: "Mandir Ka Nirmaann Karo, Babur Ki Aulad ko Baahar Karo" (Start the construction of the temple, throw out the sons of Babar).
Hearing the chaos, the stallholder's 16-year-old daughter came to intervene. She pleaded with the kar sevaks to stop beating her father and leave him alone. The kar sevaks then carried off the young girl to the train and locked her inside one of the reserved compartments (S-6).
As the train started to move out of Godhra with the elderly man banging on the compartment doors, two stall vendors jumped onto the last bogey of the moving train and pulled the emergency stop chain to halt the train. The train came to a standstill about one kilometre away from the railway station.
Having been written for a site that specialises in Islamic sob stories, it, not surprisingly, provides a tale of Islamic victimhood. It relates a story (uncorroborated by anyone else) that the torching of the train happened because a Muslim vendor's daughter had been abducted by Hindus and forced into coach S-6 of the train.
There are some gaping holes in this story, which make it, literally, incredible. Why on earth would Muslims set fire to the coach where the alleged Muslim girl was? Why on earth would the Hindu men take the purported girl to a coach where their own womenfolk were sitting? And how come there was a mob of 2,000 Muslims ready and waiting with weapons and kerosene and petrol at 7 in the morning, anticipating this eventuality?
In any case, it also gives the impression that if a Muslim girl had in fact been abducted, that was sufficient provocation to burn alive 59 Hindu women and children. Isn't this a little excessive? But according to the 'intelligentsia', it was fully justified: these were Hindu activists, including Hindu activist babies and Hindu activist ten-year-olds and Hindu activist women. Obviously, because of their ties to Ayodhya, or so went the media logic articulated in many columns, they invited the justified wrath of the Muslims. They only have themselves to blame, these dangerous Hindu activist babies and women and children.
Predatory intelligentsia -- II
Gujarat: The complete coverage
Rajeev Srinivasan
But the self-proclaimed 'intelligentsia' has been equally at fault: it has attempted to mislead the public with its biased and one-sided perorations.
The gullible public has been misled: I have seen several people suggest that they are 'ashamed to be Hindu' or 'ashamed to be Indian'. This is ridiculous: if you are ashamed to be a Hindu because of what happened in Godhra and Gujarat, then you were not a Hindu to begin with. For, otherwise you would be sharing the pain of Hindu pilgrims being burnt alive. Do not blame the religion for your own frailty, lack of self-confidence. In contrast, not a single Muslim (including famous bleeding heart Shabana Azmi) said he/she was 'ashamed to be a Muslim' because of 9/11 or Godhra. All they said was that the attacks were un-Islamic. Okay, so Gujarat's riots are un-Hindu, the rioters are not Hindus, thank you very much, we can all rest easy now.
There is an interesting situation in the Indian media: whenever a single Hindu does anything obnoxious, it is supposed to show how horrible Hinduism is. On the other hand, if any Christian or Muslim anywhere does a single good thing, it is celebrated as proving the goodness of the religion. Why? Aren't these just individual acts?
Those who are 'ashamed to be Hindu' should consider formally converting to the religion of their choice, be it Marxism, Christianity or Islam. Those who are 'ashamed to be Indian' should consider emigrating. Really, nobody made you India's ambassador or anointed representative: you should feel free to seek citizenship in China, Saudi Arabia or America, for instance.
The proximate cause of the Godhra incident, according to the 'intelligentsia', is the effort in Ayodhya to revive the Ram temple. And the proximate cause of the ensuing riots in Gujarat, according to the 'intelligentsia', is the alleged nature of the so-called Hindu fundamentalists, a term that is, in passing, an oxymoron: the fundamentals of Hinduism are tolerance and plurality, so a 'Hindu fundamentalist' is a contradiction in terms.
On the contrary, a very good case can be made that there are several layers of causes: the proximate cause, the preponderant cause, and the root cause.
The proximate cause is general Hindu frustration.
The preponderant cause is endemic Islamic fundamentalism, the deleterious results of which we see everywhere in the world: fuelled by intolerant petro-dollar Wah'abism from Saudi Arabia, Muslims have turned violently intolerant against both minorities and majorities everywhere.
The root cause in India is the decision circa 1947 by the Nehruvian Stalinists to impose apartheid against Hindus, by oppressing them in every conceivable way:
* by looting Hindu temples through control of their finances (and only theirs; while providing largesse for others); wealthy churches and mosques get huge amounts of foreign money for conversion purposes, but this is not even audited;
* by declaring open season for conversion, which is clearly violence against Hindus because only they are victimised and are never the proselytisers;
* by discriminating against them by only allowing non-Hindus to run educational institutions (thus preparing the way for generations of Hindus to be brainwashed and alienated);
* by delegitimising and destroying Sanskrit and Indological studies;
* by creating and assiduously cultivating a negative Marxist interpretation of Hinduism and making it the state-supported official view;
* by continuously insulting Hindu tradition by labelling it primitive and superstitious, whereas it is highly rational and scientific;
* by negating Hindu history itself and brushing under the carpet massive Islamic and Christian damage done to it;
* by ignoring all human rights violations against Hindus;
* by propagating as State ideology something called 'secularism', which in essence means oppression of Hindus.
In effect, there is jaziya, or a Muslim religious tax, on Hindus. The status of Hindus today is roughly what prevailed under the Muslim tyrant Aurangzeb. In 50 years, Jawaharlal Nehru's policies have also created an entire cadre of people who are intellectually colonised, who have built up their careers on Marxist dogma that has been proven utterly wrong everywhere in the world. These children of Marx and Macaulay have nothing but contempt for Hindus.
I would like to ask all those petitioning the Human Rights Commission and the Commission on Minorities about 50,000 Muslim refugees in Gujarat, and ask those august bodies themselves, what about the damage done to Hindus in Jammu & Kashmir? Every day, we hear of a few Hindus murdered there, and they are clearly minorities in J&K. Why aren't the commissions visiting Rajouri and Doda or the refugee camps in Delhi where 700,000 Kashmiri Pandits have lived in pitiful conditions for an entire decade? I will tell you why: Hindu suffering doesn't matter.
The attitude of the 'intelligentsia' can only be explained by assuming that Hindu lives are less valuable than Muslim lives. This, in fact, mirrors what the Saudis believe (see The Wall Street Journal, April 9, 2002), and therefore buttresses the charge of dhimmitude against the Indian 'secular' 'progressives'. In Saudi Arabia, there is the concept of blood money. If a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay blood money or compensation, as follows:
* 100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
* 50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
* 50,000 riyals if a Christian man
* 25,000 riyals if a Christian woman
* 6,666 riyals if a Hindu man
* 3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman
That is, a Muslim man's life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman. This is clearly the view of the Indian 'intelligentsia' as well; for they have made 33,000 times as much noise over the death of even a Muslim rioter in Gujarat as over the torching of a Hindu pilgrim woman in Godhra.
I find this discriminatory valuation of human life deeply offensive to the core. But this is the fact in the Indian media; I wrote about this in a column The value of a human life. The life of each human life should be valued at exactly the same. Why is the life of some Australian missionary considered so much more valuable than the lives of the Hindu priest and Buddhist priest murdered in Bangladesh last week? Have you even heard of this in the Indian media? Of course not!
All this has led to a perception among some sections of Hindus that they have no rights, and that therefore they have no responsibility to, or stake in, civil society. They have begun to perceive what amounts to a gross conspiracy against them, perpetuated by the State and the chatterati. They have a grievance. Gujarat is the result. The 'intelligentsia' who readily accept that Muslims, or Palestinians, or blacks in the US, have legitimate grievances, will not accept that Hindus may have legitimate grievances too.
As the Nehruvians have sown, we reap in Gujarat today.
As the Nehruvians sowed in Punjab, we reaped during the troubles there. It is worth remembering, now that Baisakhi and Jallianwallah Bagh Day have just come and gone, that the same ugly combination of State and media succeeded in converting the most patriotic of Indians, the Sikhs (a section of them, to be precise) into enemies of the nation. See my earlier column, Remember Jallianwallah Bagh! Incidentally, I would like to request that the International Court of Justice be moved to bring charges of war crimes against the British queen for Jallianwallah Bagh.
I received several hundred emails about a previous column Godhra, 'secular' 'progressives' and politics, most of it positive; but a number of people took exception to my suggestion that the Americans would take a very dim view of violence by minorities. I said that if a bunch of Muslims torched a Greyhound bus, they would round up and incarcerate all Muslims in the US in concentration camps.
My correspondents disagreed, suggesting that Muslims killed a lot of people on 9/11, Black Thursday, and that despite this, Americans did not retaliate in general against Muslims. Ah, but they are wrong. The situations aren't entirely comparable. 9/11 was not an attack on Americans by Americans, it was clearly perpetrated by 'others:' foreigners, Arabs, Muslims. Whereas in Godhra it was Indian citizens murdering Indian citizens.
And some ordinary Americans did take revenge on Muslims and others like Sikhs who they thought were Muslims. It is true that this was not widespread, but that was because they had full confidence in the ability of the American State to take revenge. They did not have to resort to acts of individual violence as there would assuredly be revenge. And there was. Can you say the same in India? Is there any chance whatsoever that the perpetrators of Godhra will ever be identified and caught? Absolutely none!
And surely my correspondents must be kidding when they say that Americans did not retaliate. What do you call the 10,000 reportedly killed in Afghanistan by the American-led force? Estimates vary all over the place from 5,000 to 50,000 civilians killed in the brief but bitter Afghan 'War against Terrorism'. What was (is?) going on there is State-sponsored retaliation, overwhelming and punitive force directed by the American state against foreigners, Afghans, Muslims, civilians.
It so happens that the US government will not attack Arabs because of other compulsions, namely, oil; so they went ahead and massacred whichever Muslims were easy prey. And they did so with such good propaganda that the world applauds them. Nobody weeps for the innocent bystanders who perished in the thousands in Afghanistan. So Muslims killed 3,000 in the US, the US killed 10,000 Muslims. This is not retaliation? A kill ratio of 1:3? And they are planning to kill more Muslims in Iraq (not to mention the 500,000 children already murdered there in a decade of sanctions.)
Retaliation is an ugly thing. No one can justify the torching of 58 Hindu pilgrims at Godhra by a Muslim mob; and no one can justify the riots that ensued in retaliation. This is something most sane people would agree on. The suffering of innocents, on both sides of the religious divide, is a blot on civilization. It is also true that the State of Gujarat has appeared to be helpless at best, and predatory at worst.
But there are several points I would like to raise. One is the endemic and brutal unfairness in the media. The media should have a simple criterion: are innocent Indians getting hurt? If so, the media should raise its powerful voice against it. The media should be colour-blind as they say in the US, or religion-blind as the case should be in India. When Hindus are systematically massacred in Jammu & Kashmir or ethnically cleansed in Tripura, when Sikhs are butchered in Delhi, when Muslims are killed in Gujarat, there should be equal vehemence on the part of the media. They should not discriminate.
But they do. They are diabolically one-sided. When I wrote my columns Blaming the Hindu victim, and "Godhra, 'secular' 'progressives' and politics", I simply followed a tactic made infamous by the 'secular' 'progressives' in the media: being one-sided and downplaying the fears and concerns of the other side. For instance, in literally thousands of articles and opinion pieces published by them, they say, "Godhra was deplorable", dismiss the horror with that, and then go on to write thousands of words about what happened in the ensuing riots. This is certainly lip service.
The 'secular' 'progressives' always mouth meaningless platitudes when there is aggression against Hindus. Then why isn't it perfectly legitimate for me, in reverse, to weep for Hindus, and to downplay aggression against Muslims? And I am one of only a pathetic handful of columnists who worry about Hindus at all. I noticed that a few 'secularists' got quite angry with what I said. Can you -- and you know who you are -- see how one-sided your own cherished values are? Do you realize that you have been brainwashed by the prevailing orthodoxy into accepting gross discrimination?
This brainwashing comes across in a series of exhibits I would like to present to you, mostly related to the burning of the Sabarmati Express at Godhra, and one relating to the ensuing riots in Gujarat. I must thank reader Kaleem (a propagandist for Islam) for bringing several of these to my attention. Others too keep sending these to me as if they proved something. In fact, they prove gullibility on the part of the senders. You have been conned, folks, by the unscrupulous media. Even though Varsha Bhosle exposed some of these as fabrications some time ago, new ones have come up, and clearly a lot of people still swear by them as the gospel truth. Stop being so gullible, will you? Think!
In the following, you can see the chain of quotations: how a fabrication from one source is repeated ad nauseam until it becomes the 'truth.' Truly Goebbelsian: say a simple thing again and again until it becomes the truth -- "truth by repeated assertion". Reminds me of the Upanishadic story of dogs forming a circle biting each other's tails.
Arun Shourie recounts the tale of how the leftist chatterati do the same thing often. There was a story of how Aurangzeb allegedly demolished the Kashi Viswanath temple in Benares "on the request of a Hindu Rajput queen". A number of 'eminent historians' asserted this, each quoting another of their tribe, each quote making the story appear more and more solid. The indefatigable Shourie finally located the source: a grey eminence who said he had heard about an old Muslim man who had a parchment which proved this; said grey eminence never saw the document and then the old man died! Pure hearsay, but the story had become an accepted 'truth' meanwhile.
Consider the following exhibits:
Exhibit A: Rajeel Sheikh's report on the Islamic site, ummahnews.org, dated March 2
Exhibit B: The anonymous email purportedly based on a report by Anil Soni, a journalist, undated and unsigned
Exhibit C: Peter Popham's report in The Independent of the UK
Exhibit D: Rajiv Chandrasekharan's report in The Washington Post
Exhibit E: Harsh Mander's article in The Hindustan Times and elsewhere
Exhibit A is from a site meant to rally the Muslim faithful. Here are a few excerpts about what allegedly happened in the Godhra railway station:
The kar sevaks started a quarrel with this stallholder too. While beating him and pulling his beard they are reported to have repeatedly shouted the slogan: "Mandir Ka Nirmaann Karo, Babur Ki Aulad ko Baahar Karo" (Start the construction of the temple, throw out the sons of Babar).
Hearing the chaos, the stallholder's 16-year-old daughter came to intervene. She pleaded with the kar sevaks to stop beating her father and leave him alone. The kar sevaks then carried off the young girl to the train and locked her inside one of the reserved compartments (S-6).
As the train started to move out of Godhra with the elderly man banging on the compartment doors, two stall vendors jumped onto the last bogey of the moving train and pulled the emergency stop chain to halt the train. The train came to a standstill about one kilometre away from the railway station.
Having been written for a site that specialises in Islamic sob stories, it, not surprisingly, provides a tale of Islamic victimhood. It relates a story (uncorroborated by anyone else) that the torching of the train happened because a Muslim vendor's daughter had been abducted by Hindus and forced into coach S-6 of the train.
There are some gaping holes in this story, which make it, literally, incredible. Why on earth would Muslims set fire to the coach where the alleged Muslim girl was? Why on earth would the Hindu men take the purported girl to a coach where their own womenfolk were sitting? And how come there was a mob of 2,000 Muslims ready and waiting with weapons and kerosene and petrol at 7 in the morning, anticipating this eventuality?
In any case, it also gives the impression that if a Muslim girl had in fact been abducted, that was sufficient provocation to burn alive 59 Hindu women and children. Isn't this a little excessive? But according to the 'intelligentsia', it was fully justified: these were Hindu activists, including Hindu activist babies and Hindu activist ten-year-olds and Hindu activist women. Obviously, because of their ties to Ayodhya, or so went the media logic articulated in many columns, they invited the justified wrath of the Muslims. They only have themselves to blame, these dangerous Hindu activist babies and women and children.
Predatory intelligentsia -- II
Gujarat: The complete coverage
Rajeev Srinivasan
Friday, April 2, 2010
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel's Letter to Jawaharlal Nehru
Full text of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel's Letter to Jawaharlal Nehru on November 7, 1950 not only deploring Indian Ambassador KM Panikkar's action but also warning about dangers from China
My dear Jawaharlal,
Ever since my return from Ahmedabad and after the cabinet meeting the same day whi...ch I had to attend at practically fifteen minutes' notice and for which I regret I was not able to read all the papers, I have been anxiously thinking over the problem of Tibet and I thought I should share with you what is passing through my mind.
I have carefully gone through the correspondence between the External Affairs Ministry and our Ambassador in Peking and through him the Chinese Government. I have tried to peruse this correspondence as favourably to our Ambassador and the Chinese Government as possible, but I regret to say that neither of them comes out well as a result of this study. The Chinese Government has tried to delude us by professions of peaceful intention. My own feeling is that at a crucial period they managed to instill into our Ambassador a false sense of confidence in their so-called desire to settle the Tibetan problem by peaceful means. There can be no doubt that during the period covered by this correspondence the Chinese must have been concentrating for an onslaught on Tibet. The final action of the Chinese, in my judgement, is little short of perfidy. The tragedy of it is that the Tibetans put faith in us; they chose to be guided by us; and we have been unable to get them out of the meshes of Chinese diplomacy or Chinese malevolence. From the latest position, it appears that we shall not be able to rescue the Dalai Lama. Our Ambassador has been at great pains to find an explanation or justification for Chinese policy and actions. As the External Affairs Ministry remarked in one of their telegrams, there was a lack of firmness and unnecessary apology in one or two representations that he made to the Chinese Government on our behalf. It is impossible to imagine any sensible person believing in the so-called threat to China from Anglo-American machinations in Tibet. Therefore, if the Chinese put faith in this, they must have distrusted us so completely as to have taken us as tools or stooges of Anglo-American diplomacy or strategy. This feeling, if genuinely entertained by the Chinese in spite of your direct approaches to them, indicates that even though we regard ourselves as the friends of China, the Chinese do not regard us as their friends. With the Communist mentality of "whoever is not with them being against them", this is a significant pointer, of which we have to take due note. During the last several months, outside the Russian camp, we have practically been alone in championing the cause of Chinese entry into UN and in securing from the Americans assurances on the question of Formosa. We have done everything we could to assuage Chinese feelings, to allay its apprehensions and to defend its legitimate claims in our discussions and correspondence with America and Britain and in the UN. Inspite of this, China is not convinced about our disinterestedness; it continues to regard us with suspicion and the whole psychology is one, at least outwardly, of scepticism perhaps mixed with a little hostility. I doubt if we can go any further than we have done already to convince China of our good intentions, friendliness and goodwill. In Peking we have an Ambassador who is eminently suitable for putting across the friendly point of view. Even he seems to have failed to convert the Chinese. Their last telegram to us is an act of gross discourtesy not only in the summary way it disposes of our protest against the entry of Chinese forces into Tibet but also in the wild insinuation that our attitude is determined by foreign influences. It looks as though it is not a friend speaking in that language but a potential enemy.
In the background of this, we have to consider what new situation now faces us as a result of the disappearance of Tibet, as we knew it, and the expansion of China almost up to our gates. Throughout history we have seldom been worried about our north-east frontier. The Himalayas have been regarded as an impenetrable barrier against any threat from the north. We had a friendly Tibet which gave us no trouble. The Chinese were divided. They had their own domestic problems and never bothered us about frontiers. In 1914, we entered into a convention with Tibet which was not endorsed by the Chinese. We seem to have regarded Tibetan autonomy as extending to independent treaty relationship. Presumably, all that we required was Chinese counter-signature. The Chinese interpretation of suzerainty seems to be different. We can, therefore, safely assume that very soon they will disown all the stipulations which Tibet has entered into with us in the past. That throws into the melting pot all frontier and commercial settlements with Tibet on which we have been functioning and acting during the last half a century. China is no longer divided. It is united and strong. All along the Himalayas in the north and north-east, we have on our side of the frontier a population ethnologically and culturally not different from Tibetans and Mongoloids. The undefined state of the frontier and the existence on our side of a population with its affinities to the Tibetans or Chinese have all the elements of the potential trouble between China and ourselves. Recent and bitter history also tells us that Communism is no shield against imperialism and that the communists are as good or as bad imperialists as any other. Chinese ambitions in this respect not only cover the Himalayan slopes on our side but also include the important part of Assam. They have their ambitions in Burma also. Burma has the added difficulty that it has no McMahon Line round which to build up even the semblance of an agreement. Chinese irredentism and communist imperialism are different from the expansionism or imperialism of the western powers. The former has a cloak of ideology which makes it ten times more dangerous. In the guise of ideological expansion lie concealed racial, national or historical claims. The danger from the north and north-east, therefore, becomes both communist and imperialist. While our western and north-western threat to security is still as prominent as before, a new threat has developed from the north and north-east. Thus, for the first time, after centuries, India's defence has to concentrate itself on two fronts simultaneously. Our defence measures have so far been based on the calculations of superiority over Pakistan. In our calculations we shall now have to reckon with communist China in the north and in the north-east, a communist China which has definite ambitions and aims and which does not, in any way, seem friendly disposed towards us.
Let us also consider the political conditions on this potentially troublesome frontier. Our northern and north-eastern approaches consist of Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, Darjeeling and the tribal areas in Assam. From the point of view of communication, there are weak spots. Continuous defensive lines do not exist. There is almost an unlimited scope for infiltration. Police protection is limited to a very small number of passes. There, too, our outposts do not seem to be fully manned. The contact of these areas with us is by no means close and intimate. The people inhabiting these portions have no established loyalty or devotion to India. Even Darjeeling and Kalimpong areas are not free from pro-Mongoloid prejudices. During the last three years, we have not been able to make any appreciable approaches to the Nagas and other hill tribes in Assam. European missionaries and other visitors had been in touch with them, but their influence was in no way friendly to India or Indians. In Sikkim, there was political ferment some time ago. It is quite possible that discontent is smouldering there. Bhutan is comparatively quiet, but its affinity with Tibetans would be a handicap. Nepal has a weak oligarchic regime based almost entirely on force: it is in conflict with a turbulent element of the population as well as with enlightened ideas of the modern age. In these circumstances, to make people alive to the new danger or to make them defensively strong is a very difficult task indeed and that difficulty can be got over only by enlightened firmness, strength and a clear line of policy. I am sure the Chinese and their source of inspiration, Soviet Union, would not miss any opportunity of exploiting these weak spots, partly in support of their ideology and partly in support of their ambitions. In my judgement the situation is one which we cannot afford either to be complacent or to be vacillating. We must have a clear idea of what we wish to achieve and also of the methods by which we should achieve it. Any faltering or lack of decisiveness in formulating our objectives or in pursuing our policies to attain those objectives is bound to weaken us and increase the threats which are so evident.
Side by side with these external dangers, we shall now have to face serious internal problems as well. I have already asked Iengar to send to the External Affairs Ministry a copy of the Intelligence Bureau's appreciation of these matters. Hitherto, the Communist Party of India has found some difficulty in contacting communists abroad, or in getting supplies of arms, literature, etc., from them. They had to contend with the difficult Burmese and Pakistan frontiers on the east or with the long seaboard. They shall now have a comparatively easy means of access to Chinese communists and through them to other foreign communists. Infiltration of spies, fifth columnists and communists would now be easier. Instead of having to deal with isolated communist pockets in Telengana and Warrangal we may have to deal with communist threats to our security along our northern and north-eastern frontiers, where, for supplies of arms and ammunition, they can safely depend on communist arsenals in China. The whole situation thus raises a number of problems on which we must come to an early decision so that we can, as I said earlier, formulate the objectives of our policy and decide the method by which those objectives are to be attained. It is also clear that the action will have to be fairly comprehensive, involving not only our defence strategy and state of preparations but also problem of internal security to deal with which we have not a moment to lose. We shall also have to deal with administrative and political problems in the weak spots along the frontier to which I have already referred.
It is of course, impossible to be exhaustive in setting out all these problems. I am, however, giving below some of the problems which, in my opinion, require early solution and round which we have to build our administrative or military policies and measures to implement them.
a) A military and intelligence appreciation of the Chinese threat to India both on the frontier and to internal security.
b) An examination of military position and such redisposition of our forces as might be necessary, particularly with the idea of guarding important routes or areas which are likely to be the subject of dispute.
c) An appraisement of the strength of our forces and, if necessary, reconsideration of our retrenchment plans for the Army in the light of the new threat.
d) A long-term consideration of our defence needs. My own feeling is that, unless we assure our supplies of arms, ammunition and armour, we would be making our defence perpetually weak and we would not be able to stand up to the double threat of difficulties both from the west and north-west and north and north-east.
e) The question of China's entry into the UN. In view of the rebuff which China has given us and the method which it has followed in dealing with Tibet, I am doubtful whether we can advocate its claim any longer. There would probably be a threat in the UN virtually to outlaw China, in view of its active participation in the Korean war. We must determine our attitude on this question also.
f) The political and administrative steps which we should take to strengthen our northern and north-eastern frontier. This would include the whole of the border, ie. Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, Darjeeling and the tribal territory in Assam.
g) Measures of internal security in the border areas as well as the states flanking those areas such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Bengal and Assam.
h) Improvement of our communication, road, rail, air and wireless, in these areas and with the frontier outposts.
i) The future of our mission at Lhasa and the trade posts at Gyangtse and Yatung and the forces which we have in operation in Tibet to guard the trade routes.
j) The policy in regard to the McMahon Line.
These are some of the questions which occur to my mind. It is possible that a consideration of these matters may lead us into wider question of our relationship with China, Russia, America, Britain and Burma. This, however, would be of a general nature, though some might be basically very important, e.g., we might have to consider whether we should not enter into closer association with Burma in order to strengthen the latter in its dealings with China. I do not rule out the possibility that, before applying pressure on us, China might apply pressure on Burma. With Burma, the frontier is entirely undefined and the Chinese territorial claims are more substantial. In its present position, Burma might offer an easier problem to China, and therefore, might claim its first attention.
I suggest that we meet early to have a general discussion on these problems and decide on such steps as we might think to be immediately necessary and direct, quick examination of other problems with a view to taking early measures to deal with them.
Vallabhbhai Patel 7th November 1950
My dear Jawaharlal,
Ever since my return from Ahmedabad and after the cabinet meeting the same day whi...ch I had to attend at practically fifteen minutes' notice and for which I regret I was not able to read all the papers, I have been anxiously thinking over the problem of Tibet and I thought I should share with you what is passing through my mind.
I have carefully gone through the correspondence between the External Affairs Ministry and our Ambassador in Peking and through him the Chinese Government. I have tried to peruse this correspondence as favourably to our Ambassador and the Chinese Government as possible, but I regret to say that neither of them comes out well as a result of this study. The Chinese Government has tried to delude us by professions of peaceful intention. My own feeling is that at a crucial period they managed to instill into our Ambassador a false sense of confidence in their so-called desire to settle the Tibetan problem by peaceful means. There can be no doubt that during the period covered by this correspondence the Chinese must have been concentrating for an onslaught on Tibet. The final action of the Chinese, in my judgement, is little short of perfidy. The tragedy of it is that the Tibetans put faith in us; they chose to be guided by us; and we have been unable to get them out of the meshes of Chinese diplomacy or Chinese malevolence. From the latest position, it appears that we shall not be able to rescue the Dalai Lama. Our Ambassador has been at great pains to find an explanation or justification for Chinese policy and actions. As the External Affairs Ministry remarked in one of their telegrams, there was a lack of firmness and unnecessary apology in one or two representations that he made to the Chinese Government on our behalf. It is impossible to imagine any sensible person believing in the so-called threat to China from Anglo-American machinations in Tibet. Therefore, if the Chinese put faith in this, they must have distrusted us so completely as to have taken us as tools or stooges of Anglo-American diplomacy or strategy. This feeling, if genuinely entertained by the Chinese in spite of your direct approaches to them, indicates that even though we regard ourselves as the friends of China, the Chinese do not regard us as their friends. With the Communist mentality of "whoever is not with them being against them", this is a significant pointer, of which we have to take due note. During the last several months, outside the Russian camp, we have practically been alone in championing the cause of Chinese entry into UN and in securing from the Americans assurances on the question of Formosa. We have done everything we could to assuage Chinese feelings, to allay its apprehensions and to defend its legitimate claims in our discussions and correspondence with America and Britain and in the UN. Inspite of this, China is not convinced about our disinterestedness; it continues to regard us with suspicion and the whole psychology is one, at least outwardly, of scepticism perhaps mixed with a little hostility. I doubt if we can go any further than we have done already to convince China of our good intentions, friendliness and goodwill. In Peking we have an Ambassador who is eminently suitable for putting across the friendly point of view. Even he seems to have failed to convert the Chinese. Their last telegram to us is an act of gross discourtesy not only in the summary way it disposes of our protest against the entry of Chinese forces into Tibet but also in the wild insinuation that our attitude is determined by foreign influences. It looks as though it is not a friend speaking in that language but a potential enemy.
In the background of this, we have to consider what new situation now faces us as a result of the disappearance of Tibet, as we knew it, and the expansion of China almost up to our gates. Throughout history we have seldom been worried about our north-east frontier. The Himalayas have been regarded as an impenetrable barrier against any threat from the north. We had a friendly Tibet which gave us no trouble. The Chinese were divided. They had their own domestic problems and never bothered us about frontiers. In 1914, we entered into a convention with Tibet which was not endorsed by the Chinese. We seem to have regarded Tibetan autonomy as extending to independent treaty relationship. Presumably, all that we required was Chinese counter-signature. The Chinese interpretation of suzerainty seems to be different. We can, therefore, safely assume that very soon they will disown all the stipulations which Tibet has entered into with us in the past. That throws into the melting pot all frontier and commercial settlements with Tibet on which we have been functioning and acting during the last half a century. China is no longer divided. It is united and strong. All along the Himalayas in the north and north-east, we have on our side of the frontier a population ethnologically and culturally not different from Tibetans and Mongoloids. The undefined state of the frontier and the existence on our side of a population with its affinities to the Tibetans or Chinese have all the elements of the potential trouble between China and ourselves. Recent and bitter history also tells us that Communism is no shield against imperialism and that the communists are as good or as bad imperialists as any other. Chinese ambitions in this respect not only cover the Himalayan slopes on our side but also include the important part of Assam. They have their ambitions in Burma also. Burma has the added difficulty that it has no McMahon Line round which to build up even the semblance of an agreement. Chinese irredentism and communist imperialism are different from the expansionism or imperialism of the western powers. The former has a cloak of ideology which makes it ten times more dangerous. In the guise of ideological expansion lie concealed racial, national or historical claims. The danger from the north and north-east, therefore, becomes both communist and imperialist. While our western and north-western threat to security is still as prominent as before, a new threat has developed from the north and north-east. Thus, for the first time, after centuries, India's defence has to concentrate itself on two fronts simultaneously. Our defence measures have so far been based on the calculations of superiority over Pakistan. In our calculations we shall now have to reckon with communist China in the north and in the north-east, a communist China which has definite ambitions and aims and which does not, in any way, seem friendly disposed towards us.
Let us also consider the political conditions on this potentially troublesome frontier. Our northern and north-eastern approaches consist of Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, Darjeeling and the tribal areas in Assam. From the point of view of communication, there are weak spots. Continuous defensive lines do not exist. There is almost an unlimited scope for infiltration. Police protection is limited to a very small number of passes. There, too, our outposts do not seem to be fully manned. The contact of these areas with us is by no means close and intimate. The people inhabiting these portions have no established loyalty or devotion to India. Even Darjeeling and Kalimpong areas are not free from pro-Mongoloid prejudices. During the last three years, we have not been able to make any appreciable approaches to the Nagas and other hill tribes in Assam. European missionaries and other visitors had been in touch with them, but their influence was in no way friendly to India or Indians. In Sikkim, there was political ferment some time ago. It is quite possible that discontent is smouldering there. Bhutan is comparatively quiet, but its affinity with Tibetans would be a handicap. Nepal has a weak oligarchic regime based almost entirely on force: it is in conflict with a turbulent element of the population as well as with enlightened ideas of the modern age. In these circumstances, to make people alive to the new danger or to make them defensively strong is a very difficult task indeed and that difficulty can be got over only by enlightened firmness, strength and a clear line of policy. I am sure the Chinese and their source of inspiration, Soviet Union, would not miss any opportunity of exploiting these weak spots, partly in support of their ideology and partly in support of their ambitions. In my judgement the situation is one which we cannot afford either to be complacent or to be vacillating. We must have a clear idea of what we wish to achieve and also of the methods by which we should achieve it. Any faltering or lack of decisiveness in formulating our objectives or in pursuing our policies to attain those objectives is bound to weaken us and increase the threats which are so evident.
Side by side with these external dangers, we shall now have to face serious internal problems as well. I have already asked Iengar to send to the External Affairs Ministry a copy of the Intelligence Bureau's appreciation of these matters. Hitherto, the Communist Party of India has found some difficulty in contacting communists abroad, or in getting supplies of arms, literature, etc., from them. They had to contend with the difficult Burmese and Pakistan frontiers on the east or with the long seaboard. They shall now have a comparatively easy means of access to Chinese communists and through them to other foreign communists. Infiltration of spies, fifth columnists and communists would now be easier. Instead of having to deal with isolated communist pockets in Telengana and Warrangal we may have to deal with communist threats to our security along our northern and north-eastern frontiers, where, for supplies of arms and ammunition, they can safely depend on communist arsenals in China. The whole situation thus raises a number of problems on which we must come to an early decision so that we can, as I said earlier, formulate the objectives of our policy and decide the method by which those objectives are to be attained. It is also clear that the action will have to be fairly comprehensive, involving not only our defence strategy and state of preparations but also problem of internal security to deal with which we have not a moment to lose. We shall also have to deal with administrative and political problems in the weak spots along the frontier to which I have already referred.
It is of course, impossible to be exhaustive in setting out all these problems. I am, however, giving below some of the problems which, in my opinion, require early solution and round which we have to build our administrative or military policies and measures to implement them.
a) A military and intelligence appreciation of the Chinese threat to India both on the frontier and to internal security.
b) An examination of military position and such redisposition of our forces as might be necessary, particularly with the idea of guarding important routes or areas which are likely to be the subject of dispute.
c) An appraisement of the strength of our forces and, if necessary, reconsideration of our retrenchment plans for the Army in the light of the new threat.
d) A long-term consideration of our defence needs. My own feeling is that, unless we assure our supplies of arms, ammunition and armour, we would be making our defence perpetually weak and we would not be able to stand up to the double threat of difficulties both from the west and north-west and north and north-east.
e) The question of China's entry into the UN. In view of the rebuff which China has given us and the method which it has followed in dealing with Tibet, I am doubtful whether we can advocate its claim any longer. There would probably be a threat in the UN virtually to outlaw China, in view of its active participation in the Korean war. We must determine our attitude on this question also.
f) The political and administrative steps which we should take to strengthen our northern and north-eastern frontier. This would include the whole of the border, ie. Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, Darjeeling and the tribal territory in Assam.
g) Measures of internal security in the border areas as well as the states flanking those areas such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Bengal and Assam.
h) Improvement of our communication, road, rail, air and wireless, in these areas and with the frontier outposts.
i) The future of our mission at Lhasa and the trade posts at Gyangtse and Yatung and the forces which we have in operation in Tibet to guard the trade routes.
j) The policy in regard to the McMahon Line.
These are some of the questions which occur to my mind. It is possible that a consideration of these matters may lead us into wider question of our relationship with China, Russia, America, Britain and Burma. This, however, would be of a general nature, though some might be basically very important, e.g., we might have to consider whether we should not enter into closer association with Burma in order to strengthen the latter in its dealings with China. I do not rule out the possibility that, before applying pressure on us, China might apply pressure on Burma. With Burma, the frontier is entirely undefined and the Chinese territorial claims are more substantial. In its present position, Burma might offer an easier problem to China, and therefore, might claim its first attention.
I suggest that we meet early to have a general discussion on these problems and decide on such steps as we might think to be immediately necessary and direct, quick examination of other problems with a view to taking early measures to deal with them.
Vallabhbhai Patel 7th November 1950
Sania verses Shoaib: Sleeping with the Enemy: Public Platform
Pakistani Cricketer Shoaib should be arrested as soon as he lands in India to marry Sania Mirza because he had married and victimized another Indian girl Ayesha Siddique from Hyderabad and has not divorced her so far. If Sania has decided to belittle millions of Indian Muslims and is ready to sleep with the enemy, definitely she has switched her loyalties to the enemy camp. Let her do so; but she should not be allowed to represent India.
Dr. Rajesh Bhatia
“I am a proud Indian…Pakistanis like Shoaib are cheating Indian girls. Truth will prevail in the end.” Shockingly, MA Siddique, father of Ayesha Siddique said, he was against his daughter getting married in Pakistan as relations were not good between India and Pakistan.
MA Siddique, father of Ayesha Siddique
India is d largest democracy,so well done sania and all the best!thakary & his followers donot represent india,infact they are the bigest terrorist and must be completely eliminated from our india..
By Dr Mohindin
4/2/2010 10:35:00 PM
a gray area u all have created above . some of u sayng in favour of sania n some in shivsena. first make it clear discussion is on sania's dicision.n u cant make points with ur past mind set about shiv sena or else.as we r commenting here same for shivsena. it is not about nationality, if you all know the complete incident.shoaib has already married wid an indian girl.n he is not admitting this.she is fighting 4 justice.if shoaib doesnt divors her she cant mary wid another. the whole pictur is clear to sania.n she still going wid her dicision.here she is wrong.n such lady can nvr reprsnt INDIA. if she doing this coz shoaib is of same religion dan shame on her as she put religion first dan NATION. i agree wid one of you let her do it n ban her to enter in here.
By vijit
4/2/2010 10:26:00 PM
She can marry anyone she wants I have no business in her personal life. But I would say this is unfortunate. She is a symbol of Indian tennis, when thinks of Indian tennis her name is one of them that pops in my mind. I have cheered for her in tennis stadiums in Grand Slam tournaments with an Indian flag in my hand. Pakistan is India's enemy at least for now, their secret service plans to blow up India. What makes people great are some subtle qualities and their preferences. The higher your position, more sacrifice you have to make. I just hope that she realize her image as a symbol of India and make wise decisions. Its her life and her decisions, but I won't cheer for her again if she marries a Pakistani.
By Riderchap
4/2/2010 10:17:00 PM
Sania Mirza did her hymoplasty operation and got her virginity back. Sania restored her hymen which represent their virginity and is ready for the Paki penis.
By ...
4/2/2010 10:11:00 PM
Wow, what ever happened to FREE WILL ??? Why does Bal Thakrey get to decide if she's a 'good indian' ? It's her right to choose her life partner because its HER life. Who the hell are we to care or to even judge her. Some of the comments I've seen here are absolutely ridiculous. It scares me that there people like "Bhagat Singh" here who has taken it upon himself to decide what kind of people should be allowed to live in India and what religions should be allowed to be practiced. This is the only thing that Indian news channels have had to report for the last two days..really ? UNBELIEVABLE
By ...
4/2/2010 9:51:00 PM
No problem .Let her marry a paki but govt must ensure that she must not play for India.
By sakhi
4/2/2010 9:39:00 PM
"sania you will be Pakistani after marrried" ......but don't worry you r not alone who loves pakistan .....many lovers of Pakistan living in India.....as SHahruKh, your Parents,Some Pollitician like Rajeev Shukla... They loves pakistan more than India....And your Brother "Kasab" who lived in pakistan... inthese days he in India........and our government giving the high respect him..
By KEshav
4/2/2010 9:21:00 PM
Who is Thakrey or Shivsena or Ramsena to give a statement against any person? World has been created for the people, Names & Boundaries came very late. What is the use of the National Passport? If anyone wants to visit or settle there are some rules & regulations which has to be followed by the person who needs it. This is non of bloody politician's business to accept or reject anyone. They live from their hard work and their earned money, They don't go to kill the people, They like each other so let them marry. What's wrong with them. I m not supportive of Sania or Shohaib. I don't believe Sania is a true Muslim. As a INDIAN, READER I just say let them live their life. Best of luck to them who stands for unity not for divide & rule...
By Azeem Kudroli
4/2/2010 9:14:00 PM
How narrow minded and hate filled you indians are! I wonder why no one protested against the bollywood movies which always show the hero from india falling win love with pakistani girl and winning her in the end, so why all hell broke loose if in real life a pakistani man marries an indian girl. Whats the big deal about it anyway. Shame on all the people who has spoken loosely about other religions and have hurt the feelings of other people just because a muslim girl from india is marrying a muslim man from pakistan. I am totally and utterly disgusted at narrow minded thinking of majority of indian hindus. Islam teaches tolerance and love and brotherhood and some misguided terrorist can not change the face of islam. These terrorist are doomed for hell in this world and the next world. Please do not let these few misguided monsters come between our two wonderful and peace loving nations. May all of the humanity live in peace.aameen.
By Dr Usman
4/2/2010 9:07:00 PM
..why not no one talked about rajive gandhi married an italian cobblers daughter..a christian...eat mutton and pork ??? even indian brahmins worship her without shame.....
By dandy
4/2/2010 8:11:00 PM
The Pakistani chhoothia muslim Shoaib who is involved with other women, and in match fixing, was given a house in Dubai by Dawood Ibrahim. He and his choothia Paki muslim family have constantly been denying this marriage. Ayesha told the 'Duniya' channel from Hyderabad that the Siddiqui family claims Shoaib is married to their daughter Ayesha and Indian tennis star Sania Mirza would be his second wife if they go ahead with the marriage. Muhammad Siddiqui, the girl's father, has threatened to sue Malik and also seek a fatwa against him from Ulemas. Signatures of witnesses are there on the certificate. Shoaib sent a copy for signature and a Haq Mahar amount of Pakistani 500 rupees. Shoaib had always been unhappy with her weight problems as the thin Shoaib could not lift her for his favorite standing sex position. For this she had even gone and had an operation in New Delhi.
By CUNT SWAMY MOHD
4/2/2010 7:28:00 PM
Shoaib Malik married the Hyderabadi Ayesha Siddiqui alias Mah Siddiqui in 2002. These Paki bast**ard muslims are capable of lying through their teeth, while saying saying Allah Allah. These muslim bas**ards have no morals and will lie or kill or kill themselves if they smell that an Indian vagina of Sania Mirza is available for free. The marriage certificate of the Pakistani cricketer's 2002 'wedding' with the Hyderabad girl is now shown in channels. The marriage certificate (Nikahnama) was shown by several Pakistani television channels and contains the signatures of Shoaib Malik on the column for the groom and the name of Maha Siddiqui on the column for the bride.
By CUNT SWAMY MOHD
4/2/2010 7:26:00 PM
sania mirza should continue with her career , I mean modelling, even afte her marriage. tennis has not been her forte, but she made tonnes of money modelling. no one cared to see her slipping abysmally in tennis, since tennis has no cheer leaders like cricket, but she always sparkled as a symbol of sex for the overwhelming majority of "her" spectators. she will have no problem in converting her Indian incomes to Dollars, in view of her marital connections and settling in dubai.
By R R R
4/2/2010 7:15:00 PM
PONGADAAAANG GOYYAALYGALA!!!!
By GOYYAALU
4/2/2010 5:50:00 PM
Sania has proved that there is no potent muslim male in India to marry her. Well done sania
By Nyaywadhi
4/2/2010 4:19:00 PM
Dear ALL hindus,sikhs&buddhists, It is time for ACTION Now and not just words ONLY.ALL hindus must TAKE a pledge to boycot the films of anti-hindu bollywood khans and to support films of Amitabh Bachchan,Abhishek and Aiswarya Rai and ONLY those HINDUS who do not support dawwod ibrahim and jehadis and paki terrorists.ALL HINDUS MUST COME IN SUPPORT OF AMITABH BACHCHAN, ABHSHEK BACHACHAN AND AISHWARYA RAI AND ALL THOSE IN BOLLOYWWOD WHO ARE SUPPORT BIG B AND nARENDRA Modiji at this time of crisis. ALL HINDUS MUST UNITE NOW AND BOYCOT FILMS OF ALL ANTI-HINDUS AND BOYCOT PRODUCTS OF ALL ANTI-HINDUS and anti-hindu bollywood actors and actresses too.UNLESS AND UNTIL THE VOTERS OF ALL STATES ELECT A NERENDRA MODIJI-LIKE LEADER in ALL states, lives of hindus&sikhs&buddhists as a whole all over India could be IN BIG TROUBLE AND they COULD FACE EXTINCTION SOON.
By Bhagat Singh
4/2/2010 3:23:00 PM
Time has come for ALL patriotic Indians TO Shout thatEnough is enough of these ungrateful hate filled minroity creratures muslims and christains. Shameless &Moronic majority ennuch hindus have tolerated such ungrateful hate-filled creatures for so many years& given them all the love&affection& allowed them to multiply 300 times&they are dreaming of killing hindus,sikh buddhist kafirs ALL the time to get heaven after death.See silence of jehadi funded TV channels like cnn-ibn,times now&ndtv,etc.See no 24 hour covergae, no debates, no special chats against this open defiance of Law by terrorist muslims. Our bribed and anti-hindu,jehadi vatican funded media are the worst in the world..RSS,VHP,BJP&all patriotic indians MUST MAKE vigilante groups in all villages &cities and kick OUT of our soil, ALL anti-hindu terrorist christians& muslims&MUST confiscate their wealth&properties as in Pakistan&Kashmir&andistribute to ALL poor,st,backward POOR hindus&other Kafirs.Hindus,Wake UP&ACT before it
By Bhagat Singh
4/2/2010 3:22:00 PM
Sania Mirza had tried the local Hyderabi muslim of Iranian decent. This Indian muslim guy could not satisfy the overly enlarged vag*ina or Sania. She tried the pen*is of the Pakistani captain who slept with many and who married another Hyderabadi muslim girl. The Paki pen*is is a perfect fit for the streched out vag*ina of Sania. This is a perfect union of unusual organs. No question of India Pakistan or Dubai. They are very happy and I am also happy. When Sania comes to heaven I will give her my biggest co*ck that is equal to that of 100 men. Even though I am illiterate back on earth my steno Aysha wrote all from her imagination in Koran. In heaven I will ask the Pakistani to give sania divorce and will tell him to enjoy the boys and the 72 Kamathipura who*res that I have arranged for Dawood Gazi or the Hindu killer. After all I did the same with my adopted son Zyed to divorce his wife back on the desert and fuc*ked her to her glory. All-hu Akbar Sania Mirza.
By Voice of Reason of Prophet Mohammad
4/2/2010 3:21:00 PM
Well DoneThackereyji.It is Time that All Hindus& ALL patriotic indiansMUST know their real enemies, the followers of hate filled semitic religions,islam& christianity.Read indian&world history of last 2000 years and you will see that the above hate-filled semitic religions have DONE Genocide of more than 100 million hindus,sikhs, buddhists,etc accusing them AS infidel kafirs&demolished more than 3000 temples to GET heaven after death with virgins&wine as GIFTS are preached by their terror manuals Quran&Bible. For peace to prevail the terror books Quran& Bible must be banned&ONLY truly SECULAR religions like hindusims,sikhism,buddhism whcih respect all human beings&ALL religions as equal MUST be allowed in our secular country.If christians&muslims do NOT shed POISON FOREVER, ALL Hindus MUST Make Vigilante Groups in ALL villages&Cities &eliminate them&media friends&CONFISCATE their wealth&ASSETS& distribute the assets of such anti-hindus&anti-nationals to poor scheduled caste&tribe&triba
By Bhagat Singh
4/2/2010 3:21:00 PM
Media should stop covering the views of ***holes. They do not represent even a small minority. Let us marginalise such people and push them out of the lime light that they do not deserve.
By Voice of Reason
4/2/2010 2:49:00 PM
Why is this a surprise? Hyderabadi's love marrying off there daughters to the middle east sheikhs and this has been going on for decades. Hyderabad is a ghetto where the muslims are cut off from the rest of india and are heavy indoctrinated. Most of them still believe they can join pakistan. This is the harsh truth about hyderabadi muslims whether you want to believe it or not. Do not forget that sania was raised in an orthodox muslim family and plus she is a hyderabadi.
By Indian
4/2/2010 2:04:00 PM
Vienna,02-04-2010 Since when Bal Thackery's heart became Indian? He is bloody blind Marathi manoos. Not Indian nor human. -Kulamarva Balakrishna
By Kulamarva Balakrishna
4/2/2010 1:48:00 PM
Is it a sin to marry a Pak citizen? Thackerays can't be otherwise. We live in a democracy. Marriage is not an issue to be decided by a political leader. It is personal.
By Sankara Narayanan
4/2/2010 1:39:00 PM
Let us not bother. After marrying a Pakistani she automatically ceases to be an India.Reports say thay they settle in Dubai. Let them settle in Dubai, Pakistan or the tribal areas of Afghanistan which are under the control of Talibans.In 1948 itself the Government should have prevented this type of happenings by enacting a Law.As all know from 15-8-1947 never the relations of India and Pakistan are good. Always only enmity.
By Karavadi Raghava Rao
4/2/2010 1:37:00 PM
Whoever one wishes to marry can marry..Love has no boundaries...Is Shoaib's heart not Pakistani because it beats for an Indian? This is 2010...when will people stop looking at the world in black and white terms.. why dont people use their brains before making such comments...
By Hurray
4/2/2010 12:41:00 PM
Quite Right,Thackereyji.HOPE SANIA,SRK&ALL ANTI-HINDUS GO TO PAKSITAN&GET LOST or are Kicked OUT soon.ALL hindus must TAKE a pledge to boycot the films of anti-hindu bollywood khans and to support films of Amitabh Bachchan,Abhishek and Aiswarya Rai and ONLY those HINDUS who do not support dawwod ibrahim and jehadis and paki terrorists.ALL HINDUS MUST COME IN SUPPORT OF AMITABH BACHCHAN, ABHSHEK BACHACHAN AND AISHWARYA RAI AND ALL THOSE IN BOLLOYWWOD WHO ARE SUPPORT BIG B AND nARENDRA Modiji at this time of crisis. ALL HINDUS MUST UNITE NOW AND BOYCOT FILMS OF ALL ANTI-HINDUS AND BOYCOT PRODUCTS OF ALL ANTI-HINDUS and anti-hindu bollywood actors and actresses too.UNLESS AND UNTIL THE VOTERS OF ALL STATES ELECT A NERENDRA MODIJI-LIKE LEADER in ALL states, lives of hindus as a whole all over Indian could be IN BIG TROUBLE AND Hindu Majority COULD FACE EXTINCTION SOON.
By V.Naik
4/2/2010 12:28:00 PM
Sania's decision in a "personal" matter to marry a man from a country with which we have serious problems unsolved for long, and growing, could be viewed from a globalisation viewpoint.World is globalising. India like indeed today's average nation of the world is falling for losing even the strong points of its own culture, assuming that globalization is the fashion, anything native is contemptible, old fashion, and further, globalization means modernisation which in turn means Westernisation. True globalization would mean one world under one world government with nations becoming just administrative units. Given the sharp and aggressive sections zealously "guading" their cultures, the opposing trend of globalisation will not let individuals in fame and position live in peace if they marry internationally.
By Anasooya K
4/2/2010 12:06:00 PM
BALASAHEB IS RIGHT AS USUAL WE INDIANS DO NOT CARE IF SANIA WANTS TO MARRY A CHIMPANZEE OR A BABOON. WE ONLY DO NOT WANT HER TO REPRESENT INDIA IN ANY EVENT AFTER SHE BECOMES THE SECOND WIFE OF THE CHIMP SHOIAB. SHE CAN REPRESENT PAKISTAN, TIMBUCTOO, AFGANISTAN OR ANY OTHER FAILED STATE AFTER MARRIAGE. WE INDIANS WILL BE HAPPY TO GET RID OF HER SOON
By DEEBEE
Dr. Rajesh Bhatia
“I am a proud Indian…Pakistanis like Shoaib are cheating Indian girls. Truth will prevail in the end.” Shockingly, MA Siddique, father of Ayesha Siddique said, he was against his daughter getting married in Pakistan as relations were not good between India and Pakistan.
MA Siddique, father of Ayesha Siddique
India is d largest democracy,so well done sania and all the best!thakary & his followers donot represent india,infact they are the bigest terrorist and must be completely eliminated from our india..
By Dr Mohindin
4/2/2010 10:35:00 PM
a gray area u all have created above . some of u sayng in favour of sania n some in shivsena. first make it clear discussion is on sania's dicision.n u cant make points with ur past mind set about shiv sena or else.as we r commenting here same for shivsena. it is not about nationality, if you all know the complete incident.shoaib has already married wid an indian girl.n he is not admitting this.she is fighting 4 justice.if shoaib doesnt divors her she cant mary wid another. the whole pictur is clear to sania.n she still going wid her dicision.here she is wrong.n such lady can nvr reprsnt INDIA. if she doing this coz shoaib is of same religion dan shame on her as she put religion first dan NATION. i agree wid one of you let her do it n ban her to enter in here.
By vijit
4/2/2010 10:26:00 PM
She can marry anyone she wants I have no business in her personal life. But I would say this is unfortunate. She is a symbol of Indian tennis, when thinks of Indian tennis her name is one of them that pops in my mind. I have cheered for her in tennis stadiums in Grand Slam tournaments with an Indian flag in my hand. Pakistan is India's enemy at least for now, their secret service plans to blow up India. What makes people great are some subtle qualities and their preferences. The higher your position, more sacrifice you have to make. I just hope that she realize her image as a symbol of India and make wise decisions. Its her life and her decisions, but I won't cheer for her again if she marries a Pakistani.
By Riderchap
4/2/2010 10:17:00 PM
Sania Mirza did her hymoplasty operation and got her virginity back. Sania restored her hymen which represent their virginity and is ready for the Paki penis.
By ...
4/2/2010 10:11:00 PM
Wow, what ever happened to FREE WILL ??? Why does Bal Thakrey get to decide if she's a 'good indian' ? It's her right to choose her life partner because its HER life. Who the hell are we to care or to even judge her. Some of the comments I've seen here are absolutely ridiculous. It scares me that there people like "Bhagat Singh" here who has taken it upon himself to decide what kind of people should be allowed to live in India and what religions should be allowed to be practiced. This is the only thing that Indian news channels have had to report for the last two days..really ? UNBELIEVABLE
By ...
4/2/2010 9:51:00 PM
No problem .Let her marry a paki but govt must ensure that she must not play for India.
By sakhi
4/2/2010 9:39:00 PM
"sania you will be Pakistani after marrried" ......but don't worry you r not alone who loves pakistan .....many lovers of Pakistan living in India.....as SHahruKh, your Parents,Some Pollitician like Rajeev Shukla... They loves pakistan more than India....And your Brother "Kasab" who lived in pakistan... inthese days he in India........and our government giving the high respect him..
By KEshav
4/2/2010 9:21:00 PM
Who is Thakrey or Shivsena or Ramsena to give a statement against any person? World has been created for the people, Names & Boundaries came very late. What is the use of the National Passport? If anyone wants to visit or settle there are some rules & regulations which has to be followed by the person who needs it. This is non of bloody politician's business to accept or reject anyone. They live from their hard work and their earned money, They don't go to kill the people, They like each other so let them marry. What's wrong with them. I m not supportive of Sania or Shohaib. I don't believe Sania is a true Muslim. As a INDIAN, READER I just say let them live their life. Best of luck to them who stands for unity not for divide & rule...
By Azeem Kudroli
4/2/2010 9:14:00 PM
How narrow minded and hate filled you indians are! I wonder why no one protested against the bollywood movies which always show the hero from india falling win love with pakistani girl and winning her in the end, so why all hell broke loose if in real life a pakistani man marries an indian girl. Whats the big deal about it anyway. Shame on all the people who has spoken loosely about other religions and have hurt the feelings of other people just because a muslim girl from india is marrying a muslim man from pakistan. I am totally and utterly disgusted at narrow minded thinking of majority of indian hindus. Islam teaches tolerance and love and brotherhood and some misguided terrorist can not change the face of islam. These terrorist are doomed for hell in this world and the next world. Please do not let these few misguided monsters come between our two wonderful and peace loving nations. May all of the humanity live in peace.aameen.
By Dr Usman
4/2/2010 9:07:00 PM
..why not no one talked about rajive gandhi married an italian cobblers daughter..a christian...eat mutton and pork ??? even indian brahmins worship her without shame.....
By dandy
4/2/2010 8:11:00 PM
The Pakistani chhoothia muslim Shoaib who is involved with other women, and in match fixing, was given a house in Dubai by Dawood Ibrahim. He and his choothia Paki muslim family have constantly been denying this marriage. Ayesha told the 'Duniya' channel from Hyderabad that the Siddiqui family claims Shoaib is married to their daughter Ayesha and Indian tennis star Sania Mirza would be his second wife if they go ahead with the marriage. Muhammad Siddiqui, the girl's father, has threatened to sue Malik and also seek a fatwa against him from Ulemas. Signatures of witnesses are there on the certificate. Shoaib sent a copy for signature and a Haq Mahar amount of Pakistani 500 rupees. Shoaib had always been unhappy with her weight problems as the thin Shoaib could not lift her for his favorite standing sex position. For this she had even gone and had an operation in New Delhi.
By CUNT SWAMY MOHD
4/2/2010 7:28:00 PM
Shoaib Malik married the Hyderabadi Ayesha Siddiqui alias Mah Siddiqui in 2002. These Paki bast**ard muslims are capable of lying through their teeth, while saying saying Allah Allah. These muslim bas**ards have no morals and will lie or kill or kill themselves if they smell that an Indian vagina of Sania Mirza is available for free. The marriage certificate of the Pakistani cricketer's 2002 'wedding' with the Hyderabad girl is now shown in channels. The marriage certificate (Nikahnama) was shown by several Pakistani television channels and contains the signatures of Shoaib Malik on the column for the groom and the name of Maha Siddiqui on the column for the bride.
By CUNT SWAMY MOHD
4/2/2010 7:26:00 PM
sania mirza should continue with her career , I mean modelling, even afte her marriage. tennis has not been her forte, but she made tonnes of money modelling. no one cared to see her slipping abysmally in tennis, since tennis has no cheer leaders like cricket, but she always sparkled as a symbol of sex for the overwhelming majority of "her" spectators. she will have no problem in converting her Indian incomes to Dollars, in view of her marital connections and settling in dubai.
By R R R
4/2/2010 7:15:00 PM
PONGADAAAANG GOYYAALYGALA!!!!
By GOYYAALU
4/2/2010 5:50:00 PM
Sania has proved that there is no potent muslim male in India to marry her. Well done sania
By Nyaywadhi
4/2/2010 4:19:00 PM
Dear ALL hindus,sikhs&buddhists, It is time for ACTION Now and not just words ONLY.ALL hindus must TAKE a pledge to boycot the films of anti-hindu bollywood khans and to support films of Amitabh Bachchan,Abhishek and Aiswarya Rai and ONLY those HINDUS who do not support dawwod ibrahim and jehadis and paki terrorists.ALL HINDUS MUST COME IN SUPPORT OF AMITABH BACHCHAN, ABHSHEK BACHACHAN AND AISHWARYA RAI AND ALL THOSE IN BOLLOYWWOD WHO ARE SUPPORT BIG B AND nARENDRA Modiji at this time of crisis. ALL HINDUS MUST UNITE NOW AND BOYCOT FILMS OF ALL ANTI-HINDUS AND BOYCOT PRODUCTS OF ALL ANTI-HINDUS and anti-hindu bollywood actors and actresses too.UNLESS AND UNTIL THE VOTERS OF ALL STATES ELECT A NERENDRA MODIJI-LIKE LEADER in ALL states, lives of hindus&sikhs&buddhists as a whole all over India could be IN BIG TROUBLE AND they COULD FACE EXTINCTION SOON.
By Bhagat Singh
4/2/2010 3:23:00 PM
Time has come for ALL patriotic Indians TO Shout thatEnough is enough of these ungrateful hate filled minroity creratures muslims and christains. Shameless &Moronic majority ennuch hindus have tolerated such ungrateful hate-filled creatures for so many years& given them all the love&affection& allowed them to multiply 300 times&they are dreaming of killing hindus,sikh buddhist kafirs ALL the time to get heaven after death.See silence of jehadi funded TV channels like cnn-ibn,times now&ndtv,etc.See no 24 hour covergae, no debates, no special chats against this open defiance of Law by terrorist muslims. Our bribed and anti-hindu,jehadi vatican funded media are the worst in the world..RSS,VHP,BJP&all patriotic indians MUST MAKE vigilante groups in all villages &cities and kick OUT of our soil, ALL anti-hindu terrorist christians& muslims&MUST confiscate their wealth&properties as in Pakistan&Kashmir&andistribute to ALL poor,st,backward POOR hindus&other Kafirs.Hindus,Wake UP&ACT before it
By Bhagat Singh
4/2/2010 3:22:00 PM
Sania Mirza had tried the local Hyderabi muslim of Iranian decent. This Indian muslim guy could not satisfy the overly enlarged vag*ina or Sania. She tried the pen*is of the Pakistani captain who slept with many and who married another Hyderabadi muslim girl. The Paki pen*is is a perfect fit for the streched out vag*ina of Sania. This is a perfect union of unusual organs. No question of India Pakistan or Dubai. They are very happy and I am also happy. When Sania comes to heaven I will give her my biggest co*ck that is equal to that of 100 men. Even though I am illiterate back on earth my steno Aysha wrote all from her imagination in Koran. In heaven I will ask the Pakistani to give sania divorce and will tell him to enjoy the boys and the 72 Kamathipura who*res that I have arranged for Dawood Gazi or the Hindu killer. After all I did the same with my adopted son Zyed to divorce his wife back on the desert and fuc*ked her to her glory. All-hu Akbar Sania Mirza.
By Voice of Reason of Prophet Mohammad
4/2/2010 3:21:00 PM
Well DoneThackereyji.It is Time that All Hindus& ALL patriotic indiansMUST know their real enemies, the followers of hate filled semitic religions,islam& christianity.Read indian&world history of last 2000 years and you will see that the above hate-filled semitic religions have DONE Genocide of more than 100 million hindus,sikhs, buddhists,etc accusing them AS infidel kafirs&demolished more than 3000 temples to GET heaven after death with virgins&wine as GIFTS are preached by their terror manuals Quran&Bible. For peace to prevail the terror books Quran& Bible must be banned&ONLY truly SECULAR religions like hindusims,sikhism,buddhism whcih respect all human beings&ALL religions as equal MUST be allowed in our secular country.If christians&muslims do NOT shed POISON FOREVER, ALL Hindus MUST Make Vigilante Groups in ALL villages&Cities &eliminate them&media friends&CONFISCATE their wealth&ASSETS& distribute the assets of such anti-hindus&anti-nationals to poor scheduled caste&tribe&triba
By Bhagat Singh
4/2/2010 3:21:00 PM
Media should stop covering the views of ***holes. They do not represent even a small minority. Let us marginalise such people and push them out of the lime light that they do not deserve.
By Voice of Reason
4/2/2010 2:49:00 PM
Why is this a surprise? Hyderabadi's love marrying off there daughters to the middle east sheikhs and this has been going on for decades. Hyderabad is a ghetto where the muslims are cut off from the rest of india and are heavy indoctrinated. Most of them still believe they can join pakistan. This is the harsh truth about hyderabadi muslims whether you want to believe it or not. Do not forget that sania was raised in an orthodox muslim family and plus she is a hyderabadi.
By Indian
4/2/2010 2:04:00 PM
Vienna,02-04-2010 Since when Bal Thackery's heart became Indian? He is bloody blind Marathi manoos. Not Indian nor human. -Kulamarva Balakrishna
By Kulamarva Balakrishna
4/2/2010 1:48:00 PM
Is it a sin to marry a Pak citizen? Thackerays can't be otherwise. We live in a democracy. Marriage is not an issue to be decided by a political leader. It is personal.
By Sankara Narayanan
4/2/2010 1:39:00 PM
Let us not bother. After marrying a Pakistani she automatically ceases to be an India.Reports say thay they settle in Dubai. Let them settle in Dubai, Pakistan or the tribal areas of Afghanistan which are under the control of Talibans.In 1948 itself the Government should have prevented this type of happenings by enacting a Law.As all know from 15-8-1947 never the relations of India and Pakistan are good. Always only enmity.
By Karavadi Raghava Rao
4/2/2010 1:37:00 PM
Whoever one wishes to marry can marry..Love has no boundaries...Is Shoaib's heart not Pakistani because it beats for an Indian? This is 2010...when will people stop looking at the world in black and white terms.. why dont people use their brains before making such comments...
By Hurray
4/2/2010 12:41:00 PM
Quite Right,Thackereyji.HOPE SANIA,SRK&ALL ANTI-HINDUS GO TO PAKSITAN&GET LOST or are Kicked OUT soon.ALL hindus must TAKE a pledge to boycot the films of anti-hindu bollywood khans and to support films of Amitabh Bachchan,Abhishek and Aiswarya Rai and ONLY those HINDUS who do not support dawwod ibrahim and jehadis and paki terrorists.ALL HINDUS MUST COME IN SUPPORT OF AMITABH BACHCHAN, ABHSHEK BACHACHAN AND AISHWARYA RAI AND ALL THOSE IN BOLLOYWWOD WHO ARE SUPPORT BIG B AND nARENDRA Modiji at this time of crisis. ALL HINDUS MUST UNITE NOW AND BOYCOT FILMS OF ALL ANTI-HINDUS AND BOYCOT PRODUCTS OF ALL ANTI-HINDUS and anti-hindu bollywood actors and actresses too.UNLESS AND UNTIL THE VOTERS OF ALL STATES ELECT A NERENDRA MODIJI-LIKE LEADER in ALL states, lives of hindus as a whole all over Indian could be IN BIG TROUBLE AND Hindu Majority COULD FACE EXTINCTION SOON.
By V.Naik
4/2/2010 12:28:00 PM
Sania's decision in a "personal" matter to marry a man from a country with which we have serious problems unsolved for long, and growing, could be viewed from a globalisation viewpoint.World is globalising. India like indeed today's average nation of the world is falling for losing even the strong points of its own culture, assuming that globalization is the fashion, anything native is contemptible, old fashion, and further, globalization means modernisation which in turn means Westernisation. True globalization would mean one world under one world government with nations becoming just administrative units. Given the sharp and aggressive sections zealously "guading" their cultures, the opposing trend of globalisation will not let individuals in fame and position live in peace if they marry internationally.
By Anasooya K
4/2/2010 12:06:00 PM
BALASAHEB IS RIGHT AS USUAL WE INDIANS DO NOT CARE IF SANIA WANTS TO MARRY A CHIMPANZEE OR A BABOON. WE ONLY DO NOT WANT HER TO REPRESENT INDIA IN ANY EVENT AFTER SHE BECOMES THE SECOND WIFE OF THE CHIMP SHOIAB. SHE CAN REPRESENT PAKISTAN, TIMBUCTOO, AFGANISTAN OR ANY OTHER FAILED STATE AFTER MARRIAGE. WE INDIANS WILL BE HAPPY TO GET RID OF HER SOON
By DEEBEE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
