Tolerance Is Over-Rated - Part 2

The spiritual roads to God or the “Power” that runs the universe are many. This is what Hindus believe and are taught. Hindus are also taught that all religions are the same. Many Hindus still chant this nonsense despite an abundance of evidence of it not being true. If all religions are the same, then followers of all religions must believe that. They don’t! The spirit of tolerance should be extended only when there is mutual respect between all religions. The time for mouthing such invalid, false philosophies like “all religions are the same” must be ended by Hindus.

There is a Mohammad Ali Road in Mumbai. It’s famous for its eateries and a delight for gluttony fans. There is one for him in Delhi too. During Eid this road in Mumbai also becomes an open Masjid where Muslims offer mass Namaz on the streets. It’s a phenomenon over the last two decades. Along with MK Gandhi he led the Khilafat movement in India. There are lots of things written about him but here is something he said about Gandhiji that you can ponder over: "However pure Gandhi's character may be, he must appear to me from the point of view of religion inferior to any Mussalman, even though he be without character. He repeated it later, saying, 'Yes, according to my religion and creed, I hold an adulterous and a fallen Muslim to be better than a Mr. Gandhi." Just imagine if a Hindu leader had said this about a Muslim leader. I can imagine your imagination running riot. And this was said about Gandhi who was far more sympathetic to Muslims than to Hindus.

The Sickulars are still reeling under the aftermath of the CharlieHebdo killings. They are at pains to find excuses to justify the actions of terrorists. From NDTV to The Hindu to a whole lot of Commie media the latest one to join the ranks is Outlook. Here’s an excerpt:

“While I am all for free speech and all for satire, it must be said that Charlie Hebdo had it coming. That sounds crude and cruel, but Muslims would treat the cartoons as crude and deliberately provocative. And it won’t cut much ice with them if you tell them that the cartoons on the Pope were equally bad. You can lampoon Islam and its followers, as you can lampoon any other religion. You can even make fun of the Caliphs (arguably) but don’t touch the Prophet. Muhammad is no go area. His name is prefaced with ‘Prophet’ or with the appellation “peace be upon him” by his billion followers. You can’t paint him, sculpt him, or build a musical around him a la ‘Jesus Christ—Superstar.’ All that these caricaturists and satirists have to do is to leave one man alone. Not too much of a price to pay for peace, is it?”

Fantastic, isn’t it? It is one thing to argue that the Prophet is a “no go area” but a totally different thing to reiterate “Charlie Hebdo had it coming”. There are many ways to protest strongly but killing isn’t one of them. Had it coming, he says! There are other “no go areas” too and we will get into it shortly. All these scumbags who argue that CharlieHebdo had it coming are at a loss to answer a simple question. 59 people were roasted alive in a coach on a train in Gujarat in 2002. Did these people draw any cartoons? Did they even shout any anti-Muslim or anti-Islam slogans? But when the Hindus retaliated violently these very people claimed genocide, pogrom, state-sponsored violence etc. Seriously, did they expect that Hindus should simply continue to tolerate such unprovoked and unwarranted attacks? Since 2002 Gujarat has seen relative peace where communal relations are concerned. There have been stray incidents here and there but no major communal riots.

The man who wrote the Outlook article (Keki Daruwalla – is not a regular journo, but another Arundhati Roy types that infest Outlook) argues that not drawing the cartoons is a small price to pay for peace. 2002 happened before all these cartoons. And is the writer suggesting that prior to these cartoons the Islamists were peaceful and there was no terrorism? Did 9/11 happen because of cartoons? Did 26/11 happen because of cartoons? Did Madrid or London underground happen due to cartoons? Saif Rahman is an ex-Muslim of Pakistani origin in the UK. Here’s what he tweeted January 26:

It is an unfortunate but inevitable truth – Tolerance of intolerance doesn’t buy peace. It never has. Increasingly, we have only seen that retaliation (and often disproportionate retaliation) stands a better chance of buying peace. Ask the Japanese. Rahman has also written a book “The Islamist Delusion”. Do read the summary on the page I have linked. Rahman has drawn no cartoons of the Prophet but merely written a book criticising the practices of Muslims. He claims to have received 139 death-threats so far. What he summarises in his tweet as the 10 Islamist commandments is for our Sickulars to think about. Playing victim will not help anymore. What should now be clear is that after the Paris incident there are many who are making this absolutely clear to the extremists.

Bobby Jindal, the governor in an American state, was a darling for our media for quite a while as they claimed he was an Indian-American. He disappointed them recently by stating that he is only “American” and that his forefathers came to America to be Americans and not Indian-Americans. More stunningly, Jindal became the first politician to boldly state what many politicians were unwilling to say. Excerpts:

"Let's be honest here. Islam has a problem… Muslim leaders need to condemn anyone who commits these acts of violence and clearly state that these people are evil and are enemies of Islam. It's not enough to simply condemn violence, they must stand up and loudly proclaim that these people are not martyrs who will receive a reward in the afterlife, and rather they are murderers who are going to hell. If they refuse to do that, then they're part of the problem. There is no middle ground here”.

Jindal went on to add in his speech in the UK that some countries have allowed Muslims to establish autonomous neighbourhoods in cities where they govern by a harsh version of Islamic law. Yes indeed, UK is facing this problem and so are many other non-Islamic countries in the world. There are over 700 no go zones created by Muslims in France and though it is not authorised in any form, the police and other services dread to go to these zones. Norway has expelled over 5000 foreigners, mostly Muslims, as action for reducing crime in the country. In a rare departure, British PM David Cameron has finally issued a warning to mosques in Britain to rein in extremists:

Belgians in the Congo. France invaded Algeria for no genuine reason except greed and now Algerians are in large number in France. The Dutch were in South Africa and some other places to subdue the original inhabitants. The Portuguese were in Bombay, Goa and Diu. And there is hardly a country left that Britain had not invaded and colonised. It is very tempting to say “they had it coming”. But it’s not revenge that the Islamists are seeking. If that was the case they could have declared formal wars. But it is intolerance of the culture and systems of the host country while enjoying all its privileges that is causing the problems. This is true in India too. “No go area” said that dumb Outlook writer and that avoiding cartoons will buy peace. I have written before that there are many towns in India that are completely Islamised and are somewhat of a no go zone for non-Muslims. This has happened even in places considered particularly holy pilgrimage locations by Hindus. It is hard to believe this has happened in Rameshwaram:

It is understandable if one makes the mistake of thinking these no go zones are stray cases across the world, although increasingly common. It would help to pause for a minute and think that an entire community was thrown out Kashmir which is now a no go zone for India’s non-Muslims. Can any no go zone be worse than that? Had the authorities acted then or even a few months later the KPs could have returned to Kashmir. They are never going to return – no go zones are forever. No politician is going to be courageous enough to alter the situation. The challenge is to avert creating some more and for that unlimited tolerance has to disappear.

To be concluded…

Tolerance Is Over-Rated - Part 1

Stories of Prithviraj Chauhan’s bravery and valour fill many books in India. He was the king of Delhi. Also famous is the story of his elopement with Samyukta who would become his wife. The barbarian invader Mohammad Ghori was defeated by Chauhan and his army in 1191 as history tells us. A year later Ghori returned and defeated Chauhan and took over his kingdom. Chauhan was later killed by Ghori & Co under captivity. Soldiers’ code of honour often requires they treat their fallen enemy with honour. Prithviraj Chauhan let Ghori get away and did not pursue or kill him. If Ghori had been killed a good chunk of history may have been different. An army declaring war for some dispute or other is understandable. Ghori had no such known dispute except to invade, loot, rape and force Islam in Chauhan’s kingdom. There is a price to pay when you let barbarians get away. They don’t deserve honour, they don’t deserve a pardon. Even Jesus who preached kindness, peace and turning the other cheek ended up on the Cross.

Before and after Chauhan there were waves and waves of Islamic attacks on Indian provinces. Some were repelled, some conquered and some Hindu rulers also made peace with the invaders. Islamic warriors had butchered many and many other countries were fully turned Islamic – Persia, countries in Africa, Syria, the current state of Israel, Egypt, even Spain and parts of Europe and so on. Despite the invasion in India being the bloodiest the Hindus somehow refused to be totally conquered. Akbar’s general at Haldi Ghati was Rana Pratap’s relative. He refused to be conquered. Today, the Muslims in India, Pakistan and elsewhere claim they are the victims. The generally peaceful race of Indians, consisting of Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs, came to be known as tolerant because they withstood the barbarism of the invaders. Maybe they set a wrong precedence.

Cut to 20th century, Reginald Dyer, aka The Butcher of Jallianwallah Bagh, killed hundreds of innocent people. He wasn’t punished. He was celebrated as a hero in Britain. A classic appeasement of the Nazis was the 1938 agreement between British PM Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler, which allowed Germany to occupy Czechoslovakia. As Winston Churchill put it – that was hoping the crocodile would eat its appeaser the last. MK Gandhi wasn’t so much against violence as he was in support of non-violence, especially when it came to his own life. But MKG is commonly cited as the apostle of non-violence for only the Hindus to practically follow. This balderdash needs to be dispelled.  

***************

Charlie Hebdo is now more known across the world that it was ever before, for obvious reasons. Following the terror attack and killing of a dozen people the Sickulars across the world have been groping for excuses to condone the attack. They suggest that religion must not be mocked and anyone who does will have to pay a price for it. Typically, the Indian media blacked out the CH images that caused offence. A couple of papers who reproduced the images willingly or accidentally had this to offer:

The cowards at “The Hindu” and “Mint” who brag about freedom of speech and all that suddenly got cold feet when it comes to Islamic cartoons. Everyone has learned by now that the Indian media’s idea of free speech is to abuse Hindus and Hinduism. Why? Because this lot is tolerant! The Hindus have historically given these Commies the idea that they will tolerate any crap thrown at them and have emboldened them to all kinds of nonsense. In the case of MF Hussain’s nude paintings of Hindu Goddesses all these Commies defended his right to freedom of expression. Many papers and magazines reproduced his porn. None withdrew or apologised. The Hindus didn’t kill Hussain. They just filed cases against him and even that is considered an attack on him by the Commies. The same Commies whined when Wendy Doniger’s anti-Hindu book was pulped by her publisher. The Hindus posed no physical or death-threat to her. It was some guy who filed a case and when it was certain that court would find Doniger’s book to be abusing Hinduism the publishers decided to dump it. What would it take for these wimps to acknowledge the truth? Here’s Malini P of The Hindu applauding the Pope for his stupid statement:

Richard Dawkins is a prominent atheist but even religious people who are sensible would find the Pope’s statement absurd. The Pope said “One cannot provoke, one cannot insult other people’s faith, one cannot make fun of faith” and that those who did “can expect a punch”. He jokingly added "If my good friend Dr. Gasbarri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch”. That is as dumb as it can get and our media idiots are thrilled about it. Malini P, of the anti-Hindu paper, claims the Pope understands a “multicultural” world.  Really? Left to the Pope’s whims he would like the whole of India (and world) turn Catholic. Someone cursing a mother getting punched in return is the same as murdering a dozen people? We have a street-thug like Rajdeep Sardesai who roughed up a man for heckling him in retaliation to Rajdeep’s abuse. I have stated in “War on Hindus-3” that many towns in India have been completely Islamised. They are “no go” zones. In major cities we have Muslim ghettos which are avoided by others. Some Europeans and Americans are waking up to this reality in their own towns and cities. We shall see

***************

We have now experienced how our media lies about events and stories. These Commie pimps are scared of Islamic terror as much as the Pope is. Fear is not unnatural but the media shows that they will trample upon you when they know will know you won’t hit back with violence and murder. English Defence League was formed in England to counter the Islamisation and the attacks by Muslim gangs on their soldiers, Jews and other random attacks. One of their founders was Tommy Robinson. He and his colleagues were on a charity march and here is the Channel4 report on an incident that happened during this walk in East London (0.42 mins):

The guy in the black T-shirt and dark glasses is Kevin Carroll of the EDL. The report mentions a clash with the guys in blue and red shirts and the image shows Kevin as the one who is offensive. Is that what really happened? People are now video-taping such events knowing what to expect of the media (and the impotent, cowardly Police). Here’s the part that Channel4 did not show its viewers (3.28 mins):

As the video shows, the guy in the blue shirt attacks Kevin who retaliates. The Police let the two guys walk away. They don’t arrest the attackers but instead arrest Robinson and Carroll. That’s Dhimmitude for you. Is it any different in India? Clearly, there is hardly any doubt that the two guys (in blue and red shirts) were planted by the police to provoke a conflict and create a “public disturbance” situation for which they can then arrest the EDL guys. And because the EDL guys protest the Islamic terror in their towns they are labelled Nazis, fascists and racists. Typical nonsense by “Sickular” thugs who label anyone who protests their crimes, with despicable names (full Robinson video on Youtube).

There have been thousands of terror attacks by Islamic forces over the years. Political and media cowards tried their best to wash the sins. It took the slaughter of cartoonists to wake up politicians to finally realise tolerance doesn’t pay. In this day and age, tolerance is increasingly the attribute of wimps and cowards. Tolerance is over-rated. More in the next part.

Al Jazeera & Internet Hindus

So the newest entrant in the English TV news media in India is Al Jazeera the famous Arabic channel. One imagines they would mostly be covering international news with an Indian flavour. To break into the minds of viewers some special event was in order. What better than a discussion on some contentious topic! And so it was about ‘Internet Hindus’ (IH). On the night of July 9 through the LiveStream (@AJStream) on the internet they had a discussion with a panel that included Dr.Subramanian Swamy(SS), Sagarika Ghose (SG) and Sadanand Dhume (SD). (Youtube)We all know about Dr.Swamy. Who in the world doesn’t know Sagarika? About Sadanand Dhume I have heard little. Other than reading a stray column of his I knew nothing about his stance. I didn’t know if he took an Off-stump or Leg-Stump guard, but from the debate it is fair to assume he prefers Middle-stump. More of all this minor discussion later! Let’s start at the beginning with the one who takes immense pride in coining the term ‘Internet Hindus’, Sagarika Ghose, of course.

IH is just one of many inventions and concepts that Sagarika has introduced into our lives. The list is too long to run here. Let me make it absolutely clear that she didn’t coin the IH term in frustration or anger. And it’s wrong to suggest that Sagarika bears any hatred towards or is against the IH. That is as far from the truth as Earth is from the planet Moronus. Sagarika is just against logic, reason, accountability and science. Umm.. maybe even against civilisation itself. Her latest piece of brilliance was seen in her tweet on the day the Higgs-Boson (God Particle) was announced. Have you educated yourself? Did you read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins? (Read the whole lot at Sudhir Kumar’s Blog). Now, since she is so enamoured by Dawkins, and so passionately calls herself and her media gang ‘liberals’, I thought it best to quote a post from The Richard Dawkins Foundation itself. The birth of IH can be partially explained by this (Emphasis mine):

Most people are aware of Karl Popper as the father of the modern scientific method, and especially as the creator of the logic known as 'Popper falsifiability'. Somewhat less known is just how well Popper applied his prodigious logical powers to issues of society. In particular, to an issue much in the news these days...that of 'tolerance'. And in that respect, Popper made what to me is the defining statement on the matter:-

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them… We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.”

This should be framed and mounted on the wall of every liberal's house. Especially those liberals...and there are all too many of them....who are so enamoured with tolerant thinking that they demand tolerance even of the intolerant. To my mind, that level of unthinking and unlimited tolerance is akin to those Trojans who rather stupidly thought the nice wooden horse outside the city was a gift.

Fatwas, open call for murder of cartoonists, chopping off arms of professors! Tolerance! Well, now that we have set a few things in place we can get back to the AJStream discussion. A lot of questions, particularly by Sagarika, were sprinkled into the discussion on Hindu tolerance. Lisa Fletcher, the host, started off with this question:

Who are the Internet Hindus? Why do they oppose a secular India?

Did I hear you say WHAT? Okay, I have to assume this is her first foray into any Hindu related topic, so I’ll choose to forgive the stupidity in her innocent question. I don’t want to recall history of the Mughals or the British but if at all anybody in India is secular it has to be the Hindus. I am tempted to rephrase John Bradford and suggest: “But for the grace of Hindus, India would have been a Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran or even Bangladesh”. And though Lisa works for an Arabic channel she doesn’t seem to have looked deep into Arabian society to be asking such a question.

And in her first draw Sagarika states there are many online ‘organised’ communities on FB, Twitter etc. who follow the ideology of Hindu Nationalism. They attack you if you differ with them. And lo and behold the best of Sagarika: “Hindutva becomes a message for violence on the ground”. Then she gets upset when the so called fake liberals are called “paid media, servants of the Congress or the govt” and oozes emotions suggesting Javed Akhtar and Shabana Azmi, the well-known Bollywood couple, can’t find a house in Mumbai. Really? So Javed and Shabana are struggling to find a flat? Where did that one come from? If Al Jazeera or Lisa Fletcher ever wanted stories from the crypt about the Indian MSM’s misdeeds and crimes then I hope they visit this site. They can close their eyes and click on any post here and they would be alarmed at what they find. And this is not the only one, there are many other sites which have repeatedly exposed the MSM’s lies, manipulations and extreme bias against Hindus. This is all the more evident when the media handles the issue of terrorism.

Naturally, Atirath Aich, formerly associated with AJStream himself, tweets this question during the discussions. Even an average eye can clearly see that the Indian media has mostly been covering up Islamic fanaticism and terrorism and trigger-happy with the so-called saffron terrorism. It’s another story that some of the saffron terror-accused are not convicted, not tried and some have proven to be spurious cases. And Sagarika claimed they have done many exposes on Islamic fanaticism. Oh yeah? I would like to challenge her to prove this silly point she makes. Subramanian Swamy made some telling points, that India is secular because Hindus are still in majority. He points to the state of Kashmir where Hindus are a minority and speaks the truth when he says a Hindu in Kashmir suffers more discrimination than Muslims do in the rest of India where they are minorities.

SS also pointed out the incident in Kerala where a quack Sharia court ordered the arms of a professor chopped because he inadvertently wrote something negative about Islam. The order was carried out and his arms were chopped off. This is the danger that Islamic fanaticism has brought to every society where it has lived with other communities. No sane Hindu would suggest discrimination against Muslims. But Muslims are certainly responsible for their own backward condition. If Hindus had continued to practice many of the social evils of their own society they would have been just as backward too. Muslims refuse to reform and have a notorious intolerance for other communities. It is this intolerance that has grown to a point, supported by indiscriminate appeasement by the Congress and other Socialist and Leftist parties that has brought about the IH. And some of the IH are belligerent and abusive as well. By Sagarika’s measure most of her own tweets would fall under the belligerent, intolerant and abusive category. Some could even be called racist.

As far as Sadanand Dhume is concerned he mostly played the balancing act. That is a splendid achievement considering the two wings of panellists he had. But he did make an important point: “Name a country in Asia that is more tolerant of its minority” than India. The current churning against the media, the Congress+Socialists+Leftists and even intolerant Muslims did not happen overnight. This was waiting to happen. Distortion of their history, abuse of their rights, discrimination through constitution and appeasement of minorities have made many Hindus say “Enough is Enough”! The Internet blogs and social media have helped bring out the truth about the distorted history and the lies the media and historians have peddled for years. Sagarika must learn to accept that fact.

If Lisa Fletcher and AlJazeera look deeper into Hindu society they will realise the undeniable fact that Hindus are not bound together as a community by their religion. They are bound together by their traditions, social customs and practices. In her opening statements Lisa mentions “Hindutva is a core principle of the RSS”. Now, RSS doesn’t influence all Hindus nor is it a concept similar to the ‘universal brotherhood’ that applies to Muslims. And the great scientist that Sagarika is, she suggests “Hindus don’t need to fear anything”. No, they don’t need to fear anything but they are also not willing to welcome any more Trojan horses. If some IH are belligerent and abusive they would have been so even without the internet. Trust me the Muslims don’t even need the internet for that. As someone tweeted jokingly, their equivalent of IH, the IM, is already a terrorist organisation.

Here’s the last word dear Cacofonix! You may have coined the IH term to ridicule Hindus but given that you’re very scientific, you didn’t foresee the response. The panellists even debated it as an offensive term. That’s seriously a laugh. THEY ARE WRONG! Far from seeing it as ridicule or offensive, many Hindus on the net have worn it proudly as their identity. The aggressive Hindus who would have otherwise have gone by their own names or other funny names have exploded into a huge mass with different variants of the term IH. That’s called Hindu tolerance, even embracing an intended ridicule as a badge of honour. That’s the true Hindu Liberal. Go figure! 

.