India-US Strategic News and Discussion

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Sep 2010 07:58

Do you guys know why the comedian was fired from ABC after 911? Find out who he was interviewing!

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 14 Sep 2010 08:54

Bill Maher? He was interviewing Dinesh D'Souza.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Sep 2010 09:04

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher

ABC decided against renewing Maher's contract for Politically Incorrect in 2002, after he made a controversial on-air remark shortly after the September 11th attacks,[14] whereby he agreed with his guest, conservative pundit Dinesh D'Souza, that the 9/11 terrorists did not act in a cowardly manner. Maher replied, "We have been the cowards. Lobbing cruise missiles from two thousand miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building. Say what you want about it. Not cowardly. You're right." Maher later clarified that his comment was not anti-military in any way whatsoever, referencing his well-documented longstanding support for the American military.[15][16][17][18][19]

In the context of the sensitive aftermath of the attacks, such a remark was deemed too controversial for some corporate advertisers. Although some pundits, including conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, came to Maher's defense in pointing out the distinction between physical and moral cowardice,[20] several companies including FedEx and Sears Roebuck pulled their advertisements from the show, costing the show more than it returned. Ari Fleischer, the then White House Press Secretary for the Bush Administration, addressed the issue in response to a reporter's question about Maher's remark during a daily press briefing: "...they're reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. This is not a time for remarks like that..."[21]

And yet DD never lost his sheen! He still carries on as a pundit.

akashganga · Post by **akashganga** » 14 Sep 2010 09:46

Sanjay M wrote:
akashganga wrote: Dinesh D'Souza is a right wing nut. He writings appear in the US right wing websites.
Dinesh D'Souza is no ordinary right-wing nut -- he's a pseudo-secular nut who complains that "the angry old men from the American right" are persecuting Muslims, and that Muslims are natural allies of the political right who should be cultivated.

In this sense, he sounds more like an Indian Christian activist than an American Christian activist.

He's a big critic of anyone who criticizes Islam, and as a result he's fallen out of favour with the American Right. That's why he's no longer welcome at the American Enterprise Institute, etc.

It's ironic then that he always tries to distance himself from India by referring to it in alien terms, when his Indian psec-ness shines through his facade.

Btw, does anybody know what Bobby Jindal's position is on the Islamist threat to America? I'd be interested in knowing.

I agree he sounds more like an Indian Christian activist than an American Christian activist.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 14 Sep 2010 11:34

Karna_A wrote:I think there is need for another thread called 'The day after" to deal with how to manage Indian subcontinent after a nook exchange.

Yes, infact two threads:
1.) Indo-Pak-China Nuke war
2.) Post Nuke war scenario

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 14 Sep 2010 11:45

VikasRaina wrote:^ On Kuran burning controversy
So it would be ok if we call for riots and kill muslims wherever we can find them because some Muslim terrorists in Afghanistan destroyed Statues of Gautam Budh. Why should destroying temples and idols be kosher for Muslims but reverse calls for riots , murders and charges of xenophobia ?
Muslims need to respect others religions if they want to be respected in return.
After idols of Gautam Budha are as holy to me as Kuran is to Islamists.
Now that the world knows how to push the buttons, so IMO Muslims every year will face issues related to their religion one one way or the others.
Atleast the western govt's will find it hard to clamp down explicitly be it cartoon, Draw Mohammad day on FB or Ko burning incident.

I agree with you on this Vikas. It is hypocritical of to say that Koran should not be burned or Prophet's picture should not be drawn, etc, while going on and destroying other religions artificats. It is hypocritical that some christian somewhere in America does some disgusting stunt and a church in Punjab is burnt down.
On BBC the other day, I saw an angry Muslim, most probably from Pakistan or Afghanistan, saying that "if they burn the koran, we will kill the Jews, the Christians and the crusaders not only over here but anywhere they are found in this world." This is a dangerous mindset, which if not changed, will only strength the fanatic fringe of Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism. I can already picture some Sangh parivar offshots taking advantage and saying, "look how the muslims get agitated when the koran is threatened to be burnt, while how they sat silently when the statues of Bhagvan Buddha were destroyed." They will also say that muslims are intolerant and fanatics.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 14 Sep 2010 11:49

Marten wrote:It isn't the mosque by itself that is as inflammatory as the Cordoba name being used for the center/initiative. The association with the conversion of the grandest, biggest, holiest Byzantine Church in the world to a mosque has specific significance with the falling of the towers.

The name Cordoba in the West has been held up as a beacon of "tolerance" and cultural "diversity", of how one site was host to 3 different religions! Look at any introductory Spanish textbook, it will contain pictures of the Mezquita of Cordoba.

Rather than the conversion of the Christian church, the mosque name likely signifies two things. Firstly to the Western viewers it is the tolerance of Islam as interpreted by the West's own historians. It symbolizes a "golden age" in which the three Abrahamic religions lived in harmony. (Note Rauf's invocation of the Spanish Inquisition as an example of Christian "intolerance" juxtaposed with the "tolerance" of Cordoba). Secondly to the Muslim world, it also alludes to an Islamic "golden age", but it also signifies the western reach of the Islamic world. Andalus has been imagined in the Arab world as the most westward extent of Islamic power, perhaps it points to a creation of a "western" muslim polity, and a distinctly "western" practice of Islam, or perhaps it signifies that NY is part of that Muslim world itself.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 14 Sep 2010 12:19

Obama excited about India tour: Roemer
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article625177.ece

India needs US for its growth: PM
New Delhi, Sep 13, DHNS
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/963 ... rowth.html

India-US space-based solar power programme urged
http://sify.com/news/india-us-space-bas ... djbcb.html

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Sep 2010 17:59

carl t - it can be spun both ways. iirc, the arabs planned a minar in spain or france to demarcate the western boundary of islam, to complement the qutub minar in delhi as the eastern frontier
knowing the historic habits of the ROP, it is more likely to be a mark of dominance than one of tolerance
similarly al-andalus is fabled perhaps not for its beauty, but for its loss to christendom

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 14 Sep 2010 19:42

Christopher Sidor wrote: On BBC the other day, I saw an angry Muslim, most probably from Pakistan or Afghanistan, saying that "if they burn the koran, we will kill the Jews, the Christians and the crusaders not only over here but anywhere they are found in this world."

What is dangerous is the dhimmi liberal mindset which allows -
"burning of a religious text" == "taking human life"

Cart_T,

PBS had an excellent documentary on Andalusia - do not remember the title.
One thing that we know now is that there was testy peace and cooperation.
On the other hand sell out and persecution. All in all it was a very creative soup!
Ironically, it is the Muslims who lament its loss - No one to blame but themselves
Calling in the 'bearded ones' from North Africa all but annihilated the liberal Islamic mindset
and replaced it with the rules of the desert tribe.
It is hard to decipher in this controversy if the carving is for the former or for the latter!

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 14 Sep 2010 19:48

Sanjay M wrote:
akashganga wrote: Dinesh D'Souza is a right wing nut. He writings appear in the US right wing websites.
Dinesh D'Souza is no ordinary right-wing nut -- he's a pseudo-secular nut who complains that "the angry old men from the American right" are persecuting Muslims, and that Muslims are natural allies of the political right who should be cultivated.

In this sense, he sounds more like an Indian Christian activist than an American Christian activist.

He's a big critic of anyone who criticizes Islam, and as a result he's fallen out of favour with the American Right. That's why he's no longer welcome at the American Enterprise Institute, etc.

It's ironic then that he always tries to distance himself from India by referring to it in alien terms, when his Indian psec-ness shines through his facade.

Btw, does anybody know what Bobby Jindal's position is on the Islamist threat to America? I'd be interested in knowing.

Dinesh was the toast of right wing religious and racist loonies for a long time. He worked even in Bush (Sr) whitehouse. He used to write books on justifying how blacks are less smarter than whites (supporting Bell curve theory), trashing liberals, worshipping Regan and conservatives. He was the rising star of conservatives. Then he suddenly went out of circulation. I did not realize why. Now I know it. So he a pseudo secular, anti-Hindu, and anti-Black. That was fine with conservatives. But he crossed the line when he differed from their anti-Islam fight.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 14 Sep 2010 20:21

Imam weighs options for N. Y. Islamic center

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said Monday that he and his advisers are considering "every option" for what to do about the controversial Islamic community center they plan to build two blocks from Ground Zero in New York, including delaying its construction or relocating it.

The planned center, he said, has been an important part of his efforts to raise the voices of what he said are "99.9 percent of Muslims in the world" who find terrorism "absolutely abhorrent." He added: "I want a space where the voice of the moderates can be amplified. It's not good enough to teach here - no students will hear you."

wonder how many non believers and believers believe this BS

Abdul Rauf said the center would be "a place for all faiths to come together as partners, stakeholders in mutual respect. It will bring honor to the city of New York and to American Muslims. The world is watching," he said. "I offer you my pledge: We will live up to our ideals."

All faiths do not worship in mosque. To enter mosque you have to be a believer. another BS.

He placed discrimination against American Muslims and objections to the construction in the context of the historical "rejection" of minorities, including "Jews and Catholics, Irish and Italians, blacks and Hispanics," and said that "now it is our turn, as Muslims, to drink from this cup."

something behind the scenes is going on for him to think of delaying or relocating the mosque. very disingenious of him to say the above words.
Wonder what effect the construction of a gay bar near the mosque

and donald trump offer of paying 25% more for the relocation. of course majority of amirkans not liking it underlying the whole issue.

It would have been easier if he said that all places of worship including mosque will be constructed. Many would have come forward and donated for it. well I guess believers think differently.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 14 Sep 2010 20:42

Lalmohan wrote:carl t - it can be spun both ways. iirc, the arabs planned a minar in spain or france to demarcate the western boundary of islam, to complement the qutub minar in delhi as the eastern frontier
knowing the historic habits of the ROP, it is more likely to be a mark of dominance than one of tolerance
similarly al-andalus is fabled perhaps not for its beauty, but for its loss to christendom

It is probably meant to spin both ways. But I don't think to the West it is meant as a "victory minar". The iconography invoked is different, look at a Spanish textbook, see how the names of Cordoba and Moorish Spain (and the Crusades in general) are characterized today in the US. Note how Cordoba is imagined as a model of tolerance in the West and how Rauf points to the Spanish inquisition as "Christian intolerance" as a retort (in the CNN interview). To the Muslim world Andalus signifies a loss to Christendom, but to the Christian world it is much more benign...because they captured it back. So I think it means different things to either side.

They could have named it say..."Constantinople Initiative" or "Jerusalem Foundation", but neither invokes the "tolerance" that Moorish spain is supposed to stand for.

Pullikeshi - Indeed Spain is mourned as a loss by the Muslims the most, and I think it refers to Islam's past glories when they lorded over the West. Imagination of a "golden age" is key to revival!

BajKhedawal · Post by **BajKhedawal** » 14 Sep 2010 22:11

Is there any correlation between Shri Chidambaram saying bad things about colour saffron, and Ombaba doing an equal equal between Hindu temple and mosque on ground zero?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Sep 2010 22:14

Its a symbol of Islam when it lorded over the West whcih was Europe at that time. This new Cordoba House is a new Qutb Minar at the tiste of WTC ruins. Only the most deluded can see it otherwise.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Sep 2010 22:15

From Cordoba to Constantinople! another desecrated church and the fall of another pillar of christendom!
oh boy oh boy!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 14 Sep 2010 22:17

Lets hope now that may be , may be many American will now show sympathetic understanding about Indian's suffering caused by the destruction of their holy places and the Islamist monuments build on those ruins .

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Sep 2010 22:22

the spanish thing is tricky - hence the west trying to gloss over it. because the reconquista shows christian xenophobia and intolerance at its worst, which they have supposedly grown out of. spanish culture is very infused with north africa and the arabs, both positively and negatively. if you see the battle honours of lepanto at toledo (near madrid), there is no doubt of the 'victory of christ's army and navy over the barbarian turks'. spaniards started calling themselves "matamoros" or killer of moors and other similar titles, many towns celebrate elaborate local festivals featuring battles with moors and the eventual grisly victory. even today you will find a small element of pork in almost all spanish food - ostensibely to smoke out any hiding moors following the reconquista

perhaps at the time some of the moors were more 'civilised' than the europeans, but that didn't last long!

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 14 Sep 2010 22:36

Gus wrote: KSA, Talibanic Afg etc are all declared muslim states. As such, they have declared themselves to be an islamic theocracy.

USA etc are avowed secular nations. They can't say "well you are not doing it, so we won't be allowing it".

To avoid any misunderstandings, pl note that I am in no way arguing a case for muslim outrage.

Unfortunately YOU ARE. This is the logic of lifaffas and closet islamists. Just because a state is secular it doesn't mean it cannot punish religious fanatics on the basis of their faith. It is same as state punishing a murder/thief for believing and practicing his ideology. The only difference is the scale.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Sep 2010 22:36

And also all that happened in pre-Modern West. So whats the point? There is no Modern Islam anyway!

In fact it was after securing Europe the West were able to embark on Reformation.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 14 Sep 2010 22:45

Christopher Sidor wrote: I agree with you on this Vikas. It is hypocritical of to say that Koran should not be burned or Prophet's picture should not be drawn, etc, while going on and destroying other religions artificats. It is hypocritical that some christian somewhere in America does some disgusting stunt and a church in Punjab is burnt down.
On BBC the other day, I saw an angry Muslim, most probably from Pakistan or Afghanistan, saying that "if they burn the koran, we will kill the Jews, the Christians and the crusaders not only over here but anywhere they are found in this world." This is a dangerous mindset, which if not changed, will only strength the fanatic fringe of Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism. I can already picture some Sangh parivar offshots taking advantage and saying, "look how the muslims get agitated when the koran is threatened to be burnt, while how they sat silently when the statues of Bhagvan Buddha were destroyed." They will also say that muslims are intolerant and fanatics.

You do have a vivid imagination Mr. Christopher Sidor. You worry about the values of your ilk. Indian's will worry about theirs.

Isn't it true that Muslims are intolerant and fanatic - Thousands came to streets rioting and burning in J&K after seeing a "propaganda by Iranian TV?", especially when the same sunni muslims claim watching TV is haraam and Shia-Iran is infidel?

Isn't it true that Christians are intolerant and fanatic - When they oppose building of a mosque near 9/11 Ground Zero site on the basis of hurt sentiments?

Aren't the secular and democratic nations have criminal laws that put a human being in jails for years (and sometime entire lifetime) when those individuals commit a crime (sometimes according to their ideological beliefs?). Isn't secularism hypocritical to begin with when it wants to treat all religions (with different ideologies and worldviews) equal especially when some of them beget intolerance and fanaticism?

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 14 Sep 2010 22:48

Lalmohan wrote:From Cordoba to Constantinople! another desecrated church and the fall of another pillar of christendom!
oh boy oh boy!

Pardon? That is why I named Constantinople (destruction of Santa Sophia) and Jerusalem (destruction of temple)

Lalmohan wrote:
perhaps at the time some of the moors were more 'civilised' than the europeans, but that didn't last long!

That is the exact point of the name. Read between the lines, judging by representations of Spain, the names signify different things from "triumphal". IMO more accurate would be "In our glory days we ruled over a vast empire, and were tolerant to others as well, unlike how the Christians responded to us".

Again, I am not talking about whether the Moorish kingdom was really "tolerant", but simply how it is represented and imagined.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Sep 2010 22:56

Carl_T it helps to read Spanish and Byzantine History (Hagia Sophia built by Justinian) in the aftermath of Islamic taekover.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 14 Sep 2010 23:02

ramana wrote:Carl_T it helps to read Spanish and Byzantine History (Hagia Sophia built by Justinian) in the aftermath of Islamic taekover.

I've studied a decent amount of Spanish history, I don't understand your point. Everyone knows what happened to the Sophia church after Islamic takeover, which is exactly why I brought it up. Please do clarify.

As I have stated, it's not about whether the Moorish spain was tolerant, but simply how is it represented and imagined. It is about symbolism not reality. The Turks are never represented in the West as anything good, therefore calling it Constantinople initiative was out of the question. Same for Jerusalem Initiative, it would bring back imagery of destruction of Jewish temple, something that is still important. On the other hand Moorish spain has traditionally been represented as an example of Islamic tolerance contrasted with Christian barbarianism as manifested in the Inquisition. The Mezquita of Cordoba is represented in textbooks along with the Alhambra as a high point of Islamic culture. That is why the name "Cordoba" is picked, that is why Rauf refers to the Inquisition on TV as an example of Christian intolerance. Does it hint of Islamic supremacism - absolutely, triumph and victory - doubt it.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 15 Sep 2010 04:29

Carl_T,

Was he referring to the Reconquista or the Inquisition as an example of intolerance? Is there a clip somewhere? I'm not questioning your statement, just want to know precisely.

BTW, agree about the symbolism part... It is the moral high ground he's searching for here. You no doubt are already aware that Cordoba was the place where under Muslim rulers there was (to some extent) what we would call pluralism an multiculturalism today, the freedom to think, speak and write - again relatively speaking. It is this he is trying to harken back to.

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 15 Sep 2010 09:13

akashganga wrote:
Dinesh D'Souza is a right wing nut. He writings appear in the US right wing websites.

I am working on an article "How a Desi dork got Kissed, Got wild and Got Laid, all the while pretending to be a conservative".
Needless to say, it'll be plagiarized from Kavya Viswanathan's work 'cause Opal Mehta and Dinesh D'Souza are one and the same.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Sep 2010 14:55

carl, i think we agree on the core point, although was confused about the way you wrote it. your subsequent post clarifies things.

i am not sure that all muslims will interpret cordoba to mean high point of 'our benevolence', it is more likely to be interpreted as 'high water mark of our expansions'

my suggestion to the folks who want to build a mosque on ground zero, why not use the money to set up a memorial to the firefighters of new york city instead, and thank them on behalf of all american muslims?

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 15 Sep 2010 20:09

Except some suggestions to build a mosque at Ground Zero there is no one supporting or no one is planning to build a mosque at Ground Zero. There is a support for building a mosque near Ground Zero. This confusion should be clarified among many people. At ground zero there should be a building for victims certainly. If there is a need for any religious building at Ground zero then there can be a multifaith chaplaincy or centre for multifaith relationship. Otherwise any religious building at Ground zero is going to hurt someone's feeling. Building a mosque near ground zero is not a problem at all. Some Rich Islamic groups should consider renovating the church opposite to the ground zero. Building such relationship is important than dividing people in the name of religion. Even building a Hindu temple nearby place should be appreciated.

http://www.euronews.net/2010/09/11/us-d ... ro-mosque/

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 15 Sep 2010 20:27

Indian filmmaker Vijay Kumar leaves US after detention

Sources said Kumar, who is travelling to India enroute to Canada, will soon reach his country, and left Houston on "voluntary departure". Without confirming his Canada visit, Kumar's lawyer, Roger Jain said that the filmmaker is out of Houston and the United States for now. Kumar's departure marks an end to the tumultuous few weeks for him during which he was arrested and jailed for over 20 days.

Pradip Parekh, a spokesman for the Hindu Congress of America, which invited Kumar to the US, said Kumar wanted to go home and out of the country as soon as possible. "It's so outrageous, and hard to swallow that Indian government didn't do much to secure his freedom earlier, despite the fact that it promises in the Indian passport that it will take care of its citizens in any country," he said.

He hoped that appropriate action would be taken to ensure that such an event did not occur again with innocent Indian citizens in the future in any foreign land. Kumar was convicted of illegally carrying brass knuckles in his checked airport baggage. He pleaded "no contest" to a misdemeanor weapons charge in exchange for time served and so he could be returned to India soon.

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 15 Sep 2010 20:53

Is there legal grounds for India to sue the US (or the pastor) to pay-up for the Kashmir riots triggered because of BaQ day? The pastor was responsible for the riots and damage, the same way BP screwed up the lives of Louisiana fishermen.

sum · Post by **sum** » 15 Sep 2010 21:36

"It's so outrageous, and hard to swallow that Indian government didn't do much to secure his freedom earlier, despite the fact that it promises in the Indian passport that it will take care of its citizens in any country," he said.

The same PM had mentioned in open press that he wasn't able to sleep at night when another Indian ( of the Congress votebank type) was detained on much, much more serious charges in Oz...

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 15 Sep 2010 21:50

krithivas wrote:Is there legal grounds for India to sue the US (or the pastor) to pay-up for the Kashmir riots triggered because of BaQ day? The pastor was responsible for the riots and damage, the same way BP screwed up the lives of Louisiana fishermen.

krithivas ji,

The US constitution guarantees its citizens the right to burn ANY book.

Why would the pastor care about some wahabis in kashmir?

Aren't the amrekis taking out pakis in pakiland using drones?

A lot of collateral damage occurs and innocent (?) paki citizens are also taken out.

I haven't heard of any compensation being paid.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Sep 2010 21:56

Actually by forcing the pastor not to exercise his Constituional rights US has scored a self goal. It has departed from Voltaire's saying "I disagree with what you say, however I support your right to say it!" which is the fundamental tenet of Englightenment.
Its also a dhimmi power. It has done more damage to itself than the riots in Kashmir.

Also were there any such riots anywhere else in the world based on that US incident?

If not why did the Kashmir separatists feel they are beholden to exercise their grievance violently?

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 15 Sep 2010 22:07

krithivas wrote:Is there legal grounds for India to sue the US (or the pastor) to pay-up for the Kashmir riots triggered because of BaQ day? The pastor was responsible for the riots and damage, the same way BP screwed up the lives of Louisiana fishermen.

That's ridiculous - the pastor didn't cause the Kashmiri mentalcases to riot - they caused themselves to riot. If they couldn't riot over the pastor's threatened Koran-burning (which he didn't even go through with) then they would have rioted over something else

The only way to deal with such monsters is to treat them in kind - or worse. They deserve some rioting against them, to give them a much-needed education on what it feels like to be on the recieving end. They only riot because they know they can get away with it. They only want others to be meek and prostrate before them.

And Kaangress isn't helping by trying to stretch out the situation.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Sep 2010 22:17

ramana - there were riots in afghanistan

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Sep 2010 22:35

Any where else? Looks like Paki hand in both places.

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 16 Sep 2010 00:41

The threat of action of an American citizen resulted in large scale violence, and the destruction of public and private property, and importantly the lives of 15 Indian citizens.

It is the responsibility of GOTUS to have anticipated the grave sensitivity of the threat, and must have acted earlier and more decisively. Both GOTUS and the Pastor are responsible for not having anticipated the repercussions of their threat and in-action respectively.

Besides it is Afghanistan's problem if they pursue this case or not.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 16 Sep 2010 00:47

RamaY wrote:Unfortunately YOU ARE. This is the logic of lifaffas and closet islamists. Just because a state is secular it doesn't mean it cannot punish religious fanatics on the basis of their faith. It is same as state punishing a murder/thief for believing and practicing his ideology. The only difference is the scale.

Hey man...I don't understand what the heck you wrote there....

There are many arguments against the mosque...

But the one that goes "well...muslim countries are not allowing churches to be built, why should we allow mosques to be built" is not the right argument.

That's all I am saying.

That be the case, then we can all just go fornicate with our cuzins, kill people we don't like and give them blood money, and run in the streets shouting, rioting and burning flags and begging and demanding money from other countries while telling them we hate them...because that's what some muslims in muslim countries do????

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 16 Sep 2010 00:54

If not a lawsuit- GoI should send a delegation of "eminent" Parliamentarians and "eminent" Religious scholars to Florida to investigate Christian radicalization in Florida. If their actions are reverberating in India (through Pakistan), India has a right to be intrusive.

akashganga · Post by **akashganga** » 16 Sep 2010 00:58

Karna_A wrote:
akashganga wrote:
Dinesh D'Souza is a right wing nut. He writings appear in the US right wing websites.
I am working on an article "How a Desi dork got Kissed, Got wild and Got Laid, all the while pretending to be a conservative".
Needless to say, it'll be plagiarized from Kavya Viswanathan's work 'cause Opal Mehta and Dinesh D'Souza are one and the same.

Republican party in the US is mostly a white judeo-christian party. They have few non white faces to show them as all embracing. These non whites serve as useful idiots for them. When media in India call BJP as Hindu Nationalist party why don't they all Republican party as christian nationalist party.