DFI Hall of Fame

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
16,330
Likes
70,173
Summation of congress politics with comparison to house care taker
I would put it differently.

It's a long story, but the man was the caretaker of the house, which he came to be because the previous invader (British) had deemed it so. The man came to regard himself not as the caretaker but the owner of the house and made sure that few other inhabitants of the house could challenge him.

He grew arrogant, distant and increasingly dictatorial and enriched himself at the cost of others, fomented divisions, failed to protect the house from the baleful, trigger happy neighbour and blamed the inhabitants of the house for their misery and fear.

The man allowed outsiders to come in and undermine the foundations of the house as he thought, it would cement his grip on the house. If the man's underling showed an iota of competence, he was either sidelined or killed. Absolute compliance was the demand.

Many inhabitants got fed up and finally decided to remove the man from the post of the caretaker and a new person came into the job. The man refused to accept this and since then has continuously tried to undermine the new caretaker in his efforts to set right the state of the house, because if the house is set right, the man will have to change and improve himself to retain the caretakership (in his opinion the rightful ownership).
 

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,277
Likes
56,182
Country flag
Thanks @OneGrimPilgrim
story of how the always & unfailingly amazingly awesome manishankar once got amar singh's jooties in his derriere. oxford & cambridge lot get lots of practise to use tongue & rear just as rest of the Indian elite class


manishankar aiyyar's reality...
#मणिशंकर_अय्यर से याद आया।

बात नवम्बर 2000 की है। चित्रकार सतीश गुजराल ने वरिष्ठ पत्रकार एच के दुआ के विवाह की ख़ुशी में दिल्ली में एक पार्टी का आयोजन किया था। पार्टी में दिल्ली के नामी-गिरामी लोग पहुंचे थे। कांग्रेसी नेता मणिशंकर अय्यर भी पार्टी की शोभा बढ़ाने आये हुए थे।

जैसा कि दिल्ली की पार्टियों में होता है, शराब अपने पूरे शबाब पर थी। अब पार्टी में मुफ्त की दारु मिले तो दारुबाज़ तो पगलाएंगे ही। तो साहब, हमारे मणिशंकर अय्यर के साथ भी कुछ ऐसा ही हुआ। सर जी शराब के नशे में धुत्त होकर पहुँच गए अमर सिंह के पास, जो उस समय समाजवादी पार्टी के एकमात्र ऐसे नेता थे जिन्हें इस तरह की सोशल गैदरिंग में बुलाया जाता था।

अब आप पूछेंगे कि अय्यर साहब भरी पार्टी में सीधा अमर सिंह के पास ही क्यों पहुंचे, तो चलिए पहले वो सुन लीजिये, फिर उसके बाद कहानी आगे सुनियेगा।

आपको याद होगा कि 1999 में जब वाजपेयी जी की सरकार सदन में एक वोट से गिरी थी तो सोनिया गाँधी की ख़ुशी का ठिकाना नहीं था। इटली में जन्मी इस देवी का भारत के प्रधानमंत्री बनने का सपना पूरा होने जा रहा था। शपथ ग्रहण समारोह में शामिल होने के लिए देवी जी की माँ और बहन भी इटली से दिल्ली पहुँच चुकी थीं।

पर ऐन वक़्त पर मुलायम सिंह यादव ने भाँजी मार दी। उन्हें लगा कि भारत का प्रधानमंत्री बनने का हक़ सिर्फ उसी व्यक्ति को है जिसका जन्म इस देश की मिट्टी में हुआ हो। तो नेताजी ने साफ़-साफ़ कह दिया कि वह सोनिया गाँधी के नेतृत्व वाली किसी भी सरकार का समर्थन नहीं करेंगे।

अब सोनिया गाँधी करें भी तो क्या करें! मुलायम के समर्थन के बिना उनकी सरकार बन नहीं सकती थी। फिर भी मैडम जी हिम्मत जुटा कर राष्ट्रपति के पास 242 सांसदों का समर्थन पत्र ले कर चली गईं और सरकार बनाने का दावा पेश कर दिया। उन्होंने सोचा कि एक बार राष्ट्रपति महोदय ने उन्हें प्रधानमंत्री नियुक्त कर दिया तो उन्हें पंद्रह-बीस दिन का टाइम मिल जायेगा। इस दौरान सेकुलरिज्म की दुहाई दे कर मुलायम के ऊपर दबाव बनाया जायेगा और उन्हें विश्वास मत के दौरान समर्थन के लिए मजबूर किया जाएगा। पर राष्ट्रपति के आर नारायणन मजबूर थे। वह दिल से चाहते हुए भी सोनिया गाँधी को प्रधानमंत्री बनने का न्योता नहीं दे पा रहे थे क्यूंकि तेरह महीने पहले ही उन्होंने अटल बिहारी वाजपेयी को तब तक प्रधानमंत्री बनने के लिए आमंत्रित नहीं किया था जब तक कुछ खास मंत्रालय लेने के लिए कोप भवन में बैठी जयललिता ने अपने सांसदों का समर्थन पत्र उन्हें नहीं दे दिया।

तो साहब हुआ ये कि राष्ट्रपति महोदय को सोनिया गाँधी को खाली हाथ लौटाना पड़ा। सोनिया गाँधी का प्रधानमंत्री बनने का सपना चकनाचूर हो गया। कांग्रेसी नेताओं से अपने नेता का यह दुःख देखा नहीं गया। वो जब भी और जहाँ भी मौका मिलता, खलनायक मुलायम सिंह यादव को जी भर कर कोसते।

तो चलिए, अब हम कहानी की ओर वापस चलते हैं।

सतीश गुजराल की पार्टी में पाँच पैग चढाने के बाद गांधी परिवार के सेवक मणिशंकर अय्यर के अन्दर का गुस्सा जोर मारने लगा। कांग्रेस की क्वीन के प्रति अपनी लॉयल्टी साबित करने का यह एक सुनहरा मौका था। तो अय्यर साहब पहुँच गए अमर सिंह के पास, जो दो-चार अन्य गेस्ट्स के साथ बातें कर रहे थे।

मणि ने अमर सिंह से कहा, "You racist! You prevented Sonia Gandhi from becoming the Prime Minister only because she's a foreigner."

अमर सिंह ने सफाई दी, "I did not prevent her from becoming the PM. It was the collective decision of Samajwadi Party MPs and MLAs under Mulayam Singh's leadership. As a spokesperson, it was my duty to articulate the party's view."

मणि ने जब देखा कि वह अमर सिंह को उकसाने में सफल नहीं हुए हैं तो उन्होंने सिंह पर व्यक्तिगत हमला बोला, "You are a broker of industrialists, you are Ambani's dog."

अमर सिंह ने अपने गुस्से को काबू में रखते हुए पलटवार किया, "ये तू नहीं, शराब बोल रही है मणि शंकर! तुझे नहीं पता, पर सब देख रहे हैं कि नशे में धुत्त तेरा सारा शरीर कैसे डोल रहा है।"

जब मणि ने देखा कि उनके उकसाने का अमर सिंह पर कोई असर ही नहीं हो रहा है, तो उन्होंने सिंह को ललकारा, "What sort of a Thakur are you? You are a pimp. You are a bloody m**** f***** "

अमर क्रोधित हो उठे। पर उन्होंने संयम बनाये रखा। कहा, "I can also abuse your mother, but I won't stoop so low. For God's sake, don't provoke the beast in me."

पर मणि नहीं रुके। उनके सर पर तो मानो शैतान सवार था। उन्होंने कहा, "We belong to the Oxford and Cambridge set... Your leader can't even articulate himself in English... Oh that bloody Mulayam -- he looks just like me. It could be because my father visited UP at some point. Why don't you check with Mulayam's mother?"

मणि की यह सड़कछाप हरकत तो अच्छे-अच्छों को हिला कर रख देती। तो अमर सिंह भला क्या चीज थे! अपने नेता की माँ के बारे में ऐसे अपशब्द सुन कर अमर सिंह के सब्र का बाँध टूट पड़ा। उन्होंने आव देखा न ताव, अय्यर की गर्दन पकड़ी और उनके ऊपर लात-घूंसों की बौछार कर दी। अय्यर पिटते रहे और लोग देखते रहे। पार्टी में मौजूद किसी भी व्यक्ति ने अय्यर को बचाने की कोशिश नहीं की। मानो सभी को इस शुभ दिन का बरसों से इंतज़ार था।

इस घटना के बाद मणि शंकर अय्यर तीन महीने तक सार्वजनिक जीवन से गायब रहे।

यह पूरी घटना विस्तार से टाइम्स ऑफ़ इंडिया के 3 दिसम्बर 2000 के अंक में छपी थी। (Link in Comments)

बहरहाल, यह कहानी मैंने पंद्रह साल बाद फिर से यहाँ इसलिए सुनाई ताकि जिन्हें पता नहीं था उन्हें पता लग सके कि मणि शंकर अय्यर कितने बड़े लतखोर हैं। आजकल देश में और देश के बाहर पाकिस्तान में वह जिस तरह से जयचंद की भूमिका अदा कर रहे हैं, उसे देखते हुए किसी देशभक्त ने अगर उन्हें फिर से कहीं धो डाला तो लाइफ जिंगा लाला।

Rakesh Srivastava
#Repost
Originally posted on 23 Nov 2015
30 characters in the name of freedom of expression! @square
 

aditya g

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,962
Likes
4,651
Country flag

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
16,330
Likes
70,173
Looked thru forum, don't know where to post, so posting here,

THIS IS WHY WE HAVE SO MANY PRESTITUTES

Once upon a time, I was a young journalist with no opinions. I had been trained by an editor whose first instruction was that reporters cannot & should not have opinions or views. To a senior opinionated reporter in Kashmir, I may have appeared naïve because I was open listening to his and everyone’s views including those who had been instrumental in eviction of Pandits from Kashmir.

We became friends; he told me how he wanted to be a militant when he was young. He shared with me why he was sympathetic to the cause of ‘azadi’—separatism from India. He confided in me his activism projects—he was going to ensure that“his boys” get into every major news outlet of the country.

Yeah, he wanted an empire one day to do his victimhood journalism. He was training boys how to write, argue and counter-argue to make their case for ‘azadi’ and for the violent “rebellion”. Probably, I was a potential candidate too. He started directing me to stories with slants and news with tilts. But each time I scratched the surface with a reporter’s zeal, I came out with nuanced stories covering multiple voices & versions.I didn’t realize how it did not fit his scheme of things until one day he made it apparent that I had severely damaged his political agenda by speaking about my personal story of displacement to a couple of documentary makers whom he had introduced me to. I had ruined the entire project by pointing out and showing my truth to them. I had put a huge question mark on the narrative he had spun and sold to the world that Kashmir militancy was a righteous freedom movement and had nothing to do with Islamo-fascism.

In anger and frustration, he exposed himself. He said that the documentary had drifted and was presenting a different perspective from what he believes in. Our friendship began crumbling as I began voicing my own experiences and when I objected to his support for murderous stone-pelting and street rioting. It broke the day I wrote a first-person account of my life.

Moral of this short Kashmir story is? Anyone?

Source:
@Bharat Ek Khoj posting this gem over here so I doesn't get buried under sea of time
 

aditya g

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,962
Likes
4,651
Country flag
Nice one how Sarabjit was avenged.

Indian establishment taught a swift lesson to pak after it announced Sarabjith dead on 2nd may...among a large population of convicted Pak prisoners in India a target was swiftly chosen to drive home the point that Pak has crossed the line n to dissuade Pak from repeating it...Sanaullah was chosen as he s Sarabjith's counterpart with same high career trajectory n downfall in spy game...he was also arrested in the same year 1990, as Sarabjith was caught....convicted of same crime - killing through bombing....both pleaded in court the same excuse - mistakenly crossed the border.....day after Sarabjith's death on 3rd may same bodily injury was engineered -a massive head injury to put Sanaullah in coma...he was declared dead after 6 days of hospitalisation , same 6 days of Sarabjith's hospitalisation period. Every thing choreographed to teach Pak a lesson..

Vinod a court martialed Jawan was the perpetrator of the attack on Sanaullah in the Jammu prison n was acquitted in 2 years as the only witness - 2 Pakistanis were deported before they can give evidence in the case.

Sanaullah Haq was an ISI operative accorded a rare state funeral Wen his body was returned...he operated in Kashmir affiliated with hizb wen militancy started to rear it's head in late 80s....he was arrested in 1990 in Kashmir.....convicted among other things in 2 bombing resulting in death of 14 Indians.

Similar lesson was taught even during kulbhushan case.....we gave a taste of their own medicine.... kulbhushan was entrapped by isi on a promising lead....Lt col zahir played crucial role in kulbhushan entrapment....he was part of core team who tracked the Commander for a long time...We taught them a lesson in a neat way by playing Der own game n trapped zahir the same way kulbushan was trapped...a promising lead....bait was through underworld Indian ..a juicy target was promised for the Lt col n he lapped up the bait..assets in middle East , Nepal were used...text book snatch ops by highly secretive raw.....we lifted him in lumbini...apart from tit for tat, diff agencies can pick his brain for 6 months n roll up half a hostile spy dozen networks in india..as against wat many think our retaliated are not blind knee jerk reactions but carefully calibrated psy ops to drive home points n dissuade napakis in attempting another blunder.... lessons are taught n learnt..

We play now their own game in their own backyard....Why you think after the fidayeen style attack on us in Mazar-e-sharief (thwarted by ITBP/Afgan SF in a 24hrs ops) last year was paid back in the same coin in 10 days time at Pak embassy in Jalalabad ...all hell broke loose at Pakistan embassy in Jalalabad with same MO, attackers holed up in a strong room in a house opp to embassy. We showed we can turn the tables in their own game.....fidayeen attack...

Rest assured raw/mi r at the top of their game....interesting times ahead...
 

aditya g

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,962
Likes
4,651
Country flag
A typical post by @Kunal Biswas - where you can see how the man curates and shares his research from years.





These photos were taken by me during 2012 expo, It was first time i saw our own UGCV first hand, It was impressive with 30mm AGL and 7.62mm MMG ..

==========
==========





Pictures i took during 2014 expo, It was really interesting to see an Armoured cover over optics and Gun systems and electronics, The prototype was call rudra and was different from 2012 model, Its interesting to note that optics and gun placement were changed here ..

=========
=========





This is the recent config, Seems like designers are back to 2012 design but re-modified, The gun positions are moved again, The ammunition box for 30mm AGL is relocated, Updated FCS and optics ..





Back in 2016, Army brass visited this system and wanted it to be in CT areas with improvements ..
 

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
16,330
Likes
70,173
I see this thread has taken off :biggrin2:
 

aditya g

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,962
Likes
4,651
Country flag
triple distilled gyan from @Bengal_Tiger

You are right. Bangladeshi society seems to be like this.

1. One section view 71 like the Jews view the holocaust and the Armenians view their ethnic cleansing. A horrific monolithic defining event which can never be forgotten.

This is more the elite members of society including those less prone to rhetoric of "Muslim brotherhood".

2. Another section (minority) who are deluded, some who have racial self-hatred and want to be "more Muslim", which in their eyes (either overtly or covertly) means looking more wheat-skinned like people in south-west Asia which Pakistan is a peripheral part of or adjacent to in other words Jamaatis / razakaars (defence pk types).

3. Groups that in varying degrees fall somewhere within that spectrum.

Politically:

The Awami League hates Pakistan but doesn't push it too far partly because Pakistan is very clever at manipulating pan-Muslim sentiment amongst other states such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey against Bangladesh. However with Bangladesh's increasing economic growth and thus importance that sort of pressure is decreasing.

Despite the exaggerated nonsense from Pakistan-walas, the Hasina government has been relatively restrained against Pakistan especially considering the fact that Pakistan is actively trying to murder her and has tried to instigate army coups.

The key bi-lateral issues between Bangladesh and Pakistan are:

- Apology for 1971.
- Giving Bangladesh assets it was owed as part of the eastern wing of pre-71 Pakistan.
- Reparations.



The BNP and Jamaat: Jamaat are obviously nothing but Pakistanis or a tool of Pakistan, a non-military division of the Pakistan army operating in Bangladesh. The BNP are their allies and believe they can never gain power without their support. In other words the BNP is a de facto pro-Pakistan organisation working with outright Pakistani nationalists (the Jamaat, who though obviously not overtly Pakistani nationalists are nothing but that in reality).

The truth is Bangladesh is the scene of a turf war between Rawalpindi and New Delhi.

Rawalpindi basically wants a vassal state, whereas New Delhi (despite the propaganda on disinformation sites like defence pk) wants a non-hostile Bangladesh which is co-operative with it. New Delhi I would say has more of a genuine interest in the economic progress of Bangladesh and the Indian north-east, whereas Rawalpindi just wants to use Bangladesh to damage India and also secondarily soothe its ego over a "lost" territory/former half but with no genuine concern over the lives of Bangladeshis and their acute struggle to uplift themselves from poverty.


Indo-BD co-operation.

The truth is India helped Bangladesh to win its freedom in 1971 and also helped Bangladesh in the late 2000s and 2010s remove itself of Pakistani influence including ISI networks in 2009 and get some justice against war criminals.

India has to its credit in a mature and civilized fashion resolved certain bi-lateral issues with Bangladesh such as maritime territorial disputes, enclave disputes, reduction of killings on the border etc.

India can be reasoned with rationally, Pakistan cannot.

India is a civilized parliamentary democracy where the army is professional and has never carried out a coup and is a multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic federation where issues can be resolved through legal means e.g. creation of new states etc.

Pakistan is a military-run state replete with incidents of army coups, extremist Mullahs on the lose.

Hopefully with increased economic growth there will be more maturity intellectually amongst Bangladeshis and the Bangladeshi youth and they will decide whether they wish to be co-operating more with a pluralistic civilian democracy or a brutal genocidal military state infested with religious, ethnic and political infighting.
Good post.

You're totally right in everything you say.

1. Many Bangladeshis have a degree of racial inferiority, self-hate, whatever you want to call it. Not all, especially many of the Dhaka literati and elite who detest Pakistan.

I've personally met one Jamaati here in London who said he wishes Pakistan takes Bangladesh back, when I raised the issue of Pakistani racism, he didn't deny it but said "oh that's just Pakistanis" i.e. that's the way they are, one of those unfortunate facts of life but still he had loyalty to Pakistan.

2. Other Bangladeshis are urged to brush this under the carpet as "it happened a long time ago", the "current generation of Pakistanis are not responsible".

3. With many of the Islamist/Jamaati types there is also a desire for glory/pride that can be found within many forms of nationalism, since Bangladesh is a small, poverty-stricken country and they feel Bengalis are "ugly" or not "Muslim" enough, they want to be seen as Pakistanis or a de facto "east Pakistan".

Other Jamaatis are just religiously brainwashed fanatics, and as we know with many religious zealots they can be programmed to say the sky is green and the grass is blue, hence they will support the Pakistani genocide of 1971.

4. Bangladeshis are also quite emotional and soft-hearted, a bit naive. A trip by some Bengalis to Pakistan for shared military training and the "love" and "brotherhood" from Pakistanis makes them forget about 1971. There are a few instances of ex-Mukti Bahini who have become Jamaati supporters.

Are these things shameful?

Totally.

I can't defend them, nor will I. In fact even some of the anti-Pakistani Bangladeshis have a weird relationship with Pakistan e.g. they would support Pakistan over another Muslim country like Afghanistan.

The truth is by nature I am not a nationalist, or a jingoistic person. I am essentially a humanist (though religious) seeing the fact that there are good and bad in all races and we are all humans. However the real world taught me that Pakistanis are indeed racist (I am quite surprised at how well you know how they view us e.g. short, dark, inferior and with contempt, who deserved to be butchered) and not just them, but other ethnic groups. I am more of a defensive nationalist who has become a "nationalist", to ensure his race/country aren't attacked.

Also everyone in the world whether I like it or not will view me as a 'Bangladeshi' (though I have a UK passport, which as we know is only a legal thing and socially, culturally I am a foreigner) and the perception of Bangladesh in the world will affect me directly, so I can't disown myself from Bangladesh, though to be honest I'd never want to live there. I might move to a foreign country one day (most likely a Muslim one) but never Bangladesh or the gulf. There are things about Bangladeshi society which put me off.

In sum Bangladeshis definitely do have issues, and there can be no defence. The only mitigating factor is there is a huge section of the population which is anti-Pakistani and has not forgot about 1971. Are they the majority? Very possible.
I don't know about Teesta.

Mamata Banerjee is pro-Jamaat and pro-Mullah in West Bengal. In Calcutta, the Muslim voice is dominated by Urdu-wala Muslims or the sort of Mullahs that are pro-Jamaat. They want to sabotage Bangladesh's success so have lobbied her for preventing an agreement on Teesta.

Jamaatis are evil people, and they want to harm Bangladesh (their "own" country, and their "own" people) and for example want to sabotage Bangladesh's relations with the Muslim world, even if the country as a whole suffers e.g. blocking of Bangladeshi workers to the gulf labour market.
1. The Pakistani hatred towards India has a racial aspect to it and is not just based on hatred of Hindus. Pakistanis (Punjabis/Pashtuns) dislike Indic Mohajirs and view them as darker and inferior despite them being Muslim, we all know their genocidal hatred for "fellow Muslims", Bengalis so what chance do Indians stand?

Bengalis (Bangladeshis) are quite different to militaristic Pakistanis, less violent. No tribes in our culture, no blood feuds and even our religious scholars of different schools of thought are disgusted at the violent and abusive language that Pakistani religious scholars (Barelwi, Deobandi, Wahabi etc) hurl at each other.

Pakistanis like fighting and violence and thus they constantly brag about their status as a nuclear power and fantasize about fighting India, I stress "fantasize", because when push comes to shove, they chicken out e.g. 1971.

All sorts of pseudo-Islamic rhetoric was used to de-Islamize Bengalis and present them as Hindus and to portray the rapist Pakistan army as "Islamic", this brave, tough, "Islamic" army that rather than fighting to the last man, to the death, on "their" soil, meekly surrendered quite quickly in December 1971.

There is a reason why Punjabi Muslims have never had their own state besides the one bequeathed to them by the British.

Bengalis are a more peaceful, less aggressive people, even in our interpretation of Islam, besides some Jamaati fools nobody would want to fight India for the sake of it or hate Hindus for the sake of it, in fact a Hindu-hater in Bangladesh would be considered as an aggressive, abusive people.

Even Bengali Muslims and Urdu-wala (Bihari) Muslims in west Bengal are quite different.

2. Sorry for rambling on but I'm partly venting because I see so much ignorance online and have to stay quiet so I am releasing some pent up frustration and unexpressed thoughts, anyway to answer your questions more systematically.

"In your opinion, if pakistan continues to put up a false facade of pan muslim brotherhood, and continues to fund Jamaati types in Bangladesh, all the while continuing its anti Hindu propaganda, is there a possibility that Bangladeshis might turn anti India in the future? "

Yes.

The BNP-Jamaat are basically agents of Pakistan. The military like any military anywhere in the world are right-wing and nationalist which in the Bangladeshi context means being proud of the national religion, Islam, which often leads to an affinity, fondness for Islam.

So the opposition and many in the army are quite pro-Pakistan.

There are Hindus in the BNP and Bangladeshis in general abhor communalism and it's seen as retrogressive (maybe there are some issues but we are very different from Pakistan), so internally I do not foresee a major problem for Hindu citizens of Bangladesh, but I could imagine the BNP-Jamaat nexus trying to reactive their anti-India policies of the 2000s including supporting north-east separatists as ordered by their masters in Rawalpindi.

"Or is there enough anti fundamentalist sentiment in Bangladesh to counteract it and maintain good relations with India?"

Not every religious conservative in Bangladesh is an India-hater. Most of them are inclined to "Live and let live" i.e. if mainly Muslim Bangladesh and mainly Hindu India do their own thing they are happy. The biggest religious group in Bangladesh are the Deobandis. They are closer to the sentiments of the average Bangladesh regarding 1971 which includes the national distaste for Jamaatis. A dislike for them (on the part of the Deobandis) intensified since the Jamaati betrayal of Hefazat i Islam in a demonstration in Dhaka which led to a lot of deaths, in 2012.

One of the biggest scholars (a Deobandi) in Bangladesh, Boruna saab is known for protecting Hindus in 1971.

The Indian-wing of the Deobandis include pro-Congressites and "pro-Indian patriots".

The secular literati and elite include many undercover agnostics and atheists and are indifferent to any talk of "religious brotherhood", most of them support the Awami League. Though numerically small they are disproportionately powerful just like any elite in any society.

Are Bangladeshis becoming more secular, or less?

As a society I think Islam is getting stronger, this is what I hear. This belies all the Jamaati propaganda of the Awami League being "enemies of Islam".

What is the opinion of India by the common man in Bangladesh, and it is getting better or worse?

Bangladeshis in general do not talk much about India. Unlike Pakistan they do not define themselves as being opposed to India/Hindus and believe they have a messianic neo-Mughal destiny of defeating evil Hindu India in an epic final (Muslim v Hindu) showdown. Bangladeshis are just more normal people. Think of how Sri Lankans (Buddhists) view India (Hindus) and you'll probably get the picture.

We would think of India in the way that many countries have neighbouring states with which they may have some disagreements with, but we do not fundamentally seek the destruction of or vanquishing of India.

- Baltic states v Russia.
- Afghanistan v Pakistan
- Japan v China

all of these states have more hatred with each other than Bangladeshis do for India.

One of the problems is the arrogance of Pakistanis and their feeling that they "own" Bangladesh means that Bangladeshis are merely expected to be basically like Pakistanis and have the same psychopathic hatred of India as they do and the same belief that they are in a historical war which will culminate in the neo-Mughal destruction/defeat of India.

Pakistanis cannot compute that Bangladeshis are not Pakistanis and do not think like this, they feel that any "deviation" from the "norm" (as they percieve it) of anti-India/Hindu hatred is "treachery".

Virtually every Muslim country in the world has good relations with India and many/most have better relations with India than they do with Pakistan, the only key exceptions being Turkey and Saudi Arabia. However Erdogan's Turkey and Wahabi Saudi Arabia are hardly responsible moderate states.

Is the opinion of India getting better or worse?

As I said there isn't much focus on India despite Pakistan's obsessive desire to superimpose their hatred of India on to us. Is it getting better or worse? I can't say either way. However if I have to go for one I'd probably have to say "better", because issues like border killings are being resolved thus less ammunition for Jamaatis to fuel anti-India hatred.


What will happen? / Conclusion

Bangladesh will continue like Sri Lanka, an Indic south Asian state with no great hatred for India but somewhat separated due to religion (Islam/Buddhism) and an ethnic identity (Bengali/Sinhalese), but just as India could work with Sri Lanka on certain issues the same could happen with Bangladesh.

If the BNP-Jamaat nexus come in to power, their masters in Pakistan will be demanding that Bangladesh be made once again in to a giant ISI base, but the problem however even for the BNP is that aside from the Pakistanis there are influential sectors of the elite in Bangladesh who will lobby for some sort of relationship with India.

Even Hasina hasn't shut down the Pakistani embassy or stopped Pakistani businessmen making money in Dhaka.

Like wise, even Khaleda will probably have to curb some of her anti-India hatred due to practicality.

The key thing that will prevent anti-India hatred in Bangladesh is if enough of the Dhaka elite e.g. industrialists are made to appreciate India and Bangla-India relations and benefit from it e.g. lucrative economic interaction, economic trade that transcend party politics and so financially beneficial that will render it impossible for Khaleda to totally distance Bangladesh from India.

I believe Bangladeshis are reasonable people and if the Indian military make it clear to the Bangladeshi military command their legitimate concerns (Jamaati-Pak attempts to take over the army and promote hatred and destabilization of India) and that the Bangladeshi military should have a strategic doctrine of not unnecessarily provoking India the Bangladeshi military would agree to that. Look at the relatively passive reaction to the Myanmar expulsion of the Rohingyas and the insistence on a political-diplomatic solution.

Another option India has in terms of the Bangladesh sphere is to speak to Saudi Arabia and the GCC about her legitimate security concerns on her eastern borders and Pakistani destabilizing and to use GCC leverage against Pakistan and especially Khaleda not to try and cause problems for India.

However I do not ever foresee an India-Bangladesh war, the army wouldn't allow it. The army are not too keen on Khaleda and especially Tariq ZIa whom they beat up and are responsible people and do not want to engage in adventurism for the sake of Pakistan.
Complete thread:

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...ed-coup-in-crisis-hit-bangladesh.80138/page-2
 

aditya g

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,962
Likes
4,651
Country flag
@Nanjesh Patel explains through a series of posts why Army actions at LoC under current political regime have to be seen differently - it's not 'more of the same'.

With all due respect to posters over here - the Indian Army always had the skills, but the political will was absent earlier. As a fellow poster (@pankaj nema) had posted a few pages back about the chiding and transferring of aggressive officers at LC for taking decisions to the dismantling of TSD by Gen V K Singh, the political will was transparently absent.

A few points from an article based on Nitin Gokhale's book (chapter on SS) (many would have read it, but it's necessary to read it again in the current context - read debate which is going on here about political will).

- But were not cross-border raids carried out earlier too, I (*Nitin Gokhale, as can be presumed*) asked Gen Dalbir. “Yes, they were,” he agreed “but most actions taken in our younger days were, what we call, BAT (Border Action Team) raids on specific post(s) as retribution for something that the Pakistan Army troops would have carried out on our position(s),” he said. “What we were now planning for was much larger with greater ramifications,” he explained.
- In a way, it was like revisiting their basic tenets for the Special Forces men. And they loved it. Although no one could have anticipated that they would be called in to strike across the LoC, the very thought of crossing a line that was seen as taboo motivated the troops further. Indeed for over two decades no one at the highest political level had ever expressed willingness to sanction, or had demanded such an action inside PoK for the fear of escalation.
- As Col H remembers, “Most of our reorientation took place in the mind; we were crossing a threshold that had been embedded in the mind: thus far and no further. Now we were being asked to do a job that had not been undertaken in decades.” Adds Col K: “Our boys always had the skills, but they had applied the skills to a different set of circumstances, not the task we were about to undertake. However, due to our practice and reorientation, they were at the peak of their skills.” They were, like many Indian Army Officers before them posted along the LoC, aware of one-off, shallow raids launched by different infantry units into PoK. But all of them were individual punitive actions and not large-scale planned operations like the one that was being contemplated now.

Source - https://thediplomat.com/2017/09/the...16-surgical-strikes/?utm_content=buffer48626&

@COLDHEARTED AVIATOR bhai.

Add these to the points above -

- The Army in Kashmir is a realist. The surgical strike goals were not really about finishing terrorism in Kashmir or drying up infiltration. It was about the range of our response to terrorism emanating from Pakistan. The signal that we wanted to send was that we would not limit our actions only on our side of the border but also hit Pakistan in their territory. This message was sent successfully and we scored a definite moral victory.

- Can India do another surgical strike tomorrow, if there is another Uri-like terror strike? Or should be wary of Pakistani retaliation? Were you wary of retaliation after the strikes?

Of course, we were wary of retaliation. But the moment Pakistan refused to acknowledge the strike, we knew we had won the moral battle. Pakistan did step up infiltration and we had incidents of mutilation of soldiers but those were tactical actions to regain some lost ground. I wish these incidents had not happened but the Line of Control is a brutal place and these are the realities. Incidentally, our response to the mutilation was very strong and completely directed at the Pakistani Army.

- Many trans-LoC operations have been conducted when you were in service, and as you are aware, some of them have gone even deeper inside PoK than the surgical strikes. Why are the surgical strikes then so significant or unique?
The biggest difference from earlier strikes was the fact that the government had decided to nationally acknowledge the operation. When there is an element of deniability, failures could go unreported. We did not have that luxury. Also the scale at which it happened, multiple strikes across the Jammu and Kashmir regions, had not been attempted before. I think these two factors make last year’s surgical strikes somewhat unique

Source - http://indianexpress.com/article/in...s-glass-ceiling-has-been-broken-4851981/lite/
 

aditya g

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,962
Likes
4,651
Country flag
@mayfair traces the consistent but unfortunate stance of the opposition parties and their media implants from 1999 onwards.

Today we are all wiser, and recognise this as the "ecosystem" .... Our version of the deep state.

Nope. The opposition was being opposition then as well. I recall Congress shouting about Intelligence failure and what not.

Daily press conferences by Kapil Sibal and R K Dhwan and Ajit Jogi blaming government for intelligence lapses. There were cries and demands for calling for a session of the Rajya Sabha to discuss the issue. The Lok Sabha had been dissolved after the trust vote that ABV had lost and the opposition failed to form an alternative government. The opposition benches were in the majority in RS and wanted to leverage that to score brownie points in the garb of discussion over Kargil incursions.

Then the narrative shifted to how our soldiers were being sacrificed for territory that was no good. Dilip Kumar- yes the ultimate actor- who was actively campaigning for Congress said in a public meeting- "Have you seen the Kargil villages, they are smaller than a danda". This was a throwback to "Not a blade of grass grows there."

There were news paper articles in leading dailies such as Hindustan Times where Pankaj Vohra wrote writeups on the likes of- The war is being won by bombing our own territory and getting soldiers killed. Is this worth it? BBC being BBC was carrying reports on the "impact of this war on the delicate ecology of this fragile mountain ecosystem." Gungadeens slavishly nodded along.

The coffin-scam-that-never-was was published by Congress friendly media around the same time, when the rotting bodies of soldiers were being transported in discarded bofors shell cases and coffins were procured urgently from the US.

Was in Delhi then and recall how commies were being commies as usual, especially the JNU comrades. Protest marches against fascism, communalism, Indian aggression and what not.

Bhai, what unity are you speaking of?

The same Lutyens parasites who were chest beating about going to the frontlines and "lining up" to donate blood started banging against the doors of 7 RC road less than six months later when IC 814 hijacking happened with banners saying "Free Masood Azhar". The Lutyens media cabal led by NDTV prominently highlighted these "protests" and build up intense pressure on GoI externally and through internal bhedis. We all know what happened next.

The same parasites later went gaga over Pervez Musharraf when we hosted the Agra summit in 2001. The kind of fawning and awwing by the likes of Burkha, Turdesai, Coupta and Thappad et al was pukeworthy to say the least. If you get a chance, do watch Thappad's interview of Musharraf on youtube. The entire genealogy will become crystal clear.

Kargil victory did not even turn out to be electorally that much productive for the BJP. NDA returned to power yes, but BJP won the same number of seats as they did in 1998- 182. In contrast, both Congress and UPA returned to power with a bigger majority in 2009, just 6 months after 26/11.

Bhai, people in power and in the positions of decision making have very long memories and a much greater understanding of the ground situation.
 

lcafanboy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
5,802
Likes
37,219
Country flag
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...nal-border-skirmishs.79509/page-95#post-13331

India Today magazine cover goes viral in China, triggers Photoshop battle
The covers of the India Today magazine have always been iconic, ingenious and often controversial.

The cover of the July 31 issue of the India Today magazine has gone viral on Chinese social media platform Wiebo, the country's substitute for Twitter, and the Chinese are not pleased with the cover.

The latest issue of the India Today magazine has the map of China, in red, in the shape of a big chicken and a smaller chick -- Pakistan, in green -- by its side, along with captions that read "China's new chick" and "How China is buying out Pakistan with massive new investments and why India needs to worry", below it.

 

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
16,330
Likes
70,173
Go through this chronology and read the Congress contribution to keep constitution safe.

The constitution provides the power of Judicial Review( Article 32). This states the Supreme Court can strike down any law that violates constitution/ fundamental rights of citizens.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-Article-32-in-the-constitution.

1951
Our dear Nehruji decided to circumnavigate the Article 32. He amended the constitution saying that Any article placed in schedule 9, can't be touched by any court of law.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-Schedule-9-of-the-Indian-constitution

People got fed up of tryanny. Cases were filed in supreme court

1967 Famous Golakhnath case to protect Fundamental Rights

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/I.C._Golaknath_and_Ors._vs_State_of_Punjab_and_Anrs.

1971 Indira brings in 24th Amendment to nullify the SC judgement

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fourth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_India

1973 Famous Kesavanada case
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kesavananda_Bharati_v._State_of_Kerala

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_structure_doctrine

1976 Indira Gandhi brings 42nd amendment to give sweeping powers to herself. This amendment is known as "mini constitution" bcoz it changed a lot of things. Also see the fact that 18 (24th to 42nd) amendments were made between 1971 to 1975. Just 4 5 years.

Major changes .
The President now has to COMPULSORILY accept the advice of PM to sign bills and other things. It continues till this day.

Add "secular, socialist" in Preamble

Parliament can make any law, remove Fundamental Rights. Supreme Court cannot challenge Parliament and strike down these laws. Highly curtails powers of supreme court .


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forty-second_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_India

1979 finally few parts of 42nd amendment removed by minerva mills judgementt
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerva_Mills_v._Union_of_India

Sashi Tharoor was correct on the number game required to change constitution, but he forgot one major point.
The "basic structure doctrine" (BSD). In response to Indira Gandhi's frequent and major changes to constitution, Supreme Court finally said that the basic structure of the constitution cannot be changed.
What's the basic structure? They didn't define it clearly. The constitution makers themselves have NOT defined/mentioned it. The Supreme Court just "invented" it.


The usual components of BSD
  1. Supremacy of the Constitution
  2. Rule of law
  3. The principle of Separation of Powers
  4. The objectives specified in the Preamble to the Constitution
  5. Judicial Review
  6. Articles 32 and 226
  7. Federalism (including financial liberty of states under Articles 282 and 293)
  8. Secularism
  9. The Sovereign, Democratic, Republican structure
  10. Freedom and dignity of the individual
  11. Unity and integrity of the Nation
  12. The principle of equality, not every feature of equality, but the quintessence of equal justice;
  13. The "essence" of other Fundamental Rights in Part III
  14. The concept of social and economic justice — to build a Welfare State: Part IV in toto
  15. The balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles
  16. The Parliamentary system of government
  17. The principle of free and fair elections
  18. Limitations upon the amending power conferred by Article 368
  19. Independence of the Judiciary
  20. Effective access to justice
  21. Powers of the Supreme Court under Articles 32, 136, 141, 142
  22. Legislation seeking to nullify the awards made in exercise of the judicial power of the State by Arbitration Tribunals constituted under an Act
  23. Welfare state
BJP can't change :
parliamentary system and make it presidential type democracy,
universal voting rights and make it Hindu only voting system.
Multiparrt Federal India to Single Party single state India


So BJP cannot throw away the Constitution as supreme court will strike down changes.

Almost all laws like providing 69% reservation when supreme court said max 50% are put in 9th schedule to avoid SC intervention

The Constitutional 76th (Amendment) Acts 1994 has been passed by the Parliament to accommodate Tamil Nadu Government's Legislation in the Ninth Schedule to take the legislation out of the ambit of the judicial review, which provided 69 percent reservation for backward classes

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...th-schedule/story-LKZ2Rj78ORIvAgII6EXfxN.html

Go through the links and keywords in my answer and you will realise the way constitution has been attacked by congress since 1950.



Ask Tharoor to comment on Basic Structure Doctrine, 42nd amendment and see him wet his pants.
Also ask him about supreme court judges A.N. Ray and M.H.Beg
They opposed the other supreme court judges and said parliament and PM can change everything in the constitution. They were rewarded by Indira Gandhi by making them SC chief Justice of India by ignoring the other three senior SC judges above them who had taken stand against government.

A.N. ray as SC CJI turned a blind eye to Indira's tyranny during emergency as a nice pet.

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/amp....red-its-autonomy-during-emergency-254859.html

M.H. Beg enjoyed post retirement job at NATIONAL HERALD!!!!!! You see the rewards of working for the Congress.



https://www.hindupost.in/history/co...i-talking-judicial-independence-bitter-irony/



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._N._Ray

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Hameedullah_Beg


4 days ago a high court judge who worked on best bakery blasts and soharabudin case retired and joined congress. !!!
You can see his "judgements" during his time at court in political cases .

https://googleweblight.com/i?u=http...in-congress/articleshow/64563649.cms&hl=en-IN


I think this post deserves a place here @Tanmay sir
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top