Grave sins of Congress are driving India to doom!

August 13, 2010

Shravan Shuddha Trutiya, Kaliyug Varsha 5112

Highest sins of the Congress which is taking the country to Hell and of all political parties who are doing nothing about it but just letting that happen !

India and Hindus have suffered enormous and irreparable damage during the 125 years of history of the Congress owing to the terrible mistakes and sins committed by the party. Most of the political parties have been just watching indifferently these unpardonable sins with the attitude like ‘Dhrutarashtra – Gandhari’ and therefore, we no more want the charade of democratic rule. We need ‘Divine Rule’ which will treat the citizens like in a patriarchal family. We are publishing a list of the highest sins committed by the Congress everyday so that everybody gets ready to bring in such ideal rule.

Sin 103 - Sin related to appeasement of separatist Muslims

13 August 2010
The pro-Muslim Congress rulers at the Centre, who are trying to appease anti-national separatists from Jammu and Kashmir for the past two decades instead of taking stringent action against them and trying to hold discussions for peace with them, are in fact, taking this country to further partition.

Sin 102 - Sin related to being indifferent to Hindus owing to love for Muslims

12 August 2010

In the year 1947 when Pakistan was created after partition, there were 300 Hindu temples in Pakistan. Presently, there are only 36 temples remaining in Pakistan. The above information has been published on the website of metransparent.com. It has been mentioned on this website that ‘out of the remaining 36 temples in Pakistan, many temples are in a very dilapidated condition and if those are not properly renovated, even they would be destroyed. Pakistan does not grant permission to local Hindus for maintenance of these temples. In 1992 when Babri Masjid was demolished in India, Muslims destroyed 200 temples in Pakistan. The 20 lakhs of Hindus now living in Pakistan are constantly threatened by Muslims and they have to tolerate everything without uttering a word.’

Sin 101 - Sin related to appeasement of Muslims

11 August 2010

‘Muslims kill Hindus by way of ‘jihad’; take out ‘fatwas’ to convert Hindu girls; declare that they would not hoist National Flag; will not say ‘Vande Mataram’; but the Congress Government keeps quiet and takes no action against such anti-national and anti-Dharma people. Whereas Varun Gandhi of BJP made some strong statements regarding Hinduism and the Congress Government immediately became active. Election Commission issued a notice to him and the mass media started his defamation.’

Sin 100 - Sin related to suppression of pro-Hindu organizations

10 August 2010

The Congress imposed a ban on RSS after assassination of Gandhi. The then newspapers ‘Crisis’ and ‘Karmayogi’ published from Prayag, so also ‘Dainik Bharat’ published from Pune and Nagpur had to face suppression by the Congress Government for their extending support to the ‘Satyagrah (passive political resistance)’ drive started by RSS. These newspapers, however, continued to present the just side of RSS by strongly opposing the Government

Sin 99 - Sin related to appeasement of Muslims

9 August 2010

In a function organized by Jamat-e-Ulma, the President of UPA Government, Sonia Gandhi said, “The principles of Jamat-e-Ulema Hind and Congress are similar. ‘Ulema Hind’ and ‘Congress’ had only fought for freedom of this country.” The statement was made in a program while addressing the citizens which resulted in insulting feelings of 85% of the citizens of this country.

Sin 98 - Sin related to appeasement of Muslims

8 August 2010

Pakistan never paid a few billions of rupees due to Hindu refugees. India gave Rs.300 crores to England that were supposed to be paid by Pakistan. Pakistan has still not returned that money to India. We are, however, shamelessly showing this amount under ‘Receivables’ in our budgetary provisions.

Sin 97 - Sin related to encouraging dissident thinking

7 August 2010

Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh and Congress President Sonia Gandhi kept mum on the disintegrating demand made in the year 2009, by the Finance Minister Tariq Ahmad in Congress-led Jammu and Kashmir Government, for a separate currency for that State which is different from the one used all over India.

Sin 96 - Sin related to extreme appeasement of Muslims

6 August 2010

Anti-national governance of the Congress, which gives citizenship to ‘infiltrating Muslims with ‘jihadi’ mentality; but bans Indians from settling in Jammu and Kashmir !

Sin 95 - Sin with regard to inaction against ‘jihadi’ terrorism and let it spread everywhere in the country

and so on......................

Please refer link to see unending list of Congi's sins

http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/10953.html

Sree Krushna eliminated Shishupal when his 100 sins were over. Similarly, as the sins of Congress and other parties cross the limits, God will punish them severely !

Flawed teacher, ignorant pupil

Digvijay Singh's aggressive wooing of Muslim hardliners seems to have led Rahul Gandhi down a slippery political slope. Is it time to change the teacher? Or is the pupil beyond redemption?

 By Chandan Mitra in Pioneer

Achild does not decide the school in which he or she will study. This decision, like many others taken before the child reaches adulthood, is left to parents. For a number of reasons Mr Rahul Gandhi received his education mostly at home under the guidance of carefully chosen tutors. In recent years, his mother evidently decided to entrust his political training to the care of the redoubtable Digvijay Singh whose reputation precedes him. We do not know whether Mr Gandhi's political grooming has been formal or informal, but from all account Mr Singh has been setting the agenda for his celebrity student. In the process, Mr Singh's clout has increased manifold; most Congressmen hold him in awe, believing he has the ears of the First Family more than anyone else. Others such as the low-profile but clinically efficient Ahmed Patel are also high in the pecking order, but Mr Singh has managed to position himself as the only one who enjoys the blessings of both Ms Sonia Gandhi and her son.
In an earlier era when structured tutorial classes were not so common and school education was supplemented by individual private tutors, parents often monitored a child's academic progress by way of marks obtained in school examinations. If performance did not show significant improvement, they were quick to dismiss the tutor and experiment with another. Sometimes, the lack of improvement was not the tutor's fault for disinterested kids defeated the teacher's effort by being inattentive or playing truant.
We can safely assume that Mr Rahul Gandhi is neither. He is keen to learn, often travelling to the interiors to rub shoulders with the great unwashed masses in a contemporary re-enactment of his great-grandfather's discovery of India nearly a century ago. Mr Gandhi is also rather forthcoming in his interactions with young people in particular. He drops in at hang-outs crowded with 20somethings in metros, small towns and even roadside dhabas, pleasantly surprising them by his freewheeling comments on everything under the sun. Sometimes he provokes a controversy by arrogant assertions such as "If my family had been at the helm at that time, the Babri Masjid would not have fallen," or by proudly, even if undiplomatically, asserting that the break-up of Pakistan was his family's great achievement. Probably because some of these remarks were unrehearsed and led to storms of protest, the advisory council at 10 Janpath decided to bar him from interacting with the pesky regional media. Throughout his frenetic election campaign in Bihar earlier this year, in which he addressed as many as 19 public meetings, he carefully stayed away from speaking to the media. When the much-hyped revival of the Congress ended in unmitigated disaster with the party winning a laughable four seats out of 243, Mr Gandhi simply went underground -whether on account of depression or embarrassment we do not know. And that's where he would probably have stayed at least till the Burari AICC session this weekend, but for the unfortunately timed (for him) WikiLeaks revelations.
Much has already been said and written on the Gandhi scion's stupefying observations, made to the US Ambassador during an official lun cheon hosted by the Prime Minister in July 2009. To summarise, the remarks demonstrated (a) humungous knowledge deficit; (b) pathological hatred of pro-Hindu opinion and organisations; (c) dangerous disregard of India's national security concerns with regard to Pakistan-sponsored jihadi terror; (d) callous unconcern for the magnitude of the terrorist threat to India; and, (e) ineligibility to be considered for a responsible position in Government, leave alone be projected as a potential Prime Minister. Incidentally, it must be also pointed out that despite his deceptively boyish looks, Mr Gandhi is not exactly young. At 40, many of his contemporaries are heading big MNCs and his father was already Prime Minister at that age.
Stung by the heir-apparent's dangerously ignorant streak, Congress leaders have been busy rubbishing WikiLeaks, accusing the BJP of basing its offensive on unsub stantiated and questionable `leaks', whose timing they claim is suspect.
But this is not the first time that Mr Gandhi has revealed this trait. A few months ago at Bhopal, he got sufficiently carried away at a meeting to claim that the banned extremist outfit Students' Islamic Movement of India was as dangerous as the RSS! He later modified this to assert that he only meant that persons who adhered to hardline ideologies were not welcome to join NSUI, the Congress's students' wing.
Similarly, his unconvincing clarification on the WikiLeaks revelation merely reiterates the homily that all forms of terror and communal ideologies are dangerous, which, in fact is not what he reportedly told the US Ambassador. Mr Gandhi clearly enunciated that Hindu groups posed a "greater threat". Significantly, this observation was made in August 2009, less than eight months after 26/11, when the Indian Establishment was busy pressuring Islamabad to accept guilt for the horrendous Mumbai carnage and crack down on the LeT and related organisations such as Jamaat-ud-Dawa'h. Also, this was the time that the apparently senile Congress leader AR Antulay levelled a fanciful charge against Hindu outfits for the death of celebrated policeman Hemant Karkare.
Over the last few years, Mr Gandhi's tutor Mr Singh has been on a Hindu-bashing spree, questioning the Batla House encounter, visiting families of suspected terror merchants in Azamgarh and repeatedly claiming that so-called Hindu terrorist groups enjoy RSS patronage. Much of this has been outrightly rejected by public opinion because it is well known that, even assuming some misguided Hindu freelancers were involved in a few bomb blasts (though nothing has yet been proved against anyone), the RSS has nothing to do with such people.
Clearly, by repeating lies ad nauseum, Mr Singh hopes to attract fulsome Muslim support for the Congress in Uttar Pradesh. Not only is he the senior party leader incharge of the State, but Mr Singh also knows how crucial the 2012 Uttar Pradesh Assembly results are for Mr Gandhi's political future. It appears he has convinced his pupil that unless Muslims vote for Congress en bloc, other groups such as upper castes would not consider the party to be a potential winner and thus continue to stay their `hand'. So, Mr Gandhi is parroting his teacher's line and hoping the first set of examiners, namely voters of Uttar Pradesh, will give him high marks.
There is no evidence that appeasement of Muslim hardliners will yield the community's votes.
Bihar certainly didn't; in fact, more Muslims voted for JD(U)-BJP than Congress. But in the process, Mr Gandhi is steadily acquiring the image of an unabashed Hindu-basher. Most Hindus may have no sympathy for the community's radical fringe, but to suggest that SIMI is as dangerous as the well-regarded RSS or that Hindu groups are a greater threat to India than Pakistan-sponsored terrorists is bound to offend even the most avowedly `secular' Hindu. Has the time then come to change Mr Gandhi's tutor lest his flawed teaching sends the pupil to his doom? Or is the pupil beyond redemption anyway?

Rahul's comments call into question his understanding of issues

By Swapan Dasgupta in Pioneer.

When the second volume of the Mitrokhin Archive was W published in 2005, there was understandable nervousness in Whitehall over its possible impact on bilatera relations with India. The contents of Vasili Mitrokhin's notes o KGB's worldwide operations, as gleamed from the agency's own archives, were hugely sensitive. This was particularly true of the sections on India, where the KGB had managed to penetrate deep into the political establishment. Having carefully vetted and sanitised the papers to negate any possible damage to reputations of the great and good and facilitated its publication, the British Government was nevertheless worried that that the erstwhile `friends of the Soviet Union' would direct their ire at the messenger, if only to divert attention from the explosive details of how India wa systematically compromised.
Whitehall's apprehensions turned out to be completely unfounded. The Mitrokhin Archive attracted some editorial comment but didn't create even a political ripple. The attempts by some concerned Opposition MPs to raise the subject was peremptorily disallowed on the astonishing ground that it was not the job of Parliament to deliberate on books of `fiction'.
Compared to the indifference that greeted the Mitrokhin Archive, the WikiLeaks files emanating from the US Embassy in New Delhi have created a political storm. Some of the excitement is understandable: Mitrokhin's revelations centred on events that were regarded as history while the WikiLeaks disclosures have a contemporary resonance.
Moreover, those who vetted Mitrokhin's notes were meticulous in ensuring that names of politicians and officials who served as KGB `assets' were not divulged. The WikiLeaks releases aren't CIA reports; they are Embassy cables concerned with either political assessments or conversations with `open' sources, sometimes in structured meetings. As such, the cables aren't squeamish about the identities of politicians and officials.
Despite these obvious differences, it is worth noting that throughout last Friday the Congress spokespersons fell back on a variant of the `fiction' argument that killed the debate on Mitrokhin in 2005. Although the authenticity of the cables wasn't questioned (except by the gentleman who whiffed a "conspiracy"), it was argued that there was nothing "official" about WikiLeaks. Therefore, the disclosures weren't worthy of being dignified. They were, Congress spokespersons claimed insouciantly, at best, individual assessments peppered with reports of conversations torn out of context.
There was, predictably, no mention of the fact that just prior to the first instalment of WikiLeaks, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had alerted world capitals of the possible embarrassment from their disclosures. It is possible the Congress wouldn't have bothered with WikiLeaks had Rahul Gandhi's conversation with the US Ambassador at a lunch hosted by the Prime Minister on July 20, 2009, not featured in the disclosures.
The earlier release of a report on the Congress trying to play identity politics with the 26/11 Mumbai attacks hadn't resulted in a flurry of clarifications and explanations. And rightly so since the US Embassy cable was an assessment based on public statements. on public statements.
Nor was there excitement over the unflattering assessment of Sonia Gandhi's leadership during the stalemate on the nuclear debate. The colourful charge that the Congress president doesn't miss any opportunity to miss an opportunity was the Ambassador's assessment. Envoys are expected to provide such blunt reports to headquarters in confidence. Just because WikiLeaks breached that confidentiality doesn't undermine the validity of the exercise.
Nor does it suggest that any US desire to be implacably hostile to the lady. Diplomacy is rarely conducted on such black and white terms, not even by the US.
The importance of Rahul Gandhi's conversation with the US Ambassador won't be found within the framework of India-US bilateral ties. Rahul's suggestion that "radicalised Hindu groups" posed a "bigger threat" to India than the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba didn't lead to the US immediately discounting all that India had said about the 26/11 attack.
The US has its own counter-terrorism establishment that does its own assessments, and it is highly unlikely that any of its functionaries had reason to conclude that Abhinav Bharat was the new Hindu Al Qaeda. The conversation was important not for what it reveals about the Government's approach to internal security, but for its insights into the mind of India's "elusive" heir designate.
Rahul is not merely "elusive" for American diplomats; he has also eluded all meaningful interrogation of his views by Indians. Apart from his template speech on the two India's, Indians know precious little or nothing about the heir designate's views on subjects of crucial importance to the country. What does he think of Jammu & Kashmir, apart from his friendship with Omar Abdullah? What has he to say on foreign policy, economic strategies and education? Indians are as clueless about the man tipped to succeed Manmohan Singh. Rahul has kept his views severely rationed.
Unfortunately for Rahul, this non-scripted account of his view on internal security doesn't suggest a grasp of the subject. If Rahul thinks that the terror version of the kachchhabaniyan gang that worked the badlands of Uttar Pradesh is a "greater threat" to India than the LeT -and that too just eight months after 26/11 -it calls into question his understanding of issues. Worse, by revealing his zany views to the Ambassador of a country whose assistance has been sought to tame Pakistan, he has shown an incredible lack of judgement.
Some people have greatness thrust on them. This Emperor-to-be, it now emerges, has no clothes.

Modi operandi

 (With due respect to Shree Ashok Malik Sir, shooting this post for all TRUE secular people around the world)... 


Terrorists have exploited the demonisation of Narendra Modi in sections of the media

The Centre wants to fight terrorists, but not terrorists whom the Gujarat police have found. 

Activism and political partisanship have eclipsed everything else, writes ASHOK MALIK IT IS WORTH ASKING WHERE THIS EXCESSIVE AND MIND-NUMBING FOCUS ON MODI IS HEADED. WHETHER ONE LIKES HIS POLITICS OR DOESN'T, THE FACT REMAINS THAT HE NEEDS TO BE VIEWED THROUGH A CONVENTIONAL POLITICAL PRISM AND NOT ONE OF A FEVERED IMAGINATION e i The Varanasi attack may have killed just one n Varanasi indicated, the threat is perennial. Nevertheless, as the bombing of the Sheetla Ghat major terrorist assault since the horror of 26/11. minister have contributed to India escaping a etter intelligence and a purposeful Union home person -tragically, a one-year-old child -but was calculated to cause panic and trigger a stampede that may have claimed many more lives. It was a reminder that Indian Mujahideen (IM), the organisation behind the bombing, is alive and kicking.
India's astonishingly poor record in terms of terrorist convictions remains a critical gap. Between the Parliament attack on December 13, 2001 and the trial of Ajmal Kasab for Mumbai 2008, there have been zero convictions for acts of terrorism in India. This is embarrassing for a country that is among the biggest victims of Islamist terror.
In this context, the history of IM is instructive. An offshoot of the Students' Islamic Movement of India (Simi), IM first came into the public gaze in 2008, after the Ahmedabad bombings. Subsequently, the Gujarat police busted the IM network, made crucial arrests and linked key IM cells and operatives to a series of hitherto unsolved terror bombings in Delhi, Bangalore, Jaipur and other cities.
If the past two years have been relatively calm, the steps taken by the Union government after 26/11 deserve credit. Even so, the Gujarat police also merits special mention for a crippling blow to the IM matrix, one from which it's still only beginning to recover.
About 60 IM members -street troops, religious motivators, explosive technicians -were brought to trial in an Ahmedabad court. In February 2010, just as the case was gathering momentum, the accused filed a petition before the Supreme Court asking for their trial to be moved to another state, alleging they would not get justice in Gujarat. In an unorthodox decision, the apex court issued an ex parte order -without hearing the Gujarat government -and stayed the trial.
That is where the matter rests. The trial of terrorists who bombed a series of Indian cities between 2005 and 2008 is still frozen, in a legal and political limbo.
It's here that one needs to consider the congruence of political partisanship, civil society hyper-activism and terrorism. Nobody is suggesting that political parties or civil society activists are necessarily backing terror groups. Yet, by giving them ideas, by creating precedents and mechanisms for misuse, they are derailing the process of justice. The IM accused have deftly exploited the demonisation of Narendra Modi and Gujarat in sections of the media and among so-called activists who have made an industry of Modi phobia. Despite being accused of perjury and manufacture of documents, these activists have sought to convey the impression that justice can't be done in Gujarat, that Muslims who seek fair play (or need to prove their innocence) require to have their cases moved outside the state, to have these monitored by the Supreme Court and, when all else fails, go to the United Nations (UN).
Unable to defeat Modi politically in Gujarat, the Congress has lent its shoulder to such dangerous practices. As long as they are affecting an individual politician, it is one thing.
However, as is now apparent, the entire edifice of India's most robust challenge to IM has also been put at risk.
It is worth asking where this excessive and mind-numbing focus on Modi is headed. Whether one likes his politics or doesn't, believes he is India's best chief minister or isn't, considers him a future prime minister or too much of a hot potato for BJP allies, the fact remains that he needs to be viewed through a conventional political prism and not one of a fevered imagination.
Consider examples. One, it has been clear for a long time that there is no legal case against Modi for the 2002 violence and he is not guilty of acts of deliberate commission.
With even the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigative Team (SIT) said to have to come to the same conclusion, Modi haters -who range from Mumbai-based celebrities to a retired police officer still settling bureaucratic scores -have begun to denounce the SIT and are approaching the UN Human Rights Commission.
Two, the WikiLeaks cables reveal that western intelligence agencies believe the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba threat to Modi is clear and present and did not die out with the elimination of Ishrat Jehan and her accomplices. Jehan, a Mumbai student who fell into Lashkar's grip, was killed in an encounter with the Gujarat police in 2004. Modi's opponents insist she was innocent and the Laskhar plot a concoction. Perhaps now they will argue Modi wrote the WikiLeaks cables.
How long can this continue? If any other Indian politician was found to be mentioned as a Lashkar target in the cables, it would have had the media engrossed. Not with Modi; it's almost as if he's fair game. As for the Union government, it wants to fight terrorists -but not terrorists whom the Gujarat police have found. It's so cynical; those 60 Indian Mujahideen men in Ahmedabad must be laughing.
http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/PUBLICATIONS/HT/HD/2010/12/15/ArticleHtmls/Modi-operandi-15122010012005.shtml?Mode=1