<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->some supposed eviction of some sikh person from a rally, for unspecified reason, by unspecified actors, in a story run only by CNN-IBN, only once, in a vague language reminding one of their Gujarat style, and then copied pasted by their cousins, but not taken up by any sober media outlet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->And why could you not have written all that earlier: that it was very suspicious reporting? That is <i>exactly</i> what I wanted to know. I read the accusation in an article Mudy linked to in Express India (but they could just have C&P-ed it from CNNIBN).
It troubled me because the allegation was that he was excluding another Dharmic. And how would any <i>Hindu</i> person do that (unless the supposed Dharmic was not a Dharmic, etcetera). The open allegation - since it was unrefuted - made me suspect VG (that, and the decontextualised references to Rama, and the timing of the drama). Obviously you knew that the allegation was unreliable and hence had less reason to be troubled.
<b>Correcting ERROR:</b> I read the above in the CNNIBN article linked to by Bodhi earlier in the thread, not ExpressIndia. The ExpressIndia article was the one where VG was to have stated that the tape was doctored.
And that answers these questions:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So, do tell us what you know against the fellow that we don't ... your posts come out sounding like you have some inside dope against VG that others dont have.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I can imagine you did not see the videos posted by Dhu and especially the one (with Dipak Chaurasia) by me where he repeated yesterday that he stands by what he said about protecting Hindus, but has not said any derogatory thing against moslems.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Not watched any youtube videos, because bandwidth here is extremely limited. Some days (usually weekends) I go home and have a better connection. Also, was out yesterday evening.
About SG -
But that's exactly what I implied both yesterday and today: that Sanjay was <i>not</i> secular. (I thought I was being clear, putting the word into quotes, calling it type of/brand of secularism. Guess not clear enough.)
Yes, I do know that mostly muslims were affected (and chased from certain areas). I've known of it for about a decade.
Why do people want to do everything except get into an open fight with christoislamism? That fight may come some day and it may be bloody, ugly and a total loss. But there was a time when Hindus could have won Bharatam back mostly by information dissemination and pointing out the falseness of christoislamism with a unified voice. But that was too unsecular I guess. And may be too late now. Too many muslims converted to True Islam (=terrorism) and too much christopropaganda against Hindu Dharma now; and christo-instilled psecularism among Hindus that makes them the greatest defenders of christoislamism.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why do you just paint everything and everyone with same brush when you do not know much about someone? Not fair.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->What SG allowed for says something about his character. You want/expect me to be fair to him?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Although like I said, VG is of minimum importance to Hindus right now. We do know there are larger imposters entangled deeper into BJP. What can be a good outcome is that it becomes a catalyst to throw away political correctness in the prevailing discourse. I shall take that happily anyday, even at the risk of VG being a fake Hindu leader.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->But do you see only one move which is possible? The one you foresee is excellent, granted. But why am I imagining more than one possible outcome (and/or several players) in this new entry, and that at least one of these other possibilities is not quite so good. Rather bad in fact.
If there's any indications of how this episode does not *also* fit a 2009 election kkkongress ploy to manipulate the populace, I'd be relieved.
<b>EDITED:</b> Corrected an ERROR see above somewhere.
<b>ADDED:</b> See post 53 below.
It troubled me because the allegation was that he was excluding another Dharmic. And how would any <i>Hindu</i> person do that (unless the supposed Dharmic was not a Dharmic, etcetera). The open allegation - since it was unrefuted - made me suspect VG (that, and the decontextualised references to Rama, and the timing of the drama). Obviously you knew that the allegation was unreliable and hence had less reason to be troubled.
<b>Correcting ERROR:</b> I read the above in the CNNIBN article linked to by Bodhi earlier in the thread, not ExpressIndia. The ExpressIndia article was the one where VG was to have stated that the tape was doctored.
And that answers these questions:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So, do tell us what you know against the fellow that we don't ... your posts come out sounding like you have some inside dope against VG that others dont have.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I can imagine you did not see the videos posted by Dhu and especially the one (with Dipak Chaurasia) by me where he repeated yesterday that he stands by what he said about protecting Hindus, but has not said any derogatory thing against moslems.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Not watched any youtube videos, because bandwidth here is extremely limited. Some days (usually weekends) I go home and have a better connection. Also, was out yesterday evening.
About SG -
But that's exactly what I implied both yesterday and today: that Sanjay was <i>not</i> secular. (I thought I was being clear, putting the word into quotes, calling it type of/brand of secularism. Guess not clear enough.)
Yes, I do know that mostly muslims were affected (and chased from certain areas). I've known of it for about a decade.
Why do people want to do everything except get into an open fight with christoislamism? That fight may come some day and it may be bloody, ugly and a total loss. But there was a time when Hindus could have won Bharatam back mostly by information dissemination and pointing out the falseness of christoislamism with a unified voice. But that was too unsecular I guess. And may be too late now. Too many muslims converted to True Islam (=terrorism) and too much christopropaganda against Hindu Dharma now; and christo-instilled psecularism among Hindus that makes them the greatest defenders of christoislamism.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why do you just paint everything and everyone with same brush when you do not know much about someone? Not fair.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->What SG allowed for says something about his character. You want/expect me to be fair to him?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Although like I said, VG is of minimum importance to Hindus right now. We do know there are larger imposters entangled deeper into BJP. What can be a good outcome is that it becomes a catalyst to throw away political correctness in the prevailing discourse. I shall take that happily anyday, even at the risk of VG being a fake Hindu leader.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->But do you see only one move which is possible? The one you foresee is excellent, granted. But why am I imagining more than one possible outcome (and/or several players) in this new entry, and that at least one of these other possibilities is not quite so good. Rather bad in fact.
If there's any indications of how this episode does not *also* fit a 2009 election kkkongress ploy to manipulate the populace, I'd be relieved.
<b>EDITED:</b> Corrected an ERROR see above somewhere.
<b>ADDED:</b> See post 53 below.