^ See the context.
---------------
Anways,
ico said:
Amartya Sen made some foolish comments regarding Modi, and RSS goons were also saying the same thing on Twitter. "RETURN BHARAT RATNA". What's the difference between them and Congress?
Here's what Amrtya Sen spoke on Modi
1. he does not have secular credentials
2. He has not done enough to make minorities feel safe
Who is secular? One who sells the nation to get muslim vote and parades with anti-national, anti-Indian sentiments, goes soft on separatists, jihadis, welcome the likes of Syed Shah Geelani with red-carpet says "Muslims have first right to national resources" and vouches for reservations based on religion in a secular nation?
Who is minority? One whose population is 20% in second most populous country in the world or 2nd highest in the world?
Its funny that the champions of anti-nationalism, one who are hand in gloves with the terrorists, sepratists and distorting Indian history in text books and continue to divide the nation on the basis of religion are talking about secularism and secular certificates!
Supreme_Court said:
"This clearly means that, by itself, the word "Hinduism" or "Hindutva" indicates the culture of the people of India as a whole, irrespective of whether they are Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jews etc. The Supreme Court Bench has further observed that "the mere fact that these words (Hindutva or Hinduism) are used in the speech would not bring in within the prohibition of sub-section (3) or (3A) of Section 123. It may well be that these words are used in the speech to promote secularism and to emphasize the way of life of the Indian people and the Indian culture or ethos, or to criticize the policy of any political party as discriminatory or intolerant."
The words "Hindu" and "Hinduism"
Dear Ico, there is a world of difference between Amartya Sen's views and Lata Mangeshkar's opinion of Modi as PM. Former is character assassination and latter is personal view on his/her choice of PM. Former, seems to be ignorant of the term secularism itself; latter, is simply relating her voice like the choice of any voter;former doesn't know how many muslims themselves voted for Modi in Gujarat elections, something paid media never shows;latter is simply singing her choice.
HAd Amartya sen said anything against AMul Baby, his house and accounts would have been under IT scrutiny, his home ransacked like they did to Anna hazare. Had Amul Baby been in place of Modi in Patna Blasts, he and his minions would have already chickened out of the place, let alone providing composure to the fans like Modi did, whose fans were more than 10 Lakh. Moreover, had it been Amul Baby, the news channels would have made him a hero by now and argued over increasing his personal security for the next one year. Is Sen even a voter in India?
Its easy. Whatever happens, just swap the two PM candidates and realize the reality! Had it been Modi in place of Amul Baby in the above video I posed, paid media would have a got a breaking news for next one year over Modi's incompetency with words like "lack of comprehension skills", "inability to deal with crowd", "fascism" etc!
(7 people here who voted for him! What I find funny is, you really think people voted for him - look at the lighter side as it is an obvious pisstake btw