HYPOCRISIES OF ANTI-NATIONAL PERSONALITIES
On Friday, November 27, 2015, tuli yashvir <colonelyt@outlook.com> wrote:
HYPOCRISIES OF ANTI-NATIONAL PERSONALITIES ----- Beef eating like Sonia Gandhi, Shah Rukh Khan, Aamir Khan, Azam Khan, Abu Azmi etc. are instigating the Intolerance Campaigners --------------
There have been a few cases of intolerance:
======- A.R. Rahman was stopped from performing in U.P. by the Deobandi Muslims and the Muslim Raza Academy ( Who participated in the Mumbai Riots with the help of the illegal Myanmari ROHINGYA Muslims).
=====- Some members of the Hindu Organizations were brutally murdered by the Muslim Goons in Mangalore, Karnataka and Kerala.
=====- The Muslims Kerala chopped off the hand of a Christian teacher.
=====- Muslims destroyed Pooja Pandals in West Bengal
=====- Muslims destroyed the idols of Durga in West Bengal
=====- Muslims kidnapped and raped Hindu girls in Bihar and West Bengal.
=====- Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims indulged in armed conflicts in Lucknow on the occasion of Muharram.
Otherwise we see:
==== Muslims coming to Hindu Doctors
==== Hindus going to Muslim Doctors
==== Christian, Muslim, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist, Jew, Parsi, Hindu nurses are attending to the patients of all religions.
==== Muslims moving freely in Hindu majority areas
==== Hindus NOT moving freely in the Muslim majority areas.in certain cases Muslim majority areas are ''no zones'' for Hinduus
==== Gurudwaras function in the Hindu Majority areas
==== Hindus attend Muslim Classical Music Performers
==== Muslims attend Hindu Classical Music Performers.
Bade Ghulam Ali Khan, Salamat Ali Khan & Nazakat Ali Khan, Amir Khan, Ghulam Mustafa Khan, Parveen Sltana, Abdul Karim Khan sing Hindu Bhajans and Hirabai Barodekar sings Darbar Dhau and Rabba Garib Nawaz and Kishori Amonkar sings Allahkay Saamanay and so on.
==== Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs go to the Gurudwaras to listen to the Raagis and later enjoy the Langar there.
==== Hindus look lovingly at the models of the CHRIST_KIND at the time of Christmas.
==== And all Indians celebrate the Christian New Year's Day.
==== IT IS AS CLEAR AS DAY LIGHT THAT THE PRESENT CAMPAIGN OF ' INTOLERANCE' IS SOLELY PUT IN ACTION FOR BAD MOUTHING AND MALIGNING AND EMBARRASIING MODI.
==== Its main participants are those whose free loading on the Government Money has been halted by the present Government.
Romilla Thapar, Irfan Habib etc. may be waiting in the wings. Let us wait and see if they come out in the open.
==== And do not forget that those addicted to beef eating like Sonia Gandhi, Shah Rukh Khan, Aamir Khan, Azam Khan, Abu Azmi etc. are instigating the Intolerance Campaigners.
==== Reportedly the Congressman and former spokesman Kapil Sibbal is a big exporter of beef.
He has not spoken a word.
Obviously he is taking full advantage of TOLERANCE.
In 1965, when a movie called Shaheed released, Manoj Kumar became the patriotic hero of India. So much so, that after the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri asked him to create a film based on the popular slogan Jai Jawan Jai Kissan (hail the soldier, hail the farmer). He was called ' Bharat Kumar ' all over India. Fast forward to 2001. The year Lagaan released. The film was a super hit and Aamir suddenly became the thinking man's actor. The films that followed, build on his nationalistic image. He was called, the perfectionist. The god of Indian cinema, who could do no wrong.
But guess what? Aamir is no superman. He is an ordinary guy. And a hypocrite at that.
Here are ten glaring hypocrisies of Aamir Khan:
1) He has issues with the desi awards, but chases the videshi ones. Aamir Khan refuses to attend award functions in India, but spends months "lobbying " for the movie Lagaan, when it got nominated for the Oscars. Not just that, the total budget for Lagaan's Oscar publicity was $2 million (Rs 9.6 crore). You see, all this was just to get as many members of the committee to watch the movie, as possible. Its another matter, that most people fell asleep post interval, because it was three hour, 42 minute film. So, Mr Khan, if your movie was so great, why not let the film do the talking!!
2) A few months before the release of the movie 'Rang De Basanti ' , Mr Khan lends his support to the anti-development Narmada Bacho Andolan against building the Narmada Dam by socialist Medha Patkar. But a few months later, after he earned himself a title of " Environmentally Concious Star " he completely disassociated himself with the movement. Its another matter that dam's benefits include provision of drinking water, power generation and irrigation facilities. And NBA is a group of environmental extremists who use pseudo-scientific agitprop to scuttle the development of the region and that the dam will provide agricultural benefits to millions of poor in India. So, Mr Khan, if you really believed in the cause of the tribals, you should have stuck around !!
3) Now, tactful and insightful media, made him the voice of the nation. Aamir Khan tells the nation to be nice to foreigners. He even set an example for us, according to a popular glossy, Aamir met a British woman, Jessica Hines on the sets of the movie ' Ghulam’ and were in a live-in relationship. Hines got pregnant and everything changed overnight. The happiest moment turned into a nightmare when Aamir told Hines to abort the child or forego their relationship. Its another matter, that Hines refused to oblige and give birth to “Jaan”, their " alleged " love-child. He is 12 now and budding model. So, Mr Khan, you don't leave an occasion to preach morality to the nation, should have done the right thing yourself !!
4) For anyone who has seen the movie ' 3 Idiots ' and read the book ' 5 Point Someone' knows, that the movie is based on the book. However, when Mr Chetan Bhagat, the author of the book, asked for appropriate credit, Aamir Khan says " "He is trying to take away the credit from the film's writer Abhijat Joshi, which I am very upset about. It is an attempt on his part to try and take the credit away from the person who has actually worked on the script. It's very unfortunate. There should not be any confusion to anyone that Abhijat is our film's writer," . Its another matter, that Mr Chetan Bhagat is today, not only one of the most popular writers in India, but also a successful Bollywood screenwriter. So, Mr Khan, if you care so much about people's rights, why not give the writer his due credit ??
5) When the veteran activist and Gandhian Anna Hazare's fast-unto-death campaign against corruption started, Aamir Khan too has joined the chorus. You see, Talash was about to release. Its another matter, the entire movement fizzled out in a while, when Arvind Kejriwal decided to form a political party AAP ( Aam Admi Party ). So Mr Khan, if you were so serious about the issue of corruption, you should have taken it forward, instead of making it just a PR stunt, before the release of your movie ?
6) In the meanwhile, Mr Khan gets re-married to Kiran Rao. Not that its any of our business, but then we watched an episode of 'Satyamev Jayate'. Did I tell you about the show ? Well it was a show, where Aamir preached morality to the entire nation. He told us how to live. And in the meanwhile, created a whole lot of good-will for himself. The “solution” intended in his show were so obscure and so far away from reality that it was hilarious most of the times and the “problems” discussed had no novelty. In one of the episodes, the messiah discussed female infanticide. We all saw a teary eyed Aamir Khan pouring his heart out for the girl child. Its another matter and again, none of our business, but then Aamir decides to have a surrogate baby. So, Mr Khan, could you not introspect and take in an orphan girl instead ?
7) The oh-so-religious Aamir goes to Hajj and prays that all muslims go to Hajj unfailingly. He feels very close to god and a changed man on his return according to his interviews. “It was a moving and spiritually overawing. A very emotional and introspective moment for me, I am a Haji ” says the actor. Then he produces a movie called PK. In the movie he advocated us, that
' Jo darte hain, wohi mandir jaate hain ' ( Only the cowards visit temples) and showed a person dressed as Lord Shiva running helter skelter . It another matter, that in-spite of hurting the Hindu sentiment, the movie managed to gross 700 plus crores. So, Mr Khan, going to Hajj and throwing stones at the devil is a spiritual experience, but pouring milk on Shivling is superstition !!
8) Aamir produces a sleazy, low budget movie called Delhi Belly. Just to give you an idea about the movie, in one scene, actor Kunal Roy Kapur who plays, Nitin relieves himself in the loo, where the metal flush falls on his head. He cleans himself up with orange juice thereafter; his butt cheeks, he says, are now stuck to each other. So, basically, all in all, a crass movie. It had a song called ' Bhag Bhag DK Bose ' with equally grotesque wordings. A few years later, when the AIB show surfaces, which is full of expletives and adult jokes, Aamir calls it violent and vulgar. Its another matter, that after watching the AIB video, I figured that the characteristics of a being cool dude or babe are abusive language, making fun of male/female parts, being racist, passing lewd remarks/comments, laughing on the jokes on your own mother’s private parts. Coming back to Aamir, so Mr Khan, it’s pretty ironic for a person who produced Delhi belly to get offended by the AIB roast. Dont you think?
9) In one of his sermons on the show 'Satyamev Jayate', Aamir preached ethics to doctors. He turned into a ‘social superman’ and objected at the medicines and drugs being sold without prescription. All that is great! Its a very good thing that you did, Mr Khan. But the problem arose, when Aamir chose to endorse a online shopping website called Snapdeal. As per sources, he earned something between 15 to 20 crore in the deal. It was later discovered that the company was involved in selling illegal drugs without prescription online. It’s another matter, that such a thing escaped the knowledge of Mr perfectionist, who is known in the industry for his through homework. So, Mr Khan, now that the truth is out, why haven't you terminated the contract?
10 ) On the same 'Satyamev Jayate' show, in one of the episodes, Aamir talks about the perils of drunk driving. He talks about making stringent laws and making sure that the culprits get punished. He then tweets "I pledge I will never be a bystander in an accident, will always help the bystander no matter what ". And then his fellow actor Salman Khan, who was involved in a hit and run case in 2002, where one person died and four others were injured, got bail and interim relief from high court, Aamir Khan rejoiced. Its another matter, that the several concerns were raised by many people in the country, regarding the decision, but Aamir kept mum. So, Mr Khan, is friendship above morality
I do not understand why you people are proving Mr.Amir Khan right! I assume he said we are intolerant and he wants to leave the country. So let us be tolerant and support his wishes. The best thing we can do right now is send a list of possible "tolerant" countries around the the world to which Mr.Amir Khan and his family can migrate to and lead a happy life
INDIAN MUSLIMS AND THEIR PATRIOTISM TO INDIA
AAMIR KHAN, SHAH RUKH KHAN, AR RAHEMAN
OUTBURST OF INTOLERANCE NEED TO BE EXAMINED
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE AND REASON
MEDIA FAILED TO INVESTIGATE AND DECIPHER TRUTH FROM FICTION
Are Indian Muslims beginning to identify with their brethren in other parts of the world?
THE LIES AND DAM LIES OF ISLAM
TIME FOR TRUE INDIANS TO WAKE-UP AND SAVE MOTHER INDIA
· Written by Tavleen Singh | Updated: November 22, 2015 11:16 am
The author tweets @ tavleen_singh
The truth is that jihadi terrorism has everything to do with Islam for those who think of the time of the Prophet as a blessed time that Muslims must return to.
Since the Paris attacks, two lies have been repeated ad-nauseam in prime time chat shows and in the editorials of our newspapers. The first is that this jihad has nothing to do with Islam. #
And the second is that all religions are the same and can all be misinterpreted by bad people.
It defiles the memory of those who died such horrible deaths to repeat these lies, and yet they continue to be repeated, as if, as the country with the second largest Muslim population in the world, we are afraid of looking into the face of truth.
The truth is that jihadi terrorism has everything to do with Islam for those who think of the time of the Prophet as a blessed time that Muslims must return to.
In that time there were wars in which the Prophet fought, so he put into the Koran verses that instruct his followers to deal in many nasty ways with those who refuse to believe in his message.
It is in strict adherence to these instructions that the Islamic State (IS) commits its hideous crimes against countries it believes are filled with sinners and us idol-worshippers.
In the Caliphate’s own words. “In a blessed battle whose causes of success were enabled by Allah, a group of believers from the soldiers of the Caliphate (may Allah strengthen and support it) set out targeting the capital of prostitution and vice, the lead carrier of the cross in Europe — Paris…Thus they were truthful with Allah — we consider them so — and Allah granted victory upon their hands.”
The second lie that has been repeated often in the past week is that every religion has the same message.
Not true. No Indic religion orders believers to treat non-believers as heathens or ‘kafirs’. There is not a single Indic religion that believes that it alone has all the answers and that those who do not accept this should be treated as scum.
Islam not only believes that those who do not accept Islam are ‘kafirs’, it also believes that it is Allah’s wish that non-Islamic lands be treated as battlefields on which holy wars must be fought.
If you are unfamiliar with the term Dar-ul-Harb, Google it up and find out exactly what it means.
As long as we continue to lie about Islam’s direct connection to jihadi terrorism, we will never be able to deal with the problem India faces as the country with more Muslims than any other except Indonesia.
Our Muslims have lived in relative peace and harmony with other communities because the Islam that has existed here for centuries has been a very different religion to the one that the IS seeks to impose upon the world. But in recent years this has changed.
The Islam now preached from many Indian mosques is based more on the teachings of men like Syed Qutb and Abdul Wahhab, than ever before.
And since 9/11 there has been a false narrative that has been spread by Islamic preachers in which Muslims are painted as victims of a global plot to malign Islam.
In this narrative, the men who killed thousands of innocent people in New York and Washington were not Muslims at all.
A disturbingly large number of Indian Muslims believe this ludicrous lie just as a disturbingly large number believe that 26/11 was an RSS plot.
These lies have to be acknowledged as lies if we are to deal with jihadi terrorism.
Another lie that needs to be dealt with is the lie that what happened in Mumbai was the model for what happened in Paris.
It cannot be because the killers who came to Mumbai had the backing of the Pakistani army.
In a sense this makes our problem easier because we can confront Pakistan with evidence of its sponsorship of jihadi violence on Indian soil.
In Europe the enemy is more nebulous and infinitely more dangerous because the Caliphate is not a country in the modern sense of that word. Europe has to find its way of dealing with jihadi terrorism and in India we have to find our own.
The key to finding answers in India lies in finding out why Islam and many of its followers, as we knew it, has changed so horribly in the past decade or so in India.
Is it because there is a new kind of Islam being preached from the pulpits of mosques?
Is it because Indian Muslims are beginning to identify with their brethren in other parts of the world?
Is it because of the Saudi investment in spreading Wahhabi Islam? These are fundamental questions that need urgent answers, but we will not find them as long as we continue to spread lies about the nature of the threat we face.
A good starting point is to admit that Indic religions are the antithesis of Islam.
tuli yashvir [colonelyt@outlook.com]
November 27, 2015
From: Chandar Kohli <chandarkohli@rogers.com>
Subject: Shahrukh and Amir Khan
NO HINDUU WILL LISTEN TO ANY HINDUU OR ANY HINDUU ORGANISATION ------ HINDUUS WILL NEVER BOYCOTT ANY MOVIE PRODUCED BY SHAH RUKH KHAN OR BY AAMIR KHAN OR BY ANY ANTI - HINDUUS , HINDUUS NEVER BOYCOTTED PK MOVIE OR BANNED BY CENSER-BOARD WHICH WAS VERY AGAINST HINDUUS ----- AND HINDUUS WILL NEVER VOTE IN BLOCK AS MUSLIMS DO ----- HINDUUS SAY '' COME KILL ME I EAT BEEF'' BUT A HINDUU OR A MUSLIM WILL NEVER DARED TO SAY ''COME KILL ME I ATE PORK'', Hindus will never boycott the products of companies who use various Khans for advertising their products---- THINGS ARE VERY BAD WITH HINDUUS BECAUSE OF THEIR DISUNITY ---- WE HINDUUS ARE SUFFERING FOR THE LAST MORE THAN THOUSAND YEARS BECAUSE OF HINDUU DISUNITY
---------------
Shah Rukh, Aamir and their grouse against intolerance
From: Dinesh Agrawal [dinesh1234@gmail.com]
Sent: December 2, 2015
Political Play
CA Dr Sunil Gupta
Shah Rukh, Aamir and their grouse against intolerance
http://www.merinews.com/article/shah-rukh-aamir-and-their-grouse-against-intolerance/15911581.shtml 01 December, 2015
First it was Shah Rukh and then it was Aamir. The two big stars of the Khan triumvirate of Bollywood came up with bloopers, similar in nature, which caught their starry-eyed fans and others alike off guard. The nation was dismayed to note that the two larger-than-life figures had the audacity to make preposterous statements over "rising intolerance" in the country.
· 1
Their comments turned the troubled political waters of the nation a whole lot murkier. Right thinking people of the country were bewildered as to what had led to the unkindest blows dealt by the two in quick succession without any provocation. Further, they could not help wondering if there was a deep-rooted conspiracy behind the highly objectionable behaviour to defame the nation.
The reason for the puzzlement was obvious- the two iconic stars are recipients of the adulation and admiration of millions of fans spread across the length and breadth of our country as also elsewhere across the globe, cutting across the religious divide, which had made them superstars in the first place.
Why would two successful film stars, who are already well established in their career and have been decorated with impressive arrays of awards and honours, make an unwarranted faux pas and rock their own boat? It was quite difficult to believe that their reprehensible reactions were part of a familiar behavioural pattern. Even after giving allowance to the quixotic way some of these artists try to project their image, from time to time in unusual contexts and backgrounds, the statements made by these two Khans on "rising intolerance" were quite far-fetched.
Was it then the craving for cheap publicity that made them do it or was it part of a clever strategy to promote their films? Both the possibilities could not be ruled out. The most likely possibility is, however, a conspiracy. Here, let me explain what makes me think so.
Conspiracy Theory
First, consider the timing. Shah Rukh made his comment as the Bihar Assembly elections were in full swing. Meanwhile, Aamir made his ominous statement following BJP's shocking defeat at the hustings, and the party was in self-introspection mode and in the process of crafting a poll strategy for Kerala.
The virulent attack on the party launched by its bitter political rivals who had ganged up to denigrate the Prime Minister on charges of not speaking against what they called were signs of "rising intolerance" - killings of some rationalist writers in Karnataka and that of a member of a minority community in Uttar Pradesh allegedly by some people who suspected him of consuming beef- bolstered the conspiracy theory.
The shrill and strident attacks by a combined Opposition managed to make the people of Bihar believe that the Assembly elections were all about an outsider's unjustifiable bid to seize power from their own local leaders, and there was a massive "threat" of communalism purportedly waiting in store to the utmost detriment of the minority community in the event of the BJP coming to power in the state.
Here it is worth recalling that the anti-BJP parties had united not on common ideological grounds but on the plank of fear of the prospects of the BJP making big political fortunes in Bihar that would have resulted in the leaders of the grand coalition being relegated to the footnotes of history. To make matters worse, the Opposition came up with a cunning strategy of rattling and misleading some recipients of national awards for excellence in various fields such as arts, literature, etc into returning their awards in protest against "rising intolerance".
This was actually a canard spread in a bid to bring discredit to the BJP-led government at the Centre and for defaming the nation in the world arena by the unscrupulous anti-BJP elements for their narrow political gains. The insidious atmosphere of hatred for the BJP and the consequent combined assault on the ruling party by a united Opposition and a Media, heavily prejudiced against BJP, managed to sway the opinion of the people of Bihar against BJP"s development-oriented campaign.
Smoking Gun
Secondly, there are reasons to believe that the disdainful speeches and insolent comments made by the two Bollywood actors were aimed at the soft underbelly of the BJP, badly mauled in the Bihar elections, and an extension of the contumelious propaganda of the Congress and its allies, to keep the heat on the BJP for further political gains. This is a very strong possibility wherein the two actors allowed themselves to play, knowingly or otherwise, into the hands of the Opposition parties in general and the Congress, in particular.
The validity of this theory is given credence by a recent happening that involved Rahul Gandhi. The Congress Vice President, who was the guest at a program in a prominent women's college in Bengaluru, recently tried hard to run down the Prime Minister's Swachh Bharat Abhiyan and mobilize, in a vain bid, the support of the students to term the program a failure. The keenness of the Gandhi scion to turn the youth against Modi proved counterproductive when the students voiced their support for the program much to his dismay. Against the backdrop of Rahul Gandhi's futile bid to denigrate the Prime Minister, the vexatious statements made by Shah Rukh and Aamir, turned out to be part of a larger game plan conceived by the Congress.
All these appeared to be happening in connivance with sections of the Media with a vested interest, to pit its pet theory of "rising intolerance" against the soaring popularity of Prime Minister Modi, both at home and abroad. The statements of the Bollywood actors over their disenchantment with the government were sweet music to the ears of the Congress, which was quick to grab the opportunity to beat their drum about their hackneyed allegations of the government's failure to safeguard Secularism and arrest the trend of the increase of intolerance. There were familiar echoes of the charges in the Pakistani Media too. Insidious stories were floated by the Pakistani Media that Shah Rukh had blood connections with an ex-Chief of ISI and was welcome to Pakistan, should he decide to quit India.
Nothing could have brought more shame and disgrace to Shah Rukh than this kind of gimmickry by the Pakistani Media over a highly irresponsible and reprehensible statement of the actor. One could not forget, no matter how hard one tried, the extremely unpatriotic way the Congress honchos Salman Khurshid and Mani Shankar Aiyar canvassed in Pakistan for that country's support and assistance in dislodging Prime Minister Modi. There lies the smoking gun out in the open.
Master Brain at Work
Thirdly, it takes the best of directors several takes to get a perfect shot. That being the case, how do the filmy heroes enact a portentous scene perfect to a 't' in their real life without the professional assistance of scriptwriters and directors? No matter how puffed up they seem and brave they sound, they are sure to falter when they deliver statements of powerful impact away from the arc lights. Their statements are therefore taken only with a pinch of salt in normal circumstances by people who are knowledgeable and well-conversant with the ways of the filmdom. In the instant case, there seemed to be an underlying motive and sufficient indications that there was a master brain behind the well-timed delivery of the statements.
Shah Rukh's Statement
Shah Rukh had referred to an atmosphere of growing "intolerance religiously" in the country in reply to a question during a Twitter Townhall on November 2 and said that not being secular in India was the worst crime a patriot could commit. He had further defended the gesture of returning of awards given away for excellence in different areas of creative arts, literature, etc in protest. He went on to call those who returned the awards brave and honest if the gesture was going to turn things around. Shah Rukh's statements raised the hackles of a broad spectrum of right thinking individuals across the nation but were acclaimed across the border as a leading voice of dissent in castigation of the Modi government.
There was no dearth of people who questioned in the social media his loyalty to the country. They wished him Godspeed to migrate to Pakistan if he were to behave so high and mighty and was uncharitable in his criticism of his own country.
Aamir Khan Harangued
Obviously people were furious over Aamir Khan's statement and went hammer and tongs to demolish his superstar image, and questioned his patriotism. The social media was replete with condemnation of the star in the strongest of language for his disgraceful speech. Was it not the people of India who had made him a superstar and given him appreciation and accolade for his work? Why should he fear the same people and talk of moving out of the country? Even when he made highly controversial films like PK, didn't his fans stand by him and make the films hugely successful? Why now the talk of moving out of the country? And, in any case, which country would he want to go to? Definitely, not Syria or Iraq? Pakistan, for one, would not take him as he is reportedly a Shia. Also, to know what intolerance in real sense relates to, study the Blasphemy Law of Pakistan used widely as a tool to suppress voices of non-Muslim religious minorities. Equal freedom and rights to all religions and castes in India is what you shall be proud of.
Reactions on Aamir
BJP spokesman MJ Akbar brought out the stupidity of the star's talk of moving out of India by asking him if he proposed to migrate to New York or London, adding with a chuckle that at neither place would Aamir be hearing Azan, the call of the Muslim cleric to the faithful for inviting to prayers! Speaking at a press conference, Akbar said Aamir had defamed the country for some personal benefits. He alleged that Aamir had "committed a moral sin" as he did not have any "right to drag down the entire country because of personal antagonism towards a party."
He also said Aamir should not forget his iconic status and the fact that he was a relative of freedom fighter Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, whose message was that the country belonged to everybody. He reminded Aamir that Ulemas of 73 countries had praised India for religious freedom. Meanwhile, BJP leader Shahnawaz Hussain said no country in the world is better for Muslims than "incredible and 'atulya' (unmatched)" India and no neighbour better than a Hindu.
Writer Taslima Nasreen gave Aamir the most sensible and straightforward advice - India is the safest place for Aamir as that is what had made him what he is today. Meanwhile, Snapdeal, which had appointed Aamir its brand ambassador, faced flak for the controversial statements made by the film star and users on the Google Play Store for the e-commerce marketplace downgraded the e-commerce giant's app.
Netizens took to Facebook and Twitter to express their opinions, majority of which reflected abject disappointment over what the two film stars had said. They wondered why neither of these superstars ever talked about "rising intolerance" at the time of ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits, communal riots in Mumbai, the anti-Sikh riots in 1984, the Sabarmati Express coach burning incident in Godhra in 2002 and during times of the never-ending suppression of Dalit, women and children in various states of India.
Aamir's comments evoked strong, negative reactions from a cross-section of people on the social media. A comment posted on Twitter said: "A man who married two Hindu women but forced all his kids to follow Islam, is now teaching us tolerance." Meanwhile, Aamir's detractors shortlisted Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia as available countries for his migration. A highly distraught fan went to the extent of suggesting that Saudi Arabia, with its daily public executions, would be the ideal place for the star's child to grow up for his daily dose of tolerance! A highly aggressive comment indeed, but not one without a sufficiently high provocation! Calling Aamir a hypocrite, another fan said, "You did not scream intolerance when your city burned at the hands of some of your co-religionists. Your wife did not feel insecure when a mammoth crowd of some of your co-religionists attended the funeral of a hanged terrorist. You were silent even when a mob from Reza Academy kicked and destroyed a national memorial and manhandled female cops. But now, suddenly, your wife feels insecure in India and wants you to move out."
Striving to drive home the point that vast majority of Hindus are tolerant and not driven by their religious beliefs, on Facebook an avid movie-goer reminded Aamir Khan that though majority of movie-goers in India are Hindus, for years they have been spending their money to buy tickets for his movies. So it was the money of Hindus that has made him the Superstar that he is today. He signed off saying that he and his friends have decided to boycott all the Aamir Khan movies in future and also the products where he is brand ambassador.
Humble Pie
While Shah Rukh said he had not said what had been attributed to him, Aamir pointed out with all the conviction at his command that although he was sticking to what he had said earlier, he and his family were staying on in India and going nowhere else. If he was so fiercely committed to staying on in India, why he had raked up the question of moving out of the country in the first place was something he did not talk about. Maybe there was nothing to say.
Conclusion
Having stated all that happened in the past few weeks in response to the unjustifiable statements of two Bollywood superstars, rounding up the facts and impressions to reach a conclusion becomes a must to replace the dirt with clear skies. Dear superstars (I am afraid how this word personifies you), you are not the only ones belonging to and yours is not the only minority community in India. You are second to the majority in terms of numbers (in fact, your growth rate is higher among all), and Islamic followers far outnumber Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs and Zoroastrians. Sikhs are a living example of how a community faced political wrath, yet did not label the country as intolerant.
Of course, among them too are fanatics planning for a separate country for Sikhs, they are categorized as terrorists and not patriots. Then how shall we label you? You must agree that we are tolerant even after this politically fabricated and manufactured propaganda of which you are a part, consciously or otherwise. It cannot be said whether it was the Modi government's stringent action against illicit foreign funds received by NGOs (your association with them is known to all Indians) or it is the desperate need of controversy to kick-start your upcoming films' promotions or it is the unending disliking for one politician, who today is the Prime Minister of India, that prompted you to give such senseless, shameful and unacceptable statements.
Tolerance and Intolerance, our dear stars, have a very thin line of demarcation. Your shutting of doors of your cars and turning back to those street children of Mumbai is an example of intolerance, your spending on bungalow interiors, when more than half the city you live in is even deprived of basic necessities is intolerance, also, when you speak such statements, however, have no time advocating PM's Jan Dhan Yojana aimed at financial inclusion, it's intolerance. People's reaction by just downgrading a mobile app you endorse or boycotting your films peacefully is tolerance; to know what intolerance can do to you, try mocking a minority Deity in a film like PK.
Glycerin can help you bring tears to eyes while hosting a show based on social flaws, real work for deprived, however, asks for selfless devotion, charging crores for a day's hosting and profit-sharing agreements with producers of your films substantiate your hunger for paybacks. Then too, we are so tolerant and more than happy to back you when you do not cross limits; this time, however, you have done so, having defamed the country and its natives.
As a piece of advice from a common man who does not relish VIP security and fan-following like you, do refrain from using your hatred for one politician as a reason to insult the country of which we are proud to be a citizen.
Once 'Sri Sri Ravishankar Ji' spoke: Hindus are very tolerant. Indians in general are very accommodating but insult is not to be tolerated. Hatred-venom against a community is not nice for an artist. There is no other country in the world which gives so much freedom of expression as India. See with respect everyone and every religion. Nurture harmony in diversity. It is these people who fuel fundamentalism even in communities which are very peaceful and tolerant.
Let's be aware of the terrorism of PEN (Freedom of Expression).
P.S.: The ethnic cleansing of Rohingya community in Buddhism dominated country, the persecution and exodus of Kashmiri Pandits from a Muslim dominated state of India and the refugee-crisis as a consequence of ISIS' caliphate advocacy are 'Intolerance'. Better it shall be if eminent personalities of India, writers and film stars, ditch their disliking for one politician, refrain from making seditious statements under the ambit of freedom of speech and expression, and understand, search for and talk of 'real intolerance'. As the first step towards this, please categorize this writing as freedom of speech and not as an act of intolerance towards you.
==================================
No comments:
Post a Comment