http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/video/video.aspx?id=60314

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sunny Leone a true Canadian DESI now back in India !.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Vandematram

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/video/video.aspx?id=60314

---

Time Line:

1. 2009: End of BJP as a National Party; End of Hindutva.

2. 2011: New National Census based on Religion and Castes: Hindu Population 650 million, Muslims: 350 million, Christians and others: 150 million.

3. 2014: End of Congress(I) as a national party and emergence of BSP, Communists as major national political players and Islamic parties as minor power brokers.

4. 2020: India will be part of the Islamic belt stretching from Afghanistan, Pakistan on the left to Bangladesh on the right. We will have the Chinese communists with CPI-M as proxy in Nepal above and a Buddhist government in Srilanka on the bottom.

Whom to blame for this trend, the Hindus themselves for putting mud on their heads!.

God save India !.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sunny Leone a true Canadian DESI now back in India !.

very good link ..wish more and more people watch this and have a win win approach than attacking each other...

God save India...

Is this why all you chicken hearted wimps bailed out of India? Because you couldn't stay there and do something?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
If you have a gun, you can rob a bank.
If you have a bank, you can rob everyone.
- Bill Maher

Got this on email, thought to share with you all..


The same people? Surely not
>
> http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=4e661b6b-ca91-43f6-8153-e927ad151c76
>
> Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times
> March 07, 2009
>
> Few things annoy me as much as the claim often advanced by
> well-meaning but woolly- headed (and usually Punjabi) liberals to the
> effect that when it comes to India and Pakistan, \"We’re all the same
> people, yaar.\"
>
> This may have been true once upon a time. Before 1947, Pakistan was
> part of undivided India and you could claim that Punjabis from West
> Punjab (what is now Pakistan) were as Indian as, say, Tamils from
> Madras.
>
> But time has a way of moving on. And while the gap between our
> Punjabis (from east Punjab which is now the only Punjab left in India)
> and our Tamils may actually have narrowed, thanks to improved
> communications, shared popular culture and greater physical mobility,
> the gap between Indians and Pakistanis has now widened to the extent
> that we are no longer the same people in any significant sense.
>
> This was brought home to me most clearly by two major events over the
> last few weeks.
>
> The first of these was the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team on
> the streets of Lahore. In their defence, Pakistanis said that they
> were powerless to act against the terrorists because religious
> fanaticism was growing. Each day more misguided youngsters joined
> jihadi outfits and the law and order situation worsened.
>
> Further, they added, things had got so bad that in the tribal areas
> the government of Pakistan had agreed to suspend the rule of law under
> pressure from the Taliban and had conceded that sharia law would reign
> instead. Interestingly, while most civilised liberals should have been
> appalled by this surrender to the forces of extremism, many Pakistanis
> defended this concession.
>
> Imran Khan (Keble College, Oxford, 1973-76) even declared that sharia
> law would be better because justice would be dispensed more swiftly!
> (I know this is politically incorrect but the Loin of the Punjab’s
> defence of sharia law reminded me of the famous Private Eye cover when
> his marriage to Jemima Goldsmith was announced. The Eye carried a
> picture of Khan speaking to Jemima’s father. “Can I have your
> daughter’s hand?” Imran was supposedly asking James Goldsmith. “Why?
> Has she been caught shoplifting?” Goldsmith replied. So much for
> sharia law.)
>
> The second contrasting event was one that took place in Los Angeles
> but which was perhaps celebrated more in India than in any other
> country in the world. Three Indians won Oscars: A.R. Rahman, Resul
> Pookutty and Gulzar.
>
> Their victory set off a frenzy of rejoicing. We were proud of our
> countrymen. We were pleased that India’s entertainment industry and
> its veterans had been recognised at an international platform. And all
> three men became even bigger heroes than they already were.
>
> But here’s the thing: Not one of them is a Hindu.
>
> Can you imagine such a thing happening in Pakistan? Can you even
> conceive of a situation where the whole country would celebrate the
> victory of three members of two religious minorities? For that matter,
> can you even imagine a situation where people from religious
> minorities would have got to the top of their fields and were,
> therefore, in the running for international awards?
>
> On the one hand, you have Pakistan imposing sharia law, doing deals
> with the Taliban, teaching hatred in madrasas, declaring jihad on the
> world and trying to kill innocent Sri Lankan cricketers. On the other,
> you have the triumph of Indian secularism.
>
> The same people?
>
> Surely not.
>
> We are defined by our nationality. They choose to define themselves by
> their religion.
>
> But it gets even more complicated. As you probably know, Rahman was
> born Dilip Kumar. He converted to Islam when he was 21. His religious
> preferences made no difference to his prospects. Even now, his music
> cuts across all religious boundaries. He’s as much at home with Sufi
> music as he is with bhajans. Nor does he have any problem with saying
> ‘Vande Mataram’.
>
> Now, think of a similar situation in Pakistan. Can you conceive of a
> Pakistani composer who converted to Hinduism at the age of 21 and
> still went on to become a national hero? Under sharia law, they’d
> probably have to execute him.
>
> Resul Pookutty’s is an even more interesting case. Until you realise
> that Malayalis tend to put an ‘e’ where the rest of us would put an
> ‘a,’ (Ravi becomes Revi and sometimes the Gulf becomes the Gelf), you
> cannot work out that his name derives from Rasool, a fairly obviously
> Islamic name.
>
> But here’s the point: even when you point out to people that Pookutty
> is in fact a Muslim, they don’t really care. It makes no difference to
> them. He’s an authentic Indian hero, his religion is irrelevant.
>
> Can you imagine Pakistan being indifferent to a man’s religion? Can
> you believe that Pakistanis would not know that one of their Oscar
> winners came from a religious minority? And would any Pakistani have
> dared bridge the religious divide in the manner Resul did by referring
> to the primeval power of Om in his acceptance speech?
>
> The same people?
>
> Surely not.
>
> Most interesting of all is the case of Gulzar who many Indians believe
> is a Muslim. He is not. He is a Sikh. And his real name is Sampooran
> Singh Kalra.
>
> So why does he have a Muslim name?
>
> It’s a good story and he told it on my TV show some years ago. He was
> born in West Pakistan and came over the border during the bloody days
> of Partition. He had seen so much hatred and religious violence on
> both sides, he said, that he was determined never to lose himself to
> that kind of blind religious prejudice and fanaticism.
>
> Rather than blame Muslims for the violence inflicted on his community
> — after all, Hindus and Sikhs behaved with equal ferocity — he adopted
> a Muslim pen name to remind himself that his identity was beyond
> religion. He still writes in Urdu and considers it irrelevant whether
> a person is a Sikh, a Muslim or a Hindu.
>
> Let’s forget about political correctness and come clean: can you see
> such a thing happening in Pakistan? Can you actually conceive of a
> famous Pakistani Muslim who adopts a Hindu or Sikh name out of choice
> to demonstrate the irrelevance of religion?
>
> My point, exactly.
>
> What all those misguided liberals who keep blathering on about us
> being the same people forget is that in the 60-odd years since
> Independence, our two nations have traversed very different paths.
>
> Pakistan was founded on the basis of Islam. It still defines itself in
> terms of Islam. And over the next decade as it destroys itself, it
> will be because of Islamic extremism.
>
> India was founded on the basis that religion had no role in
> determining citizenship or nationhood. An Indian can belong to any
> religion in the world and face no discrimination in his rights as a
> citizen.
>
> It is nobody’s case that India is a perfect society or that Muslims
> face no discrimination. But only a fool would deny that in the last
> six decades, we have travelled a long way towards religious equality.
> In the early days of independent India, a Yusuf Khan had to call
> himself Dilip Kumar for fear of attracting religious prejudice.
>
> In today’s India, a Dilip Kumar can change his name to A.R. Rahman and
> nobody really gives a damn either way.
>
> So think back to the events of the last few weeks. To the murderous
> attack on innocent Sri Lankan cricketers by jihadi fanatics in a
> society that is being buried by Islamic extremism. And to the triumphs
> of Indian secularism.
>
> Same people?
>
> Don’t make me laugh.

A very good article.
Thanks hcheda.