https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4160064815613449047#editor/target=post;postID=6602970549658692547;onPublishedMenu=posts;onClosedMenu=posts;postNum=15;src=link
MODI WILL BE RECEIVED WITH WARMTH
BY THE INDIAN-AMERICANS
by
Bharatahitachintaka
भारतहितचिंतक
The Indian Americans are thronging to interact with the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi,
who will be visiting New York on September 28th.
His magnanimity is in not making an issue about the U.S. Government's, specifically the Department
of Justice's, refusing him visa that he never asked for. He understood quite well it was in response to agitation by a small group of Islamic Indian population claiming to hold up the "secular" banner influencing other so called secular Indians and some leftist American academics into maligning Narendra Modi in the words of Sonia Gandhi, as "the merchant of death". He forgives this group and also does not hold any ill-feelings towards the U.S. Congress or President Obama who have never quite understood the political Islam.
On the eve of Modi's visit President Obama's declaring that those who call themselves as
ISIS or Islamic State and are vowed to establish Muslim Caliphate are not to be recognized as
representing "Islam" is an indication of the dilemma the Americans and especially Obama are facing. It clearly shows how bamboozled Obama and his administration are in the face of the recent events in the Middle East. Regardless of the politics, the fanatic Jihadists who have been provoking the Americans and the West are indeed Islamists and believe in Islam more so than the moderate Muslims. This is a fact that cannot be denied.
The hypocrisy in defining the word "islam" as "peace" is deceptive for all
those who have been familiar with the history of Islam ever since the military career of its
prophet Mohammad Paigambar. So also the interpretation of "jihad" as "a spiritual struggle" is extremely deceptive except for some well meaning nerdy Koranic scholars. President Obama is constrained to appease the Muslims who have control over the oil on which the US and the West is dependent at least for now. The powerful oil companies would like to maintain a cordial relationship with the Muslims who are open to business with the West.
Under this political climate President Obama is most likely to be as condescending toward the Prime Minister of India as President Bush was. Obama will be condescending like his other predecessors were towards all the previous Prime Ministers of India who visited the U. S. since Indian independence in 1947. It is hoped that at least at a personal one on one level he expresses his regrets for the actions of his government and Department of Justice for disrespecting Modi when he was the Chief Minister of
Modi unjustly characterizing him as evil.
(See the article by Seshachalam Dutta on this blog)
One can easily understand President Obama's stand with the radical Islamists discounting them as belonging to the religion of Islam though it is irrational in the face of the historical facts.
From depth psychology viewpoint the President will have great difficulty expressing hostility
towards even the most radical Islamist by identifying them as representing Islam when one
considers the fact that his father was a Muslim by faith though was not by any means harboring an
iota of militant attitude towards the West. Yet, besides being politically correct, Obama at an
unconscious level is resolving his own serious intra-psychic conflict in facing the enemy that identifies with his father's religion or faith.
This psychological fact will impact his attitude towards Prime Minister Modi who has his own fronts of conflict with hostile Muslim powers across the borders, in Pakistan, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, ungrateful Muslim population of legitimately Indian state of Kashmir, and Bangladesh.
If Obama wants to be politically correct, Indian foreign policy related to these border states and the internal problem of Kashmir should never be on the table for any dialogue between Obama and Modi, just like Modi needs to refrain from discussing Obama's strategy against ISIS or ISIL. Modi will compassionately recognize and respect the very deep seated and intimate intra-psychic conflict
Obama faces, besides his country's "interest" in the oil rich Middle Eastern Countries. Obama and Americans can never understand the plight of Hindus and their holocaust over the last 12 or more centuries at the hands of Islam. Hence, it would be wise if the Americans and the President of US
refrain from pontificating to Modi as to how he needs to deal with Islam in India and its bordering
countries.
China and India are in a better position to form a joint front against the radical Islam in Asia than with the U.S. because Americans necessarily have a unique ambivalence towards Islam which is
also infiltrating the American society and its African American population in a surreptitious manner
as a religion of the book and Abrahamic bother of the American Christians and Jewish people. It could any day become an internal threat to the U.S. with indigenous terrorists breeding on the U.S. soil.
Despite his own Muslim lineage, Obama is more unpopular in the Middle East now than he has
ever been during his Presidency and even more so than Modi with his ill-wisher Muslims in the
neighbor states and with Indian Muslims. So preaching Modi to "stand down" with Pakistan,
Bangladesh, or to give him advice as to how to resolve the Kashmir problem would not be well
received by Modi. It will be an insult to Obama's diplomatic colleague and guest to be so condescending towards him.
Now Obama must truly realize what it is to be a target of the brutal jihadi Islamic forces than to use
the primitive psychological defense of "denial"and not recognize his enemies who have declared
a war on Americans by beheading their journalists. Calling them by any other name than Islamic
Jihadists will make no difference for those Muslims who deep down identify with them, finance them
and are even willing to join them falling for their propaganda as the victims of the West and
particularly the U.S. The article on this blog, "Terrorism : The Indian Perspective" clearly pointed out
many years ago that the West had not yet recognized "Islam" for what it is and that it is not just
a religion but a deeply religiously ingrained political power for world dominance not unlike its
currently tamed twin, Christian evangelism, despite the Catholic Pope's decrying the current wars and violence all of which his predecessors had even waged and inflicted upon the nonbelievers in the past centuries.
Lack of conceptual clarity about Islam will come to haunt England, France, Spain and many other
European countries and eventually haunt the U.S. too. The very fact that citizens from all these countries are willingly recruited by ISIS or ISIL, and their media are managed by American citizen,
son of a prominent physician in Boston, USA, is an indication of the veracity of what was predicted in the article, "Terrorism: An Indian Perspective." The root cause is that the Muslims even when educated
in the Western countries, if indoctrinated in Islam, are likely not to pay allegiance to the country of their
citizenship or residence and will have no loyalty for these countries. They will be enemies of the West from within and without. That is not to say there will be no loyal Muslim citizens who are peace loving but they do not and will not openly speak against the jihadism.
That said, Australia is the only "Western" country that has understood the threat of Islam and has given
a clear message of no tolerance to the discontent Islamists on its soil. The West in general and the
U.S. in particular are deluded about their democratic principles in not openly and repeatedly
demanding loyalty from those who reside in their countries. Waging war against the US or Americans
from within or without must be outlawed with "no tolerance policy" with no scope for
rationalization. Homeland security is not fool proof in this regard but even the official policy as
regards how to deal with political Islam that is not loyal to the US is quite mirky.
What will Modi say about these matters will be interesting to watch but his silence will be more
meaningful because these Western countries and the US have never understood that India, and the
Hindus in India have been the victims of Islamic jihad for more than a millennium (just like the
Jewish and now the Israelis) and the West is getting a bitter taste of the Islamist jihadism again after six or eight hundred years and it is yet to come full force for the European countries, and eventually reach the U.S. where it will become a militant element in due course.
It would therefore behoove Obama and Modi not to keep the subject of Islamic jihadism on the
table if they have to forge an economic and technological collaboration leaving that topic of Islam as an inevitable status quo for both the U.S. and India.
सबका साथ, सबका विकास
"Sabka sath, sabka vikas" meaning "everyone's support and everyone's progress" is the motto
for economic upliftment of India and that includes Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jewish, Buddhists,
Jains, Baha'is, atheists, and others in India. So is the all inclusive working model in the US democracy that has made the United States of America a great country which people from all over the world admire with envy. India can emulate the US in many ways and seek its guidance in many spheres but not in dealing with Islamic jihadism as the US and its president are currently discombobulated in this domain.
MODI WILL BE RECEIVED WITH WARMTH
BY THE INDIAN-AMERICANS
by
Bharatahitachintaka
भारतहितचिंतक
The Indian Americans are thronging to interact with the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi,
who will be visiting New York on September 28th.
His magnanimity is in not making an issue about the U.S. Government's, specifically the Department
of Justice's, refusing him visa that he never asked for. He understood quite well it was in response to agitation by a small group of Islamic Indian population claiming to hold up the "secular" banner influencing other so called secular Indians and some leftist American academics into maligning Narendra Modi in the words of Sonia Gandhi, as "the merchant of death". He forgives this group and also does not hold any ill-feelings towards the U.S. Congress or President Obama who have never quite understood the political Islam.
On the eve of Modi's visit President Obama's declaring that those who call themselves as
ISIS or Islamic State and are vowed to establish Muslim Caliphate are not to be recognized as
representing "Islam" is an indication of the dilemma the Americans and especially Obama are facing. It clearly shows how bamboozled Obama and his administration are in the face of the recent events in the Middle East. Regardless of the politics, the fanatic Jihadists who have been provoking the Americans and the West are indeed Islamists and believe in Islam more so than the moderate Muslims. This is a fact that cannot be denied.
The hypocrisy in defining the word "islam" as "peace" is deceptive for all
those who have been familiar with the history of Islam ever since the military career of its
prophet Mohammad Paigambar. So also the interpretation of "jihad" as "a spiritual struggle" is extremely deceptive except for some well meaning nerdy Koranic scholars. President Obama is constrained to appease the Muslims who have control over the oil on which the US and the West is dependent at least for now. The powerful oil companies would like to maintain a cordial relationship with the Muslims who are open to business with the West.
Under this political climate President Obama is most likely to be as condescending toward the Prime Minister of India as President Bush was. Obama will be condescending like his other predecessors were towards all the previous Prime Ministers of India who visited the U. S. since Indian independence in 1947. It is hoped that at least at a personal one on one level he expresses his regrets for the actions of his government and Department of Justice for disrespecting Modi when he was the Chief Minister of
Modi unjustly characterizing him as evil.
(See the article by Seshachalam Dutta on this blog)
One can easily understand President Obama's stand with the radical Islamists discounting them as belonging to the religion of Islam though it is irrational in the face of the historical facts.
From depth psychology viewpoint the President will have great difficulty expressing hostility
towards even the most radical Islamist by identifying them as representing Islam when one
considers the fact that his father was a Muslim by faith though was not by any means harboring an
iota of militant attitude towards the West. Yet, besides being politically correct, Obama at an
unconscious level is resolving his own serious intra-psychic conflict in facing the enemy that identifies with his father's religion or faith.
This psychological fact will impact his attitude towards Prime Minister Modi who has his own fronts of conflict with hostile Muslim powers across the borders, in Pakistan, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, ungrateful Muslim population of legitimately Indian state of Kashmir, and Bangladesh.
If Obama wants to be politically correct, Indian foreign policy related to these border states and the internal problem of Kashmir should never be on the table for any dialogue between Obama and Modi, just like Modi needs to refrain from discussing Obama's strategy against ISIS or ISIL. Modi will compassionately recognize and respect the very deep seated and intimate intra-psychic conflict
Obama faces, besides his country's "interest" in the oil rich Middle Eastern Countries. Obama and Americans can never understand the plight of Hindus and their holocaust over the last 12 or more centuries at the hands of Islam. Hence, it would be wise if the Americans and the President of US
refrain from pontificating to Modi as to how he needs to deal with Islam in India and its bordering
countries.
China and India are in a better position to form a joint front against the radical Islam in Asia than with the U.S. because Americans necessarily have a unique ambivalence towards Islam which is
also infiltrating the American society and its African American population in a surreptitious manner
as a religion of the book and Abrahamic bother of the American Christians and Jewish people. It could any day become an internal threat to the U.S. with indigenous terrorists breeding on the U.S. soil.
Despite his own Muslim lineage, Obama is more unpopular in the Middle East now than he has
ever been during his Presidency and even more so than Modi with his ill-wisher Muslims in the
neighbor states and with Indian Muslims. So preaching Modi to "stand down" with Pakistan,
Bangladesh, or to give him advice as to how to resolve the Kashmir problem would not be well
received by Modi. It will be an insult to Obama's diplomatic colleague and guest to be so condescending towards him.
Now Obama must truly realize what it is to be a target of the brutal jihadi Islamic forces than to use
the primitive psychological defense of "denial"and not recognize his enemies who have declared
a war on Americans by beheading their journalists. Calling them by any other name than Islamic
Jihadists will make no difference for those Muslims who deep down identify with them, finance them
and are even willing to join them falling for their propaganda as the victims of the West and
particularly the U.S. The article on this blog, "Terrorism : The Indian Perspective" clearly pointed out
many years ago that the West had not yet recognized "Islam" for what it is and that it is not just
a religion but a deeply religiously ingrained political power for world dominance not unlike its
currently tamed twin, Christian evangelism, despite the Catholic Pope's decrying the current wars and violence all of which his predecessors had even waged and inflicted upon the nonbelievers in the past centuries.
Lack of conceptual clarity about Islam will come to haunt England, France, Spain and many other
European countries and eventually haunt the U.S. too. The very fact that citizens from all these countries are willingly recruited by ISIS or ISIL, and their media are managed by American citizen,
son of a prominent physician in Boston, USA, is an indication of the veracity of what was predicted in the article, "Terrorism: An Indian Perspective." The root cause is that the Muslims even when educated
in the Western countries, if indoctrinated in Islam, are likely not to pay allegiance to the country of their
citizenship or residence and will have no loyalty for these countries. They will be enemies of the West from within and without. That is not to say there will be no loyal Muslim citizens who are peace loving but they do not and will not openly speak against the jihadism.
That said, Australia is the only "Western" country that has understood the threat of Islam and has given
a clear message of no tolerance to the discontent Islamists on its soil. The West in general and the
U.S. in particular are deluded about their democratic principles in not openly and repeatedly
demanding loyalty from those who reside in their countries. Waging war against the US or Americans
from within or without must be outlawed with "no tolerance policy" with no scope for
rationalization. Homeland security is not fool proof in this regard but even the official policy as
regards how to deal with political Islam that is not loyal to the US is quite mirky.
What will Modi say about these matters will be interesting to watch but his silence will be more
meaningful because these Western countries and the US have never understood that India, and the
Hindus in India have been the victims of Islamic jihad for more than a millennium (just like the
Jewish and now the Israelis) and the West is getting a bitter taste of the Islamist jihadism again after six or eight hundred years and it is yet to come full force for the European countries, and eventually reach the U.S. where it will become a militant element in due course.
It would therefore behoove Obama and Modi not to keep the subject of Islamic jihadism on the
table if they have to forge an economic and technological collaboration leaving that topic of Islam as an inevitable status quo for both the U.S. and India.
सबका साथ, सबका विकास
"Sabka sath, sabka vikas" meaning "everyone's support and everyone's progress" is the motto
for economic upliftment of India and that includes Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jewish, Buddhists,
Jains, Baha'is, atheists, and others in India. So is the all inclusive working model in the US democracy that has made the United States of America a great country which people from all over the world admire with envy. India can emulate the US in many ways and seek its guidance in many spheres but not in dealing with Islamic jihadism as the US and its president are currently discombobulated in this domain.
No comments:
Post a Comment