‘Impotent’ Rage of
Salman Khurshid
against Narendra Modi

Part - 1

by Ghatotkacha Nair

On Tuesday, 25th February 2014, Salman Khurshid, presently the Union Cabinet Minister for External Affairs, described Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi as "impotent" at a rally in Farrukhabad as he raised questions on the Gujarat Chief Minister's handling of the post-Godhra riots in 2002.

Earlier, Khurshid had compared Modi to the proverbial frog just out of the well.

Khurshid, who is a sitting Member of Parliament from Farrukhabad, asked why a man who aspires to be the Prime Minister of the country could not do anything during the 2002 riots.

“Some people came, attacked and went, and you couldn't protect. Are you not a strong man? We don't accuse you (Modi) of killing people... Hamara aarop hai ki tum napunsak ho. (Our accusation is that you are impotent). You couldn't stop the killers.”

Please allow this writer, a proud Kaffir to ask, who started the killings.

Congress Party Councillor Taufeeq Khan Pathan and his son Zulfi, both notorious Muslim criminals, were seen leading Muslim rioters in Godhra in February 2002. Another such character, Congress member of the Godhra Nagarpalika, Haji Balal, was said to have had the fire-fighting vehicle sabotaged beforehand. Then, he stopped the vehicle on its way to the Godhra Station and did not allow it to proceed any further. According to Justice Nanavati, Maulvi Hussain Umarji from Godhra was the brain behind the events. Two of the main accused, Salim Panwala and Farukh Bhana, are absconding, very likely having fled to Pakistan. The Congress Party’s Muslim functionaries and supporters organized a 1500-strong frenzied Muslim mob to butcher 58 Ramsevaks on Sabarmati Express. In the mean time someone used the public address system exhorting the mob “to kill kafirs and enemies of Bin Laden.” (‘Godhra: The True Story’ by Nicole Elfi)

Why didn’t Salman Khurshid stop the killings? After all, it was the workers of his own Sonia Congress Party who slaughtered the 57 unarmed Hindu passengers on Sabarmati Express.

Aah! But then it is not a murder if a Muslim kills a Kaffir is it? It is after all a religious obligation for a Muslim to kill a Kaffir.

The Islamic clerics themselves admit that it is OK to kill the Non-Muslims (Kafirs) as per the teaching of Islam.

Verses of the Quran clearly command Muslims to kill and fight those who accept not Allah as their Lord and Muhammad as his Prophet.

Quran 8:39 says, “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do.”

The author wants Muslims to fight the Non-Muslims until the religion is solely for Allah, i.e. Islam alone.

Many Islamic scholars in a classic Al Taqquiya Islamic tactic of Dissimulation, complain of Kaffirs quoting the Quranic verses out of context. Unfortunately for the Islamic scholars the verse itself says clearly to fight the all the disbeliever until religion is only for Allah, which leaves no room for any contextual interpretation.

Quran 9:14 says, “Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people.”

Muslim invaders began entering India in the early eighth century, on the orders of Hajjaj, the Governor of Iraq. Starting in 712 the raiders, commanded by Muhammad Qasim, demolished temples, shattered sculptures, plundered palaces, killed vast numbers of men—it took them three days to slaughter the inhabitants of the port city of Debal—and carried off their women and children to slavery.

Qasim’s early exploits were continued in the early eleventh century, when Mahmud of Ghazni “passed through India like a whirlwind, destroying, pillaging, and massacring,” zealously following the Kuranic injunctions to kill idolaters, whom he had vowed to chastise every year of his life. In the course of seventeen invasions, in the words of Alberuni, the scholar brought by Mahmud to India,

“Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country and  performed there wonderful exploits, by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions, and like a tale of old in the mouth of the people. Their scattered remains cherish, of course, the most inveterate aversion toward all Muslims.”

The slaughter in Somnath, the site of a celebrated Hindu temple, where 50,000 Hindus were slain on Mahmud’s orders, set the tone for centuries.

The mountainous North-Western approaches to India are called the Hindu Kush, “the slaughter of the Hindu,” a reminder of the days when Hindu slaves from Indian Subcontinent died in the harsh Afghan mountains while being transported to Muslim courts of Central Asia.

In the aftermath of the invasion, in the ancient cities of Varanasi, Mathura, Ujjain, Maheshwar, Jwalamukhi, and Dwarka, not one temple survived whole and intact.

The Islamic period of the Indian History was a very dark and dismal period of Indian History so far as Hindus are concerned. It was a period of military resistance, physical suffering and religious suffocation for Hindus. Islamic vandalism and religious domination and racial tyrrany was so stark in its evil, so barbarian in its nature and so enormous in its magnitude that it demands eternal condemnation.

Babur derived sadistic pleasure by watching heads of slaughtered Hindus. "I ordered that a tower of Hindu heads be set up on the ground." (Babur Nama, translated into English by A.S. Beveridge, p. 370)

In relation to Akbar`s conquest in Chitor, Abul Fazl recorded that "following Akbar`s order, eight thousand Rajput warriors were first disarmed and then slain and along with them forty thousand peasants were also slain." (The Islamic treatment of PoW, Surah 8, Ayat 67, the Quran) (Akbarnama by Abul Fazl translated into English by H. Beveridge). Jahangir, in his autobiography "Tarikh-i-Salim Shahi" wrote that under Akbar and Jahangir "five to six hundred thousand (500,000 to 600,000) Hindus were killed." (Tarikh-i-Salim: Trans. By Price, pp. 225-6)

Shahjahan indulged in sex enslavement of Hindu women. His grandfather, Akbar possessed a harem consisting of 5000 women, mostly Hindus. After Akbar`s death Jahangir inherited the harem and increased the number of Hindu concubines to 6000. When the same harem fell into the hands of Shahjehan, he further enriched the same with a wide assortment of Hindu women and kept renewing it by throwing away the old women and bringing in new ones from Hindu households. (Akbar the Great Moghul: V. Smith, p. 359)

One of the main objectives of Aurangzeb's policy was to demolish Hindu temples. In 1669, shortly after the death of Mirza Raja Jai Singh of Amber, a general order was issued (9^th April 1669) for the demolition of temples and established schools of the Hindus throughout the Mughal empire and banning public worship by Hindus. Soon after this the great temple of Keshava Rai at Mathura was destroyed (Jan.-Feb. 1670) and in its place a lofty mosque was erected. The idols, the author of Maasir-i-Alamgiri informs, were carried to Agra and buried under the steps of the mosque built by Begum Sahiba in order to be continually trodden upon. This was followed by Aurangzeb's order to demolish the highly venerated temple of Vishwanath at Banaras. The number of such ruthless acts of Aurangzeb make a long list but here only a few have been mentioned, supported by evidence, mostly contemporary official records of Aurangzeb's period and by such credible Persian sources as Maasir-i-Alamgiri. In obedience to the Quranic injunction, he reimposed Jizyah on the Hindus on 2nd April 1679, which had been abolished by Emperor Akbar in 1564.

Ahmed Shah Abdali attacked the Golden Temple in Amristar in 1757 and filled its Sarovar (sacred pool) with the blood of slaughtered Hindus and cows in a terrible Ghallughara. He captured Amritsar (1757), and sacked the Harmandir Sahib popularly known as the Golden Temple. According to Islamic Theology, Ahmed Shah Abdali was only performing a pious deed enjoined on a Muslim and not committing the heinous crime of genocide.

In his much-acclaimed book ‘The Story of Civilization’, Will Durant lamented the results of Islamic invasion of India as “probably the bloodiest story in history.”

Islamists taunt Hindus: “Has Has ke Liya Pakistan, Ladke Lenge Hindustan.”

After creation of Pakistan, a reign of loot, murder, rape and terror was unleashed against Hindus and Sikhs. Muslims drove out 10 million Hindus from Pakistan. They reduced Hindu population from 23% in 1947 to 1% in Pakistan.

In Bangladesh Hindu population was reduced from 35-40% in 1947 to 8-9%.

After consolidating their position, Muslims turned their eyes on Kashmir Valley. They tortured Hindu to such an extent that more than 400,000 Hindus fled their homes and hearths. Napumsak Salman Khursheed did not ask for a stop to the killings in the Kashmir Valley.

In 1971, more than 3 Milllion people were killed in Bangladesh, out of which 80% were Hindus. More than 20 Million Bangladeshi Muslims are already in India. Muslim population in Assam is increasing with leaps and bounds. Situation is assuming an alarming proportion and soon Kashmir-like situation could arise there too. Salman Khursheed did not ask for a stop to the killings in Bangladesh.

Ajmal Kasab, the sole surviving gunman from 2008 Mumbai attacks admitted that his Muslim Preachers told him that killing Hindu kafirs and getting killed while doing so is the most pious way to get to heaven, where a thousand million virgins will be waiting to serve them.

So from the Islamic point of view, Salman Khursheed’s colleagues Taufeeq Khan Pathan, son Zulfi and Haji Balal were not committing murders in Godhra. They were only performing a pious Islamic deed of despatching Kaffirs from Hindustan in order to claim it for Islam.

Now let us move on to 1980’s.
All the killings in Punjab let loose by the Congress-sponsored Khalistani Terrorist Bhindranwale and his gang of well-armed armed thugs did not upset the Islamic sensitivities of Salman Khursheed enough to demand a stop to the killings. Salman Khursheed did not tell Indira Gandhi “Hamara aarop hai ki tum napunsak ho.” How could he, after all Indira Gandhi was “the only man in the Cabinet”!

This savage record of Ahmed Shah Abdali in Punjab was renewed with Islamic fanaticism by MAIMUNA BEGUM (Muslim name adopted by Indira Gandhi on marrying Feroz Khan in a London Mosque) tried to match the savage record of Ahmed Shah Abdali in 1984. It was Begum Indira Khan Gandhi who directed the Indian Army to enter the Golden Temple at Amritsar in June 1984. Indian Army Action inside the Golden Temple caused a grievous hurt to the religious feelings, emotions, sentiments and sensibilities of the Sikh Community not only in India but throughout the world. She got her just dues and she was executed by two Sikh Policemen.

Upon arrival at Palam airport in Delhi on 31st October 1984 and hearing of his mother's assassination, Rajiv Khan Gandhi told those present,"My mother has been shot dead. What are you doing here? Go, and take revenge. No turban (distinctive Sikh headdress) should be seen."[source: ‘The Sikhs in History’ by Sangat Singh (talks on November 1, 1984 with a RAW Inspector who was present at the airport)] (Courtesy: http://amitabhbacchan1984.blogspot.com/2009/04/amitabh-bacchan-1984.html)

The pseudo-liberals, Missionaries, Marxists and Islamists, all kept quiet during the 1984 Congress Genocide against the Sikhs. None demanded that Prime Minister Rajiv Khan Gandhi resign and face trial. None of these worthies bothered to compare him with Hitler. Salman Khursheed did not tell Rajiv Khan Gandhi “Hamara aarop hai ki tum napunsak ho.”

[See Part 2]