Muslim can become PM if he is capable: Rahul

[Jumeirah]

Well for the simple fact that our nation is secular there was no need for rahul to endorse further. I guess he was addressing to some hardcore morrons

 

[deckingraj]

I never said 'some muslim' out of the blue. Like Dr. Singh there must be some individuals of islamic faith that have made substantial contribution to our country. Ultimately, it is the Gandhi family that holds the key to approving the individual, whether u like it or not.

That's what i am challenging...You are suggesting that this choice is made to appease Muslims or Sikhs...That's where i meant that you have missed happenings back home...Choice of Mr. Manmohan was not becuase he was a sikh...it was because Sonia Gandhi was never interested in PM job and congress had no other leader who could have done justice to the role and accepted by common man...

While mentioning Rajya Sabha i indicated Dr. Singh did not have any political clout in 2004. Did u or anyone expect him as PM when the election results came out ? Ofcourse the PM has to have popular support in the end; my point being the candidature decision lies in a dynastic family.

I have explained above...Now mind it i am not saying that Gandhi family is not powerful or there is no dynasty politics involved....If you talk about that then it is true for whole of South Asia(all democratic countries)...Anyways if we go by Mr. Rahul Gandhi thoughts then he wants to get away from Dynasty politics...

I said ONE of the reasons .. not the primary one. Just bcoz u dont like it, vote bank politics is not going to disappear.

Above you said that we did not know that he would become PM until the election results...Now you are saying it was dont to get Sikh votes....Its contradicting...For the records Sikhs have lot of remorse against Mr Manmohan especially because of his failure to get justice for 1984 people..his role in France banning turbans etc etc...Last election congress lost against Akali's in Punjab..so not sure what vote banks are you talking about...

Btw Sonia Gandhi as PM did appear as a joke, what were her credentials ?

Are you serious???? Though congress never publically announced their PM candidate in 2003 yet people had in mind only one name i.e. Sonia Gandhi....Indian voters choosed her so rest assured she being a PM was no joke..She choosed not to be a PM and then comes Mr. manmohan Singh..The very first line he said in Parliament was "Though Mandate is for you yet i am accepting the post to serve the nations"

She got the party popular support didnt she ? She could easily veto the chosen candidate of Congress high command for the next couple of elections at least. Which actually proves my point.

Again you are wrong...Congress was in a very bad shape at that moment(i don't want to go in details)...If you go by Poll stats(pre and post elections) you will see how everyone was favoring BJP over Congress...She not only united the party at that time but manged to surprise everyone with a victory...What does it tells you about her credentials...As far as Dynasty politics is concerned i am not challanging that...However your point that choosing a sikh or muslim PM just to appease minority is a little far-fetched...

 

[Dawkins]

That's what i am challenging...You are suggesting that this choice is made to appease Muslims or Sikhs...That's where i meant that you have missed happenings back home...Choice of Mr. Manmohan was not becuase he was a sikh...it was because Sonia Gandhi was never interested in PM job and congress had no other leader who could have done justice to the role and accepted by common man...

I am suggesting it is a useful political maneuver, not the primary reason. For decades the congress took the minority vote for granted by playing the secular card. The way PC was treated at the deoband seminary could have rung some alarm bells in the congress.

FYI your contradictions on my views does not imply i am ignorant.

I have explained above...Now mind it i am not saying that Gandhi family is not powerful or there is no dynasty politics involved....If you talk about that then it is true for whole of South Asia(all democratic countries)...Anyways if we go by Mr. Rahul Gandhi thoughts then he wants to get away from Dynasty politics...

Yeah, Rahul says so inspite of practicing it, and its nothing to be proud of. Just look at the recent Maharashtra assembly election candidate list.

Above you said that we did not know that he would become PM until the election results...Now you are saying it was dont to get Sikh votes....Its contradicting...For the records Sikhs have lot of remorse against Mr Manmohan especially because of his failure to get justice for 1984 people..his role in France banning turbans etc etc...Last election congress lost against Akali's in Punjab..so not sure what vote banks are you talking about...

When i mention vote bank politics, its about the future, assembly as well as national elections. Guess what, it sort of worked ! INC won 8 seats in Punjab in 2009 as opposed to 2 in 2004. I am sure a lot of it had to do with anti-incumbency but it did not hurt for the common Sikh to have MMS as PM.

Are you serious???? Though congress never publically announced their PM candidate in 2003 yet people had in mind only one name i.e. Sonia Gandhi....Indian voters choosed her so rest assured she being a PM was no joke..She choosed not to be a PM and then comes Mr. manmohan Singh..The very first line he said in Parliament was "Though Mandate is for you yet i am accepting the post to serve the nations"

Again you are wrong...Congress was in a very bad shape at that moment(i don't want to go in details)...If you go by Poll stats(pre and post elections) you will see how everyone was favoring BJP over Congress...She not only united the party at that time but manged to surprise everyone with a victory...What does it tells you about her credentials...As far as Dynasty politics is concerned i am not challanging that...However your point that choosing a sikh or muslim PM just to appease minority is a little far-fetched...

Its you who's being contradictory here; suggesting Manmohan Singh as a qualified PM (more often true than not) and then giving a thumbs up to Sonia Gandhi for the same post. Appeasing the people and winning elections is one thing, running the country is another e.g. George W. Bush.

I'll say this again, a muslim PM will not be PM just for being a muslim. There will be a number of capable candidates every election. Choosing one will include into consideration a lot of factors, vote banks being one of those.

 

[scrumpy]

Listen you freak Baber the mogul is a turkic todays uzbekistan. Before he reached india he travelled via afghanistan and pakistan. His army screwed and raped every possible women on the way.

By the way try and sort the taliban in ur country or else their sharia law will ban you from even ising the internet. Leave India alone. Its secular be it a hindu, muslim,Buddist, christian, sikh etc everyone has oppurtunity. You have to experience to understand. Feel sorry for you how would u know?

Please learn to identify a Troll. The only intention of that post earlier was to provoke you. Please don't feed him.

 

[deckingraj]

I am suggesting it is a useful political maneuver, not the primary reason. For decades the congress took the minority vote for granted by playing the secular card. The way PC was treated at the deoband seminary could have rung some alarm bells in the congress.

You are right about it...They have taken minority vote for granted but not sure how it is related to our current discussion...

FYI your contradictions on my views does not imply i am ignorant.

Dude neither i am claiming that you are ignorant...

Yeah, Rahul says so inspite of practicing it, and its nothing to be proud of. Just look at the recent Maharashtra assembly election candidate list.

Neither did i claim that he is practicing it...I just re-iterated his opinion...b/w bringing a change is not a very simple task especially when primary aim is to win seats...Change is going to be gradual...

When i mention vote bank politics, its about the future, assembly as well as national elections. Guess what, it sort of worked ! INC won 8 seats in 2009 as opposed to 2 in 2004. I am sure a lot of it had to do with anti-incumbency but it did not hurt for the common Sikh to have MMS as PM.

Well then you are wrong because if that was the case why did they loose Assembly election this time??? Why did they gave ticket to Titler which was later taken on due to public out cry..blah blah...Let me tell you a thing or two about Punjab politics...There are only 13 Lok Sabha seats which is negligible when it comes to states like UP-Bihar...Secondly in punjab there has never been a case of two succussive tenure of same govt..Punjabi's are equally angry against Akali's and Congress...So if i go by your logic it don't make sense to pitch in a Sikh leader whereas a muslim PM can be of much more advantage...Congress did not do that because that sounds stupid...The way BJP pitching Abdul Kalam did not change their impression among muslims, pitching MMS as PM won't change Congress impression for 84 especially when leader like tytler and sajjan singh are still there and winning elections on Congress ticket...

So if the intention is to win minority vore by pitching in PM based on religion than obvious choice should be a muslim leader(18&#37 instead of Sikh(2%) or for that matter a SC-ST candidate(40%)

Its you who's being contradictory here; suggesting Manmohan Singh as a qualified PM (more often true than not) and then giving a thumbs up to Sonia Gandhi for the same post. Appeasing the people and winning elections is one thing, running the country is another e.g. George W. Bush.

Who said that Sonia Gandhi would have been a good PM for India??? However you and I cannot deny that the mandate of 2003 elections was for her.. She was not interested so she choose Dr. Manmohan Singh not because he is a sikh but because he is qualified and will be accepted by Masses...Even go to a remote village in India and ask what they feel about Dr. MMS..they will say an honest person...

Let me ask who else you think could have been our PM if not MMS at that time???

I'll say this again, a muslim PM will not be PM just for being a muslim. There will be a number of capable candidates every election. Choosing one will include into consideration a lot of factors, vote banks being one of those.

Dude...now you are diluting your stand...Anyways vote bank politics was as its peak in 80's and 90's...As far as i know there have never been a case when a PM belonging to minority was selected for vote bank politics....I am not saying it is not working now but voters have certainly become more smarter than 2 decades ago...This tactic was not used then so rest assured won't be used even now...However i agree that there are lot of factors for choosing a PM candidate because people should be able to relate to him/her...

 

[Jumeirah]

That was a very cheap attempt at juvenile humour. You have tried to cover ur back by the portion underlined above . If you had a doubt, on then net there are a zillion ways to do a spell check before you post.

As regards the subject, I do not know why we are even discussing it. Any Indian can become the PM. He only has to be an Indian - being Hindu , Muslim, Sikh, Christian etc has nothing to do with it.

Ignore the instigator third eye. its a troll

 

[third eye]

I know what you mean but we have to understand they in tragedy right now. Bombs in the market place, Bombs in their childrens university, Bombs in religious gatherings....its not a joke...they must be insane. As i read lot of posts i see the frustration within them. Deep down they want a change, live in peace, be called a republic without military dictators etc

Without going into the ' hows' & ' whys' of what you have mentioned all I'll say is that is no reason to vilify the name of the Father of a Nation or any one else for that matter.

 

[Jumeirah]

Lets be rational here. As an indian one thing is he having no reason to say something and another is his right to freedom of speech and expression. Let not mix up what is ethically correct and what is lawfull right.

 

[Draft]

Some people try to increase their own stature by getting appointments to high offices.

But APJ Abdul Kalam ji increased the stature of the Presidency by accepting that post.

Very true. In fact I would go a step further and say that only after Abdul Kalam Sir became the President did the people of India really started respecting the post of President. Prior to him citizens hardly cared who the President was.

 

[asq]

India will have one provided the unofficial monarchs of India i.e. Gandhi family decide to have one. Manmohan Singh is after all a Rajya Sabha member and was picked out of the blue by Madame Sonia. With the current state, BJP does not seem to make it to power or have powerful allies in the next election.

Is this conceivable in the future : BJP moves from right wing to centrist ideology and is single largest party by a fair margin, appoints a muslim as PM. One of the reasons Congress appointed MMS was exorcise some of the ghosts of 1984; could the BJP do the same for 1992 & 2002 ? Just a thought.

Dawkin. you put the nail right on the head. I am glad that there are some Indians like yourself who speak the truth no matter what, I appreciate you spirit.

To add my two cents worth i would also like to add the fact that Mrs. Sonia was vehemently opposed by members of parliament it was so fierce for her being Italian that she chose not take the position and thus handed to Mr. sing.

There are many discussion articles on internet about Sonia and most tell the true story of prejudices of Indian leaders.

Read and learn the truth and refrain from insulting right minded Indian.

The case for Sonia Gandhi

 

[deckingraj]

Dawkin. you put the nail right on the head. I am glad that there are some Indians like yourself who speak the truth no matter what, I appreciate you spirit.

I am glad that you liked his POV...Though i am on the other side so may be not speaking the truth...

To add my two cents worth i would also like to add the fact that Mrs. Sonia was vehemently opposed by members of parliament it was so fierce for her being Italian that she chose not take the position and thus handed to Mr. sing.

Here you are wrong...You are right she was vehemently opposed by Member of Parliaments but if you will notice all those members were sitting in Opposition just after the elections...In fact one the issue that BJP raised during their election campaign was her of being foreign origin but guess what??..People of India rejected that and choose Congress over BJP...I will request you to once again think about What does that mandate suggests???

Secondly once Congress won no member could have stopped her from being PM...They would have been naive to oppose the mandate of people...So it was her decision not to choose the prime post and have nothing to do with members opposing...In fact the opposition you are talking about was before the elections and not after it...

There are many discussion articles on internet about Sonia and most tell the true story of prejudices of Indian leaders.

Care to explain what prejudice you are talking about???

Read and learn the truth and refrain from insulting right minded Indian.

I am not sure if it was directed at me(it was me who was discussing with Dawkins) but i have not insulted him in any way...Dawkins can vouch for it

The case for Sonia Gandhi

Now i am totally confused..Have you read the article before sharing??...The article that you have shared tells us how potent she is and her foreign origin issue was nothing than an Opposition attempt to win election...Here is one expert that sums it all

All the political personalities who opposed her and exclusively targeted her in Election 2004 have been humbled by the people of India.

 

[Awesome]

Lol his first he should remember what happened the last time his mom tried to become PM.

All of India was in a super whiny, ranty, bitchy mode over the prospects of her becoming PM. A Muslim is a few grades further down from where Sonia stood.

 

[Jumeirah]

For your info sir, Sonia never tried becoming a PM. She declined the position for reasons best known.

India is probably the most secular nation in the world. eg. in the United states california governor arnold schwarzenegger cannot stand for presidency because he was austrian born. In Great Britain Roman Catholic cannot stand for a PM post or become a monarch. In India such rules dont exist.

 

[Skeptic]

Lol his first he should remember what happened the last time his mom tried to become PM.

All of India was in a super whiny, ranty, bitchy mode over the prospects of her becoming PM. A Muslim is a few grades further down from where Sonia stood.

Expected a higher standard of posting from you, but thats my fault...

Rahul's comment have to be seen in proper prespective. He was responding to a question and this is not a speech he was making. It was a direct question - When would India see a Muslim PM, He gae a fitting reply that we will choose the most eligible person - If a Muslim happens to be that person, He/ She would be crowned (figuratively ofcoz).

Objection to Sonia becoming PM were on entirely different grounds and laid to rest forever. Choosing PM has never had and never will have anything to do with the religious beleifs of the candidate.

If anyone can claim to be more eligible than MMS please stand up. We can expect further misinterpretation for nationals who have had their right to elect their leaders suspended several times over.

My sympathies are with Pakistan, get well soon. I hope Pakistan be blessed with sufficient opportunities to understand democracy and how it works.

 

[Awesome]

For your info sir, Sonia never tried becoming a PM. She declined the position for reasons best known.

The papers were filled with a lot of resentment over congress nominating Sonia for the position. She backed off because of her unpopularity even though her party won.

India is probably the most secular nation in the world. eg. in the United states california governor arnold schwarzenegger cannot stand for presidency because he was austrian born. In Great Britain Roman Catholic cannot stand for a PM post or become a monarch. In India such rules dont exist.

That's a common misconception, just because the PM gives some church of England appointments as well.

WikiAnswers - Can you have a Roman Catholic Prime Minister of Great Britain

Rest assured, that law would change before it supersedes the popular demand of Britain.