Two prime ministers, two different receptions

[Yogijaat]

an extremist won an election in india....says a lot about india and those who voted
its all we need to know, nothing we didnt know already.....its just funny when the indians of PDF yap about secularism when they themselves were abusing it during the whole election fever in that country of theirs

we don't need a certificate of secularism from a pakistani and the definition of extremism is different for india and pakistan, the whole world knows who is a terrorist nation and where was osama hiding. A Pakistani would be the last person who can lecture india on secularism and extremism.

 

[Bang Galore]

If no one likes Nawaz as you suggested how come he is the prime minister of pakistan????? and Imran who is the most liked fellow and his party is restricted to a single province?

Well....that's what they don't like about the "fake democracy". In a real democracy, they would have just handed over the country to Imran and sent Nawaz home......

if he hadnt won the election its pretty likely the cold shoulder would've still been given.....a State Dept. spokesperson even alluded to this during an interview on Al Jazeera english

That's the point. Had he not won the election, we really wouldn't have cared whether he was given a visa or not. We are interested in how he is treated as the PM of India, not as a private individual....

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

That's the point. Had he not won the election, we really wouldn't have cared whether he was given a visa or not. We are interested in how he is treated as the PM of India, not as a private individual....

i think it was the indians who hyped up the visit more than anyone else did......though we all can agree that modis reception was warmer than Sharifs - but thats b/c even Pakistani Americans spat on NS - except for a few confused people whereas indian americans treated modi as a holy cow

 

[acetophenol]

Indian courts are just like Pakistani courts; infested by high politics. See Modi's reaction when he is cross questioned by an anchor for his role in Gujrat riots:

Modi is a Hindu-nationalist and anti-Muslim. Just admit it!!!

I don't know about Pakistani courts, but I have complete faith in Indian judiciary. They may be late, but they do deliver justice,no matter who the wrong doer is. TN Chief Minister Jayalalitha is the latest example. And regarding the interview, Modi's lack of skill in english must also be taken into account.

 

[Kloitra]

There is no negative correlation between affluence and support for extremist organizations.

In fact, the LTTE got a lot of its funding from rich Tamils in the West. Many extremist Islamic groups get their funding from rich sponsors in the Middle East.

There is every possibility, even likelihood, that extremist Hindu organizations will want to portray India's rise as the rise of Hinduism and Hindu culture. The more India rise, they more they will equate India with Hinduism.

Right now the religious violence against Muslims is mob-violence. An affluent, well educated and responsible person generally doesn't joins a mob. Intolerance may be existing among rich, but generally they do not participate in riots.

 

[Developereo]

Right now the religious violence against Muslims is mob-violence. An affluent, well educated and responsible person generally doesn't joins a mob. Intolerance may be existing among rich, but generally they do not participate in riots.

They wouldn't physically join riots, but they would fund organizations that promote their agenda.
These organizations may then funnel money to less-than-peaceful wings.
The benefactors may or may not be aware of the funneling.

 

[Kloitra]

They wouldn't physically join riots, but they would fund organizations that promote their agenda.
These organizations may then funnel money to less-than-peaceful wings.
The benefactors may or may not be aware of the funneling.

But overall prosperity would reduce the number of people participating in the violence. Compared to now. Besides, development would shift the politics further away from religion. Less and less people would support violence.

 

[Trawllu]

True . Modi has been lucky on many accounts .

frankly speaking - Modi had little to do with MOM .

He is just lucky to be PM while MOM reached its logical conclusion .

One has to give him credit to dare to time his visit to US immediately after MOM.

It was a well calculated gamble that paid off .

Modi launched himself in US straight from MOM mission success .

Modi is a smart politician to do that ...

The joy of Indians and Indian abroad has been all time high with success of Mars mission .

and he positioned himself very well ...It gives all the reasons for Indian abroad to hope for more ....they want their parent country to do well too.

I hope he converts his luck into something more solid ...

oh bhai he did not time his US visit with MOM gamble

he timed it to United nations General Assembly session

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Indian courts are just like Pakistani courts; infested by high politics. See Modi's reaction when he is cross questioned by an anchor for his role in Gujrat riots:

Modi is a Hindu-nationalist and anti-Muslim. Just admit it!!!

put him on the spot....didnt react well to the questions, you can see it in his face

he'll take his past and his shame with him to the cremation

 

[MilSpec]

i think it was the indians who hyped up the visit more than anyone else did......though we all can agree that modis reception was warmer than Sharifs - but thats b/c even Pakistani Americans spat on NS - except for a few confused people whereas indian americans treated modi as a holy cow

Pakistani Americans spat on NS - Great way to treat your elected leader....

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Indian courts are just like Pakistani courts; infested by high politics. See Modi's reaction when he is cross questioned by an anchor for his role in Gujrat riots:

Modi is a Hindu-nationalist and anti-Muslim. Just admit it!!!

The same Indian courts convicted Lalu and Jayalalitha when she is a sitting CM. Modi was acquitted when he was CM, not by a district or high court but the Supreme Court and it does hold a lots of value.
Now come back when Pakistani Judiciary have done something like that.

 

[SrNair]

Title of this thread is wrong. Nawaz is not elected PM of Pakistan, hence his treatment by international world leaders. Heck, even the West acknowledges that he came to power via rigging and corruption but dares not to admit it!


Last time he met with Obama, he was reading from his parchis in front of entire press, embarrassing Pakistan further on the world stage:
View attachment 112837
Look at Obama's face. He looks like a witch doctor while Nawaz is reading

Look like a man infront of village office witha lot of demand lists requests .Lol

 

[SrNair]

But Pakistani diaspora hate Nawaz and love Imran. See the difference?

Why is that?

On topic.Whatever the reasons when you are outside from your country you should have one mind and leader.NZ may be wrong.But emotion against him should be within Pakistan.When you take that fight outside of your nation it will bring bad reputation to Pakistan and Pakistanis also.

If you dont respect your own leader then who in this world should respect him? Foreigners will ridicule you

 

[Developereo]

But overall prosperity would reduce the number of people participating in the violence. Compared to now. Besides, development would shift the politics further away from religion. Less and less people would support violence.

Affluence is never spread evenly. There is always disparity, and opportunists will exploit the divisions.

It is wrong to think that people in rich countries are more tolerant. Even in the US, there are race riots. The only thing keeping things in check is strong law enforcement, not any kind of fundamental change in human nature.

 

[Kloitra]

Affluence is never spread evenly. There is always disparity, and opportunists will exploit the divisions.

There would be less people in absolute poverty. Besides, politics would shift (is shifting) from caste/religion/hate based to development and governance based. You can see that in recent results in UP - the attempts to get polarized Hindu votes failed miserably. Disparity would be there, but the jobless/poor which right now work as fodder for hate based politics would diminish in number.

It is wrong to think that people in rich countries are more tolerant. Even in the US, there are race riots. The only thing keeping things in check is strong law enforcement, not any kind of fundamental change in human nature.

I didn't say people would become tolerant. But they would stay away from violence and that is first step. And law enforcement becomes better with economy and governance - one of the things current government claims to be working on. Tolerance can come later. First cure the symptoms and than disease.