Other Voices Concerning The India Blog Ban
Yeah, I’m tired of moaning about being banned in India. I received maybe a hit or two a week from India, so it’s no great loss. Yet my hit count has increased 50% due to the interest on it. So my net result is that this is great for me. And people from India ARE still getting here despite India’s feeble attempt at censorship.
 |
- Banned because I support India’s secular state.
- Banned because I support India’s Hindu majority.
- Banned because I support India’s freedom.
- Banned because I don’t want India’s Federal Republic and Constitution to be overwritten by Sharia.
- Banned because I believe India is better served by a President than by an Iman.
- Banned because I believe India is better served by free elections than religious appointments.
- Banned because I believe India is better served by their Supreme Court than by an Islamic court.
- Banned because I believe India is better served by their 562 broadcast TV stations, their 153 AM radio stations, their 91 FM radio stations, instead of a single state-owned media outlet.
- Banned because I believe India is better served by their Army, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard protecting them from outside aggressors than an internal Religious Police curtailing personal freedoms.
- Banned because I have not yet fallen into Dhimmitude.
- Banned because I am not afraid to point out that Militant Islam is not a religious faith but is instead a Cult of Death.
- Banned because I have pointed out that Islam rarely, if ever, co-exists with infidels.
- Banned because I say militant Islam is not protected by Multiculturalism or Diversity.
- Banned because I write that militant Islam is a Cancer on Civilization and should be treated just like any biological Cancer.
- Banned because I am not a coward.
|
I read this from ada-paavi:
The muslims in India have to understand that they are living in a Secular State and not some Islamic State where they can have their way all the time. If this blog, because of its anti Islamic content is going to offend them, then it’s their problem, the bloody muslims have to learn to accept criticism rather than trying to stifle it. They can try stifling criticism in an Islamic state, and not a Secular democracy, which guarantees freedom of speech. The bloody Indian government should never have given in, let the Muslims riot, let them burn down busses and cars, let them damage public property. If they do, throw them in jail and prosecute them, rather than giving in to their stupid pressure.
ban, India, censorship, secular, Sharia, Islam, Dhimmitude
Tags: Dhimmitude · Hindu · India · Internet · Islamofascism · Muslim/Islam · Terrorism
1 response so far ↓
1 m // Jul 26, 2006 at 3:53 pm
The cappuccino theory -
(Presented to you after minutes and minutes of research, hard work and lots of copy- paste)
Event:
India Blocks Several Web Sites and media tries to figure out how it relates to 7/11 Bombay rail blast.
Summery:
Baskin-Robbins vanilla ice cream + Arabica beans + blended with ice = Cappuccino Blasts( Nothing unusual)
Socialist party + Forming an alliance with small political parties + UPA-Left Coordination Committee = Restriction on freedom of information (Nothing unusual)
Point:
United Progressive Alliance (UPA) is the present ruling coalition of political parties in India (As you know). Largest political party in coalition is Indian national congress (INC) which will proudly claim their socialist foundation.
This alliance is externally supported by the four left parties; Communist Party of India (Marxist), Communist Party of India, Revolutionary Socialist Party and All India Forward Bloc. In order to coordinate the cooperation, a UPA-Left Coordination Committee has been formed.
Point is:
Why is that some people are surprised, confused, furious, etc,.. by present ruling coalition banning those web site (anticommunist and Hindu right wing) which serves different political perspectives then their own.
When you combine hard core socialist and communist they will attack freedom of speech. (Nothing unusual)