She means an electoral struggle, right? Sure. But just today, two Muslims beheaded a Hindu for expressing support for Nupur Sharma, the former BJP spokeswoman who has been falsely accused of blaspheming Islam. For Mamata Banerjee to use the word “jihad” today is incendiary, inflammatory, and could incite violence. Is that what she wants?
PMK says
Sounds like a call for insurrection.
gravenimage says
Yep–a real call for insurrection.
mortimer says
But wait! Only Democrats know the meaning of the word ‘insurrection’ and it means any protest of a political party other than their own.
It is never ‘insurrection’ when the DEMS do it.
gravenimage says
India: Chief Minister of West Bengal calls for ‘jihad’ against ruling party
……………………..
Why is this incitement of violence allowed in India?
mortimer says
India’s legal code gives the freedom of expression and then takes it away if you express almost anything that will upset Muslims.
https://www.lawskills.in/ResourceDetails/12/right-to-freedom-of-speech-and-expression-versus-incitement-of-public-as-an-offence
SECTION 505 OF THE IPC INTER ALIA STATES THAT:
Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement, rumour or report, with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public whereby any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquility; or with intent to incite, or which is likely to incite, any class or community of persons to commit any offence against any other class or community, shall be punished with imprisonment or with fine, or with both. It also states that any one who makes a statement that promotes enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different reli¬gious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communi¬ties, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
What does not amount to an offence is, when a person making, publishing or circulating any such statement, rumor or report, has reasonable grounds for believing that such statement, rumor or report is true and makes, publishes or circulates it in good faith and without any such intent as aforesaid.
Infidel says
No, actually freedom of expression in that country exists only on paper. If you insult any politician of any party and that party happens to be in power in any state, that state can send its police into another state to arrest you, even though it has no jurisdiction there
gravenimage says
Very troubling.
Infidel says
Last year, the Indian government refused to intervene in Waste Bengal when BJP members and voters were being raped and murdered for voting for the BJP in the election, even though Mumtaz Banerjee’s party won that election. Normally, breakdown of law & order is a legitimate reason to dismiss a state government and bring it under ‘President’s Rule’ i.e. direct control by the Indian government
When they didn’t do that even for their own party supporters, it’s not surprising that they are supine when she issues more threats. It’s no wonder that the BJP is in shambles in that state after being in a good position for all of 2020
mortimer says
Either Mamta Banerjee already knows the violent implication of ‘JIHAD’ or she ought to know it. Either way, she is unfit for office.
It is indeed an incitement to Muslims to harm non-Muslims.
Infidel says
Mortimer
In many election rallies in that state (I was originally from there), she recited the kalma, which is the shehada plus a few more declarations. In front of muslims! Not once! Not twice! Several times! Yet people are expected to take her seriously when she claims that she still is a Hindu. Oh, and her educational degree? It was in…🥁🥁🥁🥁 Islamic studies 🥁
Based on your scholarship of islam, how many times does one have to recite the kalma before one is acknowledged to have converted to islam? There is a reason people call her ‘Mumtaz’, and not ‘Mamata’ (which is a Hindu name)
Infidel says
No, she does not mean an electoral struggle. She means full blown warfare – the same meaning as jihad normally does. Officially, she still claims to be Hindu – early this year, she visited Varanasi trying to raise Bengali support against Yogi, who was fighting an election – and was jeered at so aggressively that she fled to a temple
Last year, she fought the state elections against the BJP, and routed them. That should have been the end of things, and she should have settled down to governing. But the elections were followed by several weeks of violence, rape and murder against BJP members, BJP voters and even against Hindus who voted for her party. Law & order had completely broken down in her state, and her government should have been dismissed, but wasn’t. Result is what we see today
Also, like I pointed out in my response to Mortimer, she has several times recited the ‘kalma’ at election rallies. I don’t know why anybody seriously believes that she’s not a muslim. Years ago, I had a Bangladeshi Hindu colleague who told me that as a kid, his muslim friends would try to trick him into reciting the kalma so that he’d then be recognized as muslim, w/ all that it entails, and he’d avoid doing it. Yet, here is a politician w/ a graduate degree in islamic studies, no less, who recites the kalma in front of huge muslim crowds, and people seriously entertain the notion that she has not converted to islam
Devasur says
Mumtaz begun the jihadi CM of Bengal who is no different from jammu & kashimirs Abdullahs & muftis.
This jihadi scum should be permanently jailed.
Infidel says
I blame the Marxists for not killing her when they were in power. It’s not like they ran that state bloodlessly for some 34 years or respected opposing opinion like the BJP does: they did some pretty monstrous things, like forcing their victims to eat rice cooked in the blood of family members (much like that character in ‘The Kashmir Files’) or lit up a taxi full of people near where I once lived. From 1984 onwards, they could see that she was a real threat to their power, and yet, despite all her demonstrations, and despite their own records of thuggery, they couldn’t take her out?
Jamie James says
You know they must be mentally ill? Where is there a successful jihadist country? Are the people happy there, are they enjoying life every day? So, how can someone voluntary want to live under Sharia?