Better to fight war with Pakistan than suffer daily: Ramdev

Agencies
February 19, 2019

Raipur, Feb 19: Yoga guru Baba Ramdev said Tuesday that in the wake of the Pulwama terror attack, India should "fight a war" against Pakistan to teach it a lesson.

He also said India should extend all kind of help to the separatist movement in Balochistan, a southwestern province of Pakistan.

"A befitting reply has to be given to Pakistan and terrorists. First of all, we have to break Pakistan into three pieces," he said.

As many as 40 CRPF jawans were killed in Pulwama in South Kashmir on February 14 in a suicide bombing attack, owned up by Pak-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed.

India has lost "over 50,000 soldiers and civilians" so far due to the nefarious activities of Pakistan, Ramdev said, adding, "Now we have to teach a lesson to Pakistan. We must fight a war. Instead of suffering every day, it's better to fight a war and teach Pakistan such a lesson that it can not dare to stand for the next fifty years."

The Yoga guru was speaking to reporters after the launch of a Patanjali apparel store, a venture of his Patanjali group, here.

"India should support financially and politically those who are fighting for freedom in Balochistan and help them with weapons. India should help them in every way to liberate Balochistan," he said.

"The Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir should be merged into India. All the terrorist camps being operated from PoK should be destroyed," Ramdev added.

"Moreover, India should support rebels in Pakistan to launch a rebellion in that country so that it can be destroyed completely. Until then, Pakistan will not stop its nefarious activities," he said.

Ramdev also reiterated that construction of a Ram temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya was not a political issue but it was something linked to the nation's pride.

"I would say to the Muslims that they should come forward and say that a Ram temple should be built because Lord Ram is their ancestor too," he said.

Comments

kumar
 - 
Wednesday, 20 Feb 2019

This dhongi baba is trying to fool public.  If he is no deshbhakt first he should go to border.  Instead of going to border he is provocating innocents to go there.   This dhongi baba is only after lust and enjoyment with young girls in the ashram.   He has good enjoyment in the island donated to him by bjp govt.   let him go to border and support our jawans.   

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com web desk
June 16,2020

New Delhi, Jun 16: Despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi led government’s attempt to downplay the border dispute with China, matters have heated up unprecedentedly along the Line of Actual Control (LAC)- the effective Sino-India border in Eastern Ladakh. 

The country has lost three precious lives – an army officer and two soldiers. The last time blood was spilled on the LAC, before the latest episode, was 45 years ago when the Chinese ambushed an Assam Rifles patrol in Tulung La.

India had lost four soldiers on October 20, 1975 in Tulung La, the last time bullets were fired on the India-China border though both the countries witnessed bitter stand-offs later at Sumdorong Chu valley in 1987, Depsang in 2013, Chumar in 2014 and Doklam in 2017.

Between 1962 and 1975, the biggest clash between India and China took place in Nathu La pass in 1967 when reports suggest that around 80 Indian soldiers were killed and many more Chinese personnel.

While three soldiers, including a Commanding Officer, were killed in the latest episode in Galwan Valley, the government describes it as a "violent clash" and does not mention opening fire.

New Delhi described the locality where the 1975 incident took place as "well within" its territory only to be rebuffed by Beijing as "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong".

The Ministry of External Affairs had then said that the Chinese had crossed the LAC and ambushed the soldiers while Beijing claimed the Indians entered their territory and did not return despite warnings.

The Indian government maintained that the ambush on the Assam Rifles' patrol in 1975 took place "500 metres south of Tulung" on the border between India and Tibet and "therefore in Indian territory". It said Chinese soldiers "penetrating" Indian territory implied a "change in China's position" on the border question but the Chinese denied this and blamed India for the incident.

The US diplomatic cables quoted an Indian military intelligence officer saying that the Chinese had erected stone walls on the Indian side of Tulung La and from these positions fired several hundred rounds at the Indian patrol.

"Four of the Indians had gone into a leading position while two (the ones who escaped) remained behind. The senior military intelligence officer emphasised that the soldiers on the Indian patrol were from the area and had patrolled that same region many times before," the cable said.

One of the US cables showed that former US Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger sought details of the October 1975 clash "without approaching the host governments on actual location of October 20 incident". He also wanted to know what ground rules were followed regarding the proximity of LAC by border patrols.

A cable sent from the US mission in India on November 4, 1975 appeared to have doubts about the Chinese account saying it was "highly defensive".

"Given the unsettled situation on the sub-continent, particularly in Bangladesh, both Chinese and Indian authorities have authorised stepped up patrols along the disputed border. The clash may well have ensued when two such patrols unexpectedly encountered each other," it said.

Another cable from China on the same day quoted another October 1974 cable, which spoke about Chinese officials being concerned for long that "some hotheaded person on the PRC (People's Republic of China) might provoke an incident that could lead to renewed Sino-Indian hostilities. It went on to say that this clash suggested that "such concerns and apprehensions are not unwarranted".

According to the United States diplomatic cables, Chinese Foreign Ministry on November 3, 1975 disputed the statement of the MEA spokesperson, who said the incident took place inside Indian territory.

The Chinese had said "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong". In its version of the 1975 incident, they said Indian troops crossed the LAC at 1:30 PM at Tulung Pass on the Eastern Sector and "intruded" into their territory when personnel at the Civilian Checkpost at Chuna in Tibet warned them to withdraw.

Ignoring this, they claimed, Indian soldiers made "continual provocation and even opened fire at the Chinese civilian checkpost personnel, posing a grave threat to the life of the latter. The Chinese civilian checkpost personnel were obliged to fire back in self defence."

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson had also said they told the Indian side that they could collect the bodies "anytime" and on October 28, collected the bodies, weapons and ammunition and "signed a receipt".

The US cables from the then USSR suggested that the official media carried reports from Delhi on the October 1975 incident and they cited only Indian accounts of the incident "ridiculing alleged Chinese claims that the Indians crossed the line and opened fire first".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 5,2020

Malappuram, Jun 5: A lawyer has filed a complaint with Superintendent of Police, Malappuram against BJP leader Maneka Gandhi and others for allegedly indulging in a hate campaign against Malappuram district and its residents.

Advocate Subhash Chandran, who hails from Malappuram, on Thursday filed a complaint seeking registration of FIR against former Union Minister Maneka Gandhi and others for allegedly indulging in a hate campaign against Malappuram and the residents of the district.

The complainant alleged that the campaign against the district was very derogatory and with a malafide intent.

The complaint stated that the unfortunate death of an elephant in Mannarkkad, Palakkad District dominated social media conversations in the last two days but a group of people deliberately added communal colour into it only to spread hatred against Malappuram, which is a Muslim majority district in Kerala.

It also stated that the elephant in question died on May 29, 2020, in Palakkad not in Malappuram as claimed by a section in social media users. Prominent news outlets operating from the South also reported that the elephant died after consuming explosive-laden pineapple in Palakkad.

The complaint also named political commentator, Tarek Fatah, for allegedly starting a hate campaign against the district and the minority community.

It alleged that Union Minister Maneka Gandhi made false and frivolous allegations against the district of Malappuram and its residents.

Chandran, through the complaint, prayed to the district police chief to register an FIR against Maneka Gandhi and others under Section 153A, 120B etc. of Indian Penal Code.

An elephant had died after she ate the pineapple stuffed with crackers and forest officials said that it died standing in river Velliyar after it suffered an injury in its lower jaw.

The elephant was seen standing in the river with her mouth and trunk in the water for some relief from the pain after the explosive-filled fruit exploded in her mouth.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 14,2020

New Delhi, Mar 14: India on Friday was mulling over the option of deporting The Wall Street Journal's South Asia deputy bureau chief for misreporting Delhi riots in which over 50 people were killed last month. However, the government denied that it had made any such decision.

Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said that a complaint was registered against Eric Bellman, the WSJ South Asia deputy bureau chief based in New Delhi, by a private individual on the government's online grievance redressal platform.

"Referring the complaint to the related office is a routine matter as per standard procedure. No such decision on deportation has been taken by the Ministry of External Affairs," Kumar said.

However, government-funded Prasar Bharati News Services had earlier tweeted screenshots of the complaint which was filed by an undersecretary in the Ministry of External Affairs, Vinesh K Kalra, saying that the ministry has asked the Indian embassy in the US to "look into the request for immediate deportation of Bellman for his "anti-India behaviour".

The official had complained to the embassy about Bellman's controversial reportage on the killing of an Intelligence Bureau staffer named Ankit Sharma.

The WSJ had reported that Ankit Sharma's brother had said that he was killed by a mob belonging to a particular religious community. Ankit's brother later told Indian media that he never spoke to the WSJ reporter.

After the Prasar Bharati tweet got circulated widely on social media, the government backtracked and said that no such decision has been taken.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.