#aaptards

[aaptards]

AAP ka Kumar Vishwas insulting Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Jain religions

Insulting Hindu God Lord Shiva

Insulting Hindu God Lord Hanuman

Insulting Sikh and Islam religions

Insulting Jain religion

[aaptards]

AAM Party sting operation: Yogendra Yadav lying openly on TV

In the press release issued on 22nd November, the AAP have mentioned that an important statement is intentionally not transcripted during the talk between the sting reporter and Ms. Shazia Ilmi.

Dr. Yogendra Yadav insists that the sentence specifies the amount of donation in thousands and not in lakhs, i.e., when the reporter says that they can give donation up to "25", that means "25 thousand" and not "25 lakhs" as claimed by the Media Sarkar portal.

I checked the video, and found that yes, Dr. Yogendra Yadav is correct in assessing that such a sentence is indeed not transcripted.

But is his claim correct? Does "25" really mean "25 thousand" and NOT "25 lakhs"?

Sorry dear AAP, unfortunately, Dr. Yadav is misleading people. During the talk with the PA of Ms. Shazia Ilmi (Mr. Siddharth), the reporter clearly specifies "25" as "25 lakhs" for more than once. See yourself!

Dr. Yadav himself said that he has watched the complete 48 min video at least dozen times, to such an extent that he could notice even the missing transcription of the small sentence!

Then how did it happen that Dr. Yadav missed to notice when 25 lakhs is specified multiple times just within 2 minutes??

Do you believe he genuinely failed to notice when 25 lakhs is specified? Or Does it seem an intentionally dishonest effort by Dr. Yadav to mislead people?

In my view, if a person can notice such a small mistake of missing transcription, it is absolutely impossible that the same person would genuinely fail to notice that 25 lakhs is specified multiple times.

Does this very dishonest effort not reveal how dishonest the AAP is in their intentions!!?

[aaptards]

AAP on Communal Violence Bill

For those, who don't know what is communal violence bill, it is directed to punish the offenses done or anticipated against a group which essentially comprises of a religious or linguistic minority and Scheduled Castes and tribes (Sec 1 (e)). Nobody else is given protection. If in certain area, Hindu population is minority and attack is targeted against them or where the minorities themselves start organized attacks and riots, this law wont help to Hindus. Such is the viciousness of the draft bill. Read more here. 

Communal violence bill is totally against Uniform Civil Code which administers the same set of secular civil laws to govern all people irrespective of their religion, caste and tribe, and is directed many times by Supreme Court of India.

Lets see what aaptard Shazia Ilmi has to say on Communal Violence Bill. On January 9, 2012, Shazia Ilmi had tweeted that she clearly supports Communal Violence Bill and she is not 'kanfused'. And the aaptards, chamchas are retweeting it.

@Saeil I already support communal violence bill. Why are u so confused??

— shazia ilmi (@shaziailmi)

January 9, 2012

Haha, later on November 26, 2012, just take a look what she says,

@mlr05 I have never expressed my views on communal violence bill which I have yet to read. I have campaigned hard for janlokpal bill

— shazia ilmi (@shaziailmi)

November 26, 2012

Now who is 'kanfused'? And by the way, had Shazia Ilmi supported the communal violence bill earlier without reading? If you are thinking Shazia Ilmi is right, and I am either Congress or BJP agent, then you are truly an "aaptard". 

Maulana Arvind Kejriwal, who says that he will himself answer to his Aam Aadmis, never gives a clear statement on Communal Violence bill. Because, if he does so, then he will lose either minority vote bank or the majority vote bank. Now who is playing communal card in politics?