Kharge's 'terrorist' label fits Congress, not BJP: Pralhad Joshi
Hubballi: Union Minister Pralhad Joshi hit back at AICC President Mallikarjun Kharge, accusing him of mistakenly referring to the BJP as a "party of terrorists" instead of naming Congress.
Speaking to the media in Hubballi, Joshi said, "Kharge has called the BJP a party of terrorists, but in reality, he must have been referring to what is happening within his own party."
Joshi went on to criticise Congress, saying, "It is well known that Congress showed a soft stance on Afzal Guru, retained Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, and allowed the growth of terrorists. The entire country is aware of this. It was Congress that repealed the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) in 2004 and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh shook hands with separatists and extremists. Kharge seems to have forgotten all this."
Highlighting the BJP's actions, Joshi stated, "It is the BJP government under Prime Minister Narendra Modi that has successfully curbed terrorism. During Congress rule, the youth of Kashmir had stones in their hands, but today they have jobs. As a senior leader, Kharge should be more mindful of what he says."
Joshi also took a dig at Congress, claiming, "The BJP has truly honoured Dalits in this country, while Congress has always acted against them, which is why the party finds itself in its current state."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Sujit Nair raises concerns over speculation of DMK-AIADMK understanding to block TVK
Chennai: Journalist and political commentator Sujit Nair has expressed concern over speculation that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam could explore a post-poll understanding to prevent Vijay-led Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam from forming the government in Tamil Nadu.
In a social media post, Sujit Nair said the election verdict in Tamil Nadu reflected a clear public demand for political change and argued that the mandate should be respected irrespective of political preferences.
Referring to reports and political discussions surrounding a possible understanding between the DMK and AIADMK, he said he hoped such developments remained only speculative conversations and did not turn into reality.
Nair stated that if such an alliance were to take shape, it would raise serious questions about ideological politics in the country. He said TVK had emerged through a democratic electoral process and that the legitimacy to govern in a parliamentary democracy comes from the people’s verdict.
According to him, attempts to prevent an electoral winner from forming the government through unexpected political arrangements may be constitutionally valid, but many people could view them as politically opportunistic.
He further said that such a move could particularly affect the political image of the DMK, which has historically projected itself around ideology, social justice and opposition politics. Nair said that in ideological terms, the DMK appeared closer to TVK than to the AIADMK, and joining hands with its long-time political rival only to remain in power could weaken its broader political narrative.
He added that the same questions would apply to the AIADMK as well, as the party had spent decades positioning itself against the DMK and such an arrangement could create discomfort among its cadre and supporters.
Drawing a comparison with Maharashtra politics in 2019, Nair said he had expressed similar views when the Shiv Sena formed an alliance with the Indian National Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party after the Assembly elections.
He said post-poll alliances between long-standing political rivals often create a public perception that ideology and electoral mandates become secondary when political power equations come into play.
Nair also said such developments increase public cynicism towards politics and reinforce the belief among voters that ideology is often sidelined after elections.
He maintained that the Tamil Nadu verdict was emphatic and said respecting both the spirit and substance of the mandate was important for the credibility of democratic politics.
