Rand invited to foreign policy event by Indian-American conservative group

[compromise]

http://www.niac.co/images/Aug-1-event.jpg
I hope he goes to this. He's already courting blacks, Latinos and Orthodox Jews with the intention of broadening his base, and this is another good opportunity to do so, as Indian-Americans tend to be socially conservative, vehemently opposed to foreign aid for Pakistan and often run small businesses.

[eduardo89]

I hope he goes to this. He's already courting blacks, Latinos and Orthodox Jews with the intention of broadening his base, and this is another good opportunity to do so, as Indian-Americans tend to be socially conservative, vehemently opposed to foreign aid for Pakistan and often run small businesses.

This should win him a lot of praise.

[AlexAmore]

Elizabeth Warren thought it was a good demo to go after.

edit: shit, wrong indian.

[JCDenton0451]

This is smart politics for Rand in terms of winning over the Establishment: you must show that you love minorities to prove that you're 'electable'. But if he actually thinks that a sizable amount of these blacks and indians and orthodox Jews will register Republican to vote for Rand in primary, he must be on crack...

Like I said before, he would do much better by meeting with some young single women in Iowa: ask them what they think about his nationwide abortion ban.

[compromise]

This is smart politics for Rand in terms of winning over the Establishment: you must show that you love minorities to prove that you're 'electable'. But if he actually thinks that a sizable amount of these blacks and indians and orthodox Jews will register Republican to vote for Rand in primary, he must be on crack...

Like I said before, he would do much better by meeting with some young single women in Iowa: ask them what they think about his nationwide abortion ban.

Find me these young single slutty women that will register Republican to vote for Rand in a primary. I'm not seeing any. They will register Democrat to vote for Clinton in a primary.

Orthodox Jews and Indians are wealthy ethnic groups that can be easily brought over to the conservative position with the right outreach.

[Warlord]

Find me these young single slutty women that will register Republican to vote for Rand in a primary. I'm not seeing any. They will register Democrat to vote for Clinton in a primary.


Ask Brian or Dave to give you the tour of Porn Valley sometime. Lots of rich, slutty independent businesswomen .

[compromise]

Ask Brian or Dave to give you the tour of Porn Valley sometime. Lots of rich, slutty independent businesswomen .

Is there actually any proof that those people are open to voting GOP?

[Warlord]

Is there actually any proof that those people are open to voting GOP?

Rich white women good for GOP I think. They get it with regards to taxes at least. There's not enough of them in CA though.

[AlexAmore]

This is smart politics for Rand in terms of winning over the Establishment: you must show that you love minorities to prove that you're 'electable'. But if he actually thinks that a sizable amount of these blacks and indians and orthodox Jews will register Republican to vote for Rand in primary, he must be on crack...

Like I said before, he would do much better by meeting with some young single women in Iowa: ask them what they think about his nationwide abortion ban.

You have to start reaching out to these groups at some point. Whitey won't be the majority forever, plus there are a lot of similarities we can highlight. Indians being major entrepreneurs is a great example and I bet they understand the value of outsourcing.

I think the young single women in Iowa will have to be hammered over the head with the non-interventionist foreign policy during the general.

[JCDenton0451]

Find me these young single slutty women that will register Republican to vote for Rand in a primary. I'm not seeing any. They will register Democrat to vote for Clinton in a primary.
Why should any sexually liberated woman vote for a Republicans when idiots like you are calling them sluts? I talking about white, college-educated, middle-class women, who don't rely on a husband (or the government) to support themself. Based on average income alone this should be a Republican constituency. But of course dumb socons ruin everything.



Orthodox Jews and Indians are wealthy ethnic groups that can be easily brought over to the conservative position with the right outreach.

Orthodox Jews care about Israel first and foremost. They will support a Republican with the most pro-Zionist stance on foreign policy, which is why I'm concerned about Rand associating with this kind of people.

[JCDenton0451]

I think the young single women in Iowa will have to be hammered over the head with the non-interventionist foreign policy during the general.

Most young and sexually active women could care less about your foreign policy. They just want to know that if they become pregnant due to a broken condom, there will be always abortion option out there.

Also, women are emotional beings. When promiment Republican figures like Rush Limbaugh call them sluts, it's a major turn-off.

[JCDenton0451]

Lastly, Republican party is doomed with non-white vote. The median net worth of a black household is 5K, for hispanics it's 7K. This simple fact ensures that those will remain solidly democratic constituencies for decades to come.

You can't just discard millions of middle class white women as 'sluts'. They are still far more likely to vote Republican than catholic Hispanics.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2012/06/21/news/economy/wealth-gap-race/chart-racial-wealth-gap-3.top.gif

[lib3rtarian]

Oh wait, this is from 2012. See the date of the event.

[compromise]

Oh wait, this is from 2012. See the date of the event.

Sorry for that. They put this on the upcoming events page of their site for some reason.

[juleswin]

I wonder what they want in return. US bombing Pakistan? favorable trade deals with India? US buying more Indian made Rapiscan? Inquiring minds would like to know.

[lib3rtarian]

I wonder what they want in return. US bombing Pakistan? favorable trade deals with India? US buying more Indian made Rapiscan? Inquiring minds would like to know.

Pakistan uses most of the aid that we give them to foment trouble in India. Indians wanting to stop this doesn't equate to wanting the US to bomb Pakistan. Can you only think of these 2 extremes? How about just not give them foreign aid, or at least put in some conditions that they not use it against India? Apart from the McCain, Graham types, I don't see how anyone can disagree with this. A lot of animus in India towards the US is due to the fact that US arms India's sworn enemy, Pakistan. Despite this, Indians are still friendly towards the US, and without the foreign aid to Pakistan factor, Indo-US relations can really prosper.

[JCDenton0451]

The problem with ethnic lobbies is that don't really care about our politics, they just want special preferences for their group. That's why it's called National Indian coalition.

[July]

Most young and sexually active women could care less about your foreign policy. They just want to know that if they become pregnant due to a broken condom, there will be always abortion option out there.

Also, women are emotional beings. When promiment Republican figures like Rush Limbaugh call them sluts, it's a major turn-off.

Well, being characterized this way, as a walking emotional vagina, that only cares about abortion, is also a major turn off...and it really isn't any more attractive when the left speaks this way either.

[JCDenton0451]

Well, being characterized this way, as a walking emotional vagina, that only cares about abortion, is also a major turn off...and it really isn't any more attractive when the left speaks this way either.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I suppose you don't mind Big Government regulating your reproductive capacity then? As a socially conservative young woman, you're a minority.

[lib3rtarian]

The problem with ethnic lobbies is that don't really care about our politics, they just want special preferences for their group. That's why it's called National Indian coalition.

Average Indian-American household income - $88,538.
Average US household income - $50,221.

So I highly doubt it that they are looking for handouts. But it's highly possible that they may want the government to take less of their money in taxes.

[compromise]

NIAC's main issues seem to be ending Pakistani foreign aid and getting an Indian Chief Minister who was banned from entering the United States a US travel visa (Rep. Joe Walsh was involved with the latter cause, hence why he is so popular with these guys).

Neither goal really conflicts with the libertarian positions on these issues.

[July]

I'm sorry you feel that way. I suppose you don't mind Big Government regulating your reproductive capacity then? As a socially conservative young woman, you're a minority.

I didn't say anything about liking big government, I'm a libertarian, and I didn't say I was necessarily a social conservative either, I just find it ironic that you find social conservatives to be that offensive, whilst you are defending sexist stereotypes. I may be a minority (And I'm not so sure I am, I think most women would rather be thought of as individuals, and not as a walking vagina). This is one reason why I abandoned the Democratic party even though both of my parents were life long liberals/Democrats. I would agree that many women do likely see themselves as a minority and/or oppressed class, though, this is not the sort of rhetoric Rand should copy by any means to appeal to liberal minded women, IMO. First of all, a Republican will never out demagogue the Democrats on this issue-- moderate Republicans keep making this mistake.

[JCDenton0451]

Average Indian-American household income - $88,538.
Average US household income - $50,221.

So I highly doubt it that they are looking for handouts. But it's highly possible that they may want the government to take less of their money in taxes.

They could call themselves "anti-tax coalition", but they chose to be called "Indian-American coalition". What's up with that?

Special preferences don't necessarily come in the form of simple handouts. Think AIPAC.

[Warlord]

They could call themselves "anti-tax coalition", but they chose to be called "Indian-American coalition". What's up with that?

Special preferences don't necessarily come in the form of simple handouts. Think AIPAC.

People are allowed to organize however they want and dont need you telling them.

[supermario21]

This is dated August 1, 2012, and Joe Walsh is no longer a congresman. Is there an event in 2013 or is this just an old find lol?

[JCDenton0451]

I didn't say anything about liking big government, I'm a libertarian, and I didn't say I was necessarily a social conservative either, I just find it ironic that you find social conservatives to be that offensive, whilst you are defending sexist stereotypes.
I don't defend sexist stereotypes. I just think for the Republicans to advocate any new restrictions on abortion is a terrible idea. It undercuts the entire message of small government and liberty, and it's simply bad politics. Social conservatism alienates huge swathes of educated, middle class, white voters, especially young female voters, since restriction on abortion and birth-control pills would affect them personally.

[JCDenton0451]

People are allowed to organize however they want and dont need you telling them.

We have a right to question their agenda and motivations.:)

AIPAC is a horrible scourge on American politics, arguably the worst special interest group. And if this is something NIAC wants to emulate, then to hell with them.

[compromise]

This is dated August 1, 2012, and Joe Walsh is no longer a congresman. Is there an event in 2013 or is this just an old find lol?

I actually think this whole organization might be dead or defunct. They list this as an upcoming event.

[JCDenton0451]

I actually think this whole organization might be dead or defunct.
http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/36757781.jpg

[lib3rtarian]

They could call themselves "anti-tax coalition", but they chose to be called "Indian-American coalition". What's up with that?

Special preferences don't necessarily come in the form of simple handouts. Think AIPAC.

Maybe it's because they want to send a message that Indian Americans, contrary to the popular narrative that all minorities automatically love the Democratic party and socialism, can identify with Republican/Conservative principles?

I, being an Indian American, is extremely glad to see such a group, assuming they are still active. Gives me hope that at least some of my fellow IAs are not brainwashed zombies. IAs are brilliant at entrepreneurship and innovation, but then turns around and votes Democratic because they think the GOP is a rich white man's party. IAs often vote against their own economic interests. It's all about perceptions. Obama loots their wealth and then puts out a video wishing them "Happy Diwali" and IAs think Obama is awesome. It's all about who is most friendly. You can can be a jackass and berate them for their group name, or you can shake their hands and say "I am your friend". They are pretty rich. They don't need your money. Just say hi and have a cup of tea with them. Not too hard, is it?

[JCDenton0451]

I, being an Indian American, is extremely glad to see such a group, assuming they are still active. Gives me hope that at least some of my fellow IAs are not brainwashed zombies. IAs are brilliant at entrepreneurship and innovation, but then turns around and votes Democratic because they think the GOP is a rich white man's party.

I think you might be unto something here. The Dems have established themselves as the party of non-white, "diverse" America, and that's part of the reason why minorities are attracted to them. It's dumb identity politics: what's so bad about the "rich white man's party", unless you hold a grudge against rich white men?

I don't think there is anything the GOP can do to win them over. For these people who see politics as a kind of zero-sum game between "oppressed" minorities and the evil "rich white men", shaking hands will never be enough.

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

The problem with ethnic lobbies is that don't really care about our politics, they just want special preferences for their group. That's why it's called National Indian coalition.
If i had my way, i would not only FIGHT the ethnic lobbies. I'd fight the gay lobby, the woman lobby and the male lobby. I'd fight every single special interest. because they are harming america. They think they deserve front seat, when they don't. Lets hope Rand preaches a message of American VALUES regardless of who you are. Oh, no, because "SOCONS ruin everything" and giving free shit and kissing guys wins over people. America is doomed. I'd rally for the return of slavery if it brought back small government.

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

I think you might be unto something here. The Dems have established themselves as the party of non-white, "diverse" America, and that's part of the reason why minorities are attracted to them. It's dumb identity politics: what's so bad about the "rich white man's party", unless you hold a grudge against rich white men?

I don't think there is anything the GOP can do to win them over. For these people who see politics as a kind of zero-sum game between "oppressed" minorities and the evil "rich white men", shaking hands will never be enough.
Then kill this demographic BS with American VALUES and common american (libertarian) positions. Make americans feel singular.

[compromise]

It's never good to count a group of people out.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100192846/how-do-right-wing-parties-attract-immigrant-voters/

The GOP faces a problem common to Right-of-Centre parties around the world. Immigrant communities, despite the initiative required to relocate to another country, and despite their often conservative values when it comes to enterprise, self-reliance, family and so on, tend to gravitate to the Left.

I can think of only one major contemporary exception to that rule, and it’s a telling one. At the last Canadian election, the Conservatives won more votes from immigrants than from people born in Canada. How? Not by changing their policies on immigration or multi-culturalism, but by sheer, grinding hard work.

Canada’s Tories grasped that most immigrants lived, at least initially, in areas represented by Left-of-Centre politicians. Because these politicians were the their first contact with Canadian politics, they tended to define the terms in which newcomers viewed the different parties. First impressions count. The achievement of the Canadian Conservatives was to put themselves where the migrants were: in the community centres, in the mosques and temples, at the festivals. And to do so, not once or twice, but continuously over many years, until those communities began, in the phrase of the brilliant Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, ‘to vote their values’.

The problem is not the people, it is the outreach.

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

It's never good to count a group of people out.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100192846/how-do-right-wing-parties-attract-immigrant-voters/


The problem is not the people, it is the outreach.
The Telegraph is not a newspaper, its a conservative slanted one. The Times Is. The guardian is a trashy leftist version of the telegraph but well written.

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

It's never good to count a group of people out.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100192846/how-do-right-wing-parties-attract-immigrant-voters/


The problem is not the people, it is the outreach.
anyways, it shows we can win

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

It's never good to count a group of people out.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100192846/how-do-right-wing-parties-attract-immigrant-voters/


The problem is not the people, it is the outreach.

I think Rand Paul, since he is a doctor, should reach out to doctors for votes. Maybe have a nifty Doctors for rand paul kinda thing

[compromise]

Maybe it's because they want to send a message that Indian Americans, contrary to the popular narrative that all minorities automatically love the Democratic party and socialism, can identify with Republican/Conservative principles?

I, being an Indian American, is extremely glad to see such a group, assuming they are still active. Gives me hope that at least some of my fellow IAs are not brainwashed zombies. IAs are brilliant at entrepreneurship and innovation, but then turns around and votes Democratic because they think the GOP is a rich white man's party. IAs often vote against their own economic interests. It's all about perceptions. Obama loots their wealth and then puts out a video wishing them "Happy Diwali" and IAs think Obama is awesome. It's all about who is most friendly. You can can be a jackass and berate them for their group name, or you can shake their hands and say "I am your friend". They are pretty rich. They don't need your money. Just say hi and have a cup of tea with them. Not too hard, is it?

I did a little more research and it seems they split into two separate groups, both of which seem to be barely active and poorly organized:

http://www.niappi.com/index1.htm
http://www.indianamericansforfreedom.com/index1.htm

Edit: Seems they are involved in organizing Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers' trip to India and also a Skype session between Gingrich and the chief minister they want to get a visa for, so they must be doing something right, but their site is still terrible. They need to get some Silicon Valley Indians on board to help redesign their websites.

[JCDenton0451]

You guys realise that Canadian "conservatives" are to the left of Obama on issues, right? lol

And yes, there are limits to what minority outreach can accomplish. The blacks are never going to support a candidate that would cut food stamps and wouldn't bail out Detroit. Period.

It's not about visiting communities and shaking hands with people, it's about issues and the way people perceive their interests.

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

You guys realise that Canadian "conservatives" are to the left of Obama on issues, right? lol

And yes, there are limits to what minority outreach can accomplish. The blacks are never going to support a candidate that would cut food stamps and wouldn't bail out Detroit. Period.

It's not about visiting communities and shaking hands with people, it's about issues and the way people perceive their interests.
JC what is your solution? Purge the SoCons? Be more socially liberal?

[compromise]

You guys realise that Canadian "conservatives" are to the left of Obama on issues, right? lol

And yes, there are limits to what minority outreach can accomplish. The blacks are never going to support a candidate that would cut food stamps and wouldn't bail out Detroit. Period.

It's not about visiting communities and shaking hands with people, it's about issues and the way people perceive their interests.

It's true that it will be very difficult to get a majority of the black vote or the latino vote and that there are limits to minority outreach, but we are not yet at these limits. Rand doesn't need to get 50% of the black or latino vote. He needs 8-11% of the black vote and 35-44% of the Latino vote, like GW Bush got.

It seems that the votes the Canadian conservatives got came not from blacks or latinos, but from Asian-Americans. Indian and Chinese Americans, although they are a small percentage of the population, will help grow the Rand 2016 coalition. The GOP received a plurality of the Asian-American vote up to the early 90s. Orthodox Jews have been voting Republican more in the last few years than they did previously. They don't really count for much at the ballot box, but these groups have lots of money and can support political campaigns through donations.

[JCDenton0451]

JC what is your solution? Purge the SoCons? Be more socially liberal?

If anyone needs to be purged, it's the neocons. They simply don't belong in the Republican party. As far as social issues are concerned, my advice to GOP politicians would be stop crusading against abortion. It alienates millions of white female voters. The marriage rate among whites is declining, clinging to "family values" is a losing strategy in the long run.

The whites still make up 70% of the electorate, GOP can be competitive in national politics decades from now, but it will need the votes of socially moderate whites to make it possible.

SoCons don't bring anything to the table. Their ideas are a turnoff for anyone who isn't a Evangelical, and most of them are old white people who would be voting Republican anyway.

[JCDenton0451]

Orthodox Jews have been voting Republican more in the last few years than they did previously. They don't really count for much at the ballot box, but these groups have lots of money and can support political campaigns through donations.

Oh, I know and that worries me.

[JCDenton0451]

I think Republican establishment could learn from the Canadian conservatives when it comes to the abortion issue. No need to purge pro-lifers, just get them to shut up:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/abortion-is-legal-in-canada-harper-gvmt-opposes-infanticide-investigation-i/

[eduardo89]

Oh, I know and that worries me.

Because you're a liberal.

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

If anyone needs to be purged, it's the neocons. They simply don't belong in the Republican party. As far as social issues are concerned, my advice to GOP politicians would be stop crusading against abortion. It alienates millions of white female voters. The marriage rate among whites is declining, clinging to "family values" is a losing strategy in the long run.

The whites still make up 70% of the electorate, GOP can be competitive in national politics decades from now, but it will need the votes of socially moderate whites to make it possible.

SoCons don't bring anything to the table. Their ideas are a turnoff for anyone who isn't a Evangelical, and most of them are old white people who would be voting Republican anyway.

Neo Cons and SoCons are not interchangeble. Rand is a SoCon, so is Amash, and other Liberty congressman. You just don;t talk about it.

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

I think Republican establishment could learn from the Canadian conservatives when it comes to the abortion issue. No need to purge pro-lifers, just get them to shut up:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/abortion-is-legal-in-canada-harper-gvmt-opposes-infanticide-investigation-i/
How come democrats parrot all they want on F**s and yet i can;t say abortion is TECHNICALLY murder.

[Brian4Liberty]

I wonder what they want in return. US bombing Pakistan? favorable trade deals with India? US buying more Indian made Rapiscan? Inquiring minds would like to know.

Increased Indian immigration.

Bombing Pakistan and nation building in Kashmir are probably longer term goals.

[compromise]

Increased Indian immigration.

Bombing Pakistan and nation building in Kashmir are probably longer term goals.
There is no mention of immigration or the US bombing of Pakistan on their site.

Their only really unique issues are getting a US visa for an Indian Chief Minister who was banned from the US by the Bush Administration and cutting off foreign aid to Pakistan. Most of their views are basically standard for a GOP group, less tax, less spending, less regulation, etc.

This group isn't really equivalent to AIPAC, which is bi-partisan (largely Dem actually) and focused on representing the interests of Israel. This represents the interests of Indian-American conservatives, not the nation of India, so it's more like the National Black Republican Association.

[ronaldo23]

Average Indian-American household income - $88,538.
Average US household income - $50,221.

So I highly doubt it that they are looking for handouts. But it's highly possible that they may want the government to take less of their money in taxes.

you would think this would be the case. Surprisingly, Indian's in America overwhelmingly vote for Democrats in presidential elections. I think it has a lot to do with poor Republican outreach, an image problem of being the party of white people, which makes Indians a great group for Paul to go after.

[69360]

I hope he goes to this. He's already courting blacks, Latinos and Orthodox Jews with the intention of broadening his base, and this is another good opportunity to do so, as Indian-Americans tend to be socially conservative, vehemently opposed to foreign aid for Pakistan and often run small businesses.

Good, should be a good fit.


Orthodox Jews care about Israel first and foremost. They will support a Republican with the most pro-Zionist stance on foreign policy, which is why I'm concerned about Rand associating with this kind of people.

Dead wrong. Orthodox jews are NOT zionists. In fact they oppose zionism.

[eduardo89]

Dead wrong. Orthodox jews are NOT zionists. In fact they oppose zionism.

That's actually not true. The vast majority of Orthodox Jews support Israel and Zionism. It is a small minority of ultra-Orthodox Jews who are anti-Zionist.

[enhanced_deficit]

Very good move, will raise his international exposure and political stature. India is the world's largest democracy.




I hope he goes to this. He's already courting blacks, Latinos and Orthodox Jews with the intention of broadening his base, and this is another good opportunity to do so, as Indian-Americans tend to be socially conservative, vehemently opposed to foreign aid for Pakistan and often run small businesses.

And very likely they oppose tax payers perpetual aid to biggest welfare state Israel also.
From another thread here couple of weeks ago:





http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/hindux.gif
Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Nov 13, 2004




Arafat was a patriot and India's friend: Manmohan

By Our Special Correspondent



http://www.hindu.com/2004/11/13/images/2004111304181101.jpg
The Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, paying homage to the Palestine Liberation Organisation Chairman,Yasser Arafat, at the Palestine Embassy in New Delhi on Friday. — Photo: V. Sudershan


NEW DELHI, NOV. 12. The Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, today described the late Palestinian Liberation Organisation Chairman, Yasser Arafat, as a great leader of the Palestinian struggle. As a mark of respect, the Government of India has declared three days of mourning.
Dr. Singh, who visited the Palestinian Embassy to sign the condolence book, wrote that Chairman Arafat was a "patriot and friend" of India. "We salute Arafat's dedication to the cause and join his people in mourning the passing away of the great leader."


http://www.hindu.com/2004/11/13/stories/2004111304181100.htm

http://www.hindu.com/2004/11/14/stories/2004111406200800.htm

[compromise]

I'm not too sure about that. These groups seem to be closely aligned with India's BJP, a religious nationalist party which nowadays models itself on Likud. I doubt many of them support Manmohan Singh, the current Indian PM, who is from India's main liberal party.

I doubt the average Indian cares either way though.

[enhanced_deficit]

I'm not too sure about that. These groups seem to be closely aligned with India's BJP, a religious nationalist party which nowadays models itself on Likud. I doubt many of them support Manmohan Singh, the current Indian PM, who is from India's main liberal party.

I doubt the average Indian cares either way though.


That would not be good news if these groups are aligned with BJP, I'll be surprised if most Indians in America were aligned with BJP insrtead of secular Congress party. BJP has questionable reputation and is linked to nationalist groups known to persecute Christians in India. Perhaps some caution and inquiry is warranted before Rand accepts invite.

Weed out Christianity, says Hindu BJP nationalist leader (http://www.persecution.in/content/weed-out-christianity-says-hindu-bjp-nationalist-leader)
www.persecution.in
Prahlad Remani, a state lawmaker with the Bharatiya Janata Party, made the ...

Good News for Christians in India's Most Persecuting State ... (http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/may/good-news-for-christians-in-indias-most-persecuting-state.html)
www.christianitytoday.com/.../good-news-for-christians-in-indias-most-pers...
May 10, 2013 - Indian Christians are celebrating the result of recent elections in ... However, Christians were encouraged when the BJP lost control of Orissa in ...

[compromise]

That would not be good news if these groups are aligned with BJP, I'll be surprised if most Indians in America were aligned with BJP insrtead of secular Congress party. BJP has questionable reputation and is linked to nationalist groups known to persecute Christians in India. Perhaps some caution and inquiry is warranted before Rand accepts invite.

Weed out Christianity, says Hindu BJP nationalist leader (http://www.persecution.in/content/weed-out-christianity-says-hindu-bjp-nationalist-leader)
www.persecution.in
Prahlad Remani, a state lawmaker with the Bharatiya Janata Party, made the ...

Good News for Christians in India's Most Persecuting State ... (http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/may/good-news-for-christians-in-indias-most-persecuting-state.html)
www.christianitytoday.com/.../good-news-for-christians-in-indias-most-pers...
May 10, 2013 - Indian Christians are celebrating the result of recent elections in ... However, Christians were encouraged when the BJP lost control of Orissa in ...

I don't know if all of the people that support this group are BJP supporters, but there does seem to be a few BJP leanings.

The OP mentions that the BJP national spokesperson will be in attendance to their event. Also, the Chief Minister they want to get into the US is a member of the BJP, albeit a moderate within the party.

[enhanced_deficit]

http://www.niac.co/images/Aug-1-event.jpg


I should have read the sign before calling this a good move. Their top guest is notorious Dick Cheney advisor and then they have anti-Christian BJP party's leaders as guests...a party that has leaders calling for Christians to be weeded out of India.

BAD IDEA to share stage with this crowd.

In quick google, found more news pointing to same and main BJP keynote speaker on this list Nirmala Sitaraman is seen rallying crowds for the BJP leader who Indian Christians accuse of sponsoring groups behind Christians persecution.

Attack on Bible Study leaves 1 dead in India (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=india%20bjp%20christians%20attacked%20dead%20pas tor&source=web&cd=11&cad=rja&ved=0CCkQFjAAOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.churchnewspaper.com%2F%3Fp%3D 27724&ei=31HuUY22E4m-9QS64ICABg&usg=AFQjCNELyPawG27OznI6yrXqTZ5lWtXxvg&bvm=bv.49478099,d.eWU)
www.churchnewspaper.com/?p=27724‎ (http://www.churchnewspaper.com/?p=27724%E2%80%8E)
Sep 3, 2012 - Two Christians were hospitalized following the attack and the melee ... The Indian press reports the police have charged seven BJP party ...

Attacks on Christians planned by BJP (http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Attacks+on+Christians+planned+by+BJP:+Congress/1/15536.html)
indiatoday.intoday.in
Sep 17, 2008 - The Congress on Wednesday blamed the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for communal violence against Christians in Karnataka saying the ...

India: Charges of BJP's complicity in murder of Christians rock ... (http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/02/ind-f05.html)
www.wsws.org (http://www.wsws.org)
- ... climax to months of verbal and physical attacks on India's Christian ... Criticism of the BJP's organisational links to the Barang Dal and failure ...

Militant Hindus growing bolder with BJP's rise to political ... (http://www.khalistan.net/?p=801)
BARODA, India – The mob came in the dead of night, wielding pipes, bicycle ... Two men picked up Raman Chiman Kristi, a small-town pastor, and threw him off a ... attack in an intensifying campaign against the spread of Christianity in India.




http://www.christiantelegraph.com/images/top.gif (http://www.christiantelegraph.com)
Indian party will persecute Christians in order to gain votes

The Washington-DC based human rights group, International Christian Concern (ICC) -- www.persecution.org (http://www.persecution.org) -– says that it has learned that Hindu extremist groups openly campaigned for the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the run up to the elections to the state legislature in the western state of Gujarat, indicating that they work in tandem to persecute religious minorities, including Christians.
ICC says that according to media reports, groups associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the parent organization of numerous Hindu extremist groups and the chief persecutor of Christians in India, sought votes for the BJP chief minister, Narendra Modi, to strengthen “Hindu forces” in the state. Voting for the 182-member assembly in Gujarat ended on December 16.
ICC added that, for instance, an elusive but overtly militant group, “Hindu Brotherhood - Kashmiri Hindu Liberation Army” (HB-KHLA), appealed for votes saying Modi's victory could be a means to “Hinduize politics and militarize Hindus.”
“Don't let your children ask you, �?When you had a chance, why did you not establish Hindutva....because of you, we are at the mercy of radicals (read Muslims and Christians),’” said an email message sent en masse through a Google group by the HB-KHLA. ICC has a copy of the email.
Similarly, Ashok Singhal, the chief of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (World Hindu Council or VHP) told the media that his organization did not want the “model state” to fall into the hands of a party run by a “Christian foreigner” (referring to Congress party president Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, a Roman Catholic by birth).
“The BJP is the symbol of Hindu forces,” he said.
“The Dangs district of Gujarat is of particular interest to the VHP because it is dominated by tribal people where close to 30 percent of the population is estimated to be Christian. However, at the state-level, Christians comprise less than one percent of the total population, which is more than 50 million,” said a spokesperson for ICC.
“According to analysts, the RSS cadre helps the BJP, its political wing, to win elections by raising issues that divide communities along religious lines. Having come to power, the BJP in turn helps the RSS cadre to indulge in violence with impunity.”
Gujarat is seen as the BJP's “laboratory of Hindutva” by rights activists.
Note: ICC is a Washington-DC based human rights organization that exists to help persecuted Christians worldwide. ICC delivers humanitarian aid, trains and supports persecuted pastors, raises awareness in the US regarding the problem of persecution, and is an advocate for the persecuted on Capitol Hill and the State Department.

http://www.christiantelegraph.com/issue144.html


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJs67L0NzTA






Edit: Just saw 2012 date. Note to OP, you should either add a corretion in OP or delete this outdated sign before people waste time on this.


It is very possible that this group of dopes helped Teocon Joe Walsh lose his seat in Nov 2012. Looking at his idiotic bills, that probably was a good thing for America.


6/3/2012 1:28 PM
Walsh steps into political minefield with suburban Indian community

Support for Indian leader could cost him some votes

A controversy is brewing in the suburban Indian-American community over Republican Congressman Joe Walsh's support of an Indian politician accused by some of complicity in the ethnic cleansing of Muslims a decade ago in India.
The McHenry Tea Partyer says he was approached by several members of the Indian-American community in the 8th Congressional District — where he is making a Nov. 6 bid for re-election against Democrat Tammy Duckworth of Hoffman Estates — to intervene on behalf of Narendra Modi, chief minister of the state of Gujarat in India, who was denied a U.S. diplomatic visa and whose tourist/business visa was revoked in 2005.

"I looked into this. I was comfortable being an advocate for him," said Walsh, who recently wrote a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking that she consider granting Modi a visa.

A coalition of Indian Americans, including Muslims, Christians, Dalits, Sikhs and secular Hindus, will "reach out to Joe Walsh's campaign manager to try to educate them about this issue," Vohra added. "We have a massive campaign under way."

To date, nobody has been held accountable for the Gujarat genocide, said Rajinder Singh Mago, a leader in the suburban Sikh American community and a member of the Palatine Gurudwara and Punjabi Cultural Society of Chicago.
"No government official or person in power should be above the law," said Mago, who lives near St. Charles.
"There should be some lesson taught to perpetrators of these crimes," he said. "They should be brought to shame. The world has become smaller, interconnected through commerce, business and humanity. They should realize that it's a global village and there are people who are watching."

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120603/news/706039869/

[compromise]

I should have read the sign before calling this a good move. Their top guest is notorious Dick Cheney advisor and then they have anti-Christian BJP party's leaders as guests...a party that has leaders calling for Christians to be weeded out of India.

BAD IDEA to share stage with this crowd.

I don't think Rand would really share stage with them had he attended. They would speak and he'd speak separately. CPAC had some people like Pamela Geller speaking, but Rand didn't have a problem there. Rand could also provide a different point of view from the BJP representative and the Cheney guy, who probably want more surveillance and war.

[JCDenton0451]

That's actually not true. The vast majority of Orthodox Jews support Israel and Zionism. It is a small minority of ultra-Orthodox Jews who are anti-Zionist.

Orthodox Jews are neoconservatives essentially. The last thing we need is a wealthy Zionist constituency in the Republican party pushing Republicans for more interventionism in the Middle East. I think we can all agree that Sheldon Adelson is bad enough.

Oh, and BTW these Zionist Jews support the Amnesty too.

[FriedChicken]

One heck of a good thread for JCD - gets to rant about Jews and pro-lifers both at the same time! Unfortunately I can't help but noticed how much he seems to depend on collectivists type views.

Fun fact: a Jewish family I know came over to see my kids yesterday. Had to leave quickly though because their daughter had to be at her Arab friend's party ... and by Arab I mean they are deeply religious Muslims - but they really enjoy getting to know each others cultures (the Jewish girls loves their food apparently) etc.
Both of these families are very stereotypical in some ways and there is plenty of disagreements I have with them but this goes to show that even the most stereotypical people can throw in some surprises at times.

[helmuth_hubener]

Orthodox Jews and Indians are wealthy ethnic groups that can be easily brought over to the conservative position with the right outreach. The Indians I know kind of were happy Obama got elected the first time. Because of foreign policy -- he was seen as less of a war hawk -- and just general perception that he was "for the people". But by the second time, at least one was upset about capital gains and inheritance tax increases and wanted them back down again. That one, by the way, donated to Ron Paul. :)

[JCDenton0451]

One heck of a good thread for JCD - gets to rant about Jews and pro-lifers both at the same time!

I think this needs clarification:

"pro-life" is an ideology, Jews are an ethnic group.

Zionism is ideology that most American Jews support, and yes this ideology is reprehensible. More importantly, Zionist ideology is incompatible with the ideals of the Liberty movement.

[Federico]

One heck of a good thread for JCD - gets to rant about Jews and pro-lifers both at the same time!

lol, +1

Not sure what that guy's problem is, but he should really seek professional help.

[Federico]

I think this needs clarification:

"pro-life" is an ideology, Jews are an ethnic group.

Zionism is ideology that most American Jews support, and yes this ideology is reprehensible. More importantly, Zionist ideology is incompatible with the ideals of the Liberty movement.

Why is Zionism reprehensible, and how is it incompatible with the ideals of the Liberty movement?

[JCDenton0451]

Join Date 07-19-2013


Hmmm. That's the day spladle was banned...

[helmuth_hubener]

From Liberty Defined, by Ron Paul:


ZIONISM


More than two thousand years after the Jewish Diaspora began, in the eighth century BC, and especially following widespread Jewish assimilation into national groups in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, a worldwide movement began to recapture a universal Jewish identity, culture, and faith. Part of this mission was for Jews to return to the Middle East (Palestine) and establish a single homeland. But this was not the only issue. The leaders of the Zionist movement, as it came to be called, wanted to preserve the Jewish identity, language, and religion, in the face of acculturation.

Nathan Birnbaum, an Austrian political activist, is credited with coining the word “Zionism” in 1891, from the name of a hill in Jerusalem. It is not in its cultural, religious, or language aspirations that Zionism has inspired the most controversy but rather in its political goals of securing a geographic homeland. The timing of the movement’s most notable victory, the establishment of the State of Israel, coincided with a widespread reaction against the violence of anti-Semitism in Europe.

There is no doubt that Jews have a historic claim on the land itself. The Bar Kochba revolt in AD 135 against the Roman Empire prompted a large number of Jews to be exiled from the area now known as Israel. Some historians report that the Jewish population of 300,000 was further reduced to a thousand families during the Christian Crusades in the Holy Lands.

From the 1890s until 1948, when Israel became a sovereign nation carved out of Palestine, immigration was mostly voluntary, gradual, and accomplished with due respect for existing land titles. Zionism, during the first forty years of this movement, was not about taking land by force nor was it about militarism. A continual peaceful transformation would probably have occurred except for the political actions after World War II in which the United Nations turned a local and demographic issue into an international and highly politicized one.

One of the first decisions made by the UN was when the UN General Assembly accepted the Security Council’s recommendation in 1947 to partition Palestine. The same year, the United Nations also got involved in the partitioning of Korea. By June 1950, under a UN resolution, America was back at war siding with South Korea against the Soviet Union and China, which supported North Korea.

The partitioning problems of Palestine and Israel and North and South Korea persist to this day. Considering the lives lost and the money spent, it doesn’t say much for the UN’s peacekeeping efforts or our own foreign policy of the past sixty years.

Though I was not active in politics in high school or college, I recall attending a Rotary Club meeting in the early 1950s with my father. The speaker was a college student from Palestine studying in the United States. Her story was about how her family had been forced from their property, which had been in the family for centuries, but was then used for Israeli settlements. I can recall thinking at the time that this did not seem fair to me, and it doesn’t seem fair to me today.

This taking of land from one group for the benefit of another has been criticized by most Muslims, many Christians, and Jews as well. The entitlement argument that this new arrangement was ordered by God and reflects ancient ownership by the Jews is not an easy case to make. This belief inspires those who support the use of force to achieve an expanding geographic presence for a greater Israel, including most of the Middle East.

Zionism as a movement has accomplished wonderful things for the Jewish people and Jewish faith. It inspired Jews the world over to recapture their language, and to do so in a period of time that was nearly miraculous. It helped restore the Jewish faith as a living presence and heighten consciousness of Jewish identity and purpose. It is tragic that the political agenda has been so divisive for the Middle East and the world, especially given that the entire mission of creating a homeland might have been accomplished without the use of force.

Historian Juan Cole has pointed out that Jerusalem (Palestine), through the many centuries, was under Jewish rule for only about 170 years. In other words, there are many competing claims for the same land, and it is impossible to decide between them. Dozens of other regimes occupied the land for much longer periods of time. For instance, Muslims ruled Jerusalem for 1,191 years.

Factual history is not much help in sorting out the emotionally charged religious and secular arguments over who should live in and rule over this region. It seems that there should be a statute of limitation on ancient claims of ownership. Those still in possession of titles to land and homes should not be cavalierly dismissed out of a sense of justice.

Even with recognizing the ruthless way some American settlements uprooted both Mexican and Indian occupants, I’m certain I wouldn’t be too happy to give up without compensation any property I now own to those with claims just hundreds of years old, let alone thousands. Religious interpretations of God’s desires are subjective and can never be settled through reason, no matter how logical some would like to make the debate.

Though the fighting has gone on for literally thousands of years, and control of the Holy Lands has shifted back and forth among Muslims, Romans, Christians, Jews, and others, there have been examples when the people were left alone, for relatively long periods of time. With less government involvement, different religious groups were quite capable of getting along together peacefully. Intermarriage regardless of religious beliefs was not unusual. My advice: Leave the young people alone and they’ll find out that they prefer lovemaking to warmongering and are more anxious to get along with one another than the older generations who stir the pots of war.

Give government any kind of foothold and it will figure out a way to force or incite young people into war making. The old saying is true: Old people and governments start the wars and young people must fight and die in them for all kinds of cockamamie reasons.

Today, the Israeli political lobby is a powerful political force. Two to three hundred nuclear weapons, under Israel’s control, make Israel more powerful than all the Arab and Muslim countries put together. But that’s not where the real power lies. The UN can labor tirelessly in “controlling” one nuclear weapon (in Iran) that doesn’t exist while the international community does not put pressure on Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. In contrast, the world community rarely even admits that Israel’s nukes exist—and at the same time Iran has never been ruled in noncompliance with the NPT. The fact that Muslim nations become annoyed with this policy is written off by most in the West by charging anti-Semitism.

Meanwhile, within Israeli politics, there is a great deal of debate and diversity of opinion. The Liberal party in Israel often raises questions about the apartheid conditions that Palestinians are subjected to. Even newspapers in Israel are willing to discuss this issue openly, but it is essentially never permitted in the United States. Former President Jimmy Carter is now persona non grata for raising the question in his most recent book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. J. Street, a new pro-Israel Washington PAC, is challenging AIPAC’s monopoly control of the discussion of U.S.-Israeli relations in the United States. The group Peace Now also strives to change the tone and essence of the debate.

Other American Jews have spoken out against Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians as well. The American Council for Judaism is growing in influence in the American Jewish community, especially with the younger generation. Though it’s argued that Jews are motivated to immigrate to Israel because they were exiled from Palestine, only a small fraction of American Jews ever moved to Israel.

Even given all of this, my position on Israel is the same as my position with regard to any other country. I favor a noninterventionist position, consistent with what the American Founders favored and what the Constitution enshrines. I would like a policy of peace, friendship, and trade—and no intervention in any country’s internal affairs.

I’m convinced that this would serve Israel’s best interest. Since we generously subsidize Israel, the potential of stopping our aid means that Israel must get tacit approval from the United States for its policies toward its neighbors. We have been known to hinder friendly outreaches by Israel in the Middle East, as well as Israel’s use of force to protect her borders. Israel is not a truly sovereign nation as long as it depends on getting U.S. permission to do what it sees is in her best interest.

But this is a two-way problem. If Israel would be so bold (something that I do not believe it will be) as to attack Iran without explicit approval of the United States, we’ll be blamed anyway, and if war spreads to include Iran, we’ll be in the middle of it as long as today’s conditions persist.

A principled stand against all foreign aid is a net benefit to help Israel. Foreign aid breeds dependency and sacrifice of sovereignty and removes an incentive to promote a free market economy. We subsidize and protect Arab nations with money and weapons, and many of those are not even close to Israel in supporting democratic elections. No aid means Arab Muslim nations suffer more, giving Israel a military plus. But unfortunately, that will never happen because we must protect “our” oil and we will remain in the region for the foreseeable future.

Our strong support for Israel practically eliminates any desire for it to work out differences in the region by direct negotiations with organizations like the Arab League. Alliances among moderate states to maintain peace and in opposition to the radical mullahs would be more likely than when we control the whole process. And when we do achieve a peace agreement like the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel, it costs the American taxpayers plenty—in perpetuity. This bought peace has cost us well over $150 billion since 1979, and yet friction remains. Artificial peace treaties hinder the need for all involved to rely on commerce and trade to improve the standard of living for both sides and to work out their differences locally.

An alliance between Israel and moderate Arab nations may well have developed to deal with Saddam Hussein. That type of a solution would have been a blessing to all Americans.

Voluntary support for Israel either by joining its army or sending money there is quite different from taxing, borrowing, and inflating to pay for the additional debt burden to support both sides of this constant fight in the Middle East.

Zionism and the politics of the entire Middle East are international. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cannot be separated from the general acceptance of our two major political parties that our obligation to support Israel at all costs is deeply embedded in our political culture. The threats toward Iran and the sanctions come at the constant urging of the Israeli right-wing government and their supporters here in the United States. The dissidents who speak out in Israel are rarely quoted here in the United States, and any opposition arising in the United States is rarely reported in our media.

As historically controversial and emotionally charged as the Middle East is, logic is not likely to prevail and allow a peaceful solution anytime soon. Misplaced religious passion of the three great religions—which are theoretically supposed to worship the same God—prohibits the universal sharing of the Golden Rule, love for our fellow man, and desire for peace.

But first, we must see more admission of mistakes made as Ronald Reagan did after the Marines were killed in Beirut in 1983. In his memoirs, he admitted he did not realize how complicated Middle East politics were and that he had made a serious error. That is why he went against his own proclamation that he would never “turn tail and run,” because he decided that it was in the best interests of the United States to change a failed policy.

If we were to stay out of the Middle East, militarily and politically, I’m convinced it would be most helpful, in that a “neighborhood” solution would more likely occur without us stirring the pot and jeopardizing more Americans being killed in wars yet to come. This policy, I am certain, would be in the interest of Israel and the United States and world peace.

http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Defined-Essential-Issues-Freedom/dp/1455501441

http://torrents.thepiratebay.sx/7229556/Liberty_Defined_by_Ron_Paul_%5BePub_Mobi_AudioBook %5D.7229556.TPB.torrent

[Federico]

Hmmm. That's the day spladle was banned...

I will take your changing of the subject to be a tacit admission that you are spouting nonsense and know it. Kindly stop. Nobody wants to hear your hateful drivel.

[FriedChicken]

While zionism isn't a passionate study of mine I'd have to say I'm an anti-zionist based on how I've heard it defined and what I know about it. The biggest thing about it is that I don't want to be involved from a non-interventionist standpoint.

I'm not sure about zionism being so much much than most of our other interventions so I don't understand the tendency for some people to constantly single it out, but as I said, its not a passionate study of mine.

I can accept that JCD has a much more passionate view of it and feels very strongly that being pro-life is a losing position. But I also find it very funny how it seems he can find a way to bring up one or both of those subjects in practically every thread he posts in.
Its almost like you could make a game out of trying to guess how he will tie your thread topic to a discussion on pro-choice vs. pro-life or slip in a quick anti-zionist rant.
In one thread he had a simple disagreement with Rocco (I don't even remember what about) and came to the conclusion that Rocco much be an in the closet zionist trying to infect the liberty movement.


Things could be worse though ... at least he isn't obsessed with feverishly discussing his completely anti-liberty views on education regulation every time he enters a discussion. That would be too much.

[JCDenton0451]

Except that Rocco is a Zionist though. This is not my opinion. It's a fact. There are several people like this on this board.

[FriedChicken]

oh dear goodness boy.
If you say so.

The only thing I can remember about Rocco is his campaigning for Ron Paul, thats the only interaction I've had with him, you must know him better.

But ok. I don't want to continue participating in an absolute derailment off the OP topic so I'll be seeing ya!

[compromise]

Except that Rocco is a Zionist though. This is not my opinion. It's a fact. There are several people like this on this board.

It's great news that more and more people on here are accepting Israel as a genuine friend of the United States.

[JCDenton0451]

It's great news that more and more people on here are accepting Israel as a genuine friend of the United States.
haha. Rocco is a self-confessed Jewish American so his love for Israel comes as no surprise.

[Federico]

haha. Rocco is a self-confessed Jewish American so his love for Israel comes as no surprise.

Your racism is disgusting. "A self-confessed Jewish American?" So Jews are supposed to be ashamed of their race now? Jesus Christ. Literally kill abort yourself.

[JCDenton0451]

Your racism is disgusting. "A self-confessed Jewish American?" So Jews are supposed to be ashamed of their race now? Jesus Christ. Literally kill abort yourself.

You don't believe in Jesus Christ. And you also said that rednecks are sub-human. And you also said you love Power. And you're supposed to be banned anyway, spladle. So, GTFO!

[Federico]

You don't believe in Jesus Christ. And you also said that rednecks are sub-human. And you also said you love Power. And you're supposed to be banned anyway, spladle. So, GTFO!

Deflection isn't exactly helping your case. We already have enough anti-semitism associated with the Pauls, we don't need more. If anyone should gtfo, it's you.

[LibertyEagle]

Except that Rocco is a Zionist though. This is not my opinion. It's a fact. There are several people like this on this board.

So?

[Federico]

So?

Silly LibertyEagle, don't you realize that the Jews are a blight on the planet that must be purged if liberty is to be achieved in our lifetime? Hitler had the right idea!