Left liberals calling terrorists as an unemployed youth
Recently, the most significant triumph of India is undoubtedly the realm of internal security. With the exception of four districts in South Kashmir, terrorism in India has been effectively stamped out. The orchestrated protest on December 13, 2023, targeting Parliament, appears to be a well-coordinated effort by the communist-congress alliance, seemingly aimed at tarnishing the image of India.
On December 13, a notable incident unfolded when two men, identified as Sagar and Manoranjan, infiltrated the Parliament building, deploying a smoke canister. Concurrently, a male and a female, Neelam Devi and Amol Shinde, staged a protest outside the parliamentary premises. Media reports point to Lalit Jha from Kolkata as the primary orchestrator behind this parliamentary disturbance. It is worth noting that 22 years prior, on December 13, 2021, the terrorist group Jaish-e-Mohammad orchestrated a notorious attack on the Parliament. Afzal Guru, regarded by some as a hero among communists factions, was subsequently executed for his involvement in the parliamentary assault.
In the aftermath of the recent assault by unidentified individuals, the left-liberal faction in India has begun characterizing the alleged terrorists as unemployed, frustrated, and revolutionary youth. Some deranged individuals among the communist ranks have even drawn parallels between the actions of these attackers and those of the historical figure Bhagat Singh. However, in this analysis, we will meticulously examine the evidence to assert that the individuals who attacked the Parliament were neither revolutionaries nor driven by frustration; rather, they were seemingly influenced and manipulated by the ideologies of the leftist and liberal groups. Much like how Lashkar-e-Taiba groomed Ajmal Kasab, the faceless liberals played a role in grooming individuals like Sagar, Neelam, and others.
Only a naive perspective would dismiss the notion of a connection or deem it a mere coincidence that the recent assault on Parliament occurred on the anniversary of the Jaish-e-Mohammad attack on Parliament, 22 year ago. If this were truly a revolutionary act, why choose 13th December a date marked by the tragic loss of nine innocent lives in Parliament in 2001, at the hands of Pakistani terrorists? It’s noteworthy that communist groups from JNU organized an event commemorating Afzal Guru on February 9, 2016—the very day Guru was executed. The choice of date carries significant implications in this context, prompting one to question whether a true patriot would choose to protest on the anniversary of the day when nine fellow patriots lost their lives.
Hailing from diverse corners of India, Neelam from Jind, Sagar from Lucknow, Manoranjan from Karnataka, Amol Shinde from Pune, Vishal from Gurgaon, and Lalit from Kolkata. Their strategic coordination unfolded through Facebook, demonstrating a meticulous plan where each participant hailed from distinct regions. Manoranjan D and Sagar Sharma duplicitously secured a visitor pass from Pratap Simha, a BJP MP from Karnataka, under the guise of wanting to tour the new Parliament building. This calculated move indicates a well-orchestrated plan with the foresight that PM Modi would bear blame for the attack. According to Hindustan Times, Manoranjan was already aware, as early as July, that footwear wasn’t scrutinized in the Parliament. Lalit Jha, the alleged mastermind, surrendered to Delhi police in Rajasthan after erasing his phone data. The extent of planning and coordination suggests this was a carefully orchestrated attack with calculated precision.
Mere minutes after the attack, leftists began likening it to Bhagat Singh’s smoke scare act in court from 1929. Singh’s quote, “If the deaf are to hear, the sound has to be very loud,” was invoked by pseudo-liberals drawing parallels between Singh’s actions and the recent assault. It’s essential to note that Singh executed the Smoke Scare Act on April 8, not December 13, when Afzal Guru attacked Parliament. If there were any merit to these claims, the attack would likely have occurred on April 8. Additionally, the Modi government has demonstrated responsiveness, evident in the rollback of the three farm laws due to failure in convincing farmers. During demonetization, the government adapted dynamically, held multiple meetings to address CAA protests, and actively supported marginalized communities during the Covid lockdown by providing full household rations. The attackers, it seems, lacked a nuanced understanding of British Raj and democratically elected governments.
Following the Delhi government’s imposition of UAPA charges on the protesters, advocate Asim Sarode emerged as a legal representative for them. However, nationalists on X conducted a comprehensive investigation into the advocate’s background. Notably, Sarode has been observed walking alongside Rahul Gandhi during the Bharat Jodo Yatra and has been spotted in the company of Teesta Setalvad. In June 2022, Setalvad faced arrest by the Anti-Terrorism Squad of the Gujarat Police for alleged involvement in conspiracies related to the 2002 Gujarat riots, suggesting a controversial figure known for fueling unrest and riots. This prompts contemplation on the intricate connections and potential conspiracies surrounding the events of December 13. A cabal, implicated in numerous riots during PM Modi’s regime, appears to be deeply entwined in the incident.
The left-liberals in India are fervently attempting to portray the parliament attack not as an act of terrorism but as an act of revolution. This prompts questioning why liberals are so determined to label an act of terrorism as an act of heroism. From the perspective of the Opposition-INDI alliance, the attack on parliament serves as ammunition to scrutinize the country’s internal security. Simultaneously, the attack provides left-liberals with ammunition to characterize it as an expression of frustration against issues such as unemployment. This is not unexpected from liberals who have previously eulogized terrorists like Burhan Wani, Afzal Guru, Yakub Memon, and Osama Bin Laden.
Lastly, the sixth point directs attention to Neelam Azad, a 37-year-old self-professed holder of nearly every conceivable educational degree who, despite her extensive qualifications, identifies as “unemployed.” Essentially, she is an andolanjeevi, a disciple of Yogendra Yadav and Sudeep Goyat. Following the attack, a protest was orchestrated in support of Neelam, with protestors asserting that she is diligently preparing for civil services exams. Neelam has been a consistent presence in virtually every protest under PM Modi’s tenure, spanning from the CAA protests to demonstrations by wrestlers. Despite being unemployed for a significant portion of her life, Neelam has seemingly found solace in andolan. Based on online videos, she is actively encouraging voters to cast their ballots against the BJP.
Upon digesting the aforementioned six points, an individual with an average level of intelligence can discern that the recent attack on Parliament on December 13 was undeniably an act of terrorism. However, left-liberals seem determined to whitewash such reprehensible acts as heroic. Comparing the crime committed by these six individuals to Bhagat Singh’s actions is a misguided parallel. Instead of encouraging such deplorable acts, it is imperative to recognize the potential consequences for the brainwashed youth who will find themselves serving a lifetime in prison due to their actions.
Also Read: Viral Claim of Virat Kohli Consuming Beef in Florida Restaurant is Fake
This website uses cookies.