Those who hate the Hindus deeply and intend to mock them have a specific lingo. It focuses on cows and plays up the Hindu reverence for cows. Its a dog whistle really. For those who are steeped in deep hatred for the Hindu way of life.
Mechanics of Hindu-hate narrative building
We have seen how cow slaughter was used by the Islamic invaders to humiliate the Hindus. And, that is where the sensitivity of the use of blatant killing of cows for Hindus comes from.
Think of it like calling a black man a “Nigger”. Just like the pejoratives with history in slavery underlined the hatred for the black man and racist attitudes of the whites at that time, cow slaughter in the face of Hindus and use of beef as part of the conversion routine from Hinduism to Islam is to bring back the humiliation that was part of imperialist Islamist routine.
Of course, in recent times, cow illegal traffickers have stolen and smuggled them across the border to Bangladesh for profit. Those villagers who lost their cows have obviously taken law in their own hands in very few cases. What is an economic crime with no recourse for the poor villagers and turn that against Hindus has been central to the anti-Hindu strategy. After all, how and when did cow become to important to Muslims? There are no cows in Arabia!
So, when someone starts to talk about Modi and brings cow urine and cow slaughter be very sure about what is coming closely behind. Anti-Hindu venom.
This wasn’t her only anti-Hindu rant. She had been a serial offender.
That is why when Sudhir Krishnaswamy, the Professor of Law at Azim Premji University wrote an article for New York Times replete with anti-Hindu themes neatly embedded into the narrative against Indian PM Modi, those in the anti-Hindu camp knew what that really meant.
This Sudhir Krishnaswamy is now part of Facebook’s Oversight Board to moderate content and decide which stuff should be deleted and which should be kept.
Muslim Brotherhood gets a seat on Facebook Oversight Board too
This board comprising 20 people selected by Facebook will be the one to police content moderation process for Instagram and Facebook.
The other member of this Facebook Oversight Board is Tawakkol Karman. She is a Yemeni, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011, which many say was sponsored by Qatari dole to the Nobel Committee.
Karman was overwhelmed with joy, but many media reports questioned her eligibility for the award. Qatar’s role in supporting her candidacy through a financial donation to the Nobel Committee quickly surfaced.Arab Weekly
She has been accused of being part of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Karman held a senior position with her country’s Al-Islah Party. This party is aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood. An organization which has been declared as a terrorist organization in many countries.
When Tawakkol Karman was awarded the Nobel Prize, she was invited to Doha and was personally congratulated by Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. Who is Qaradawi? He is the ideological mastermind behind many terrorist attacks.
That is why many in the Arab countries are extremely worried about what she really brings to the table.
Facebook “risks becoming the platform of choice for extremist Islamist ideology,” Nuseibeh, who is also chair of UK-based nonprofit Muslims Against Anti-Semitism, told Arab News. Source – Arab News
Here is a very detailed discussion on what Karman would be able to unleash in terms of prejudice, given her ideology by someone who knows what Facebook does with its algorithms.
Wael Ghonim is a technology entrepreneur and a social media professional. He shared on his Facebook account about how the social media companies have been infiltrated by terror sympathizers.
What he shares is extremely scary.
Sham integrity and loaded board
The oversight board triumphantly calls itself “independent”. And goes at great lengths to explain why it is saying so. The truth is that this oversight board is loaded with people who are an extension of the prejudicial agenda of Facebook’s current ways.
More importantly, Facebook and its decisions on content can create major situations, often of national security, in many countries. And who are the ones who orchestrate that?
People who have known anti-Hindu views or are associates of Muslim Brotherhood.
You see, Facebook does not have to give directions to the Oversight Board. It just has to load it up with people who are in their mirror image. That will ensure their hold.
Since Social Media companies and their editorial policies are now becoming a major factor in matters of national interest and security, it is imperative that such decisions have a proper process that aligns with the legal procedures of that country.
What we would suggest is that a special law be created in countries like India, which manages the deletion of any content. If social media companies have to delete any content, then it must be proved in court about its danger. Otherwise, it should be illegal for any social media company to either delete or promote/demote any content.
The keys to social conversations cannot be given in the hands of a few ideologically suspect people.
Such actions should be treated at par with the special warrants for search with oversight of the courts. These platforms which have the power to create riots, incite killings and create national narratives, cannot be overlords in countries they have no one to answer to.