Explained Featured National

Sam Pitroda’s ‘Normalisation of Terror’ is Ingrained in Congress: Here Are Five Instances

sam pitroda’s comments

Sam Pitroda, the trusted advisor of the Congress President has not only belittled the role played by our army in attacking the terror camps of Pakistan but also exposed the very casual attitude of Congress in dealing with the terror and national security. This is not an isolated incident where the top functionaries of Congress have shown a casual and careless attitude on fighting terrorism. Including the statement of Sam Pitroda, here are the other instances of Congress taking the issue of terror lightly.

Sam Pitroda’s Comments on India’s Airstrike

Sam Pitroda is the long-time advisor to the Congress President and a very close aide of the Nehru-Gandhi family. No one can set aside his comments as an opinion coming from an insignificant fringe element within the Congress and hence, it could reflect the thought process of the party. Sam Pitroda has made more than one point to undermine the valor of our security forces. Here they are:

  1. “Attacks happen all the time”: Thus, Pitroda suggests India should bear with the attacks. He normalizes terrorism and the death of innocents.
  2. “Attack happened in Mumbai also, we could have then reacted and just sent our planes but that is not the right approach. According to me, that’s not how you deal with the world.”: With this, Pitroda opposes the very idea of retaliation and pre-emptive measures against terror.
  3. “I would like to know more as I have read in New York Times &other newspapers, what did we really attack, we really killed 300 people?”: With these words, Sam Pitroda echoes the sentiments of Pakistan and certain sections of international media which try to stoke doubts about the valor of our armed forces.

Here is a tweet with video-clip by the news agency ANI.

All these utterances by Sam Pitroda seem to be reflecting the overall stance Congress has been maintaining on terror. There are other instances from the recent past to illustrate the casual attitude of Congress on terror.

Rahul Gandhi’s Response to Mumbai Attack

Long ago, Rahul Gandhi had already tried to normalise terror with his response that it is “difficult to stop every terror attack.”

According to the media reports at that time said that Rahul Gandhi went partying at a farmhouse on Delhi’s outskirts soon after the Mumbai attack.

 

UPA’s Response to Mumbai Attack

In the aftermath of the Mumbai attack also, Indian Air Force was ready to carry airstrike on Pakistan’s terror camps. But the political leadership did not give the order. A retired IAF officer has made this public when IAF struck terror camps in Pakistan’s Balakot. Speaking to media, the officer said:

“After the Mumbai attacks, we planned a similar air strike over Muzaffarabad. I was leading the Sukhoi squadron…and we had the plan ready. It was a secret plan and I had lied to my boys that we were going to a different place…it’s a long story. We were deployed and waited in all readiness to strike for nearly one month but the government did not approve it.”

Sonia Gandhi Cried for Terrorists

In 2008, two Indian Mujahideen terrorists were killed in an encounter by Delhi Police, in which Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma was martyred. At a later stage, a Minister in the UPA Government Salman Khurshid had publicly said that Sonia Gandhi cried for the death of two terrorists.

‘Hindu Terror’ Bogus Bogey

As you can see from the above description of Sam Pitroda’s account on terror, it is clear that he is not making Pakistan responsible for terror. This line of thinking was very much evident in the UPA’s tenure. To divert focus from Pakistan, Congress floated a false ‘Hindu terror’ angle severely damaging India’s standing in the equation with Pakistan, on Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. Congress leader Digvijaya Singh had even promoted the view that the Mumbai attack was a conspiracy by RSS. None other than the Union Minister of that time, Sushil Kumar Shinde had baselessly claimed that “RSS, BJP camps are promoting Hindu terror”

This bogey has been exposed by a retired MHA official RVS Mani, who has written a book to describe how the UPA Government invented ‘Hindu-terror’ to safeguard the real perpetrators of terror. The recent acquittals in the Samjhauta blast case also exposes the ‘Hindu terror’ falsehood built by Congress.

Conclusion

So, Sam Pitroda’s comments suspecting the Balakot airstrike by the Indian army, further reiterate the casual and careless attitude of Congress on terror. These articles may help you to understand the mindset of Congress with regard to national security:

The False Alarm of Attempted Coup: Seven Instances That Define Congress’ Relationship with Army

The Congress and Maha Milawat: Why the Desperate Peddling of Pakistani Version?

Here are the Indian Leaders Questioning Their Own Military

Share