Why Indians Should Boycott Shah Rukh Khan

Let’s start with SRK’s strange obsession with Pakistan.

Shahrukh Khan is among the most famous people in India. His popularity and influence now extend well beyond the reel world. As the owner of the IPL cricket team, Kolkata Knight Riders, he has become a power player in the high-octane world of Twenty/20 which is followed by hundreds of millions of people worldwide. The likes of Brendon McCullum and John Buchanan are known to genuflect at a mere signal from him. Congress politicians and their children queue up to get his autographs. Clearly, SRK wields power.

With power comes responsibility. But SRK has not lived up to it. On the contrary, he has abused his power and hurt the sentiments of millions of his supporters with his anti-Hindu stance. Now he has ramped up the anti-Hindu rhetoric with his statement that there is “extreme intolerance” in India.

shiaThis is not an offhand remark. Over the years, SRK movies have shown Hinduism in a bad light. For instance, in one movie he slyly questions idol worship. Would he question Islamic beliefs such as why Shias need to flog their own bodies into a bloody mess during Id? Or more pertinently, why Muslims pray in the streets and block traffic.

An Enquiry into the Nature of SRK’s Tolerance

Let’s start with SRK’s strange obsession with Pakistan. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying you should love India alone. By all means, go ahead and love any country you want – Germany, Kazakhstan, Russia, El Salvador, even the USA.

Love that transcends national boundaries is fine with me – as long as that country is not a jihad factory. And Pakistan is clearly a terror hothouse where international jihadis are incubated – with the active support of the state and enthusiastic participation by the common people.

For a chilling picture of what the world should be prepared for from Pakistan’s jehad factory, read this: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/jstern/pakistan.htm and this: http://www.rferl.org/content/pakistan-education-jihad-islam-khyber/25092236.html.

And yet this is what SRK said in 2010 after the billion-dollar Indian Premier League (IPL) decided not to accept Pakistani cricket players: ‘‘Pakistan is a great neighbour to have. We are great neighbours, they are good neighbours. Let us love each other. Let me be honest. My family is from Pakistan, my father was born there and his family is from there.’’

Really? In what universe is Pakistan a great neighbour? One doesn’t have to reel off statistics to prove Pakistan is by no means a good neighbour to have. Virtually every terrorist attack on the planet can be traced back to Pakistan – the latest being San Bernardino. It is a measure of Pakistan’s reputation that ‘Paki’ tops the totem pole of four-letter words in Britain.

Banning Pakistanis

So why had the IPL banned Pakistani players? Well, just two years earlier, 10 Pakistani terrorists had raided the city of Mumbai, killing 154 and injuring hundreds of Indians and foreign tourists. The terrorists struck a railway station during rush hour, luxury hotels, a synagogue and a maternity hospital. Yes, read that again – a maternity hospital.

48kasabThese are the targets chosen by SRK’s beloved country.

The attackers were trained by the Pakistani military and intelligence agencies, which continue to spawn an endless supply of terrorists that are sent not only to India but to every troublespot in the world. Sometimes they are sent to places you wouldn’t think of as troublespots – such as New Zealand. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/local-blogs/dark-matter/8819157/What-are-Pakistani-terrorists-doing-in-New-Zealand)

And yet, Khan thinks Pakistan is a good neighbour to have. With his sweeping statements, Khan insulted the memory of the innocent civilians who were brutally killed and the commandos and policemen who died in their attempt to free Mumbai from the jihadis in November 2008.

While the Indian government and most of the leftist media networks tried to suppress the stories of tortures of the hostages, at least one website didn’t sanitise the truth. Doctors, who had conducted post-mortems on the victims, told Rediff.com (http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/nov/30mumterror-doctors-shocked-at-hostagess-torture.htm) they had not seen anything like this in their lives.

‘‘I have seen bodies of riot victims, gang war and previous terror attacks like bomb blasts. But this was entirely different. It was shocking and disturbing,’’ one doctor said.

Another said: ‘‘I have seen so many dead bodies in my life, and was yet traumatised….It was obvious they were tied up and tortured before they were killed. It was so bad that I do not want to go over the details even in my head again.”

Remember, these were civilians not combatants. While Rediff has left out the gory details of the tortures, sources in the know say children’s fingernails were pulled out in front of their parents, before they were shot.

But all this doesn’t disturb Khan. Not even the fact that among the victims were over 50 Muslims. Khan seems to be saying it’s okay to live with Pakistan tormenting India at will. For such people – including dumb liberals, Marxists, secularists and AAPtards– a candlelight vigil or a minute’s silence is enough to counter terrorism.

Do you remember the 2008 picture of well-dressed Indian tykes (apparently belonging to upper class Indian families) holding up placards saying, ‘‘Terrorist Uncle, please stop the killings.’’ This is obviously SRK’s fan base. This fan base is dwindling and I’ll come to that in a moment.

Speaking on this group of Indians, who unwittingly support the unlikely triumvirate of liberals, leftists and terrorists, R. Vaidyanathan, analyst and professor of finance, Indian Institute of Management-Bangalore, wrote in 2008: The attitude of this class is that “if we are slapped on both the cheeks we should feel bad that we do not have a third cheek to show. Such is our strategic thinking in this complex world since the elite don’t think through issues”.

A History of Supporting Pakistanis

In February 2007, after losing the T-20 World Cup final match to India, Shoaib Malik the captain of the Pakistani cricket team apologised to ‘‘Muslims all over the world’’ for not being able to beat India. That statement made many Indian Muslims cringe. After all, there were two Muslim players in the Indian side that beat the Pakistanis. In fact, it is a measure of how much they identified with India that those two Muslim players, Irfan Khan and Zaheer Khan, were always more aggro when they played against Pakistan.

But what did SRK do? He tried to defend Malik in a subsequent interview. “I don’t think he meant to segregate Muslims and Christians and Hindus and say this was a match between Islam and Hinduism,” he said.

Who the hell told you that SRK? Did the Pakistani cricketer phone you up and personally tell you what he ‘really’ meant?

It seems SRK is some sort of middleman who is trying to validate Pakistani players for Indian team owners. Disappointed at the Indian cricket board’s decision to ban the Pakistani players, he said it was humiliating to him as a team owner that no one bid for the Pakistani players despite them being put up for auction. “They are the champions, they are wonderful but somewhere down the line there is an issue and we can’t deny it,” he told a news channel.

But SRK is the one living in denial. In fact, he had as many as five players from Pakistan playing for his team Kolkata Knight Riders in the IPL’s first edition in 2007. What does that tell you about his feelings towards Pakistan?

SRK’s record in hurting Indian sensibilities remains consistent. In 2009 when the IPL cricket tournament was temporarily moved to South Africa, he replaced the highly popular Sourav Ganguly as skipper and foisted New Zealander Brendon McCullum on his team. Much like his performance in New Zealand, McCullum was a complete disaster.

John Buchanan, his Australian coach, publicly insulted Indian players. ‘‘Sourav, Dravid and Laxman have reached the twilight in T20 cricket,’’ he said in a press conference. Anyone who had seen Ganguly and Dravid bat in 2010 would have thought Buchanan was stark, raving mad. SRK did not reprimand Buchanan for snubbing the three all-time greats. The actor had no reason to be outraged because Buchanan had insulted Indians not Pakistanis.

Feroz Khan: True patriot

Celebrities from minority communities have an even bigger responsibility because they – often unwittingly – become the face of the community. This is something the late Indian actor Feroz Khan understood.

ferozSeveral years ago, responding to a provocative Pakistani TV anchor, the actor shot back: ‘‘India is a secular country where a Sikh Prime Minister and a Muslim President are the pride of the nation, unlike Pakistan which was created for Muslims but where Muslims are killing each other.’’

Feroz Khan’s statement mattered because it went a big way in reinforcing in the Indian Muslim’s mind that Pakistan is indeed a disaster. Coming from a popular Indian Muslim, it drilled home the message that Indian Muslims should not look at Pakistan as some sort of promised Islamic land west of the border.

Feroz Khan’s statement sent the Muslims of Pakistan into a tizzy. Ever since the creation of Pakistan, the people of that country have believed – more in hope than faith – that Indian Muslims are a fifth column within India who will one day overthrow the Hindus and complete the ultimate aim of Pakistan, which is to recover the lost ‘glory’ of the medieval Muslim empires. To be sure, many Indian Muslim clergymen and politicians have voiced exactly such sentiments but largely Indian Muslims no longer believe in such rubbish. The evidence is before them – Pakistan is a failed nation and is nothing less than a hell for Muslims.

So when Feroz Khan rubbished Pakistan, there was a great deal of heartburn, bewilderment and anger among sections of the Pakistani elites.

SRK on the other hand is playing spoiler. By shooting off his mouth, he is undoing all the good work achieved by the likes of Feroz Khan and other truly nationalist Muslims such as Tufail Ahmed, columnist at IndiaFacts.

Calling the Bluff

Like SRK, many male Muslim celebrities are married to Hindu women. These Muslim men bizarrely say it proves their secular credentials. This is facetious because a Muslim man marrying a Hindu woman has nothing to do with tolerance.

We all know what the so-called secular – but in reality closet Hindu hater – Aamir Khan said about his family: “My children will be brought up as Muslim.”

Now look at the flip side. Few Muslim women are married to Hindu men. Back in the 1950s, when top actors Dev Anand and Suraiyya announced they would tie the knot, the Muslims of Mumbai threatened to riot. The Muslim clergy vocally disapproved of a Muslim woman marrying a Hindu. Back then, none of the Muslim actors came out in support of the deep love that Dev Anand and Suraiyya had for each other. The marriage was called off.

The reality is Muslim men only want to marry Hindu women. It’s a one-way street where Muslim women are not allowed to marry Hindu men. It’s about acquisition. Marrying a Hindu woman is like a victory – they have brought over someone from the kafirs into the camp of the believers. One less Hindu, one more Muslim. And since it’s a woman, one more womb for breeding more Muslims. What could be better?

Ghazwa-e-Hind – or the conquest of India – is at the back of the mind of many Muslims. It is the unfinished business of the Muslim conquest of Hindustan. Muslim men who marry Hindu women are congratulated by their community. Since only the very elites are able to do this, it becomes an even more prestigious and sought after badge.

In this backdrop, the true test will be when famous people such as Naseeruddin Shah, SRK and Aamir Khan – who proudly claim they are secular because they are married to Hindu women – allow their daughters to marry Hindu boys. The good money is on this not happening.

Dwindling Fan Base

Because you cannot fool all of the people all of the time, SRK fan club members are saying goodbye and good riddance. The actor’s comment on “extreme intolerance” in India has upset millions of his fans.

Many Indians are refusing to watch his latest movie Dilwale. Pressure from several Hindu organisations has led to cinemas around the country cancelling shows. The Twitter hashtag #‎boycottDilwale is gaining traction.

Member of Parliament Yogi Adityanath compared SRK to Pakistani terrorist Hafiz Saeed, and the holy woman Sadhvi Prachi called the actor a “Pakistani agent”.

Facing fire from his fans – and very likely his producers – SRK gave an interview to ABP News, saying he was being “misunderstood” and that he did not believe India is intolerant. But watch the interview here, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGmnU_1bcVs)  from 1.26 to 1.33 seconds. He is not apologising but in fact being sarcastic: “Everything is all right in our country. God bless India. Long live us. Long live us Indians. There is no problem at all.”

The secular media has simply translated his words into English and claimed he has apologised. But they ignore the petulant, mocking tone in which he said these words.

But social media isn’t as forgiving as the mainstream media and the boycott calls are being taken up by millions of people all over India. SRK’s fan base is indeed eroding and it is young Indians – fed up with Indian seculars and their tolerance of Pakistan – who are saying goodbye to SRK.

The Lou Grant Factor

Not many people remember Lou Grant, an American television drama series starring the charismatic Ed Asner in the lead role as a newspaper editor. Aired from 1977 to 1982, it was a runaway success until it was suddenly cancelled. The reason: Asner’s views on Nicaragua, which did not align with the right wing administration of Ronald Reagan.

The actor said the Sandinista guerrillas should be allowed to come to power even if it meant the loss of American influence in the country. Reagan was at that time supporting the murderous Contras, which had pretty much destroyed the tiny Central American nation.

Asner, being an amiable guy, just meant well. He was supporting the good guys in a murderous war. And yet he was crucified professionally. Reagan belonged to a long line of scumbag US presidents who destroyed the careers of Americans who disagreed with the US policy of meddling in the affairs of foreign countries.

Indians need not subject SRK to the same jingoistic keel-hauling, but at least they should demand some accountability from the actor they have cherished for more than two decades. Dancing at weddings may be a easy moonlighting cash, but SRK forgets that he owes his wealth, fame and adulation to India and its Hindu majority who buy tickets for his movies with their own hard earned money and have made him enormously wealthy.

If he continues to label India – and by implication Hindus – as an intolerant nation, then fans should boycott his films. SRK’s oxygen is publicity and he’ll fade away once the adulation ends.

Rakesh is a journalist at New Zealand’s leading media house. He mostly writes on defence and foreign affairs.
His articles have been quoted extensively by universities and in books on diplomacy, counter terrorism, warfare, and development of the global south; and by international defence journals.
Rakesh’s work has been cited by leading think tanks and organisations that include the Naval Postgraduate School, California; US Army War College, Pennsylvania; Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington DC; State University of New Jersey; Institute of International and Strategic Relations, Paris; BBC Vietnam; Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk; Centre for Air Power Studies, New Delhi; Institute for Defense Analyses, Virginia; International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, Washington DC; Stimson Centre, Washington DC; Foreign Policy Research Institute, Philadelphia; and Institute for Strategic, Political, Security and Economic Consultancy, Berlin.
His articles have been published by the Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi; Foundation Institute for Eastern Studies, Warsaw; and the Research Institute for European and American Studies, Greece, among others.
  • Harindepreet singh

    SRK is indian but you are not. Idiot post just for making money

    • edl

      why dont u read the article before commenting,dumbass.

  • Sam

    Why are you all reminding that SRK is known across the world and India is known as land of SRK? He is well-known for acting, not for how he is as a person. Remember that Wankhede stadium incident?
    He is sometimes polite, but people have accused him of being arrogant, too.
    And yes, all this mentioned in the post is totally true. He has indeed mentioned his admiration for Pakistan.
    Back in 1960s, the US and Russia had boycotted each other’s sports events. This is an example of patriotism.
    Showing love for Pakistan is insulting an emotion called solidarity. Solidarity with our soldiers. You cannot be busy in any sort of engagement with Pakistan when our soldiers die at the border. This is also what veteran Major Gaurav Arya had said. And he is right.

    Infact, when Peshawar school attacks happened, SRK reportedly donated 40 crore to them to mourn their loss. Any money from him for our Armed Forces Welfare?

    SRK has been wrong. Don’t respect him just because he is an actor. Is he really that good as a person? Have you got any totally concrete evidence to prove that he is really very good, humble, polite and importantly, very patriotic?

  • Nina

    This is some kind of bullshit. Might as well title this article “I hate Muslims and Pakistan so I hate SRK.” You’re creating a bad image of unity for Muslim and Hindu relations in India.

    • edl

      hate muslims? author himself has provided feroz khans statement to cater to the pseudo sickulars like you. if somebody is creating bad image for unity it is the muslims themselves. and this fraud and fake theory called ‘hindu muslim’ unity means nothing but that the hindus will be forever persecuted in their own country,islamic terrorism will run a rampage and you cant even call it by its name while any act of retribution will be ‘communal’

  • shrikant kale

    only indians has raised SRK to peak..some indians rather hindus lost respect towards india. why to see such actor movies who support pakistan? & such actor should move to pakistan immediately by selling his/her property to government. as a hindustani i cant bear sympathy for pakistan in india. indian peoples are not ambitious as other religeon. country first then actor/actress

  • Deepak Thakur

    indiafacts.org fuck off srk is the best he is the greatest

  • Ziprun Khi

    Few fundamental mistakes…. it seem author has zero info on Islam or Islamic History.
    one for your ref …. Shia do not do matam on ID.

    How stupid can u go?

  • Sekhars

    SRK can only act, reality of life is much different. None of the Bollywood stars can live the reality of life. He should just focus on his acting and beyond that he is a moron

  • Just do what you are supposed to do… sitting in NZ writing for Russia. I don’t see you having any rights whatsoever to write anything about India. And Oh! put a sticker on your head “I spread HATE”

    • Devang Chavda

      Finally something positive to read. All these Sanghis made it harder for me to breath even!

    • edl

      only if you put an ‘i am a moron’ one, first

  • Smith Ghule

    if u want to boycott srk , comeon. but remember he is the only person having the greatest impact overseas . People knw India as country of king khan . grow up .u r insulting your nation by boycotting king .

    • shrikant kale

      Friend, you have lost countries respect. you can bear the disrespect of india . SRK was my favourite actor initially. but when i saw his love towards pakistani players i found that i hv made a mistake. look @ china does it has any king khan? but still USA hesitate to fight with china. KING HONA HAI TOH REAL LIFE MAI BANO, NA KI MOVIE MAI. and he acted in movies ,does he pay u something to support him? usko FAME dene mai tum hi responsible ho. did u heard something regarding indian Army or terrorist attack? no he had never said. still you guyz support him . every true indian should boycott his movie make him realised that he had done mistake by supporting pakistanis.

  • Jana Weiss

    Ask someone in oversea about Bollywood and you will get as answer Shah Rukh Khan.
    Ask someone in oversea abut a famous Indian and the answer will be Shah Rukh Khan before Ghandi.
    Ask someone in oversea which person is the ambassador of India and he will answering Shah Rukh Khan.

    Shah Rukh Khan stands for India in oversea, no other public person of India but is seems as Indian hating Shah Rukh Khan and there can be only one reason for it – they are jealous bcs he made his way from the lower middle class but they are not able to do the same bcs they don´t want do work so hard!

    And this all is only proving, Shah Rukh Khan was speaking about a danger for Indias future if the intolerance will growing but he was wrong – the intolerance in India is already there and it´s a shame, that indian politics and their supporter wanting the same rules for India like the ISIS!!!!!!

    • Jana krish

      I think you r really fkd in the head…

    • Jana krish

      Jana weiss, im compelled to reply to you again… India is just not Bollywood and Bollywood is just not the khans…over the years its the money of dawood and his henchmen who financed BW…obviously they wld listen to their masters voice…the isi…which has helped them build the biggest drugs ane brothel network… across the world…it’s end of days for these farts who live of treachery and deceit

    • shrikant kale

      then better you settled with him in pakistan as early as possible. ticket mai karva deta hu dono ka

  • Dr. MS

    Just as some protesters and harsh critics of Trump are only giving Trump more attention, importance and support…the more you target a nice guy like SRK, married to a Hindu, you are going to give him and his supporters more tools to hit you with

    After reading IndiaFacts I am convinced that many Hindus don’t talk well, write well and communicate smartly. It takes content and communication to be connected to traditions and heritage while also being relevant and adequately socially useful.

    I was at someone’s Bheema Rathi shanthi, 70th B’day, and the priest, who had a whole bunch of students confidently reciting in Samskritiam, did a horrible job of trying to explain the rituals, its significance and its connection to modern world in Tamil or English. What do you do when the priest experts on a ritual cannot explain it and make it relevant to today’s challenges, needs, concerns and difficulties?

    Hindus don’t seem to have 1) The right knowledge (in history, social sciences, customs and traditions, and social problems) ; 2) healthy pride ; 3) dignity focused on authentic being, correct or ethical living and the internally consistent and externally helpful actions and 4) sensible unity (to defend and fight for justice within one’s community and for the larger society or nation). Where do you go from there? Even if one leg is missing from the four stated above the table or the chair will tilt, fall down or break.

    The community seems to not know how to be rooted while also being flexible in the right way…without too much pragmatism (without values or consistency), survivalism, crises and social approval as the only tool for changing. Change has to come with more than the above mentioned four reasons or pressures.

    You cannot say, for example, that you disapprove of your son marrying outside the community and make a big drama of it…and then quietly support him or integrate him because of your need for his assistance, his help, pretentious family values and to keep the money inside the circle. I have more respect for fundamentalists and conservative who draw a line in the sand and stick to it…when it comes to “fighting community manipulation that they fear erodes authenticity and unity”.

    Hindus seem to bend, break and/or bend over for pragmatism or some sleazy convenience while claiming “purity, authenticity and all that masala melodrama”.

    I find many Hindus hypocritical even when they are dealing with something that I fully endorse as “inter caste or inter religious marriages”. You cannot say that Muslims are unacceptable in a marriage first and then change that tune when your own son or daughter marries a Muslim. This is why many men say, “You grab the Hindu daughter and their parent, their family and their tribe will come around to kiss your butt soon. Family values, family values”. This kind of personal over political helps some remain very flexible…but also “pretentious and not very value driven”. It is important to support inter caste and inter religious marriage: but not someone who elopes with a loser who will breed idiots, criminals and useless children, or someone who practices so called “Jihaadi love”. And for the sake of affluence and approval if you marry within your community or outside…you are greedy and/o a coward irrespective of who you marry. Many HIndus don’t get this.

    The Hindu has to grow up and be a man…who does not have to put women down or have his petty ego flattered to feel good and important.

    And Tam Brahms who stayed back in Tamil Nadu represent a very weak part of Hinduism..and that is where Hinduism is going. Good luck to all of you before you all disappear.

  • Rajat Datta

    People like Shahrukh Khan can get away with everything because the people of this country do not really care. The biased anti-hindu media continues to glorify such traitors and the Indian public continue with their worship of traitors. I doubt any significant number of people would actually boycott his movies. My mother did though.

    • shrikant kale

      yes dude i really support you.. i am also stopped to watch his movies. kabhi kabhi doubt hota hai ki SRK ko support karne wale hindu pehle muslim the..

  • Virat

    Why these movies even release in BJP ruled states ?? .. remember What Jailalita did to Kamal Hasan …

    We have Chutiya BJP …… who believe in “Morals” …. Apana Sikka Kohta , Chutiya hai … Koiee Kay kare

    Modi disappointing me ….. He better act now ….. Should not fear being labeled as Right wing Hindu , Dar ke aage jeet hai.

  • jin

    Why not boycott all the bollywood itself. I don’t watch them in theaters until it is cleaned up of underworld money.

    • March Ahead’ India

      You’ve given the best solution. Boycott whole of Bollywood Coz there’s lot of mafia money in Bollywood especially Saudi/Paki.
      I haven’t watched a movie in 10yrs. Oh. Only movie i watched in these 10yrs is Baby

  • V S

    kuchhh bhi
    He said players are not terrorists, why to involve them in this, thats it.
    He never donated to pak, but 1 crore to chennai.
    Many people are trying to defame him, but with reasonless comments.

    • shrikant kale

      arey bhai aap bahut bhole ho.. players bhi toh pakistan ke hai na? unka aim bi india ko beat karna hai na? i think indian player not supposed to play frm KKR side.. people like you make fooled by SRK. and how do u knw that he had never donated to pak. bhai unka swiss bank se paisa jata hai. apne ko nahi pata hota..wo chennai ke liye indian bank se deta hoga. sirf positive side mat dekha karo.

  • Tambi Dude

    I can say with pride that I am boycotting SRK since 2006. The last movie I saw was Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna. I regret I did not do it earlier.

    • shrikant kale

      same from me ..chodo bhai apne hi kuch log gaddar hai. jo uski movies dekhte hai

  • Andrew

    Shah Rukh Khan,, AS OWNER OF KKR, REFUSED TO TAKE ADVERTISEMENTS FROM
    THE
    INDUSTRIALISTS TODIS IN KOLKATA because THEIR HINDU DAUGHTER (Priyanka)
    HAD AN AFFAIR WITH A MUSLIM MAN (Rizwanur Rahman). THE PARENTS OBJECTED.
    THERE ARE MANY Cases of Muslim families/men objecting to Muslim women
    marrying HIndu men. Khan has never once objected to it. Incidentally
    this incident was also featured by the OTHER KHAN in Satyameva Jayate.
    VERY Convenient use of their celebrity status to advance Love Jihad—
    AS A FILM CELEBRITY THiS MAN SRK HAD NO BUSINESS GETTING INTO A LAW
    & ORDER issue. He is a closet Islamist.

  • Andrew

    SRK,, AS OWNER OF KKR, REFUSED TO TAKE ADVERTISEMENTS FROM THE
    INDUSTRIALISTS TODIS IN KOLKATA because THEIR HINDU DAUGHTER (Priyanka)
    HAD AN AFFAIR WITH A MUSLIM MAN (Rizwanur Rahman). THE PARENTS OBJECTED.
    — AS A FILM CELEBRITY THIS MAN HAD NO BUSINESS GETTING INTO A LAW
    & ORDER issue. He is a closet Islamist.

    • shrikant kale

      aisi daughter ko nikal dena chahiye india se..bloody daughter.. agar meri daughter hoti toh mar deta usko

  • Andrew

    SRK,, AS OWNER OF KKR, REFUSED TO TAKE ADVERTISEMENTS FROM THE INDUSTRIALISTS TODIS IN KOLKATA because THEIR HINDU DAUGHTER (Priyanka) HAD AN AFFAIR WITH A MUSLIM MAN (Rizwanur Rahman). THE PARENTS OBJECTED. — AS A FILM CELEBRITY THIS MAN HAD NO BUSINESS GETTING INTO A LAW & ORDER issue. He is a closet Islamist.

  • Amak4u

    Hindus are plain dumb arsholes. They will never unite and never boycott such traitors. Alas.

    • Ayna

      Sometimes I agree.

      But causasians abroad are doing the exact thing.

      It’s called left-liberalism’s self hate.

      Elite’s selfproclaimed enhightment of moral standards, tolerance and understanding, by understanding the perpetrator and don’t care about the victim, blaming themselves for the trouble all over the world, as an excuse for

      importing muslims from hell holes into Europe.

      Which is in fact a profit-model, a replacement industry for the original population of the causacian’s living grounds because those have become too critical about their islam-appeasing governments.

      They are acting exactly like those SRK-adoring Indians who throw all their principles aside when keeping supporting another former ‘broad minded’ muslim you knew he would become his real self eventually, but surely when reaching 40.

      • Amak4u

        The difference is unlike Indians, Westerners are polite but savages. Things already reaching tipping point. Not long before a severe backlash if another few attacks on western soil. They will even chase these liberal supporters.

        • Ayna

          You know it.

          I live in Europe, so you know I can only agree.

          The new traitors of our countries, we call these treacherous liberals that are basically ruining Europe, and any country in which they allow muslims to conquer their ‘lebensraum’.

    • shrikant kale

      hmm i too agree with you. apna hi sikka khota. young generation ko muslim bahut pasand hai..

  • Ayna

    Indians adore their movie stars unconditionally.
    No matter if they kill, rape, whatever.

    A little less adoration and more healthy standards of principles would be nice for those kind of fans.
    Good to read new insights are taking over with his former fans.

    Many SRK fans are just following the hype of their environment in the choice of their adoration, but that’s just my opinion.

  • Shubhangi Raykar

    Why are we discussing SK? He has a surrogate child whom he has christened as Av ram-(Abraham?) Ram ,yes but Avram is antithesis of Ram. Let no one be misguided about the etymology. His family did not come from Pakistan. it was from India as Pakistan did not exist then.To say they came from Pakistan is anachronism of which LK Advani is also guilty.

    • vasan

      We are discussing Shakkur because he makes crores of rupees from Indians whom he hates. We are discussing on how to make sure Indians do not give money to the enemy.

      • INDIAN

        This is such an blatant example of narrow-mindedness. So you believe that these muslims actors chose to marry their hindu partners , because they are secretly doing Love-jihad and not because they wanted them as life partners ? So tell me muslim actresses married their hindu partners for what ?
        No sane person in this world would call SRK traitor & anti india , because had some opinion about current atmosphere in our country , which president of india and a lot respected personalities had expressed too .. So go ahead & attack the biggest traitor ie the president of india because he has different opinion than you .

        And pls , no indian gives a damn about the mindless comments made by this fanatic yogi aditnath ,Kailash verghese & Holy sadhwi , the epitomes of bigotry , about SRK .

        BTW , my friend pls understand ,no one watches Amitabh bachchan movie because he is a hindu . It so below nonsensical . Lets not forget we are all Indian first.

        • vasan

          How do you know they are NOT doing Love-Jihad?!! It amazes me that people think they are right and everyone else is wrong! Yes – I grant you that they may NOT be doing love-jihad, but are you willing to grant me that they MAY be doing it?

          I doubt you have that much ‘breadth’ of mind!

          The recent San Bernardino shooting is a classic case of love jihad, but it has escaped the ‘broad minded’ people of the world because they are too busy accusing others of being narrow minded!

          • Vishal

            How do u kniw that they are doing love jihad.. Evidences please?

    • Rajat Datta

      We need to discuss SK because he is a hero of the HINDI film industry who has made crores from his films which this ignorant nation watches. Insulting that same country and singing praises about a terrorist nation is not acceptable.

    • shrikant kale

      tumchya sarkha mansamule asha landyanchi bolaychi himmat hote..he has kept his sons name ‘ABRAM ‘ thatt doesnt mean that he do not support pakistan . te sarva dikhava ahe tyacha. kasa nahi samzat tumha lokana.. kadhi tyane indian army chi praise keli atta paryant? SRK chya grandfather ne indian army opposite help keli hoti.. and his mother Latifa belongs to pakistan. TUMHI “marathi Gentleman” tyala support kartat.. a great salute to Mr. L K Advani who dared to destroy mosque. Aurangzeb, mohd. Gazni pan avdat asel tumhala. .wah great. !

      • Vishal

        Btw he was the celebrity to condemn when Pakistan attacked India recently.. And he was the first one to celebrate when India destroyed Pakistan armies.. So better fuck off..

        • shrikant kale

          you fuck off…dont use abude words. bhosadike

  • vamsi krishna

    The simple reason why the boycott doesn’t work is because..

    1. Of the 200 crores that a khan movies earns on average, around 40% comes from middle east, pakistan and US markets and so they do not usually lose so much sleep on this boycott even if it works in India. It isn’t a lie when bollywood is called as NRI industry by other film industries in India (Tamil, Telugu, Malyalam,Bengal,Bhojpuri and bengal).

    2. It needs just 1 crore Indians out of 1.3 billion to watch khan movies and make it a success. Most of khan movies only run in in multiplexes and big malls whose tickets is in the range of 150-200 rupees. This class called COPS (community of opportunistic seekers) never care for any nation, a self-serving community who do not read news and not connected to society living in their own gilded cages and gated comumunities. This small sections (about 2% the population) the upper class people just watch the movies as a fashion statement. So these liberals watching baji rao mastani is an insult to their life style.

    3. Salman khan movies are popular among muslim masses and kela selling muslim hackers and so they will watch too. South Indians who watch Hindi movies spend their precious time watch branded movies of khans rather than waste money on unknown actors.
    So it takes only a small % of Indians, fools they are, to make khan movies hit.
    Its actually business where every khan movie is hit because even before the market talk about the movie, the producer would have earned hundreds of crores (just like in hollywood, they won’t make any loss due to the size of market itself. A good opening would suffice). Hindu actors like Akshay suffer both due to lack of penetraion in arab and pakistan market but also most muslim masses avoid their movies. The mafia also ensures that the money laundering industry under khans thrive.
    Its an illusion that they depend on Hindus watching their movies , no they are not. If they would have, they would not have dared to insult us. The reason they get away because most of the audience are Muslim and small proportion of rich hindu fools.

    • vamsi krishna

      If you really want to teach a lesson to khans just banish their films in Pakistan and realease piracy videos through your secret establishment (I hate modi always goes by the book) in arab world and see the fun. Inspite of big market for US films, they would not insult their army per se.

      Have you seen the US movies lately, somehow barring the movie ‘TAKEN’ most of the movies are apologists of their country’s technological power (Captain America etc) or absolving muslims or finding new enemies (hilariuosly south american drug lords or enemy countries which does not have much market for hollywood movies like North korea).

      • vasan

        The way to hurt the Khans or converted Rahmans is by indifference. Stop seeing their movies and listening to their music. No need to do anything beyond that. If people can put some effort in learning about the 969 movement in Myanmar the answers to how we can hurt the Khans and thier collaborators will be right there.

        As for Hollywood movies, it is not because of any national policy but because the movie industry is filled with left leaning liberals. They do what they think is right by thier ideology. In the 50s the industry was filled with Commie haters and they movies of that kind. Movies are just works of fiction that will not influence reality though they think they are doing it. All the ‘good muslim’ image of a hundred movies can be erased in one second by one incident of a suicide bomber attacking a school.

        • vamsi krishna

          Agreed! All I was saying is, by avoiding these movies you are not really hurting them economically anyway. You could be small proportion of elite Hindus who had decided to move away.

          Unless the leftist ideology is not countered in media, movies and national discourse, people like shahrukh khans will continue to thrive. The problem of this kind of behavour is more of a symptom rather than disease.

          • Remo

            Getting a start to the boycott is the way forward..counter productive talking is obfuscation and coming up with theoretical hypotheses is a non-starter. Lets get to work..

          • Vishal

            Karte raho boycott.. Koi fark nai padhne wala.. I can assure you haven’t watched his movies much before as well.. Bas yahaan aag mein ghee daalne aaya hai

          • rama ranjan

            There is another angle to all this. All the three khans have aged – SRK is not as charming as when he was a pimpled boy in the 80’s. As with every other large actor in bollywood & the regional woods, these guys and gals hedge their bets by investing in other industries and ventures – real estate, movie distribution, media, hotels, sports teams, (now lately gyms) and other consumer industries. So, as SRK’s movie career is heading into its sunset years, he needs alternative means to grow his income. It is an open secret that all these guys and gals invest heavily in Dubai and Saudi (so much that even the saintly looking Lata and Asha sisters invest in Dubai into their dusk years of life). More than a deep seated sentiment about the country and its political direction, the likes of SRK are simply selling their brand like used car salesmen – given that, in this case, SRK’s was really hurt by his inability to buy up Pakistani cricketers.

            I had some better regard for SRK than the other two shitty Khans that Bollywood produced. But with this & his alleged corruption case involving his Kolkota team, I’d place in the same cadre of bollywood trash.

            But seriously, it is us the self-effacing Hindus who pay these bollywood dimwits. I never pay a single penny to watch any bollywood, tollywood unless there is a known reputation of the movie. The entire Indian movie industry thrives by selling soft pornography to unsuspecting youth.

    • vasan

      I would like to see if you can apply the same kind of economic analysis to the Salt Satyagraha and show how it worked for or against the movement to get rid of Brits.

      • vamsi krishna

        Sure, You can apply it. There is a crucial difference though. Not many people knew that the moment triggered like wild fire across the country that people as far as kakinada, bengal and madras were seen supplying salt for free.
        Over the year, the british Govt started feeling that its difficult to hold indians without welcoming them to the negotiating table (even if its a facade).
        In case of movies, most of India does not watch Movies at theatres but only at homes. 99% of movies are watched in televisions not theatres. That answers your question. There is no repurcussion effect of movies and they are less and less relevant on Indians over the time.

        • vasan

          Yes – the point is it did not even touch them(Brits) economically but hurt them deeply in the long run politically. Even if Dilwale makes crores in the box office, this movement can be sustained in the long run to hurt them deeply. So you cannot really judge the power of the movement byt the monetary hurt it causes, or not causes, to the adversary..

      • vamsi krishna

        Its also like you asking has mangalyam mission or mission to mars of India a success. Since most Indians do not benefit of it. No really, the recurcussion effect is that we get more business and more recogniction

        • vasan

          I don’t get this analogy.

      • suresh devineni

        It may not have an impact on a single movie, But Its is going to have a big impact on SRK brand value, which is more related to Indian viewers than abroad, Now the companies will have to think twice before making him a Brand Ambassador, as he has irked majority of Indians..

        • Vishal

          Look at srk brand value now.. Its dollar 750 million.. That guy is getting richer and richer..

    • Ayna

      Well every bit helps.

      And it’s not that the Hindu, movie watching population is small by any means.

    • shrikant kale

      arey start to karo boycotting SRK or khans movie..phir dekho Aage..SRK ko unity ka pata chalega..

      • Vishal

        Ab koi boycott nai hone wala..he has again made our country proud through his ted talk mentioning about best qualities of India..

  • Hamlet

    Fantastic summing up of things. The whole SRK & other Muslims games played in India, & how they wanna marry only Hindu Women,but will not allow a Muslim Woman to marry a Hindu Man. We have read countless incidents where both were killed.
    But any way, great thoughts Rakesh Simha. I closely follow your articles on rbth..;-)…

  • Sibby

    The reason for three big Khans: Amir Khan, Salman Khan and Shahrukh Khan to show Pakistan and Middle east in good light is that their movies are popular there. If suppose Amir Khan PK was critical of Islamic practices (the same way it was critical of Hindu practices), the movie would have faced a ban in lot of those countries including revenue losses. This is why they tend to sympathize with Pakistan. This is why the movie show only Hindus and Indians in bad light while a Pakistani guy in good light

    Even after so many terrorist attacks from Pakistan including one in their own Bollywood town, they turn blind eye to it. Is there is reason that all the top 10 grossing bollywood movies belong to one of these Khan given that muslim contribute 14% of population. Please also compare the pay of film actors and actresses based on religion, you will know the difference. (How many Sikh, Jain and Chistian actors do you see in film industry?) I usually do not get into this comparison between religion, but it is necessary to point out the hippocracy of media and celebrities alike.

    Suddenly India became tolerant for SRK because a lot of people are boycotting his upcoming movie. He need his intolerant indans to watch his movie so that he can earn money.

    Amir Khan and his wife did not feel unsafe during 2008 Mumbai attack because it was orchestrated by “our friendly neighbourhood” Pakistan. BTW Media plays it own part. According to them Awardwapsi and Amir Khan statement was justified because it was non violent and personal freedom. But at the same time, Aapwapsi, i..e. to unstall Snapdeal app in response to Amir Khan intolerance remark was portrayed as an attack on the actor belonging to minority community.

    • Shubhangi Raykar

      He had a different wife I think then. But she also was from a Hindu family i suppose.

    • rama ranjan

      Excellent analysis. Far worse, if Amir Khan were to criticize Islam, a fatwa will be issued not just against his movies and his money, but his life. They know this very well & know how to cut their cake precisely.

    • DRRao

      How many Khans blamed Pak for killing 18 Indian soldiers in Kashmir?

      • Vishal

        Srk was the first one to tweet.. Just follow him dude..

  • 0nlyPeace

    Excellent rebuttal to the traitor Khan.