I would like to say that you have written an article , so serious, with a partial view taken from a right-wing neo-conservative publication, Manorama, which is an ardent supporter of Italian Sonia Ghandhi.
I am an Indian. My parents are from India. If I go back a few generations I can say that they were Hindus. But now I am a Muslim. But I am an Indian and I am proud to be an Indian. Subrahmania Swamy’s article says that ,while they are Muslims , practise their religion, turn to Mecca for prayer, they should accept that their root is from Bharat, that their great great parents were Hindus, and so , theirs is a Hindu heritage. Then they are a part of Big Hindu Parivar.
We should ask ourselves this question: why Arabs are called Arabs and not just Muslims? because Arabs are proud of their Arab heritage. Why Arabs do not call us Arabs but call just Indian Muslims, because our heritage is not Arab. We are Indian.
An indian by becoming a Muslim does not lose his Indianness. That is what Swamy means. Indianness is not Muslim heritage, not Christian heritage. It is Hindu heritage.
But Sonia Ghanidhi is not from India, her heritage is not Indian, she is a naturalized citizen, so she cannot be considered a part of Brihth Hindu Parivar. She should not be given voting rights.
Any Jack and Ass cannot go to any country, naturalize, and become a part of its heritage.
What is the wrong with this point of Swamy?
If you have a Bharatiya Heritage you will be able to consider bharath as your homeland, work for it, save it from foreign enemies and terrorists from destruction. You will defend this country.
If you are a part of Brihth Hindu Pariar you cannot terrorise this country, make bombs, collude with enemies of Bharath to blast this great land and kill people. One cannot disintegrate one's homeland.