Drunk, shirtless MNS leader's son abuses woman, flaunts father's clout
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
In the video,
, son of MNS leader Javed Shaikh, was seen rabidly abusing the woman, who confronted him for hitting her vehicle.
Rahil Shaikh, who presumably seemed under the influence of alcohol, was heard threatening the woman about his father's political position.
Hitting out at the MNS, Shiv Sena leader
asked if MNS workers were "attacking Hindus under pressure from these very Muslims".
"Drunk. Half-naked. The son of an MNS leader was hurling abuses at a Marathi-speaking woman. And on top of that, flaunting his father's influence. This is the true face of those who claim to protect Marathi pride. Are MNS workers attacking Hindus under pressure from these very Muslims?" asked Nirupam on X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
12 minutes ago
- Time of India
Suvendu Adhikari's call to stay off Kashmir riles own party, NC slams it as ‘terrorism'
File photo: Bengal BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari (Picture credit: PTI) SRINAGAR: Bengal BJP leader of opposition Suvendu Adhikari's comments advising Bengal's people not to travel to Kashmir have drawn fire in J&K, with his own party repudiating the statement and the governing National Conference (NC) equating it with 'terrorism'. 'Kashmir is the crown of India, an integral part of our motherland. Every Indian holds Kashmir close to his heart,' former J&K BJP chief Ravinder Raina said in a video message where she asked Adhikari to visit the Valley and witness firsthand the 'patriotism of Kashmiris'. Adhikari had advised Bengal's people against going to places 'where Muslims are in a majority'. 'If you want to visit Kashmir, visit Jammu.' Referring to the Pahalgam terror attack, Adhikari said tourists were 'selectively killed' and advised people to visit Himachal Pradesh or Uttarakhand instead. Raina contested Adhikari's version of events. 'After the Pahalgam terror attack, it was local Kashmiris who rescued the wounded and later sheltered tourists to ensure their safety. Thousands of Kashmiris have laid down their lives for the nation's unity and security. Many of our own BJP workers from Kashmir were killed by terrorists. Countless Kashmiri policemen and security personnel have been martyred defending the country. If the Tricolour flies proudly in Kashmir today, it is because of the sacrifices and patriotism of Kashmiris,' Raina said. Adhikari's comments came after a meeting between J&K CM Omar Abdullah and Bengal's Mamata Banerjee in Kolkata on Thursday. After the talks, Mamata had appealed to the people of her state to travel to Kashmir and support its tourism. She also accepted Omar's invitation to visit the Valley, promising to do so after Durga Puja in Sept. Mamata's TMC has slammed Adhikari's comments, accusing him of indulging in a 'disgraceful, calculated act of communal provocation' and 'pushing the message of terrorists at home'. On Saturday, Omar's NC echoed the condemnation. NC spokesperson Tanvir Sadiq said he did not find 'any difference between him (Suvendu) and terrorists' and pointed out that the statement was contrary to efforts by the Centre and J&K govt to revive tourism. 'Terrorists also wanted that no one should visit Kashmir and this person (Adhikari) is saying the same. If you want to condemn the Pahalgam terror attack, you must visit Kashmir,' Sadiq added.
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bawankule criticizes Uddhav for opposing Maharashtra Security Bill
Nagpur: Revenue minister and senior BJP leader Chandrashekhar Bawankule criticised Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray for criticising the Maharashtra Special Public Security bill, saying the former CM must keep the interests of the state in mind. Bawankule said he headed the draft bill committee, which also included opposition leaders, and claimed that it received unanimous support. The bill has been passed by both houses of the legislature and will now be sent to the governor, after which it will finally become a law. "Uddhav Ji, please for once think for Maharashtra's benefit. Think of our youth who will benefit from this bill," said Bawankule, while addressing the media in Nagpur on Saturday. "We put the draft in the public domain and it received support from the public too. Over 12,000 citizens responded to the draft. Generations will be saved because of this law, and the entire Naxal system will collapse. Now, even if after this Uddhav Ji wants to criticise, then God bless him," he added. The opposition to the bill is 'political', said Bawankule. "In the joint committee for the draft bill, I sat down with senior leaders like leader of opposition in the legislative council Ambadas Danve (Shiv Sena UBT), Congress' Vijay Wadettiwar, Nana Patole, NCP (SP) leader Jayant Patil and discussed things in detail. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like She Took 1 Teaspoon Before Bed – Her Belly Was Gone in a Week Hollywood News | USA Click Here Undo We had almost five meetings for this and they all went over the draft clause by clause. All of them supported the bill and any statements given otherwise are simply for political compulsions," said Bawankule. He said the bill is not against any political party. "It's against the movement which is taking our youths towards the Naxalite movement. All organisations which propagate such types of ideologies will now be cornered," said Bawankule. "We have seen that such organisations are active in urban areas, in places like universities, and misleading our youth into the Naxalite movement. Everything will now stop due to this bill," he added.
Deccan Herald
30 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
A language for lost voices
Jean Paul Sartre in his foreword to The Wretched of the Earth, observes: 'To speak means to be in a position to use a certain syntax, to grasp the morphology of this or that language, but it means above all to assume a culture, to support the weight of a civilisation.'.India's Home Minister recently remarked that he was ashamed of speaking in English. The backlash was swift and predictable. He was accused of linguistic nationalism, cultural regression, and endangering India's cosmopolitanism. English remains our bridge to the world – a competitive advantage, and a neutral lingua franca in a multilingual subcontinent. Yet, behind the sharp political criticism lies an uncomfortable truth: the English language, a legacy of colonial rule, continues to dominate not merely our official discourse, but our imagination. In doing so, it estranges the vast majority of Indians from the highest institutions of law, learning, and policy – domains where their voices remain unheard and their intellect unacknowledged. This linguistic bifurcation – between those who command English and those who do not – has become one of the starkest class and power divides in contemporary India. After 78 years of independence, we still lack a national language that speaks to both our civilisational past and our democratic future. Instead, we battle endlessly over Hindi vs. regional is both voice and intellect. Language is not merely a medium of instruction or administration. Language is thought. If English remains the dominant language of our higher education, policymaking, courts, and elite discourse, it means that the civilisational logic embedded in English – its categories, metaphors, rhythms, and rationalities – continues to shape how we think. In effect, the coloniser took our language, and by doing so, took our voice – and with it, our intellectual sovereignty. This is not to demonise English. It is a rich and flexible language, and India has made remarkable contributions to it – from RK Narayan to Arundhati Roy, from Amartya Sen to Salman Rushdie. But English in India is not the language of the street, the kitchen, the workshop, or the panchayat. It is not the language in which most Indians dream, argue, joke, cry, or sing lullabies. It is the language of governance, aspiration, and exclusion. And therein lies the does it mean for a country to think in a language that most of its people do not understand? What happens when the very act of participating in civic life requires a linguistic passport that is inaccessible to the majority? We must move towards a civilisational reclamation. There is no going back to an imagined past where a single classical language held sway. Sanskrit, Persian, Prakrit, and Tamil – all have profound legacies, but none can serve as the common tongue of a modern, democratic, multilingual India. Instead, we must embrace the hybrid tongues already spoken in India's cities and popular culture – Hinglish, Tanglish, and Benglish – not as corruption but as the seedbed of a new, evolving national idiom. These creoles, born of necessity and innovation, already carry our metaphors, our idioms, our lived experiences. They represent a living, breathing negotiation between rootedness and modernity. What if we were to take these mixed languages seriously, not just in cinema and advertising, but in education, policymaking, and civic discourse? What if our textbooks, court judgements, and parliamentary debates spoke in a voice more legible to the majority?.This is not merely an administrative task – it is a civilisational project. It will require investment in translation across Indian languages, nurturing of literature in both vernacular and hybrid forms, and the development of digital tools such as natural language processing engines for Indian tongues. Reclaiming our languages is not anti-modern – it is how we modernise on our terms. Above all, this is an ethical and political imperative. A democracy that does not speak in the voice of its people cannot be truly participatory. The denial of linguistic dignity has cascading effects on education, opportunity, legal rights, and psychological Fanon warned that the colonised intellectual, uncritically adopting the coloniser's language and worldview, risks becoming 'a kind of mimic man'. For India, the decolonisation of language is not a nostalgic indulgence – it is the bedrock of self-respecting modernity. In reclaiming our languages, we do not reject English – we provincialise it. We make it one among many, not the only one. In doing so, we open the doors once more to the full range of Indian minds – to speak, to think, and to korish na, local-a-iruku, swalpa adjust maadi. Some jugaad might help not just express, but belong!
