In April 2016, he stirred up a controversy with his remark stating that the population should be controlled by ensuring that people of all religions have the same number of children in their families. In October 2016, he was embroiled in a controversy when he urged Hindus to produce more children. Again on 4 November 2016, Giriraj Singh stressed that the Hindus in India need to increase their population.
In January, 2020, he raised controversy by remarking that Indians eating beef outside the country was "a matter of concern". He also suggested imposing Hindu religious texts on school children.
Unlike the EU, Russia has one single central government, and a strong one at that. The Russian intelligence and security services are amongst the best on the planet, as is the Russian military. Russia does not suffer from the disease of political-correctness: it is totally acceptable in Russia to denounce Islamic terrorism in the harshest possible terms. In fact, Putin even made a famous statement about "offing the terrorists in the toilets if needed" and the Russians did exactly that: they killed every single Chechen Wahabi leader and, far from denying it, they proudly proclaimed it. The key difference with the EU is that Putin and the Russian people had the political will to stop the insurgency in Chechnia, even if that meant turning all of Chechnia into a pile of smoking rubble.
Yet, at the same time, Putin made major efforts to support the Muslim community in Russia. Not only did he built a huge (and beautiful) mosque in Moscow, he has embarked on major program to support the growth of traditional Islam in Russia (just as he has done with the Orthodox Church). As for Chechnia, Putin has made Ramzan Kadyrov something of a "political son" and has given the Chechens an extremely wide autonomy, especially in matters of religion. So is Putin anti-Muslim or pro-Muslim? Neither. Putin understands a simple thing which, so far, totally eludes western politicians: Russians are very good at killing Takfiris, but only Muslims can kill Takfirism.
[...]
So the key characteristic of Takfiris is that they believe that all those who do not follow their version of Islam are not even Muslims. How do you think that this makes these other Muslims feel about the Takfiris? Actually, there is nothing wrong in theological terms with the notion of "Takfir" just as there is nothing wrong with the notion of "excommunication" or, for that matter, "anathema" or "heretic". These are categories which, when properly used, are indispensable for specific types of theological arguments. However, just as "excommunicate", "anathema" or "heretic" can be used by some only as insults, slander or even calls to murder, "Takfirism" is first and foremost a mindset. Guns and bullets cannot defeat a mindset. In fact, only ideas can defeat other ideas. The Russians know that.
There are several videos on YouTube (alas, in Russian) which show Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov coming to the location of a battle with Chechen extremists and engaging the terrorists in a theological dispute about Islam. Instead of just ordering his troops to kill them all, he challenges them by asking them "so you think that you are Muslims and we are not?" or "how is our society not Islamic?". And his favorite one "if you can find a single quote in the Quran proving to me that what I do is not Islamic then I will immediately cease doing it". This does not always work. Some refuse to surrender and they are all inevitably killed (there is zero tolerance for Takfiris in Chechnia). But frequently this does work. Terrorists lay down their weapons, come out and instead of being abused and jailed or simply shot, they are sent to special prisons where Islamic preachers come and spend long hours teaching them about true Islam. And more often than not, when these young men come out they become volunteers for the Chechen security forces!
Comment: Bloomberg's campaign strategy has also resorted to using billboards to criticize Trump's choice of how to cook and eat his steak, as though that would endear him to the common voter. The man has zero self-awareness.