Category Archives: Hindutva
National song, national anthem and more-I
Monday, 18 January, 2010 , 04:54 PM It is now ‘very clear’ that the singing of the National Anthem will be offi cially avoided at all Government of India functions in which our Prime Minister is going to participate. Our Prime Minister had recently gone to Thiruvananthapuram to participate in the inaugural session of the 97th Indian Science Congress. The local organisers had planned and rehearsed the National Anthem for the Science Congress. However, the Government of India officials who had come to review security and other arrangements the previous day, ‘clipped the National Anthem from the order of events’, CITING A DIRECTIVE from the ever-neutral Prime Minister’s Office.
Rabindranath Tagore Bankim Chandra Chaterjee
(1861 – 1941) (1838 – 1894)
It is a matter of National shame and dishonour to know the background for this decision. It seems that such a fateful decision was taken as there were instances when the audience did not pay full respect to the National Anthem by either refusing to stand up or stand in attention when it was played. It was following such reports that it was decided to exclude the National Anthem from the PM’s public functions rather than play it and allowing it to be insulted under officially uncontrollable situations.
P Parameswaran who is the President of Vivekananda Rock Memorial Committee, Kanyakumariand Director of Bharateeya Vichara Kendram, Thiruvananthapuram has given me shocking news to the fact that Shashi Tharoor, Lok Sabha MP from Thiruvananthapuram and Union Minister of State for External Affairs delivered a speech at a public function in the CSI Church premises in Thiruvananthapuram in November 2009 in which he had stated that the singing of Vande Matharam, the Officially approved National Song of India, is purely a matter of personal choice, to be left to the sweet will and pleasure of the person concerned. The same view was also taken by the Union Minister Arjun Singh in 2006. Decided only to be undecided, resolved only to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity only to be politically impotent, such a Prime Minister officially avoided the National Anthem at the Science Congress held in the first week of January 2010 at Thiruvananthapuram. The Union Minister of State Shashi Tharoor officially exhorted the people present at a public function at Thiruvananthapuram to keep in mind the fact that the singing of Vande Mataram — the National Song — is a purely voluntary, optional affair, totally subject to the whims and caprices of individual citizens, rather than a sacred, patriotic and emotionally stirring national duty! We can see from the postures of our Prime Minister towards our National Anthem and of Shashi Tharoor to the singing ofVande Mataram that the UPA government is steeped in self-chosen conceptual confusion on all vital national issues which have been settled once for all by the Founding Fathers of our Constitution.
Dr Rajendra Prasad, while presiding over the Constituent Assembly on 24 January, 1950, made the following statement which was also adopted as the basis for the final decision on the issue: ‘The composition consisting of words and music known as JANA GANA MANA is the National Anthem of India, subject to such alterations as the Government may authorise as occasion arises, and the song VANDE MATARAM, which has played a historic part in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honored equally with Jana Gana Mana and SHALL HAVE EQUAL STATUS WITH IT. (Applause) I hope this will satisfy members.’ (Constituent Assembly of India, Vol. XII, 24-1-1950)’
Even before our Prime Minister had officially chosen to ignore the National Anthem at Thiruvananthapuram in January 2010, Shashi Tharoor, MP and Union Minister of State for External Affairs had officially prepared the ground in November 2009 when he told an audience at Thiruvananthapuram that the singing of Vande Mataram — the National Song — is purely optional. P Parameswaran sent a letter to Shashi Tharoor on 17-11-2009. Portions of it are worth quoting in the larger public and national interests: ‘
Respected Shashi Tharoor,Namaskar ‘Mathrubhumi’ the popular Malayalam daily dated 16-11-2009, carried prominently a news item with the title ‘Vande Matharam need not be sung’. It was part of the speech, which you delivered at a gathering in the premises of the CSI church, Palayam, Thiruvananthapuram. You are reported to have stated that singing of Vande Matharam is purely a matter of personal choice, left to the sweet will and pleasure of the person concerned. At first I was literally shocked and could hardly believe that the MP representing this enlightened capital city of Kerala could have made such a statement. I made enquires and got confirmed that it was a verbatim report of the speech you made at the church premises. I am also told that it was a suo motto statement without any provocation or to clarify any point and therefore quiet unwarranted. It has no justification what so ever. Our constitution is very clear on the point that Vande Matharam is our National song having equal status with our National Anthem. Therefore it goes without saying that every citizen is supposed to pay due respect by singing it without any reservation. I understand that of late there have been some negative voices regarding singing Vande Matharam among some communal circles. But that is not a justification for a Congress MP and a Central Minister to come out with a public statement endorsing such sentiments, which lowers the status and dignity of Vande Matharam. On the other hand I sincerely feel that it was your duty to create a congenial atmosphere in favour of Vande Matharam by using your good will and also your authority. You have done just the opposite.
Any student of India‘s freedom movement knows pretty well the historic role played by Vande Matharam. In the year 1905, Lord Curson, the then Viceroy of India, made a declaration partitioning Bengal into West Bengal and East Bengal, basically on communal (Hindu and Muslim )consideration. The entire Bengal rose up against the partition. There was an upsurge of nationalist feeling, which engulfed, not only Bengal, but the whole of India . It was the song Vande Matharam, publicly led by great men like Ravindra Natha Tagore which inspired the people to fight against the colonial dictate. Many of them laid down their lives singing this patriotic song. Ultimately the haughty Viceroy had to eat the humble pie and withdraw the declaration of partition. …’ After freedom and adoption of the Constitution of the Republic of India , which gave equal status to both Janaganamana and Vande Matharam, the demand now is being made from religious obscurantists to give up the great song , which expresses the spirit and soul of Bharat in toto. I am sure, any sign of weakness and any further compromise on this is bound to lead, to further weakening of the national fabric and accentuate dangerous divisive forces. It will be suicidal for India. It is against this historical background, that I make bold to say that your public statement on Vande Matharam is nothing short of denigrating this symbol of nationalism and also questioning the validity of the relevant constitutional provision. As a Central minister, who has taken the oath promising to defend the constitution of the country, it is my firm view that you have acted against the spirit of the constitution and your own solemn oath. …
I WISH AND HOPE THAT YOU WILL MAKE A PUBLIC STATEMENT EXPRESSING YOUR REGRETS FOR THIS UNWARRANTED AND OBJECTIONABLE STATEMENT.’ The Union Minister has not even bothered to send a reply to Parameswaran, one of the senior most and respected Hindu leaders in Kerala today.
Taking note of this attitude of this Union Minister,Parameswaran wrote a letter to the Prime Minister of India on 10 December 2009 inviting his attention to the conduct of Shashi Tharoor. I am quoting below the relevant excerpts from this letter: ’
This is to invite your kind attention to a serious lapse, bordering on the violation of the ministerial oath, taken by Shri. Shasi Tharoor, Hon ble Minister for State, External Affairs, in a public speech organized by the Church of South India, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala on 15/11/2009. The Hon‘ble Minister made a suo motto statement. ‘… The national song, like the national sport, is optional. Sing it out of respect for the mother land. Do not sing it if you do not want to. No one forces you’ (Times of India). Such a statement is derogatory and denigrating Vande Mataram which has been accorded equal status with ‘Janaganamana’, our National Anthem.” As a post script (PS) his letter to the PM, Parameswaran also added that: ‘It is extremely regrettable, and throws very bad light on the minister, that even though I had written a personal letter (copy enclosed) to him about the matter on 17/11/2009, he has not yet shown the elementary courtesy of even acknowledging the same. A member of Parliament is expected to behave better and be more responsible to public institutions and personalities.’ Shashi Tharoor, the Union Minister cavalierly trampled upon the soul of Bankim Chandra Chatterjee with pseudo-secular enthusiasm at Thiruvananthapuram in November 2009 by saying that the singing of Vande Mataram is purely voluntary and optional.
A month later in January 2010, the ‘Minority First’ Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh tortured the soul of Rabindranath Tagore at the Indian Science Congress by officially by-passing the National Anthem. Thus the UPA has outraged the modesty of Bharat Mata.
(To be continued) (The writer is a retired IAS officer) e-mail the writer at email@example.com
National song, national anthem and more-II
Tuesday, 19 January, 2010 , 03:36 PM In these columns yesterday, (Monday, 18-1-2010), I had narrated the shameful story of how the Union Minister of State for External Affairs hashi Tharoor showed his contempt for Bankim Chandra Chatterji’s “heathenish and paganish” National Song ‘Vande Mataram’. Lest Tharoor should shine in solitary splendour, our ‘neutral’ between Neutrals Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh outclassed him within 50 days by dropping the singing of National Anthem ‘Jana Gana Mana’ by Rabindranath Tagore at the official function of the Indian Science Congress held in Thiruvananthapuram in the first week of January 2010. This diktat from the PMO runs counter to long-established tradition of Official Protocol regarding the playing of National Anthem at functions attended by the Prime Minister or the President of India.
When the Muslim clerics in India today dismiss the sacred National Song of Vande Mataram with scorn and contempt, we should not forget the fact that their spiritual and cultural progenitor in this sordid drama was Maulana Mohammed Ali Jauhar (1878-1931) who was the most important Muslim leader in the days of the Khillafat Movement immediately after World War I. Maulana Mohammed Ali Jauhar paid his Islamic tribute to Maha-KafirMahatma Gandhi in these immortal words: “However pure Gandhiji’s character may be, he must appear to me from the point of view of religion inferior to any Mussalman, even though he be without character. Yes, according to my religion and creed, I do hold an adulterous and a fallen Mussalman to be better than Mahatma Gandhi”. All this he said in 1921. It has to be borne in mind that Mahatma Gandhi was the President of the Khilafat Movement at that time.
Maulana Mohammed Ali Jauhar who had thus politically stabbed Mahatma Gandhi in the back even in the days of the Khillafat Movement was given the supreme honour of presiding over the Kakinada Session of the Congress in 1923. It was in that Session THAT THE FIRST ISLAMIC BLOW WAS STRUCK AT THE NATIONAL SONG OF INDIA, ‘VANDE MATARAM’ BY THE CONGRESS PRESIDENT MAULANA MOHAMMAD ALI JAUHAR HIMSELF. During those years, (particularly from 1917 to 1922) the reputed singer and patriot Vishnu Digambar Paluskar of Maharashtra used to sway the inaugural session of Congress with his deep and resonant singing of ‘Vande Mataram’ song.However, when Paluskar came on the dais to sing at the Kakinada Session in 1923, he was stopped by the President Maulana Mohammed Ali. The Maulana exclaimed that singing of music was taboo in Islam and as such he would not permit it. The entire Assembly was stunned; everyone, including the top leaders and stalwarts adorning the dais like Mahatma Gandhi, Madan Mohan Malaviya, and others sat dumbstruck, unable to think of a proper reply or retort to the Congress President. Paluskar, however stuck to his post of duty. In a voice filled with righteous indignation he retorted to the Maulana: ‘The Indian National Congress is not the monopoly of any one particular sect nor is this place a mosque, where singing could be prohibited. You have therefore no authority to prevent me from singing VANDE MATARAM. Moreover, if singing in this place is against your particular religion, HOW IS IT YOU COULD TOLERATE MUSIC IN YOUR PRESIDENTIAL PROCESSION?’
This infamous tradition established by Maulana Mohammed Ali Jauhar in 1923 was continued by Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru and his Congress Party and this tradition continues even today. The next stage in the strenuous and tortured story of ‘Vande Mataram’ was reached in 1937 when Congress Party formed the Government in seven Provinces under the Government of India Act of 1935. In keeping with its past tradition, the Congress Party began commencing the Provincial Assembly proceedings with the singing of VANDE MATARAM. The Muslim League, equally true to its separatist Maulana tradition declared war against it. The League Members in the various Provincial Legislative Assemblies raised a storm of protest and staged walk-outs. The Muslim League conducted its session earlier and denounced Congress-ruled States as ‘HINDU STATES’. And the weightiest testimony it adduced was the singing of the VANDE MATARAM in the PROVINCIAL Assemblies!!
The Muslim League condemned the Congress for imposing ‘VANDE MATARAM as the national anthem upon the country’ and termed it as ‘callous, positively anti-Islamic, idolatrous in its inspiration and ideas, and definitely subversive of the growth of genuine nationalism in India’. The MUSLIM LEAGUE further called upon ‘MUSLIM MEMBERS OF VARIOUS LEGISLATURES AND PUBLIC BODIES IN THE COUNTRY NOT TO ASSOCIATE THEMSELVES IN ANY MANNER WITH THIS HIGHLY OBJECTIONABLE SONG’. H V Sheshadri has brilliantly summed up the ideological surrender of the Congress party to the machinations of the Muslim League in 1937: ‘When the Congress Working Committee (CWC) met a few days later, it was haunted by the spectre of the Muslim League’s opposition and formulated ITS POLICY ON ‘MINORITY RIGHTS’. If HINDU-MUSLIM unity “without which the British would not part with power” was to be achieved, the Muslims should not, AT ANY COST(of course only to the Hindus of India!!), be allowed to feel displeased. Their sentiments should never be injured, for whatever reason. Accordingly, the Congress decided to ‘cut out’ those portions of ‘Vande Mataram‘ which were likely to offend the Muslim susceptibilities as indicated in the Muslim League’s resolution. Only the first two stanzas of the song depicting the physical picture of the motherland-were retained and the rest ‘dropped’. INDEED, IT WAS IN THOSE SUBSEQUENT STANZAS THAT THE REAL ESSENCE OF OUR NATIONALISM AND THE SPIRIT OF THE FREEDOM STRUGGLE WERE ENSHRINED.”
I have carefully scrutinized the pro-Islamic and patently anti-Hindu 1937 Congress Working Committee Resolution on ‘Bande Mataram’. I am quoting below the relevant excerpts from that Resolution to prove my point:
“A controversy having recently arisen about the Bande Mataram song, the Working Committee desire to explain the significance of this song. … During the past thirty years, innumerable instances of sacrifices and suffering all over the country have been associated with “Bande Mataram” and men and women have not hesitated to face death even with that cry on their lips. The song and the words thus became symbols of national resistance to British imperialism in Bengal especially and generally in other parts of India. The words “Bande Mataram” became a slogan of power which inspired our people, and a greeting which ever reminds us of our struggle for national freedom.” “Gradually the use of the song spread to other provinces and a certain national significance began to attach to them. The rest of the song was very seldom used and is even now known by few persons. These two stanzas described in tender language the beauty of the motherland and the abundance of her gifts. There was absolutely nothing in them to which objections could be taken from the religious or other point of view. The song was never sung as a challenge to any group or community in India and was never considered as such or offending the sentiments of any community. Indeed the reference in it to thirty crores of Indians makes it clear that it was meant to apply to all the people of India. … The Working Committee feel that past associations, with their long record of suffering for the cause, a well as popular usage, have made the first two stanzas of this song a living and inseparable part of our national movement and as such they must command our affection and respect. There is nothing in these stanzas to which any one can take exception. The other stanzas of this song are little known and hardly ever sung. …” “The Committee recognize the validity of objections raised by Muslim friends to certain parts of the song. While the Committee have taken note of the objection in so far as it has intrinsic value, the Committee wish to point out that the modern evolution of the use of the song as part of national life is of infinitely greater importance than its setting in a historical novel before the national movement had taken shape. …” “But while there can be no question about the place that “Bande Mataram” has come to occupy in the national life, the same cannot be said as to the other songs. …”
Thus the Congress party laid the cultural, religious and ideological foundation for the communal partition of India as early as in 1937, by abjectly surrendering to the black-mailing tactics of the Muslim League in 1937 by tearing apart the ‘Vande Mataram’ Song on communal grounds and dishonouring Bharat Mata with pseudo-secular fervour and passion. This task begun in 1937 was completed by Jinnah, Gandhi and Nehru in 1947. Today the Imam of Jamma Masjid and the other Muslim Clerics are asking the Congress Party to give up even the so called ‘secular portions’ of Vande Mataram as identified by the Congress Party in 1937. I have already referred to the abusive language used by Maulana Mohammed Ali Jauhar against Mahatma Gandhi in 1921. The British Government at that time rightly viewed him as an international Islamic terrorist and jailed him. Such a back-stabbing Muslim fanatic who heaped his Islamic abuse on Mahatma Gandhi was honoured by the Government of India by the issue of a postage stamp on the occasion of his Birth Centenary in 1978. I have presented this postage stamp above.
THE SWAMI’S IDEA OF INDIA
The common educated people of this country must raise their voice against fanatics, who are emboldened by the silence of the pseudo-secular intellectuals, the support of the vote-bank seeking political class and the crusades of a biased media
The country’s Left-wing intelligentsia and the so-called progressive media, which goes hammer and tongs every time any one talks of Sanskrit, Surya Namaskar, Vande Mataram or even Yoga, were strangely silent when a few days ago some Islamic radicals forced authorities at the Mahatma Gandhi University at Kottayam in Kerala to call off the inauguration of a Chair named after Swami Vivekananda, whose 150th birth anniversary the nation is celebrating.
The Chair is headed by Professor OM Mathew, a well known academic, who belongs to a Jewish family which subsequently converted to Christianity. The incident took place days ahead of the anniversary of the Monk’s address to the Chicago World Parliament of Religions, which catapulted Indian spirituality to the global arena.
Apart from the fact that Swamiji’s 150th birth centenary celebrations were inaugurated by none other than Prime Minister Manmohan Singh himself, the youth icon has never been viewed by any section of the society as a sectarian or divisive personality.
In fact, paying rich tribute to Swami Vivekananda, Mr Abdul Salam of Kerala’s Calicut University had recently written thus: “His remarkable speech at Chicago on September 11, 1893, is a call for tolerance and universal brotherhood — the enduring foundations on which the modern Indian nation is built.”
Therefore, the so-called ‘Muslim opposition’ to Swami Vivekananda is beyond comprehension, if one takes into account the latter’s famous letter, dated June 10, 1898, written in Almora to Mohammed Sarfaraz Husain of Naini Tal.
“We want to lead mankind to the place where there is neither the Vedas, nor the Bible, nor the Koran; yet this has to be done by harmonising the Vedas, the Bible and the Koran. Mankind ought to be taught that religions are but the varied expressions of THE RELIGION, which is Oneness, so that each may choose that path that suits him best.
“For our own motherland, a junction of the two great systems, Hinduism and Islam — Vedanta brain and Islam body — is the only hope. I see in my mind’s eye the future perfect India rising out of this chaos and strife, glorious and invincible, with Vedanta brain and Islam body.”
The Swami had all along maintained that the only rational way to cope with differences was to accept them not only as inevitable but also as essential. “One must learn that truth may be expressed in a hundred thousand different ways, and that each of these ways is true as far as it goes. We must learn that the same thing can be viewed from a hundred different standpoints, and yet be the same thing…
“Suppose we all go with vessels in our hands to draw water from the lake. One has a cup, another a jar, another a bucket, and so forth, and we all fill our vessels. The water in each case takes the form of the vessel carried by each of us, but in every case, water, and nothing but water is in the vessel… God is like that water filling these different vessels, and in each vessel, the vision of God comes in the form of the vessel. Yet He is One…”
Could there have been a more stronger message of universal harmony and brotherhood? Yet, there cannot be anything more unfortunate than the fact that such a protest took place in the highly literate State of Kerala, where the Swami had lit the first sparks of social reform.
Shocked by the untouchability and casteism during his visit to the southern State, Swami Vivekananda described its social condition as a “lunatic asylum”.
In the words of Justice VR Krishna Iyer, known for his Left leanings, “The outright condemnation of the deplorable social condition in Kerala expressed by Vivekananda luckily acted as a clarion call for reform for the succeeding generation of Kerala. The generation that succeeded, I must say, rose to the occasion and an era of social and spiritual reform followed…in one sense, the emergence of progressive classes and high level education in India and Kerala especially can be attributed to Swamiji’s powerful campaign which created new thinking.”
There is growing concern over the Islamic radicalisation in Kerala, where majority of the Muslims are not only educated and prosperous but also politically influential, unlike in many parts of the country. Led by the Popular Front of India, these radicalised youth have spread terror not only among the Hindus and Christians in the State but also among progressive members of the Muslim community. It was not long back that a bunch of PFI cadres chopped off the right palm of a college teacher TJ Joseph for setting a question paper that allegedly insulted the Prophet.
Recently, attempts were made to include in the Calicut University syllabus the poem Ode to the Sea by the Saudi-born poet and Al Qaeda’s Mufti Ibrahim Sulayman Muhammad Arbaysh alias Ibrahim al-Rubaish. However, good sense prevailed and following nationwide outrage, the university withdrew the move.
Forewarning about religious extremism, Swami Vivekananda had said, “The greatest harm comes from the fanatic. We may not doubt the sincerity of the fanatic but often he has the irresponsibility of a lunatic. The fanatic is the greatest enemy of mankind.”
The protests against the Vivekananda Chair was also in a way an attempt to tear apart the State’s secular fabric represented by academics such as Mr Mathew.
Mr Mathew, who was deeply influenced by the teachings of Ramakrishna Paramhamsa during his days as an intermediate student, epitomises the universal values of tolerance and pluralism.
In fact, he not only preaches but also practices the same in his personal life. When it came to naming his three sons, who are Jewish Rabbis, he combined the names of Hindu and Judaist historical personalities. Thus, Rabbi Akkibangiras, Rabbi Brighu Hillel and Rabbi Maimonides Kashyap, have names of Hindu sages and Jewish personalities. His granddaughter, Jessie Hellel, is a singing sensation in New Zealand.
Unfortunately, such saner voices are getting suppressed in an increasingly radicalised Kerala society. As the Vice-Chancellor of the Calicut University, Mr Abdul Salam aptly put it in an article on Swami Vivekananda published recently, “The ideas of Swami Vivekananda continue to guide our nation in many ways. I wish that this year of celebration of his 150th birth anniversary be an ideal time to re-look at his ideals in constituting an India that is tolerant and inclusive and at the same time vibrant and challenging.”
As we commemorate Swami Vivekananda’s 150th anniversary, there cannot be a more befitting tribute than working for realising his vision of a universal religion. As he famously stated, “but is there any way of practically working out this harmony in religions? …I have also my little plan…In the first place, I would ask mankind to recognise the maxim ‘Do not destroy’…iconoclastic religions do no good to this world…
“Given these cleavages, is the idea of the universal religion realistic or just idealistic? But behind all these differences, we must recognise a deeper level of commonality that suggests that the universal religion already exists, and is constantly evolving and taking clearer shape. No two persons are exactly alike, yet, despite these differences, there is a common thread of humanity.”
It is high time the common educated people of this country stand up and raise their voice against fanatics, who are emboldened by the silence of the pseudo-secular intellectuals, the support of the vote-bank seeking political class and the unidimensional crusades of a biased media. These fanatics pose a threat to the very idea of India.
(The author is Senior Fellow and Editor at the Vivekananda International Foundation)
Pratap Bhanu Mehta : Thu Jul 11 2013, 04:26 hrs
A story of destructive governance and citizens who did not speak out
First, the UPA came for the roads sector. They destroyed contracting. They slowed down road construction. They left highways half built. We did not speak out. After all, the only reason the NDA could have started the golden quadrilateral is because they wanted to spread Hindutva.
Next, they came for the airline sector. They let Air India suck more money from taxpayers. They let bad regulation destroy the private sector. They let crony banking sustain bad bets. They ensured India would never be an aviation hub. We did not speak out. After all, flying is what birds do, not humans. Besides, aviation is bad for climate change.
Then they came for the power sector. They confused creation of mega capacities with actual generation. They had no rational pricing plans. They were arbitrary in the awarding of licences. They could not make up their mind whether they wanted to protect the environment or destroy it. We did not speak out. After all, the only power that matters is political. Electricity be damned.
Then they came for education. They promulgated the RTE after 100 per cent enrolment. They expanded capacity, but cut-offs still rose. They regulated in such a way that there was a glut in some subjects and a shortage in others. They confused university buildings with building universities. We did not speak out. After all our, our low quality education left us incapable of speaking out.
Then they came for industry. They turned the clock back in every way and waged open war. Ensure that regulations become more complex and uncertain. Ensure that input costs rise. Ensure crummy infrastructure. Promulgate a land scam policy known as SEZ and sell it as industrial policy. They encouraged FDI. But they forgot which one they wanted: outbound or inbound. But we did not speak out. After all, India is a rural country.
Then they came for employment. There was some growth. But they decided that the only good employment is that which has the hand of the state. So the NREGA’s expansion was seen as a sign of success, not failure. By its own logic, if more people need the NREGA, the economy has failed. But we did not speak out. After all, the more people we have dependent on government, the more we think it is a good government.
Then they came for agriculture. First, they create artificial shortages through irrigation scams. Then they have a myopic policy for technology adoption. Then they decide India shall remain largely a wheat and rice economy; we will have shortages for everything else. Then they price everything to produce perverse incentives. But we did not speak out. After all, why worry about food production when the government is giving you a legal right? Is there anything more reassuring than social policy designed by and for lawyers?
Then they came for institutions. They always had. This has been Congress DNA for four decades. They drew up a list of institutions that remained unscathed: Parliament, the IB, bureaucracy and you name it. They then went after those. They used institutions as instruments of their political design. They demoralised every single branch of government. But we did not speak out. After all, this was reform by stealth. Destroy government from within.
Then they came for inflation. They confused a GDP target of 10 per cent with an inflation target. Inflation will come down next quarter, we were told. Then they tried to buy us out. Inflation: no problem. Simply get the government to spend even more. Then they pretended inflation is a problem for the rich. Then they simply stopped talking about it. We did not speak out. After all, for some, inflation is just a number
Then they came for the telecom sector. They got greedy and milked it. They got arbitrary and retrospectively taxed it. But we did not speak out. After all, new communication can be a threat to government. Besides, we can always revert to fixed lines. More digging is good.
Then they came for financial stability. They produced a large deficit. They brought the current account deficit close to an unsustainable point. They nearly wrecked the banking sector. They created every macro-economic instability you can imagine, which makes investment difficult. But we did not speak out. After all, what would you rather have: macro economic stability or a free lunch?
Then they came for regulation. It was back to the 1970s. More arbitrary regulation is good. More rules are good. Uncertainty makes business more adept. The answer to every administrative problem is enacting a new law. Multiple regulators are good because they represent the diversity of India. We did not speak out. After all, just like the religious confuse piety with mere ritual, the virtuous confuse regulation with outcomes.
Then they came after freedom. They promulgated more restrictive rules for everything: freedom of expression, right to assembly and protest, foreign scholars. They used sedition laws. They kept the architecture of colonial laws intact. They said they stood against communal forces. But then they let Digvijaya Singh keep the communal pot boiling. They matched BJP’s communal politicisation of terrorism at every step and then some. We did not speak out. After all, if they are not Hindutva forces, they cannot be a threat to peace and liberty.
Then they came for virtue itself. They preached, from the very summit of power: avoid responsibility. It will always be someone else’s fault. They legitimised being corrupt: you are entitled to it if you are the party of the poor. They encouraged subterfuge to the point that members of the cabinet were subverting each other. They pretended that integrity is a word that does not mean anything. To independent thinkers, they said: why think when there is 10 Janpath? We did not speak out. After all, virtue and thinking can both be outsourced.
Then they came for the poor. They visited their houses and slept in their homes. They liked the experience so much they decided to become growth sceptics. Enact policies that keep India in poverty a little longer. But we did not speak out. After all, once the poor have been used as an argument, all else is immobilised.
Then they came for the citizens. They used the secularism blackmail to reduce our choices. If you are not with us you are evil they said. Then they infantilised us. You are not capable of exercising choices so we will make them for you. They acted as if we were so stupid that the three topmost leaders felt no need to justify themselves to us. But we did not speak out. After all we do have the vote.
The writer is president, Centre for Policy Research, Delhi, and a contributing editor for ‘The Indian Express’
Some additions to the above:
Then they came for states. They looked at all states in the country and found out that they have pockets where they got their maximum vote share. They liked retaining them so much that they decided to break them down just on the eve of elections to maximize their gain and minimize the gain of opposition. But we are not speaking out. After all, what was India but a loose amalgamation of over 600 princely states unified into one.
Then they came for national security. They looked at all borders and neighbors of the country and told themselves that non-alignment is just another name for inaction and chose to take no decisions at all. But we did not speak out. After all, who cares about national security when personal future is not secure without any dependence on government.
Vasanth Ramadurai •
On another side, perhaps I would add…
Then they came for those who decided to speak out. Lathis & water cannons were used on students who protested the brutal rape of a young girl. People who requested a LokPal Bill were hounded into silence. One corrupt minister replaced another in the cabinet – with utmost disregard for people’s faith in democracy. They mistook our patience as powerlessness. After all, they know a lot of us have a very short-term memory & they will prevail come 2014.
last but not least – Congress ruined India, But we did not speak out. After all we are Indians.
Just one point… WE DID SPEAK OUT but the FIREWALL called MEDIA, BLOCKED it out, and let their own PAID/TWISTED logic spread…
Unconquerable Ayodhya, the kingdom of Kosal
By: Bharat Itihaas
The description of Ayodhya in Ramayan is beautifully tendered into verse by Mr. Griffiths, who was the Principal of the Banaras College in the late 19th century. He writes, “Her ample streets were nobly planned and streams of water flowed to keep the fragrant blossoms fresh, that strewed her royal road. There many a princely palace stood in line on level ground. Her temple and triumphal arc and rampart banner crowned. There golden turrets rose on high above the waving green of mango groves and blooming trees and flowery knots between. On battlement and gilded spire, the pennon streamed in state, and warders with the ready bow kept watch at every gate.”
The kingdom of Kosal was ruled by King Dashrath who is believed to be 56th descendents from Manu. His 3 wives Kaushalya, Sumitra and Kaikeyi lived intheir respective palaces. Shri Ram was born at the Kaushalya’s temple, which is now termed as the Ram-janmbhoomi.
In the Brahmaand Puraan, Ayodhya is described as holiest of the 6 holy cities. Maharshi Vyaas refers to the story of Ram in the Vanopakhyaan of Mahabharat. Thus the city of Ayodhya and Shri Ram have been held in veneration by the residents of this land for centuries. Almost 200 years after Alexandar, during Mauryan rule, when Buddhism was flourishing, came the Greek King Minander. He embraced Buddhism and pretended to be a monk. He invaded Ayodhya and destroyed the temple on the Janmsthaan site. Soon he was defeated and killed in the battle by Raja Dhyumatsen of the Shrung Vansh, and Ayodhya was liberated.
The janmsthaan temple was reconstructed by King Vikramaditya. History knows of 6 different Vikramadityas. Historians have different opinions of which of them constructed the temple. Some say it was Vikramaditya of Ujjain who defeated the Shakas in 56 BC and after whom the Vikram Samvat is named. Others attribute the re-construction to Skandgupt who also called himself Vikramaditya and built the temple in late 5th Century AD. However, it is generally accepted as P Carnegie mentions in his Historical Sketch of Faizabad that Vikramaditya’s main clue in tracing the ancient city where the river Saryu and the shrine still known as Nageshwar Nath, which is dedicated to Lord Shiva. It is also generally accepted that Vikramaditya constructed about 360 temples in and around Ayodhya. The tradition of veneration to Shri Ram has continued in the Hindu society in one form or another. The earliest known inscription to testify this fact is the Nasik cave inscription during the Satvahan dynasty. The celebrated Sanskrit dramatician Bhaas identifies Shri Ram with his Archanavataar.
Evolution of the tradition of worship of Shri Ram as an incarnation of Vishnu is evident in the early Rama-shrine inscriptions. The 4th century inscriptions at Ramtek (Madhya Pradesh), the 423 AD inscription at Kandhar (Afghanistan), the Chalukya inscriptions in 533 AD at Badami, the Mamallapuram inscriptions in the 8th century AD, Amba Maata temple near Jodhpur in 11th century AD, Ram temple at Mukundpur (Rewa, MP) in 1145 AD, Hansi inscriptions in 1168 AD, Rajiv Lochan Temple at Rajim in Raipur (Chhatisgarh) are some of them.
In 12th century, at least 5 temples existed in Ayodhya. They were, Guptahari at Gopratar-ghaat, Chadrahari at Swarga dwaar Ghaat, Vishnu hari at Chkrateerth Ghaat, Dharmahari at Swarga-dwaar Ghaat, and Vishnu temple, on what is known as the Janmbhoomi site.
Mehmood Gaznabi looted and destroyed the temple of Somnath and went back. His nephew Salar Masood advanced in the direction of Ayodhya. On 14th June 1033, Masood reached Behraich, 40 km from Ayodhya. The people united under the leadership of Raja Sohail Dev. Sohail Dev’s army attacked Masood, defeated his army and killed Masoon himself. Abdul Rahman Chishti writes in the biography of Masood, titled, “Meerat-e-Masoodi”.
“.. maut ka saamana hai, firaaq soori nazdeek hai, hinduon ne jamaav kiya hai, inka lashkar beintahaa hai, sudoor nepal se pahaadon ke neeche ghaghara tak fauz mukhalik ka padaav hai. Masood ki maut ke baad ajmer se Muzaffar Khan turant aaya par wah bhi maar diya gaya .. Arab Iraan ke har ghar ka chirag bujha hai ..”
(It is trial with death, but the destination is near. Hindus have deployed armies in huge number from faraway Nepal’s mountains to the basin of Ghaghra river, there armies stand. After the death of Masood, Muzaffar Khan came from Ajmer but he too was killed. Every house of Arab and Iran has lost a son in this battle.)
- NRI Hindus rally against Jihad in India at Indian Consulate in New York. “SAVE INDIA FROM ISLAM”.
(VIDEO) HINDUS PROTEST INDIAN CONGRESS & SHARIA LAW NYC- 5TH AVE & 64TH ST
Sept. 2, 2012. From their flyer, the reason for this rally is to protest the Indian Congress that is Anti-Hindu and Pro- Islam. “Save the Tribal Indians. Save the Hindus. Kick out Congress.” Not all of the chants were in English, but did manage to catch “Say NO to Sharia Law” There was also a “Charge Sheet against the Congress Govt. of India” that was handed out to the passersby. The organizers were The Indian American Intellectuals Forum; Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America; Hindu Human Rights Watch and Indian Heritage Foundation of Lansing, Michigan. There was very small rally in opposition to this rally that was supporting the Indian Congress.
Pictures and flyers posted here:vigilantsquirrelbrigade
HINDUS PROTEST INDIAN CONGRESS & SHARIA LAW NYC 5 AVE & 64TH ST
- Sept. 2, 2012. A protest against the Indian Congress that is Anti-Hindu and Pro-Islam.
A “Charge Sheet against the Congress Govt. of India”
“Save the Tribal Indians. Save the Hindus”. Kick out Congress.”
The organizers were The Indian American Intellectuals Forum; Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America; Hindu Human Rights Watch and Indian Heritage Foundation of Lansing, Michigan.
A very small rally in opposition was supporting the Indian Congress. An anti-Hindu counter-protest preaching ‘peace’ by forming an alliance with the “Religion of Peace”… aka Islam… and ignoring the victims cries for help.
But, the Hindu victims are NOT being ignored as these signs made very clear.
“HUMAN RIGHTS FOR ALL! NO TO SHARIA LAW in US OR INDIA!”
Link to slideshow HERE
ALSO READ/See More Pics@:
Indian Hindu Rally against Jihad at the Indian Consulate, NY: “Save India from Islam”–AtlasShrugs
“Congress Hatao, India Bachao…” — INDIAN AMERICAN HINDUS PROTEST IN NEW YORK
from: Upananda Brahmachari
date:Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM
subject:Three important Hindu News. Must see.
date: Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:46 PM
subject: REPORT ON PROTEST IN NEW YORK ON SEPTEMBER 2ND NEAR INDIAN CONSULATE AGAINST ISL
A boisterous Protest by 100 strong Indian American Hindus was organized by Indian American Intellectuals Forum in New York September 2nd near Indian Consulate to express their repugnance and revulsion against burning of Hindu villages by Bangladeshi Muslims in collusion with Muslims from Assam and West Bengal and making thousands of Hindus (Bodos) refugees in their own country.
The Protesters said that India is in danger. After Kashmir Radical Islam is taking over Assam in the North East. Jihad is spreading far and wide.
The Protesters also expressed their abhorrence at the inaction and apathy on the part of Government of India in handling the riots in Mumbai by 50,000 Muslims, who, armed with petrol cans and plastic bottles, hockey sticks, iron rods, damaged the police vans, stole their guns and ammunition, injured more than 50 policemen, molested the policewomen, burnt the City’s transport system, smashed journalists’ TV cameras, vandalized War Memorial and held the entire Mumbai City to ransom, in the broad day light.
The Protesters held responsible the ruling Congress Government of India for not taking stern action against Kashmiri Muslim militants who fought pitched battles with India’s security forces in the month of Ramadan, chopped of one Hindu teacher’s hand in Rajasthan, killed one Hindu boy in Kerala, attacked TV journalists in Lucknow, did not allow Hindus to celebrate the Birth Day of Lord Krishana (Janamashthami) in Ranchi, and in cooperation with Pakistani Muslims sent thousands of SMS messages to North East residents in Bengaluru, Pune, and Hyderabad and threatened them to leave these cities otherwise they would be killed.
Instead of punishing the perpetrators of the above mentioned crimes, Congress Government banned Hindu websites, facebook and twitter.
The Protesters also blamed the Congress Party of Sonia Gandhi for taking income from Hindu temples and giving it to Muslims to build mosques, run Madrassas and go to Mecca for Haj.
Every month 20-25 Hindu girls are abducted by Muslims, forcibly converted to Islam and married to Muslim men. The Congress Government is doing nothing to ameliorate the miserable plight of these unfortunate girls.
Half a million Kashmiri Hindus have been ethnically cleansed from the Kashmir Valley, but the Government of India is taking no action to resettle them back in the Valley.
Infiltration by Bangladeshi Muslims tantamount to an invasion of India by foreigners sponsored by Congress Party, Communist Party and supported by Jihadists in Assam and West Bengal. The aim of this insidious design is to keep Congress in power and help Muslims to Islamize India.
Mr. Tathagata Roy, an erudite scholar and former Prof. of Engineering and former President of BJP, West Bengal who was on a visit to New York was surprised to see so many Hindus protesting against Islamization of Assam and appreciated their vigor and vitality.
The Protest was supported by Mr. Gaurang Vaishanav of Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America, Mr. Satya Dosapati of Hindu Human Rights Watch, Dr. Kumar Arun of India Heritage Foundation, Lansing, Michigan and Panun Kashmir International. The unique feature of this Protest was that it was supported by non-Hindu American groups such as “Stop Islamization of America” of Pamela Geller, “Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam” of Dr. Marvin Belsky, “The United West” of Mr. Stuard Kaufman,LogansWarning@hotmail.com and several other groups.
A copy of the Memorandum addressed to the Prime Minister of India, Shri Manmohan Singh was sent by email to the Consul General of India. It will be formally sent to him by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested today.
Narendra Modi and the Muslim votebank
9 July 2012
Before, if ever, Narendra Modi becomes India’s prime minister, he will have to break the stranglehold of the Muslim votebank on Indian politics. His sadbhavna yatras (goodwill missions) to win the confidence of Muslims are good as far as they go. However, even hundreds of such yatras will not take him even an inch closer to the throne of Delhi. Hindus, and Hindus alone, can propel him to power at the Centre, if they choose to.
For BJP’s central leadership, Narendra Modi poses a dilemma: he is viewed as a great asset and also as a great liability. Modi’s popularity crossed the borders of Gujarat long ago. He emerged as a national leader on the back of resolute leadership, efficient administration and a clean image. He enjoys a good deal of support from the RSS, which in BJP is a trump card.
With ears close to the ground, easy accessibility and a sound track record of delivering on promises, Modi has acquired a measure of credibility and charisma which none of the BJP’s central leaders possess. Shivraj Singh Chauhan of Madhya Pradesh and Raman Singh of Chhattisgarh have also earned popularity on similar strengths, but neither appears to be keen, as of now, to play a leading role at the Centre. Modi is a different case. BJP bigwigs cannot ignore him or his ambitions.
However, if Modi is selected to command BJP forces in the forthcoming Lok Sabha election, many BJP leaders will have to forget their ambitions and rein in their lust for power. The pull of such lust should not be underestimated.
These leaders want Modi to campaign for the party, not only in Gujarat, but also in other states where his presence can make a difference, while expecting him to confine his own ambitions to Gujarat. Modi is unwilling to oblige them, unless he could augment his own political capital by campaigning outside Gujarat. He wants to be the commander, not a foot soldier. This subtle tug of war is slowly becoming visible and will emerge out in the open by the time of the Lok Sabha election.
It is equally certain that if BJP selects Narendra Modi as its prime ministerial candidate, it will have to forget not only about the few (if any) Muslim votes it gets, but also about allies who are mortally scared of annoying Muslim votebanks. Therein lies the rub. Barring the Akali Dal and the Shiv Sena, all other parties in the NDA are enamoured of the ‘secular’ label. The hypocrisy of leaders like Nitish Kumar is infuriating. By insisting that the NDA candidate for prime minister must have a ‘secular’ image, he is playing to the green gallery while trying to keep a powerful rival off the field. The ploy is too transparent to be missed, but, unfortunately, it threatens to work.
Muslims are naturally amused to watch the game. In their view, their security (actually, political clout) lies in keeping out of power any party or leader who enjoys any credibility – real or fake – among the Hindus. And if Hindu leaders can articulate that position for them in as many words, so much the better.
This is a decisive moment, not just for the BJP or NDA, but for Hindu society. The modern Hindu intelligentsia has failed to grasp a basic fact: clout, influence, power or authority is central to human relations. Power that is not exercised eventually wears off and vanishes. Hindu intellectuals rarely examine any issue, development or trend in terms of Hindu influence or power. For most of them, such an exercise is weird and anti-secular if not anti-national. They think it is beneath them to indulge in it. Hindu society has paid, and continues to pay, a heavy price for this failure of its intelligentsia.
In the post-independence period, Hindus have never asserted primacy of their civilisational identity at the political level. They have never claimed to be the essential national society, the fulcrum of the polity around which every institution and organization must arrange itself. In contrast, Muslims realize the centrality of power in relations with non-Muslims. They can and do use their votes as an effective political weapon. I do not criticize Muslims for doing so, just as I do not applaud Hindus for neglecting power equations in post-independence India.
Hence it is that Hindus have become political orphans in the only country they can call their own. Hence it is they are still maligned for Gujarat riots ten years after the event, while the original provocation (burning alive of 59 Hindus by a Muslim mob without any provocation) is all but forgotten. Hence it is that heartrending tales of Kashmiri pundits, who have suffered far greater atrocities for much longer, hardly ever evokes any sympathy at all from any political party – not even the BJP. Hence it is that Hindus can speak as Dalits, Adivasis, Jats, Yadavs, Kurmis, Lingayats, Reddys, Vanniars and Nairs, but not as Hindus. Hence it is that 12 per cent Muslims, without uttering a word, can frighten mighty Hindu politicians into rejecting anyone with Hindu credentials…
In the pre-independence period, a con game was played in the name of nationalism. Only that party, that leader was national (and could speak for the whole country) which was not opposed by the Muslim League. In this reckoning, the Congress was an organization of Hindu banias, but the Communist Party of India was a national organization. After independence, the same game is played in the name of secularism. Only that party, that leader, that programme or proposal is secular which is not opposed by Muslims. The name has changed, participants have changed, but the game remains unchanged. And so does its objective: to keep the Hindus on the defensive.
How history repeats itself! Congress is now saying about BJP whatever Jinnah used to say about Congress in 1940s: that it is a party of Hindu banias, that Muslims can never expect justice from it, that if it ever came to power then Muslims will have to fear for their lives and so on. Again the object is the same: to use Muslims as political pawns to delegitimize and checkmate nationalist sentiments.
Narendra Modi has the power to break this game. Without a single Muslim vote, without making any special or specific gesture to Muslims, he has swept assembly elections, not once, but twice, in Gujarat. He has demonstrated that if Hindus stand solidly behind any leader, he does not have to flatter Muslims. This is why he is regarded as a mortal enemy by most Muslims, all brokers of Muslim votes, and all parties hankering after the Muslim votebank.
If Modi can replicate at the national level what he has done in Gujarat, it will decisively break the stranglehold of Muslim votebanks on Indian politics, breathe a new self-confidence in Hindu society and force a rethink among Hindu politicians in non-BJP parties. Muslims will become just one of the many groups in Indian politics and thus join the national mainstream.
Whether Modi is interested in attempting this feat, whether BJP will give him an opportunity to make such an attempt is, of course, another matter. His sadbhavna yatras have aroused speculation that he, too, may be craving acceptability among circles that want BJP to shed every trace of Hinduness. As to BJP, it does not deserve a single Hindu vote as of now as a party of Hindu nationalism. But that does not affect the position outlined in the earlier passages.
If the BJP really regards itself as a party of Indian nationalism, it should distance itself from those hankering after the 12 per cent votebank and announce Narendra Modi as its prime ministerial candidate for 2014 Lok Sabha election.
The author is Executive Editor, Corporate India, and lives in Mumbai
HC’s go-ahead for probe into doctored affidavits of Teesta
Ahmedabad, 11 July, 2011
Teesta with husband Javed
The Gujarat High Court Monday gave the go-ahead to police investigation into filing of ‘doctored’affidavits by controversial NGO operator Teesta (Javed) Setalvad on behalf of victims of the 2002riots before various courts.
A single judge bench of Justice M.R. Shah rejected a petition filed by the registrar of a sessions court challenging the order of a magisterial court, which entrusted a probe against former aide of Teesta Setalvad, Rais Khan, and others, to the police.
Khan, formerly associated with Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), had confessed before the various forums and court that he and Setalwad had fabricated affidavits and statements of the riot victims and submitted them before the lower courts and Supreme Court.
Taking cognizance of these, designated judge of Naroda Gam massacre case, S.H. Vora, had asked the registrar of the city civil and sessions court to file a complaint before the magisterial court against Khan and others.
A metropolitan magistrate had subsequently directed the police to probe the case and file a report in 30 days.
However, the registrar sought the high court’s intervention on this, by terming proceedings initiated by the magistrate as ‘erroneous’.
Justice Shah accepted special public prosecutor J.M. Panchal’s arguments.
Panchal, who appeared for the state, had submitted that the magistrate’s order was just, proper and legal.
He submitted that the magistrate had the jurisdiction to order the investigation.
Khan had claimed that the false affidavits of those witnesses and many other victims of the 2002 riot cases were prepared at behest of Setalvad to get the trial shifted outside Gujarat.
He requested the court to summon him as a witness under provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure to prove that the witnesses had falsely implicated him and had lied before the court.
Express news service Posted: Tue Jul 12 2011, 03:17 hrsNew Delhi:
The Supreme Court on Monday sought an explanation from the Delhi Police regarding the midnight crackdown at a camp organised by yoga guru Baba Ramdev against corruption. The court also questioned the need for resorting to teargas shells and lathi-charge in a closed enclosure, where people were sleeping.
A bench of Justices B S Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar asked for responses from the Delhi Home Secretary and the Delhi Police, while posting the case for hearing on July 25.
Referring to Ramdev’s reply in support of his claim that a yoga camp was on at Ramlila Maidan, the bench observed that there are documents and DVDs to show that yoga was undertaken.
The court said it may even view over 30 hard disks of footage to help determine what really happened at the site.
Ramdev had, in his reply, blamed Home Minister P Chidambaram for the entire incident, saying the decision to arrest him was taken well in advance. The yoga guru asked the court to issue a notice to the Home Minister personally.
While the court asked for a reply from the Home ministry, no clarification has been sought from Chidambaram personally.
The government had said that instead of a mass-yoga class for 5,000 people, for which the permission was sought, there were close to 65,000 people present on the grounds.
Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, appearing for Ramdev, said a detailed response was required from the police on why they used water-cannons and teargas, putting Ramdev’s followers at the Maidan in harm’s way. He termed the police action as “murder of democracy”.