Category Archives: Mockery of Democracy
Such gruesome news want me to puke. Are we a democracy or a collection of feudal fiefdoms isn’t there any rule of law? And we aspire to be a superpower? Since the woman that was executed and her lover, both were Muslims, it stands to reason that the Panchayat of the town was also Muslim because no Hindu Panchayat would dare to convict or execute a Muslim. Then the question arises, are Muslims a law unot themselves? is this Sharia in action?
Police begin investigation to punish the culprits
- By Lata Rani, Correspondent
- Published: 17:02 December 4, 2012
The incident occurred at Asiyani village in Purnia district, more than 300 kilometre east of Patna, the capital of Bihar state, at the weekend but was reported by the local media only on Tuesday.
Media reports said the local Tiyarpara village panchayat took a serious notice of the “offence” after it was informed that the 32-year-old Bibi Shahzadi, a mother of three, was having extra-marital affair with a local youth. The victim’s husband works in a factory in Ludhiana (Punjab).
Soon after the matter became public, the village panchayat tried the victim at its court, and after finding her guilty of “illicit relationship”, sentenced her to death. Subsequently, she was beaten to death at the village court in the presence of local villagers as no one dared to protest. “She was executed in public but no one dared to oppose”, a local villager who witnessed the horrible scene told the local media.
Locals said the victim was an educated woman with a Maulvi degree (equivalent to intermediate degree) who had been helping the impoverished women by running a self-help group for them. Her group was imparting the poor women training in sewing and weaving to make them self-reliant.
Taking the matter seriously, the local police have ordered an investigation into the case to bring the culprits to book.
“We are investigating the case and culprits will not be spared at any cost,” the additional district superintendent of police, Purnia, Deepak Barnwal, who has been given charge of investigation, said on Tuesday.
The development comes close on the heels of another such diktat issued by another village council in the neighbouring Kishanganj district, who have declared to impose a heavy penalty on women found talking over mobile phones on the streets. In this case too, the local administration has begun investigation and declared to punish the “culprits” trying to enforce such orders on the villagers.
Muslim thinker: Government should withdraw Haj subsidy
Last updated on: October 30, 2012 23:41 IST
‘Politicians make hundreds of promises, many of them false, to trap Muslims,’ Abusaleh Shariff, member, Rajinder Sachar Committee, tells Rediff.com‘s Faisal Kidwai.
“Many Muslims are illiterate and don’t understand the political system, they get trapped,” says Abusaleh Shariff, member, Rajinder Sachar Committee.
Shariff, who is also president, Centre for Research and Debates in Development Policy, New Delhi [ Images ] and chief scholar of the US-India Policy Institute, Washington DC, tells Rediff.com‘s Faisal Kidwai why he believes Muslims are shortchanged in India [ Images ].
When it comes to social and economic development, are Muslims in India behind other communities?
The Muslims are behind almost all other communities in India. In some areas, such as education and employment, Muslims are even worse than Dalits.
What are some of the major reasons for the Muslims’ underdevelopment?
There are many reasons. First, many of them live in rural areas where services such as schools and job opportunities are not that easily accessible.
Second, even those Muslims who live in cities live in slums and in the periphery of the city. They are confined to their own neighbourhoods and areas where public services are not provided as much as required.
So, if enough public services are provided to Muslim-concentration areas, their economic situation will improve. But this does not mean that services should not be provided to areas that are non-Muslim majority areas. We need broad-based parallel policies to address this lack of services.
If there are more schools, hospitals, etc, in their areas, then they will be more involved and will be in a better position to compete.
There are three charges that are levelled against Muslims: They are pampered by politicians (b) they get a huge Haj subsidy and (c) they have more children than others. What’s your view on these accusations?
Politicians want to use Muslims as vote banks. It’s a trick they play to use them.
Politicians make hundreds of promises, many of them false, to trap the Muslims and, since many Muslims are illiterate and don’t understand the political system, they get trapped.
I am a secular person and believe that the government should not have any role in any religion.
The Haj subsidy is a trap used by politicians to curry Muslim votes. As per Islam, only those people who can afford it should perform Haj.
The Haj subsidy is a form of interference by the government in religion; it should withdraw the subsidy.
The issue of population growth is as old as Independence. At the time of Independence, the fertility rate was high among all communities, including Muslims, Hindus and even Christians; the rate among Muslims was only marginally higher.
During the past 60 years, the fertility rate has dropped across all communities; it has also fallen for Muslims.
In fact, recent data shows that the drop in rate has been higher among Muslims than in any other community.
The birth rate has nothing to do with religion; it has to do with culture. Muslims are also part of the grand Indian culture and they are also changing with the culture.
Are you seeing more Muslims getting educated and coming into the mainstream?
Muslims have similar aspirations as any other community. They want their children to get educated, to move up in the economic chain and become part of the political system. They have same ambitions and aspirations as anybody in India.
It’s wrong to say that they are not interested in development. I have no reason to believe that Muslims are less patriotic than any other community.
Go to the rural areas in Uttar Pradesh [ Images ]. You will see that the Muslims there want education for their children, but the government has failed to construct schools and colleges.
Instead of constructing schools and colleges, the government is providing for madrassas and modernisation of madrassas. This is wrong because madrassas are religious institutions and the government should not play any role in them.
Religious schools like madrassas create segregation and that is bad for Muslims and the country.
The Web site of the ministry of human resources talks only about madrassa modernisation in the name of Muslims; the government should do better than that.
Don’t you think the Muslims too are to be blamed for their present situation?
The Constitution has provided certain guarantees. It’s the government’s job to provide primary education and healthcare.
Take immunisation, for instance. The government has to provide immunisation not only to Muslims, but to all people. It has to bring the immunisation programme to everybody.
The government has to create awareness and sensitise and inform people instead of blaming Muslims or saying that Muslims are not interested. It has to make them participatory, a stakeholder in the programme. This is true for every community.
The Dalits were backward, but the government created educational and employment programmes for them. Now, the Dalits are in a much better socio-economic position than they were a couple of decades ago.
Providing basic services is the duty of the government. If the government is discharging its duties properly, then we do not need special programmes or reservations for Dalits or anybody.
The failure to provide services shows that the government is discriminatory against Muslims and, by government, I mean the system.
Photograph courtesy: Abusaleh Shariff
Courtesy: Rediff News September 06. 2012
By Seema Mustafa
The Washington Post in its story ‘India’s ‘silent’ prime minister becomes a tragic figure’ with the headline saying it all, is really a repetition of what has been appearing in sections of the Indian media for years now. There is little new in the report that has sent ripples of consternation down the government and the Congress party hierarchy, except for the fact that the American media has finally decided to end the honeymoon with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [ Images ] in recognition of the fact that his honeymoon with the Indian middle class ended a long time ago.
Dr Singh does cut a sorry figure as he sits motionless, and expressionless, through the Parliament sessions and has more and more started appearing as a leader who has given up, or one should say given in. Nothing seems to move him, and the post of the prime minister has, in the process, been reduced to levels never seen before.
He does not meet people any more, he barely travels within India [ Images ], and seems unaware that he is sitting on top of one of the most corrupt governments this country has ever seen. Scam after scam rolls by without the weak doctor blinking an eyelid, as the government remains unaccountable and the institutions of democracy shake under the pressure.
The government’s response to the newspaper report is again a case of over-reaction, as surely it cannot be anyone’s case here that the media cannot write freely and independently. Particularly the world media that follows its own laws, and clearly perceives the prime minister to be far from functioning. The fuss, and the strong reactions seeking an apology from the Washington Post, arises from several factors, and unfortunately, none of them complimentary to the UPA government.
One, the report that is really a repetition of all the Indian media has said several times before hurts only because it is from theWashington Post. And this government cares more about the opinion there, than the opinion here as has been demonstrated over and over again by Dr Singh and his cabinet cronies before, and since, the India US civilian nuclear energy agreement. In short, it hurts and the government is finding it difficult to ignore it as it does the Indian media.
Two, the Post report also reflects the inability of this government and the ruling party to introspect. Instead of taking the criticism on board, and taking measures to revive the sagging image of the prime minister, the government and the Congress party have emerged fists flying in the belief that this will work in silencing the ‘opposition.’
It is not as the Washington Post, unlike the big media here, might not be as easily retract what it has reported as it has little to lose. And for every one report there will be several such reports as these cats, when out of the bag, have a tendency to multiply with increasing rapidity.
“ but as the image of the scrupulously honourable, humble and intellectual technocrat has slowly given way to a completely different one: a dithering, ineffectual bureaucrat presiding over a deeply corrupt government,” read the Washington Post report, brutal and frank in its assessment.
What it does not add is that the bureaucrat seems to have given up, as Dr Singh gives a pretty good demonstration of the civil servant who, pulled in all directions, is resigned to being a dummy. He does not have the politician’s courage to strike out for whatever he believes in, and seems to have resigned himself to servility on the one front, and abject inertia on the other.
In the process he has become the Washington Post headline, silent and tragic, more so perhaps for those who had expected great things from him at one point in time.
Those who have worked closely with Dr Singh when he was just a bureaucrat decades ago seem to have a better judgment of his personality and character. And see him as a bureaucrat who has managed to work the system to his advantage. His apparent humility has made him a favourite of the politician who are not threatened by his presence, and impressed by his knowledge. Unfortunately these qualities do not work for a prime minister who is required, and expected, to lead from the front and steer the complicated ship to some level of governance.
It is true that his cabinet colleagues are more loyal and responsive to their respective party presidents than to him. But surely it was for Dr Singh to crack the whip. He failed to do so, and now cannot really sit back and cry about the fact that no one listens to him. If that is true, as it appears to be, the prime minister should resign with the admission that he is not fit for the job assigned to him. He and his party must realise that there cannot be a government of any merit, without a prime minister to guide it. And a leader who believes in sitting it out, under a party that feels less threatened if he does exactly that, is not going to be able to manage this complex country, in or outside Parliament.
Governance is not about clever tricks, and the Manish Tiwari kind of rhetoric. These cannot replace decisions and action, but unfortunately this is all that seems to be happening. The flurry of activity over the Washington Post report is precisely this, a great deal of noise from empty vessels who are scared of introspection, and hence a recognition of the hollowness within. Thus, it is always better to beat the messenger in the hope that his news dies with him. It does not work, but then the Congress party and its government is too self absorbed to realise this.
Happy Teacher’s Day
Truth is out. Manmohan Singh, i.e., MMS is a spineless politician, covering up for his corrupt ministers and serving as a hand-maiden of Madam Supremo. Bharatiya media in the pay of Congress would not dare to write this, so here is an American journalist who tells it all. Do not forget to read PMO’s whining letter to Washington Post and a rejoinder by the newspaper.
India’s ‘silent’ prime minister becomes a tragic figure
Punit Paranjpe/AFP/Getty Images – Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s second term in office has been damaged by corruption scandals and policy paralysis.
By Simon Denyer, Published: September 4
NEW DELHI — India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh helped set his country on the path to modernity, prosperity and power, but critics say the shy, soft-spoken 79-year-old is in danger of going down in history as a failure.
The architect of India’s economic reforms, Singh was a major force behind his country’s rapprochement with the United States and is a respected figure on the world stage. President Obama’s aides used to boast of his tremendous rapport and friendship with Singh.
But the image of the scrupulously honorable, humble and intellectual technocrat has slowly given way to a completely different one: a dithering, ineffectual bureaucrat presiding over a deeply corrupt government.
Every day for the past two weeks, India’s Parliament has been adjourned as the opposition bays for Singh’s resignation over allegations of waste and corruption in the allocation of coal-mining concessions.
The story of Singh’s dramatic fall from grace in his second term in office and the slow but steady tarnishing of his reputation has played out in parallel with his country’s decline on his watch. As India’s economy has slowed and as itsreputation for rampant corruption has reasserted itself, the idea that the country was on an inexorable road to becoming a global power has increasingly come into question.
“More and more, he has become a tragic figure in our history,” said political historian Ramachandra Guha, describing a man fatally handicapped by his “timidity, complacency and intellectual dishonesty.”
The irony is that Singh’s greatest selling points — his incorruptibility and economic experience — are the mirror image of his government’s greatest failings.
Under Singh, economic reforms have stalled, growth has slowed sharply and therupee has collapsed. But just as damaging to his reputation is the accusation that he looked the other way and remained silent as his cabinet colleagues filled their own pockets.
In the process, he transformed himself from an object of respect to one of ridicule and endured the worst period in his life, said Sanjaya Baru, Singh’s media adviser during his first term.
Attendees at meetings and conferences were jokingly urged to put their phones into “Manmohan Singh mode,” while one joke cited a dentist urging the seated prime minister, “At least in my clinic, please open your mouth.”
Singh finally did open his mouth last week, to rebut criticism from the government auditor that the national treasury had been cheated of billions of dollars after coal-mining concessions were granted to private companies for a pittance — including during a five-year period when Singh doubled as coal minister.
Singh denied that there was “any impropriety,” but he was drowned out by catcalls when he attempted to address Parliament on the issue. His brief statement to the media afterward appeared to do little to change the impression of a man whose aloofness from the rough-and-tumble of Indian politics has been transformed from an asset into a liability.
“It has been my general practice not to respond to motivated criticism directed personally at me,” he said. “My general attitude has been, ‘My silence is better than a thousand answers; it keeps intact the honor of innumerable questions.’ ”
Singh probably will survive calls for his resignation, but the scandal represents a new low in a reputation that has been sinking for more than a year.
‘I have to do my duty’
Singh was born in 1932 into a small-time trader’s family in a village in what is now Pakistan, walking miles to school every day and studying by the light of a kerosene lamp. The family moved to India shortly before partition of the subcontinent in 1947, and Singh pleaded with his father to be allowed to continue with his studies rather than join the dry-fruit trade.
A series of scholarships allowed Singh to continue those studies first at Cambridge and then at Oxford, where he completed a PhD. Marriage was arranged with Gursharan Kaur in 1958; they have three daughters.
A successful career in the bureaucracy followed, but it was in 1991 that Singh was thrust into the spotlight as finance minister amid a financial crisis.
With little choice, Singh introduced a series of policies that freed the Indian economy from suffocating state control and unleashed the dynamism of its private sector.
More than a decade later, in 2004, Singh again found himself on center stage, becoming in his own words an “accidental prime minister.”
The Congress party led by Italian-born Sonia Gandhi had surprised many people by winning national elections that year, but she sprang an even bigger surprise by renouncing the top job and handing it to Singh.
In him she saw not only the perfect figurehead for her government but also a man of unquestioning loyalty, party insiders say, someone she could both trust and control.
“I’m a small person put in this big chair,” Singh told broadcaster Charlie Rose in 2006. “I have to do my duty, whatever task is allotted of me.”
From the start, it was clear that Sonia Gandhi held the real reins of power. The Gandhi family has ruled India for most of its post-
independence history and enjoys an almost cultlike status within the Congress party. Sonia’s word was destined to remain law.
But Singh made his mark during his first term in office, standing up to opposition from his coalition partners and from within his own party to push through a civil nuclear cooperation deal with the United States in 2008, a landmark agreement that ended India’s nuclear isolation after its weapons tests in 1974 and 1998.
It was a moment that almost brought his government down, an issue over which he offered to resign. While no electricity has yet flowed from that pact, it marked a major step forward in India’s relations with the United States.
The Congress-led coalition went on to win a second term in 2009, in what many people saw as a mandate for Singh.
The 2009 election “was a victory for him, but he did not step up to claim it — maybe because he is too academic, maybe because he is too old,” said Tushar Poddar, managing director at Goldman Sachs in Mumbai. “That lack of leadership, that lack of boldness, lack of will — that really shocked us. That really shocked foreign investors.”
‘He suffers from doubts’
In a series of largely off-the-
record conversations, friends and colleagues painted a picture of a man who felt undermined by his own party and who sank into depression and self-pity.
His one attempt in 1999 to run for a parliamentary seat from a supposedly safe district in the capital, New Delhi, had ended in ignominious defeat. His failure to contest a parliamentary seat in 2009, making him the only Indian prime minister not to have done so, further undermined both his confidence, his friends and colleagues say, and his standing in the eyes of the party.
Congress, insiders say, never accepted that the 2009 election was a mandate for Singh and jealously resented the idea that he could be seen to be anywhere near as important as a Gandhi. Rahul, Sonia’s son, was being groomed to take over from Singh, and the prime minister needed to be cut down to size.
He soon was openly criticized by his own party over attempts to continue a peace process with Pakistan despite the 2008 attack on Mumbai by Pakistani militants.
Singh became even more quiet at his own cabinet meetings, to the point of not speaking up for the sort of economic changes many thought he ought to be championing.
“His gut instincts are very good, but sometimes he suffers from doubts about the political feasibility, about getting things done,” said Jagdish N. Bhagwati, a Columbia University professor who has been friends with Singh since their Cambridge days.
Singh will go down in history as India’s first Sikh prime minister and the country’s third-longest-serving premier, but also as someone who did not know when to retire, Guha said.
“He is obviously tired, listless, without energy,” he said. “At his time of life, it is not as though he is going to get a new burst of energy. Things are horribly out of control and can only get worse for him, for his party and for his government.”
Now See PMO’s whining and apt reply by Washington Post’s Journalist:
Indian prime minister’s office responds to Washington Post’s profile on Manmohan Singh
The office of India’s prime minister objected to The Washington Post’s front-page article, published Sept. 5, 2012, on Manmohan Singh’s evolution as a leader.
The following is a letter from the Prime Minister’s office:
We do not complain about criticism of the government which is a journalist’s right. But I am writing this letter for pointing out unethical and unprofessional conduct at your part.
I would like to put on record my complaint about your article which was published today on many counts:
— Despite all lines of conversations open, you never got in touch with us for our side of the story though you regularly talk to me about information from the PMO. This story thus becomes totally one sided.
— You have been telling the media here in India that your request for an interview was declined though the mail below says clearly that the interview was declined “till the Monsoon Session” of the Parliament which gets over in two days.
— When I rang you up to point this out, you said sorry twice though you tell the media here that you never apologised.
— Your website where we could have posted a reply is still not working, 11 hours after you said sorry the third time for its inaccessibility.
— The former Media Adviser to the PM Dr Sanjaya Baru has complained that you “rehashed and used” an 8 month old quote from an Indian Magazine.
We expected better from the correspondent of the Washington Post for fair and unbiased reporting.
Without going into your one sided assessment of the Prime Minister’s performance, as comment is free in journalism, I hope you will carry this communication in full in your paper and your website so your readers can judge for themselves what is the truth.
Communications Adviser to the Prime Minister’s Office
New Delhi – India
Below is a response to the letter from Simon Denyer, author of the article and our India bureau chief:
— I requested an interview with the PM on three occasions, and also with T.K.A Nair, Advisor to the Prime Minister, and with Pulok Chatterji, Principal Secretary in the Prime Minister’s Office. Those requests were either ignored or declined.
— When I made my final request for an interview with the PM in July, I was told on July 30 “The PM has declined all interview requests till the Monsoon session is over.” At that stage the current session of parliament (known as the Monsoon session) of parliament had not even begun. There was no mention of the possibility of an interview afterwards. In any case my story touches on the fact that parliament has been adjourned every day throughout the current session by opposition calls for the PM to resign, which is a story I felt should be told, interview or not.
Indeed, we remain extremely interested in speaking to the prime minister.
— My apology was for the fact that the website was down and the PM’s office could not post a reply directly. As soon as the problem was fixed, I informed them. I stand by the story.
— I spoke to Dr Baru personally on the telephone during the reporting for the story. He confirmed that these sentiments were accurate.
- 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.
June 29, 2012
Defining ‘Secular’: The war rages on
It was Nitish Kumar who lit the fuse on the amorphous word this time. He did that last week by warning that his party, the Janata Dal (United) would accept only a ‘secular’ prime minister. His target was clearly Narendra Modi, said to be the likely choice of the BJP for that post. Why the Bihar CM’s bouncer to his ally BJP should have been bowled at the time it was is a separate subject for debate.
The issue is that Kumar was wrong in not realising that:
Even after 10 years of investigations, Narendra Modi is still innocent of the charge of being personally responsible for the post Godhra riots of 2002. Even Supreme Court judge Ajit Pasayat, (now retired), who orally alluded to ‘Nero fiddling while Rome burnt’ during a hearing on Godhra did not have evidence to put down that remark in his written judgment.
Amidst the decade-old demonisation of Modi unleashing a ‘Genocide’ against Muslims, nobody has explained why, of the total 1044 killed in those riots, 254 were Hindus.
Modi fielded 247 Muslim candidates on the BJP card in Gujarat’s civic elections of October 2010, and, more unbelievably, 118 of them were victorious. Would a ‘communal’ chief minister do that ‘secular’ act?
Even after Indira Gandhi got the word ‘Secular’ into the Preamble of the Constitution of India with the 42nd Constitution Amendment Act, 1976, our nation is not secular. Take a look below
‘Dr Ambedkar made it clear in Parliament that he did not believe our Constitution was secular because it allowed different treatment to various communities and the legislatures could frame separate laws for different communities.’ (‘Reforming The Constitution’ UBS Publishers Distributors Ltd, 1992, edited by Subhash C Kashyap, an eminent Constitutional authority.)
In the above book, Kashyap writes, ‘Where there is discrimination between man and man on the grounds of religions… where the administration of places of worship can be entrusted to Government Officers… where even fundamental rights are demanded and conceded on grounds of communities, it is a cruel joke to talk of secularism.’
The Indian nation as a whole is itself not ‘secular.’ Unknown to almost our entire political class, the Preamble of the separate Jammu and Kashmir State Constitution, November 1956, does not proclaim J&K State as a ‘Secular’ State, courtesy Article 370.
Come now to Mohan Bhagwat, the RSS chief who was provoked by Kumar’s remark to talk of dharmanirpeksh. He too was wrong in not realising that the word dharmanirpeksh does not denote the adjective ‘secular.’ The exact Hindi word for ‘secular’ is panthnirpeksha, coined, at the behest of Indira Gandhi, by Lakshmi Mall Singhvi, (1931-2007), a literary figure and an altogether very versatile personality who was awarded the Padma Bhushan in 1998… He said the word ‘secular’ should more appropriately be translated as panthnirpeksh. He argued that dharma, the fundamental duty, is the foundation ethic of the Indian nation and of every walk of life, and the very foundation for the section called Fundamental Duties of Citizens being part of Mrs Gandhi’s Constitutional amendment. Panth, on the other hand, meant religion. That is how the word panthnirpeksh to denote ‘secular’ got into the Hindi version of the Preamble of our Constitution. It is, therefore, a shame that dharm continues to appear in Articles 15, 16 and 25 of our Constitution’s Hindi version with regard to ‘Prohibition of discrimination…,’ ‘Equality of opportunity…’ and ‘Right to freedom of Religion’ respectively in the English version.
Below is another true story.
In 1977, the Janata Party government introduced a Constitution Amendment Bill wherein one clause sought to define the word ‘Secular’ as ‘equal respect for all religions.’ The proposal was passed in the Lok Sabha where the newly elected Janata Party was dominant, but was rejected by the Congress majority in the Rajya Sabha.
The Congress should no longer object to that definition suggested 34 years ago. Why? Because in a lecture delivered on June 9, 2007, at the Nexus Institute, The Hague, Sonia Gandhi herself proclaimed that ‘India is a secular country. The term secularism means equal respect for all religions.’
Let me end with a poser. A political party represented in our Parliament from 1952 till now says in its website that among its aims is ‘To secure and protect the rights and interests of the Muslims and other minorities in the state.’ Which is that party? And can it be labelled as ‘secular?’
Published Date: Jun 29, 2012
SIT report uncovers the murky world of anti-Modi cottage industry, where cops, journalists, NGOs, politicians are in nexus
(our Thanks to DeshGujarat.com and Japan Pathak)
Ahmedabad, 9 May 2012
In its closure report, the Special Investigation Team (SIT) has clearly expressed an opinion that “certain vested interests including Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, different NGOs, and some political leaders were trying to use honorable Supreme Court/SIT as a forum for settling their scores”. The SIT has in its report noted that “Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been colluding with the persons with vested interests to see that some kind of charge-sheet is filed against Shri Narendra Modi and others.” The report has quoted some email communications of Sanjiv Bhatt that clearly make a point that Bhatt had attempted to influence Amicas Curiae through NGOs, media campaign and pressure groups.
The SIT in it report says: Government of Gujarat vide its letter dated 22-6-2011 forwarded a set of emails exchanged between Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, DIG, Gujarat Police and certain individuals during April and May 2011. It was mentioned in the above letter that during the course of an inquiry instituted against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, IPS by DG (Civil Defense), Gujarat regarding misuse of official resources, some revelations have been made having direct bearing on the cases being monitored by SIT. The material forwarded by Govt. of Gujarat has been scrutinized and the salient features of the same are summarized as below:
(1) That top Congress leaders of Gujarat namely Shri Shaktisinh Gohil, Leader of Opposition in Gujarat Legislative Assembly and Shri Arjun Modhwadia, President of Gujarat Pradesh Congress Committee are in constant touch with Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, DIG. They are providing him ‘packages’, certain materials and also legal assistance. Further, on 28-04-2011 Shri Sanjiv Bhatt exchanged mails with Shri Shaktisinh Gohil and the former gave point for arguments in honorable Supreme Court matter, allegations to be made against the members of SIT and to establish that the burning of a coach of a Sabarmati Express at Godhra railway station was not a conspiracy. From the emails, it appears that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was holding personal meetings with senior mentions that he was ‘under exploited’ by the lawyer representing Congress before Nanavati Commission of inquiry.
2. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been persuading various NGOs and other interested groups to influence the Ld. Amicus Curiae and the honorable Supreme Court of India by using ‘media card’ and ‘pressure groups’.
3. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been exchanging emails with one Nasir Chippa and in the email dated 11-5-2011 Shri Bhatt has stated that he (Nasir Chipa) should try to mobilize support/pressure-groups in Delhi to influence Ld. Amicus Curiae Shri Raju Ramchandran in a very subtle manner. In another email dated 18-5-2011, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had requested Shri Nasir Chippa to influence Home Minister Shri P.Chidambaram through pressure groups in U.S. It is believed that Shri Nasir Chippa has strong U.S. connections and his family stays there.
4. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt arranged an appeal from Shri M.Hassan Jowher, who runs a so called NGO titled SPRAT(Society for Promoting Rationality) to Amicus Curiae on 13-5-2011, to call Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, IPS, Shri Rajnish Rai, IPS, Shri Satish Verma, IPS, Shri Kuldeep Sharma, IPS and Shri Rahul Sharma, IPS (all police officers of Gujarat) to tender their version of the Gujarat story. It may be mentioned here that the draft for the said appeal was sent by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt himself to Shri Jowher, Further, a copy of this mail was circulated by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt to Ms. Shabnam Hashmi, Ms. Teesta Setalwad, Shri Himanshu Thakker, journalist, Shri Leo Saldana, journalist and Shri Nasir Chippa to encourage the prominent persons/organizations to write to Amicus Curiae on the similar lines so as to pressurize him.
5. In emails exchanged on June 1, 2011 between Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and Shri M.H.Jowher, it was proposed that a PIL may be field through a lawyer named Shri K.Vakharia( a senior advocate and chairman of legal cell of Congress party in Gujarat) in the Gujarat High Court for providing security to Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. It was also proposed that another complaint may be filed with the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad city against Shri Narendra Modi and others for his alleged involvement in 2002 riots which would be taken to appropriate judicial forums in due course.
6.That Ms. Teesta Setalwad, her lawyer Shri Mihir Desai and Journalist Shri Manoj Mitta of Times of India were in constant touch with Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, IPS and were instrumental in arranging / drafting of the affidavit for filing the same in honorable Supreme court. Vide email dated 10-4-2011, Shri Bhatt solicited “Co-ordinates” from Ms. Teesta Setalwad, who had also arranged for a meeting with her lawyer Shri Mihir Desai at Ellis bridge Gymkhana, Ahmedabad. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt sent the first draft of his proposed affidavit to Shri Manoj Mitta on 13-4-2011, after meeting Shri Mihir Desai, Advocate and invited his suggestions. Shri Manoj Mitta advised Shri Sanjiv Bhatt to incorporate a few more paragraphs drafted by him which were incorporated by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt in his final affidavit sent to honorable Supreme Court of India as suggested by Shri Mitta.
7. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was instrumental in arranging an affidavit of one Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary, a journalist, to corroborate his claim that he had gone to attend a meeting called by the Chief Minister at his residence in the night of 27-2-2002. Significantly, Shri Bhatt had sent his mobile phone details of 27-2-2002 to Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary and had also suggested that probable timings of his meeting to Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary on 15-5-2011. Simultaneously, these details were sent to Ms. Teesta Setalwad on 16-5-2011, for drafting the document, presumably the affidavit to be filed by Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt sent an email to Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary that the said affidavit could be leaked out to the print media which would force the Amicus Curiae and honorable Supreme Court to take notice of the same. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt also sent another email to Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary, in which he has stated that they should play the ‘media trick’ so that affidavit is taken seriously by Amicus Curiae and the honorable Supreme Court.
8. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been exchanging emails with one Leo Saldana, a Narmada Bachao Andolan activist, with a view to mobilize public opinion in their favor. On 1-5-2011, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had sent an email to the latter to the effect that what they needed to do at this stage was to create a situation, where it would be difficult for three judges Supreme Court bench to disregard the ‘shortcomings of SIT under stewardship of Mr. Raghavan’ and that the pressure groups and opinion makers in Delhi could be of great help in forwarding the cause. He has further stated in the mail that he was hopeful that things would start turning around from the next hearing, if proper pressure was maintained at national level.
9.That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was trying to contact Shri K.S.Subramanyam, a retired IPS officer, through Shri Nasir Chippato make an affidavit supporting his stand with a view to convince the Amicus Curiae and through him the honorable Supreme Court of India that Shri K.Chakravarthi, former DGP of Gujarat, was a liar.
10. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been taking advice of Ms. Teesta Setalwad in connection with his evidence before Nanavati Commission of inquiry. He had also been in touch with various journalists, NGOs and had been forwarding his representations, applications and other documents through email, whereas on the other side he had been claiming privilege that being an intelligence officer he was duty bound not to disclose anything unless, he was legally compelled to do so.
11. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been maintaining a close contact with Shri Rahul Sharma, DIG of Gujarat Police and had been getting his mobile phone calls analyzed with a view to ascertain his own movements of 27-2-2002. This shows that Bhatt does not recollect his movements on that day. He has also been trying to ascertain the movements of Late Haren Pandya, the then minister of state for Revenue on 27-2-2002, with a view to introduce him as a participant of the meeting of 27-2-2002 held at CM’s residence, but could not do so, as Shri Rahul Sharma had informed him after the analysis that there was absolutely no question of Late Haren Pandya being at Gandhinagar on 27-2-2002 night.
From the study of emails, it appears that certain vested interests including Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, different NGOs, and some political leaders were trying to use honorable Supreme Court/SIT as a forum for settling their scores.This would also go to show that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been colluding with the persons with vested interests to see that some kind of charge-sheet is filed against Shri Narendra Modi and others.
Elected Chief Minister’s Visa is not private matter Mr. Consul General
File photo:Consul General Peter Haas with Gujaratis at Mumbai consulate
By DeshGujarat News, Ahmedabad, 20 March 2012
Again US Consul General was in Gujarat, and again he was asked a question about Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s Visa issue, and again he had the same answer that “we don’t comment on personal visa matters.”
Once upon a time there was a practice that American Consul Generals would meet Gujarat Chief Minister during their Gujarat visit, but for last some years Modi doesn’t give time to meet US Consul Generals and divert them to meet the Chief Secretary. Present Consul General Peter Haas is not exception.
While Chinese, Japanese and other consulate officials can meet the Chief Minister of Gujarat, the American Consul General are avoided, thanks to America’s policy of succumbing to pressure and propaganda of leftist anti-Indian groups lobbying against Narendra Modi in America.
“Its a long-standing US policy… We do not comment on private visa matters,” Haas said when asked if there was any change in the US policy with regard to granting of visa to Modi.
(Mr. Haas should know that it could be private visa matter for America, but for Gujarat, Mr. Modi is not a person living private life but he is in public life. He is the Chief Minister of a state, elected by over five crore people)
Talking about relations between US and Gujarat, Haas said that there was good cooperation and many American companies have set up plant in the state.
The relationship of US with Gujarat can be judged on the basis that Gujarati was the first Indian regional language to be included in the US Census, he said.
During his last visit to Ahmedabad, Mr. Haas was asked that while people to people relations are excellent, and trade relations between America and Gujarat are in the best time-phase at present, why government level relations are sour, and what America wants to do in this regard? Haas had replied that question, saying that he met the Chief Secretary of the state, and people to people relations were more important.
While Mr. Modi’s stature is growing nationally and internationally, America is likely to face major embarrassment over Visa issue in future. Such embarrassment is always visible on Consul General’s face when he faces question on Modi’s Visa issue.
It is other thing that nobody is dying to go to America and Modi had not demanded visa, but the way America behaved on Modi’s Visa issue under the pressure of few vocal groups in 2005 and then-after, funnily in the name of ‘human right violation’, it is neither forgettable nor forgivable, at least when it comes to state-state relations.
The US Consul General during his Ahmedabad visit, went to a residential colony of 2002 riot affected Muslims and also met Archbishop in Gandhinagar. He also went to Adalaj stepwell and Sidi Saiyad mosque wearing Islamic skull cap. The Consul General visited DAIICT campus in Gandhinagar, met state minister Saurabh Patel, visited Bhadrakali mandir in Amdavad, American company Inductotherm in Bopal, and American corner at Ahmedabad Management Association.