Category Archives: Exclusivist religions

Has JNU Been Hijacked by Pro-Terror Groups ?

First it was University of Hyderabad. Now it’s JNU. This bush fire will spread further. The purpose is to disrupt the India Story with a new urban insurrection. A robust and energetic political response is needed, cautions a senior journalist, Kanchan Gupta.

There were posters in the University of Hyderabad put up by “Ambedkar Students Association”, ASA of UoH, which says, “Tum Kitne Yakub Maaroge, Har Ghar Se Yakub Niklenge” (How many Yakub’s will you kill, one Yakub will arise from each home”). After serious objections from all quarters, finally the matter is now subjudice.

Now, this pattern of disruption politics and slogan mongering further continues and is badly echoed in various other Universities, which are by the way already rearing many impressionable and gullible students into becoming anti-National elements on the campuses.

JNU ‘Cultural Evening’ Poster

On 9th February 2016, there was an incident in #JNU, where a group of (claiming to be) ‘students’ and ex-members of a student organization DSU (Democratic Students Union) called for a ‘cultural meeting’ of a protest against what they called ‘judicial killing’ of terrorist Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhat. The meet, as their poster described was ‘against the Brahminical collective conscience’, against what they called judicial killing’ of Afzal Guru and Maqbool bhat.

AB2    AB1

DSU is an ultra-leftist group in the campus that believes in the ideology of Maoism and in cahoots with JNUSU (Jawaharlal Nehru Students’ Union) and other left–wing student organizations like SFI (Students Federation of India) and AISA(All India Students Association).

If we read their poster, we see it written that the event was to portray ‘history of occupation in Kashmir’ and that ‘India was occupying Kashmir illegally’ and invites them to join for “Protest in rage against the occupation and in solidarity with valiant (brave) people of Kashmir”. The slogans in the poster are themselves a testimony to their vicious game-plan in the first place.

TimesNow

The students’ shouted slogans hailing ‘Shaheed’ Afzal Guru and also raised anti-India slogans. They also advocated for ‘Azad Kashmir’ and ‘India go back, Kashmit ki azadi tak jung chalegi. Bharat ki barbaadi tak jung chalegi’. (It is to be recalled that, there were similar incidents in the past in 1999, 2010 and 2012 by the separatists in the garb of students in JNU. In 1999, in the midst of Kargil war, leftist students in JNU organised an India-Pakistan mushaira. Abuse and worse was heaped on India and its defence forces. A decade later, in 2010, Leftist students organised night-long revelry to “celebrate” the massacre of 76 CRPF jawans by Maoists in Dantewada. The next year, Arundhati Roy, speaking to her admirers at JNU, justified the killing of security forces to loud applause and louder cheers. Examples abound of such events at JNU…from pushing the demand for Tamil Eelam to promoting separatism in Kashmir Valley, from expressing solidarity with secessionists in India’s Northeast to berating Hindu beliefs).

ABVP Demands Action:

Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad ( ABVP) objected to the event and wrote to the Vice Chancellor that such kind of marches should not be held on campus of an educational institution, prompting the university administration to order cancellation of the march as they feared that it might disrupt peace on campus. But the organisers went ahead with the programme despite the cancellation of the permission. Agitated over the issue, ABVP members gathered outside VC office and shouted slogans demanding expulsion of the students who contributed to the “anti-national” activity. In this context, the protest by ABVP was very much legitimate against holding the so called ‘Cultural Event’. When authorities blocked the main venue of the event, the secessionist hooligans continued their rampage near a dhaba. In response to that, ABVP students peacefully protested with slogans of Bharat Mata Ki Jai and Ye Kashmir Hamara Hai.

ABVP_1     ABVP_2

Action from JNU University Authorities:

JNU Registrar, Bupinder Zutshi in his right wisdom wrote a letter to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, South district (dated 11th February) having said, “VC grants to the police force permission to enter JNU campus if need be and as you may deem fit”. As per the latest reports, the letter states that, Considering the serious nature of the alleged offence, permission was given to the Police to investigate the matter as per law of land. The Vice-Chancellor apprised the Deans of Schools and the Chairpersons of the Special Centers about the situation on the ground on 11th Feb, 2016.”  The JNU Vice Chancellor, M.Jagadeesh Kumar said that the university only provided cooperation (to the police) as per the law of the land.

The police have arrested JNU student’s Union President, Kanhaiya Kumar on sedition charges. A case was registered on 11th February 2016, under Sections of 124 A (sedition) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of IPC following complaints by BJP MP Maheish Girri and the ABVP. Five students, who were allegedly involved in the anti-India protests, are still on the run. Kumar was produced at the Patiala House Court in New Delhi on Monday the 15th February 2016 extending his custody. Zee news sources say, a high-powered inquiry panel of the university has found JNU students’ union president Kanhaiya Kumar as guilty.

Home Minister Press brief:

Earlier on Sunday, 14th February 2016, honorable Union Home Minister Sri Rajnath Singh in his Press brief had mentioned about the event’s link to terrorist organisation for which the Press has rallied behind him demanding for ‘proof’. The Home Minister declared that these student protests at JNU were supported by the founder of terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba” Hafiz Saeed, who tops the list of most-wanted list of terrorists. The Home Minister said the students have gone ahead with their demonstrations, despite JNU denying them the permission and warned of “sternest action” against those who have aided and abetting secession through the campuses.

Media activism with some exceptions:

The Leftist media, with the rare exception from TimesNow and some other channels, questioned Home Minister on the veracity of a mere’ tweet and sought the proof from Home Minister. The day later ABVP released video, which were widely televised by TimesNow, ZeeNews and NewX and have thus exposed the nefarious and fissiparous tendencies of secessionists, breeding on the educational institutions, as more than proof behind such ‘cultural events’.

Another video emerged from JNU with slogans like ‘Naara e takdeer, Allah hu Akbar’…’Bharat tere tukde honge, insha Allah…‘. If these are not seditious, what else is then ?

Now since the student leader is taken to the court with ample proofs, the goal-post is shifted to ‘Freedom of Expression’ and ‘attack on journalists’ in the Court by lawyers and thus the debate is twisted! Attempts are being made to divert the attention from the main issue by focusing on ‘journalists attack’ (incidentally led by Barkha Dutt) and OP Sharma for violently reacting to the students for raising anti-national slogans in the Court.

Home Minister reiterates:

Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh reiterated that while the students would not be harassed, the “guilty would not be spared“. Union Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiran Rijiju also said the JNU would not be allowed to become a hub for “anti-national” activities. As a matter of fact, those who question Home Minister’s intervention in this matter forget that, actually, the Police and Courts themselves can take ‘suo motu’ action on such serious crimes against the State.

Police Clarification:

The Television debates continue quoting instances of normative jurisprudence, morality and legal lines being drawn quoting rules and sections of IPCWhen quizzed by the media, the Delhi Police Chief replied multiple times about the need for caution and quoted Section 124A of Indian Penal Code (IPC). He tweeted about IPC Section 124A, as saying “Sec124a IPC-Sedition: Bringing into hatred/contempt or exciting disaffection towards State by words or by signs or visible representation… Sedition: K Singh v Bihar(SC1962): acts involving intention/tendency to create disorder/disturbance of law & order incitement to violence”.

police124A

The Delhi Police arrested the JNU Students’ Union President Kanhaiya Kumar on the charges of sedition and criminal conspiracy. The arrest was made into political controversy, with Rahul Gandhi visiting JNU campus and expressing solidarity with the students! Ironically, questions are being raised by Leftists, as to whether the colonial ‘sedition’ is still applicable in a free country and whether citizens have no right to dissent, etc, etc. Well, the IPC Section 124A says, the expression “disaffection” includes DISLOYALTY and all feelings of enmity.

BS Bhim Bassi (Delhi Police Commissioner, IPS) interviewed by Rajat Sharma, IndiaTV:
We Have Evidence against Kanhaiya Kumar“, Police Commissioner tells Rajat Sharma.

The matter now rests with Delhi Police for now as they hunt down the unknown faces (masked men) in the group, who were present and Umar Khalid (so caled student of JNU) is believed to have co-ordinated with Jaish-e-Mohammad in the past. NewX infact quoted as showing, Umar Khalid as a confirmed JEM-terrorist/protagonist who has visited Pakistan earlier and was creating anti-nationalist atmosphere in India.

Exclusive Video of JNUSU President Kanhaiya shouting Anti-National Slogans 

(EDIT: Youtube Video removed by the User – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AAV6iihPHg).
The earlier video by India News in Youtube was deleted. Same video captured by ‘IBTL Official’ is posted here. Those defending comrade Kanhaiya Kumar must watch this video of his raising anti-India slogans.

Video Ambiguity: There is an attempt to cleverly twist this case from “sedition” into “dissent“. A great way of creating an alibi. Firstly, Kanhaiya Kumar joins slogans with Umar Khalid of Democratic Students Union, known for pro-Naxal stance. Shout ‘Azaadi’ slogans from India for Kashmir, pro-Yakub, pro-Afzal. Then make it up with other slogans with ‘bhukhmari’.

Whether Video is edited/doctored and not genuine, in the debate on India News, Kanhaiya Kumar first mentioned that he was not there in the program and then changed stance after being shown his presence in the video in the same program!

Assuming that he is innocent and did not mean ‘Azaadi’ in the context that Umar Khalid was, did he even complain to JNU, Police or any other authority about the slogans that were being raised by Umar Khalid? As a President of Student Union of a reputed University, was this not his basic duty to report the incidents of anti-nationals (fugitive Umar Khalid et al) roaming in the University Campus to Police? Instead, he was in cahoots with them, lecturing loads of hate speech against a democratically elected government and his own country men. Sedition or not is a matter for Court to decide, but he was definitely abetting anti-India pro-Terror groups. ‪#‎JNU‬

Intelligent reports quotes, as published in IndiaToday:  

Umar

Umar Khalid had planned Afzal Guru show across India:

  • Umar Khalid, a PhD student in Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) who conceived the idea of a cultural evening to mark the hanging of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru, had planned similar events across the country.
  • Intelligence reports suggest the group wanted to hold such events in 18 universities in the country.
  • The report explains the role of DSU activists in organising the event.

 

Conclusion:

(1) Ideological differences will be there and good for country as long as the ideology is for
India and within the ambit of Constitution. That is what is Manthan all about.

(2) This country is not about Modi, BJP, Congress, AAP or any single person or party. It is about
all of us. Who comes to power is incidental in this. Vigilance is a citizen’s duty and a
fundamental duty of a citizen is to protect the national fabric of our Nation. They have to
support the Law.

(3) If there is a pro-separatist, pro-terrorist program happening in our residential area in my know, naturally I would be concerned and inform the law as a citizen. Many have done it in the past and have seen ordinary citizens doing it inspite of receiving threats. And here is Kanhaiya Kumar, who is not just an ordinary citizen but the President of Student Union JNUSU of a reputed University – JNU. He goes to the program, sees what’s going on and then makes no mention of it. In the debate on India News, he first mentioned he wasn’t there in the program and then changed stance after being shown his video in the same program. He then joins the same organisers for a program. The simple point is not that he met someone, but that inspite of knowledge as an activist and president, he or his organisation did not put up a simple complaint. which is why I said whether it was Sedition or not is a matter for Court to decide, but what cannot be wished away is that he abetted anti-India pro-Terror groups. ‪#‎JNU‬

Dangerous Unification of Anti-National forces:

Over the last few days, the nation is witnessing ideological convergence of ‪#‎BreakingIndia‬ forces. The convergence of those Adharmic forces can be witnessed in University campuses in full action, who speak about “Tolerance” & “Freedom of Expression (FOE) on one hand, but demonstrate the exact opposite and in extremity elsewhere in south in Kerala. The Communists in Kannur have once again taken a young life, yet we see no media trial. This is how the proponents of FOE deal with people who differ with their ideology. Irony died 1000 deaths when the left bandwagon, the inheritors of Stalins and Mao spoke of FOE. Just recall the two major oppressions of the history – the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1976 and Great Purge of 1936. “Those who want to create trouble are using masks of Dalits, of Ambedkar, of free expression, and of human rights”, cautions the National Organising Secretary of ABVP, Sri Sunil Ambekar.

ABVP_Interview

As Tarun Vijay has rightly put, “…the camouflaging of the treason behind ‘Freedom of Expression’ (FoE) is an old game of those who have their Nation hooked to the TRP ratings and whenever it suits them they use the soldiers and the Army officers to put up a show of patriotism, presenting jawans and their bunkers on their screens to prove, yes, they too have some sort of feelings for the forces. But actually they protect and help the anti-soldier and anti-forces elements like those we saw in JNU…”. The Constitution provides freedom of expression to all. But what about those who do not accept this Constitution and abuse it to air their seditious views?

Jawaharlal Nehru University was established in 1969 by an Act of Parliament and enjoys enormous financial aid from the Union Government of India through India’s tax payer’s money. Just as an example, JNU received Rs.1300 Crores between 2012-13 and 2015-16 from the Centre. Approx Rs. 325 Crores every year! After spending millions from tax payers pocket shouldn’t the people of India naturally expect the students to be atleast loyal to national interest ?

As Dr. Subramanian Swamy put it, “JNU must shut down for 4 months and reopen after getting the students to sign the affidavit stating to uphold constitution of India, only those would be allowed to come back. Central government has the right to see whether the money is being used for academic activities. JNU is opposed to India. Many of their professors have started speaking out because they fear that the government is predisposed towards them. The Communist mentality is anti-national. They are backed by western powers. In mid 1940’s Communists said that India is not a one country”.

Time has come for this historic university to be cleaned up – “Operation Sanitize JNU Has Just Begun” .

Note : The JNU virus spreads to Jadhavpur University with anti-national sloganeering in the name of ‘Azadi’. Pro-AfzalGuru slogans raised at  protest march in Kolkata’s Jadavpur University.

JNUSU passes a resolution on 19th February 2016:

Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union passed a resolution condemning the Anti-India and Pro-Pakistan sloganeering on campus in the presence of JNUSU President and some other office-bearers. JNUSU also condemned them for not stopping such an act on spot and not filing any complaint against them with the JNU Administration or the Police.

The resolution was proposed by ABVP’s Joint Secretary Saurabh Kumar Sharma and seconded by JNU students after a meeting held on 19th February 2016. This is a welcome change!

This is a victory for India. Bharat Mata Ki Jai _/\_

ABVP_JNU_Victory

(It may be recalled that for the first time JNUSU passed a resolution on violation of rights of Tibetans on 25th Sept 2015, which has also  condemned gross human rights violation by Communist China over indigenous people of Tibet. The resolution was proposed and led by ABVP’s Joint Secretary Saurabh Kumar Sharma and seconded by an Councillor from SIT Ram Nayan Verma and passed after a marathon debate in which Communists have ultimately abstained when they couldn’t argue reasonably against).

Union Minister for HRD, Smt. Smriti Irani’s speech in Lok Sabha in reply to a debate on the JNU issue on 24th February 2016.

Delhi High Court grants interim CONDITIONAL bail to Kanhaiya Kumar for Six months:

JNUSU President Kanhaiya Kumar was granted interim bail on 2nd March, 2016 for six months by the Delhi High Court, with strict instructions that he has to cooperate in the ongoing investigation and has to present himself before the investigators as and when required. The high court made it clear that a JNU faculty member has to stand as surety for Kanhaiya. Further, it said that the accused has to furnish an undertaking that he will not violate any of the conditions mentioned in the bail order.

DHCC

Extracts from the Court Order:

DHC-1 DHC-2

FULL TEXT of Delhi HC Order: http://lobis.nic.in/ddir/dhc/PRA/judgement/02-
03-2016/PRA02032016CRLW5582016.pdf

DHC-3 DHC-0

This is how the Honorable High Court Order began by upholding the spirit of Nationalism and quoting couplets from the famous patriotic song expressing love for our Motherland:

‘Rang hara Hari Singh Nalve se, Rang laal hai Lal Bahadur se,
Rang bana basanti Bhagat Singh, Rang aman ka veer Jawahar se.
Mere Desh ki Dharti sona ugle, Ugle here moti mere desh ki dharti’

This patriotic song from ‘Upkaar’ by Lyricist Indeevar symbolizes individual characteristics representing by different colours and love for motherland.

The Court observed that – “…..The thoughts reflected in the slogans raised by some of the students of JNU who organized and participated in that programme cannot be claimed to be protected as fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. I consider this as a kind of infection from which such students are suffering which needs to be controlled/cured before it becomes an epidemic….”

In this context, it would be worth to recall the case of Indian Parliament Attack in 2001: “Shoukat Hussain Guru vs State (Nct) Delhi & Anr on 14th May, 2008 Supreme Court) – Details from this link

…Having known about the plans of Afzal in collaborating with terrorists, Shaukat Hussain Guru
(cousin of Afzal Guru) refrained from informing the police or Magistrate intending thereby or
knowing it to be likely that such concealment on his part will facilitate the waging of war…”.

In this context, it is relevant to refer to Section 39 CrPC:

Section 39 of the CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code) states that, every person aware of the
commission of, or intention of any other person to commit any offence punishable under any of
the specified sections of the IPC is liable to inform to the nearest Magistrate or police
officer of such commission or intention. The person can escape from this offence, only if he
holds any solid reasonable excuses, which are: a) I had a reasonable excuse; b) I did inform; c)
I did not conceal it intentionally.

In the JNU Case, Kanhaiya Kumar as President part of the event hosting, present at stage but did not  inform the Police or State. The case is subjudice.

Advertisements

M.F.Husain Debate – The Double Standards

Weak to the Strong, Strong to the Weak

–  An Article by Arun Shourie

In painting Goddess Saraswati naked M.F. Hussein, his secularist advocates argue, is merely exercising his Fundamental Right to freedom of expression, he is merely giving form to his artistic, creative urge. The first question is: How come the freedom and creative urge of the thousands and thousands of artists our country has have never led even one of them to ever paint or draw a picture of Prophet Muhammad in which his face is manifest? I am not on the point of dress or undress, the features could have been made as celestial and handsome as our artists could have imagined — why is it that they never got the urge to draw or sculpt even the handsomest representation of the Prophet?

The rationalization is that doing so would have hurt the religious sentiments of the Muslims, the Prophet himself having forbidden all representations. The reason, as distinct from the rationalization, is different: were an artist to make such a representation Muslims would be ignited by their controllers to riot, they would not let that artist live in peace thereafter.

Notice first that in the lexicon of those who are shouting for Hussein the point about not hurting religious sentiments manifestly does not apply to the Hindus: in their case the alternate principle of the right of the artist to paint as he pleases takes precedence. The Hindus notice this duality more and more.

Indeed they notice the length to which some are prepared to exercise their right to give full rein to their creative urge, disregarding what Hindus might feel as a consequence. As recently as August last year, the art gallery of the INDIA TODAY group, ART TODAY held an exhibition of “modern Indian miniatures”. Prominent among the paintings on display was one that showed a naked ( that is, completely naked ) Radha astride a naked ( that is, completely naked ) Lord Krishna — the two fornicating in a garden. Posters with this painting prominently featured were put up inviting viewers to the gallery. The August, 1995 issue of the magazine, INDIA TODAY carried an advertisement — urging readers to purchase prints of paintings which were on display at the gallery, the advertisement too featured prominently the same painting of Radha laying Lord Krishna in a garden. Some persons protested. No one heeded them. A demonstration was then held outside the gallery, the demonstrators entered the gallery. The painting was taken down. Friends who heard of the incident denounced the demonstrators: “Hindu bigots”, “The saffron brigade on the look-out for issues,” “Fascist goons who want to impose their constipated brand of Hinduism on everyone.” To establish the principle, and even more to demonstrate the scorn in which they held “these goons” another publication, ‘The India Magazine’, as demonstrative about its secular credentials, put that very painting on its cover. That this was done with full knowledge that doing so was likely to offend others is evident from the fact that, simultaneously with putting the painting on the cover, the person most prominently associated with ‘The India Magazine’ applied for anticipatory bail.

Now, the collections of hadis contain scores and scores of descriptions of the Prophet, as they contain accounts — accounts in the words and on the testimony of the Prophet’s wives themselves — about his relations with his wives; how is it that none of our artists have ever felt the creative urge to portray even accurately any of those descriptions, to say nothing of these magazines ever inviting their readers to purchase colorful reproductions of the paintings or putting the paintings on their covers and posters. Indeed I have not the least doubt that if they received even an article — which, after all, can never be as tantalizing as a Hussein painting — an article which did no more than reproduce verbatim those accounts, they would refuse to print it: all the great principles about not hurting the religious sentiments of others, all the provisions of law — sections 153A, 295A, 298 — will be invoked in justification. But when it comes to a painting of a naked Radha astride a naked Lord Krishna fornicating in a garden, carrying it in advertisements, putting that on the cover is a Fundamental Right, to object to it is to throttle an artist’s right to give expression to his creative urge.

It is not the freedom of expression these worthies are committed to. They are committed to their having freedom alone: can you recall a single liberal protesting against the ban on Ram Swarup’s Understanding Islam Through Hadis — a book so scrupulously academic that it was but a paraphrase of the Sahih Muslim, one of the canonical compilations of hadis — to say nothing of any one of them deigning to put in a word against goondas — claiming to represent the Muslims — who tried to get at me in Hyderabad or the goondas — claiming to speak for the other lot these worthies champion, the “Dalits” — who did get at me in Pune? Not one deigned to do so. They are not the champions and practitioners of free speech, they are the practitioners of a very special brand of the dialectic: Strong to the weak, Weak to the strong. And that is what the Hindus are noticing: neither the gallery nor the magazine spared a thought for the religious sentiments it might offend till the “goons” marched into the gallery, but they had but to march in and the painting was immediately taken down; Hussein was all defiance one day, but the moment some paintings of his were burnt, he was suddenly sorry….

“But nude representations are a part of our tradition. Look at Konark, look at Khajuraho,” the advocates have been shouting. But what has the figure of a woman being had by a dog in Konark have to do with worship ? What basis is there for declaring the women portrayed there are Saraswati or Sita or Lakshmi ? And then, as a reader points out, there is the other consideration : depicting women completely naked has for centuries been very much a part of European painting and sculpture tradition; but do the artists not stop at using this tradition for portraying Virgin Mary naked?

And as for Saraswati being depicted naked, her image is set out in our iconography, in the mantras by which we invoke her; in all these she is referred to as “….yaa shubhra vastraavritaa….”, as one “draped in white”. That white dress draping her is one of the four distinguishing marks of representations of Goddess Saraswati — the other three being that she holds beads in one hand, a book in another and the vina in a third.

“But I have every right to portray her as I will,” a secular friend protested when I repeated to him this iconographic description to which one of the best known and sagacious authorities on our art had drawn my attention. Assume you do, but then you can’t simultaneously claim that what you are doing is in accord with that tradition. Second, if painting Goddess Saraswati naked is an intrinsic part of our tradition because sundry women have been depicted naked and fornicating in Khajuraho and Konark, then, my dear friend, what about the Dasham Granth of Guru Govind Singh and its 300 treyi chitra? How come not one of you has ever been stirred by his creative urge to put on canvas any of those — most vivid and vigourous — pen-portraits? Is the work of Guru Govind Singh any less a part of the Sikh tradition than the Gita Govind? What about the scores and scores of hadis I mentioned earlier ? Alongside the Quran, they are not just any old element of Islam, they are the very foundation. Let us see you affirm the right of artists to depict images — not imagined ones, not ones that depart from the mantras as the painting in question does, just the most scrupulously faithful and exact images — of what is described therein.

The next argument of our artists and intellectuals is just as much a manufacture of convenience: “All our religions, everything about our past is the common heritage of all of us, it belongs to each of us equally,” they have been saying. This presumably has been done to preempt those who would say that Hussein is particularly in the wrong to have painted Hindu goddesses naked because he is a Muslim. Fine. But how come so many of you are up in arms when I write on Islamic law? In particular, how come you work up such a fury even though, unlike a painter, I am not conjuring up an image and am instead documenting every single sentence and paragraph with the exact text of the sacred works of Islam? What happens at that time to this principle of all our religions and everything in our past being the common heritage that belongs to each one of us equally? Then these very magazines and intellectuals are full of sanctimonious sermons: If members of one religion start commenting on the practices and beliefs of other religions, there will be hell to pay, they proclaim.

It is this double-standard which outrages the Hindus more and more, it is this which these inchoate outbursts are revolts against.

Many Hindus also notice the other thing — the one I mentioned as the reason as against the rationalization for no artist ever being galvanized by the creative urge when it comes to painting the features of the Prophet. They notice that the artists do not do so, not because these masters cannot do so, nor because their muse never goads them in this direction, but because they know that, were they to do so, they would be set upon. And that the State — which is weak, and which also has internalized the same double-standards to rationalize its weakness — will not come to their rescue. Therefore, more and more Hindus are concluding that we too should acquire the same reputation, we too should acquire the same capacity. In a word, three things are teaching the Hindus to become Islamic: the double-standards of the secularists and the State, the demonstrated success of the Muslims in bending both the State and the secularists by intimidation, and the fact that both the State and the secularists pay attention to the sentiments of Hindus only when the Hindus become a little Islamic.

The secularists’ shout, “But these things destroy the very basis of our culture.” The Hindus see that argument as being no better than the Devil quoting the Scripture, or, to put it in words the secularists would find more persuasive, than my quoting the Quran: for they know that these are the very persons who have been deriding them for living a life rooted in that culture, they are the ones who have been denouncing that culture and every thing associated with it — the idols, the beliefs, the rituals — as being nothing but devices which the Brahmins have forged to perpetuate inequity, to perpetuate exploitation of the poor masses.

The arguments of the secularists therefore are mere pretense. Yet I believe that it was plain wrong to break the window-panes and burn the paintings. Free speech is vital for our country. If it is curbed, what will be killed is not a painting but reform — for all reform offends as it is a voice against the way things are at that moment. I believe that even if one’s singular concern is Hinduism and its rehabilitation, free speech is the best guarantee: the more Eastern religions — Hinduism, Buddhism and others — are subjected to critical inquiry the more their luminescent essence shines forth; by contrast the Semitic religions — down to Marxism-Leninism — wither at the first exposure to exegesis and inquiry: and the controllers of these religions have been very conscious of this, that is why they have for centuries together put inquiry down with a lethal hand. The twin principles which the champions of Hussein’s right to paint as he will have been proclaiming are the exact pincer which will work — the principle that there must be freedom of speech and that every religion, and the principle that every aspect of our past is the common heritage of each of us equally. All we should ensure is that these principles hold good for all equally. And when someone paints like Hussein did in this instance, instead of burning his paintings we should use them to document the double-standards which mar current policies and discourse, and demand that either the standard apply to all or to none. Thus : education, not burning; parity, not suppression.

In Hussein’s case in particular, I feel that the youngsters who took offence missed a very vital point — not just about his painting but about his life. He is and has continued to be a Muslim. Now, as anyone who has read anything about the Prophet knows, the Prophet cursed and detested those who made representations of things. He put pictures at par with dogs, and, remember, he had all dogs killed. “The angels do not enter a house,” he declared on the authority of the angel, Gabriel, “which contains a dog or pictures.” Abu Huraira, the source of a large proportion of the hadis, states that God’s Messenger narrated that Gabriel had promised to visit him one day but didn’t turn up, and so, when he came the next day, the Prophet inquired as to what had happened. Gabriel, the Prophet narrated, said, “I came to you last night and was prevented from entering simply by the fact that there were images at the door, for there was a figured curtain with images on it and there was a dog in the house. So, order that the head of the image which is at the door of the house be cut off so that it may become like the form of a tree; order that the curtain be cut up and made into two cushions spread out on which people may tread; and order that the dog be put out.” “God’s Messenger,” the hadis concludes, “then did so.” His wife, Aisha tells us, “The Prophet never left in his house anything containing figures of a cross without destroying it.” She recalls how the Prophet reprimanded her for two cushions she had made because they contained pictures. The Prophet declared that those who made representations of things “will receive the severest punishment on the day of resurrection,” that “Everyone who makes representations of things will go to hell.” He declared them to be “the worst of God’s creatures.” He put them at par with “the one who kills a prophet, or who is killed by a prophet, or kills one of his parents.” [ Several other hadis, and of course several instances can be cited; for the few which have been quoted see, Mishkat Al-Masabih, Muhammad Ashraf, Lahore, Volume II, Book XXI, Chapter V, pp. 940-44. ]

Hussein on the contrary has made painting images his very life. Therefore, in a very deep sense, his entire life is an endeavour to open an aperture in that wall of prohibitions. It has been a banner for liberalism, indeed for liberation.

In sum, I am for Hussein, not for his champions;

The position which Hussein’s champions have taken up is just the one which our society needs;

We should hold them to their word, and have them stick by it in the case of one and all;

And we should await the day when their muse will lead them to exercise their creative urge, “that one talent which is death to hide,” paint as freely and with as much abandon themes from all our religions and traditions.

Finally, a forecast : the more the secularists insist on double-standards, the more Islamic will the Hindus become.

End of article

P.S: MF Hussain not only painted Saraswati, Radha-Krishna in the nude but also Bharat Mata, Sita, Hanuman. Speaks a lot of the perversion of the debate.

One more interesting article on this subject – “Why are Hindus Offended to MF Hussain’s Art

Dr.Abdul Kalam In The Eyes of Islamic Scholars

The tragedy is that someone whom the nation reveres and hopes that all young Indian Muslims should follow his footsteps, has been cariactured as a covert Hindu by Islamic scholars. No wonder that they promote their heroes are Aurangzeb and Ghaznavi as their heroes and communalise the minds of young Muslims.

Dr.Rafiq Zakaria’s objection to Dr.Abdul Kalam being called a Muslim can be summarised in thie following statements by the so-called Islamic scholar himself

” He goes through the Gita and is enchanted by it. He is sincerely devoted to Krishna. He recites the Hindu mantras on every occasion.  He is a strict vegetarian and a life-long brahmachari….and he enjoys all the sacred Hindu scriptures” 

Hindus don’t become lesser Hindus when they go to dargah, celebrate Ramzan with their friends, sing Sufi Music but it does seem that a Muslim who reads the Gita becomes a less Muslim ! Was Dr.Kalam declared less Muslim because he was an thorough Indian by heart and deed.

We rest the case for readers to assess the mind-set that is taking their community to the path of anti-pluralism and rigidity !

Full article by Dr.Zakaria is below.

Whats Muslim about Kalam?

Author: Dr Rafiq Zakaria
Publication: The Asian Age
Date: June 19, 2002

Dr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, who will be our next President, is by all accounts a great scientist; his  contribution to India’s defence is of the highest order; he is rightly called the Missile Man; every Indian feels proud of him; he is in every respect a Bharat Ratna. But because he was born a  Muslim and bears a Muslim name, he should not be put in the same category as the two  former Muslim Presidents, Dr Zakir Husain and Mr Fakruddin Ali Ahmed. Both of them were as great a patriot and Indian to the core as Dr Kalam. But they were also Muslims in the real sense of the word; they believed in the tenets of the Quran and faithfully followed the traditions of the Prophet. They worked for the uplift of the Muslims as much as for the progress of India. They  were ardent followers of Gandhiji and had sacrificed for the cause of India’s freedom. They  opposed Jinnah’s Two- Nation  theory  and  were  close  associates  of  Maulana  Azad.  They had full faith in India’s composite culture and never hesitated to be a part of her ancient heritage.
Withal, they were also deeply involved in the hopes and aspirations of Indian Muslims; they  engaged themselves actively in the emancipation of their community. Dr Zakir Husain built up the Jamia Millia Islamia and was for some time the  vice-chancellor  of  the  Aligarh  Muslim  University. Similarly Mr Fakruddin Ali Ahmad always took up the cause of the Muslims, both in Assam and in the rest of the country.

I am afraid, Dr Kalam has kept himself completely away from Muslims; he refused to mix with them and even when invited to participate in their nationalistic activities, he politely declined. As chairman of the  All-India  Khilafat  Committee  I  requested  him  to  be  the  chief  guest  at  the mammoth Prophet’s birthday celebrations in Mumbai, which is attended by more than ten lakh Muslims every year, but he refused. This was, in fact, started by Gandhiji in the wake of the Khilafat and the Non-Cooperation Movement in 1921 to promote Hindu-Muslim unity. It has been attended by most of our national leaders both during the Freedom Struggle and after Independence, even Prime Ministers and other highest dignitaries have graced the occasion by their participation. Likewise, Dr Ishaq Jamkhanwala, president of Anjuman-i-Islam,which was founded by the third Congress president, Mr Justice Badruddin Tyabjee, tells  me that his invitation to Dr Kalam to visit the Anjuman to deliver the famous Seerut lecture to  pay homage to the Prophet was turned down by him. He has hardly shown any interest in the  affairs of the Muslim nor has he had any affiliation with the practices and conventions of Islam.

He was one of the founder trustees with me of Maulana Azad Educational Foundation, floated  by Government of India for promoting and aiding education among the Muslims; but Dr Kalam showed no interest in its work.

Dr Kalam feels much more at home with the Hindus. His Hindu friends, with whom he has  spent a good deal of his life, have testified to the fact that he is far more attracted to Hinduism than Islam; I find nothing wrong with it. But for God’s sake, don’t describe him as a Muslim  President and take credit for having obliged the Muslims for giving them this great honour.  K. Rama Rao, former director of Defence Research and Development Laboratories (DRDL)  writes: “I have known him for more than three decades, but find him the same, from the simple and unassuming fellow who shared a room with me in 1954 to the one who became my boss in the ’80s. He would stay up late at night, eat vegetarian food and never show any signs of being a Muslim. I have not seen him offering prayers during namaz nor fast during Ramzan.”  Likewise R. Aravamudan, former director ISRO’s Satellite Centre, Bangalore: “We lived in Indira Bhavan Lodge in Thiruvananthapuram. People there called him Kalam Iyer because he moved around with Brahmins and had similar eating habit. The only non-vegetarian food he ate occasionally was egg masala along with Kerala parottas. He would not  talk much about his parents or siblings.”

Dr Kalam never reads the Quran but every morning he goes through the Gita and is enchanted by it. He is sincerely devoted to Krishna. He recites the Hindu mantras on every occasion. Namaz does not appeal him nor has he ever fasted in the month of Ramzan. He is a strict vegetarian and a  life-long  brahmachari.  His  roots  are  really  in  Hinduism  and  he  enjoys  all  the sacred Hindu scriptures. Hence the credit for his elevation, in communal terms, should go to the Hindus; to give it to the Muslims would be wrong. In fact Dr Kalam himself would be happy if he is not described as a Muslim President and his name is not linked with Dr Zakir  Husain and Mr Fakruddin Ali Ahmad.

This does not mean that he is not a good man or inferior to the two Muslim Presidents; I am  only objecting to the appellation. He is in fact most worthy to be President. He is great in the true sense, and his simplicity, humility and honesty will add lustre to the highest office of our  country. I wish him all the best; may God, of whatever denomination Dr Kalam believes in, be  with him

Indian Census 2011 – Alarming Signs

The Hindu population is now officially below 80% nationally as per the census. If we consider the undeclared Christian population to it, ( those who enjoy Hindu reservation benefits but practise Christianity ), the numbers would be further lower to this.

For those wondering why a reduced Hindu population should be a matter of concern, recall the words of Dr.Annie Beasant

Hindus and India

Hindus and India

 In 4 states, Muslim population has grown by over 2%. Muslims are near 97% in Lakshadweep, and 68% in J&K. 6 states have over 15% Muslim population.

States like Assam, Bengal which have seen a lot of infiltration of Muslims, but equally concerning is growth in a temple state like Uttarakhand. A recent visit to Nainital confirms that Muslims have virtually taken over large portions of this temple town which houses Naina Devi. Is it due to infiltration via Nepal or is it homegrown numbers ?

Muslim Population Growth

Muslim population

Christian population is generally misleading since a lot of Christians do not officially show their numbers to enjoy Hindu reservation benefits. In the states of Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu, the Christians would definitely be over 10%.

States like Arunachal Pradesh which had a ban on religious conversions see a free conversion spree. Christians grew by over 12%. Manipur had a Xtian growth of 7%

Xtian population

From the above data, it is clear that Hindus are in a minority in the states of Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya, J&K and in the Union Territory of Lakshadweep. They are less than 65% in the states of Kerala, Goa, Assam, Manipur,

Category Total Male Female Percentage
India 1210854977 623270258 587584719
Hindus 966257353 498306968 467950385 79.8
Muslims 172245158 88273945 83971213 14.2
Christians 27819588 13751031 14068557 2.3
Sikhs 20833116 10948431 9884685 1.7
Buddhists 8442972 4296010 4146962 0.7
Jains 4451753 2278097 2173656 0.4
Other Religions and Persuations 7937734 3952064 3985670 0.7

The growth rate of population of the different religious communities in the same period was: 16.8% for Hindus; 24.6% for Muslims; 15.5% for Christians; 8.4% for Sikhs; 6.1% for Buddhists and 5.4% for Jains

This is a serious matter. Only 6 decades ago, the country was partition on the basis of religion. the same community is now being allowed a free-hand in growing  their numbers. At the same time they enjoy privileges of minority rights, create sense of insecurity in the areas where they have larger numbers.  History shows that whenever the Hindu numbers have reduced, those parts become communally very sensitive, lead to ethnic cleansing and ultimately lead to secession. इतिहास बताता है की ” जब हिन्दू घटा देश बटा “

It is generally noted that such issues are not shared much among Hindus for the fear of being branded as “Non-Secular”. Hindus have to realise that unless they treat this an issue of national importance, we would lose all the civilization parameters based which our nation was called Bharat or Hindustan.

Also Read

The Church and Blood Money

The Vatican has a number of skeletons in its cupboards, ranging from money laundering, drug trafficking, sex scandals and paedophilia. Gerald Posner investigates the death of Pope John Paul I, operations of the Catholic Church and its nexus with politics and organised crime. God’s Bankers is more thrilling than Mario Puzo’s Godfather, writes KUMAR CHELLAPPAN

The Catholic Church is a subject of interest to millions of non-Catholics all over the world mainly because of the secrecy associated with the functioning of the world’s largest religious congregation. The Iron Curtain which shields this church will put both the former Soviet Union as well as the Italian Mafia to shame. The Vatican City, world’s smallest sovereign country (area 110 acres and population 842) and abode of the Pope, the spiritual head of the Catholics, wields tremendous influence in global politics.

The younger generation in India may not be aware of the influence wielded by the Catholic Church in India. The role it played in getting the EMS Namboodirippadu-led Kerala Government (world’s first democratically elected communist regime) dismissed in 1959 was revealed by Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the former US diplomat in his book A Dangerous Place. The CIA too helped the church in Kerala, financially as well as morally, to get the communists removed from its path. The church feared that the communists would take over the vast stretches of landed properties and educational institutions owned by it.

Such is the power of the Catholic Church in India that many people attribute it to the fall of the Janata Party Government in 1979. The Freedom of Religion Bill introduced in Parliament by OP Tyagi resulted in the disintegration of the Morarji Desai Government with Mother Teresa, the queen of proselytisation herself coming out to stage protest march against the Bill.

When the Catholic Bishops Council of India, the most powerful body of the church in the country, came out against the Narendra Modi Government questioning its “indifference” to vandalisms perpetrated by “Sangh Parivar” activists on churches, all hell broke loose in India. Cardinal Cleemis, the CBCI chief, was vocal in his criticism of the Modi Government and alleged that minorities have become unsafe under the present BJP dispensation at the Centre. With law enforcement agencies unravelling the details of each and every attack on the Churches, the Cardinal has become somewhat silent.

The Catholic Church has overturned Governments and regimes in South America, Africa as well as in Europe which were not of its likings. Vatican has a number of skeletons in its cupboards. It ranges from money laundering, drug trafficking, sex scandals and cases of pedophiles. A lot of wealth under the dispensation of the church is said to be dirty money and the curia (the bureaucracy in Vatican City) has a lot to shield from public scrutiny, reportedly.

God’s Bankers, authored by Gerald Posner, the attorney-turned-investigative journalist is a well-researched chronicle about the history of money and power at the Vatican. The book has brought out hitherto unheard accounts and mysteries associated with the church and the death of Pope John Paul I in 1978. Not only the death of the Pope; many investigating officers, prosecutors and crucial witnesses who could have thrown much light into the shady deals of the powerful people in Vatican were either bumped off or killed in staged accidents.

A shocking revelation made by Posner is about a woman who was present in the official residence of John Paul I in the Vatican the night he breathed his last. The Vatican has never revealed to the outside world about this fact as it would have given rise to many uncomfortable questions about the Pope’s celibacy. John Paul I, whose real name was Albino Luciani reigned for just 33 days. He was elected Pope following the death of Pope Paul VI on August 6, 1978. According to a communique issued by the Vatican, Pope John Paul I was found dead on September 29 around 5:30 am by John Magee, his private secretary.

But Posner’s investigations are based on the secret files in the archives in the Vatican and interviews with people who had inside information and first hand access to the interiors of the papal palace and has thrown out some shocking facts which may put a shadow on the Vatican’s claims of puritanism. It was Vincenza Taffarel, a nun who had been with Albino Luciani for more than 20 years as the head of his household who first found him dead. Vincenza ran to John Magee’s bedroom and roused him from a deep sleep. Magee sprinted to John Paul’s private chamber and put his hand on the pontiff’s cheek.

Villot, the secretary of state, who decided to cover up the presence of Vincenza and drafted the version that it was Magee who found out the Pope dead. Villot also summoned two morticians to prepare the Pope’s dead body for public display. “The morticians took out a small rope from a canvas bag. They tied some around the corpse’s ankles and knees. Then they straightened his legs and secured the rope to each end of the bed’s frame. The morticians looped it around John Paul’s chest and both pulled his arms and torso until the corpse was flat,” says Posner in his account.

Though the Vatican officials described “myocardial infarction” as the cause for John Paul’s death, there were many accounts which said that the Pope was poisoned to death. One of the morticians attending to the Pope found that there were clotting around the Pope’s neck. But the group of cardinals who reached the Vatican immediately after the pontiff’s death ruled out the possibility of any autopsy which sabotaged the chances of getting any lead for the investigators.

What went unnoticed was an attempt on the life of the Pope which happened days before he was found dead. Metropolitan Nikodim, the second-ranking prelate of the Russian Orthodox Church called on John Paul immediately after his installation as the Pope. “Nikodim sipped coffee from a cup the Pope had just poured. Then the bishop dropped his cup and saucer. He clenched at his throat as he gasped for air, and fell over backward, smashing a small table as he slammed into the floor. Luciani (the Pope) called for help and dropped to his knees to administer the last rites. By the time Dr Renato Buzzonetti, the deputy chief of the Vatican medical service arrived a few minutes later, the 48-year-old Nikodi was dead”, says Posner in the book.

Strangely no autopsy was performed. A conspiracy theory swept through the Vatican; a poisonous brew that had been intended for the new Pope had killed Nikodim. This incident as well as the unexpected death of John Paul in a gap of few days are similar to the murders and mayhem carried out by the dreaded Mafia.

Much has been written about the death of John Paul 1. The book In God’s Name by David Yallop has given an entirely different account about the murder. Kunhanandan Nair, an Indian journalist, who covered the death of John Paul and the subsequent election of the next Pope, has said in his reports that the Pope was murdered by a cartel consisting of certain cardinals, politicians and mafia dons who wanted him out of the scene as they feared the Pope would throw out those responsible for money laundering and financial embezzlement worth hundreds of crores of dollars from the Church owned Bank of Vatican (Banco Ambroziano).

Immediately after assuming the throne, the Pope had ordered a thorough probe into the financial irregularities committed by this cabal of cardinals, bishops, bankers and mafia dons with money drawn from Banco Ambroziano, owned by the Vatican. The Catholic Church today is the world’s largest capitalist holding company with lot of financial, commercial and political interests.

The Banco Ambroziano was one of the largest private banks in Italy and was owned by the church. Roberto Calvi, chairman and managing director of this bank was found hanging from the London Bridge on June 18, 1982, four years after the death of Pope John Paul I. Though the coroner in London declared it as a suicide, in 2002, it was scientifically proved that Calvi was murdered and hanged from the London Bridge. Why? Posner answers this question and many other hitherto unasked and unanswered queries which are not music to the ears of the church.

But why all these shady deals and operations? The church authorities have the answer themselves: “You can’t run the Church on Hail Marys”, a bishop is reported to have told the author. Posner has given a chilling account of the activities of the Catholic Church with special focus on Italy. One cannot help laughing when Catholic bishops and cardinals in India describe the BJP, RSS and other Hindutva forces as fascists. The Vatican City, the abode of the Pope itself is a gift of the Fascist Mussolini to the Catholic Church.

The church was with Hitler and Mussolini during the Second World War. Even today, the Church is run on blood money. Blood money from where? By whom? Well, the details are in God’s Bankers. It is a must read for all those who love action-packed and suspense -filled real life incidents. God’s Bankers is more thrilling than Mario Puzo’s Godfather.

Source