Justice Kuldip Singh. a Sikh retired judge of the Supreme Court said in a public address in 1999, - "India is secular because wherever, whenever 10 Indians sit, 8 of them are Hindus".
Secularism in Indian polity simply means, India first. Nationalist fervor is the hall-mark of Narendra Modi's campaign for a resurgent India.
Relax, Economist. Mind your own goofed-up European economy and do not meddle in the body polity of India.
Kalyanaraman
Hindu Lobby
Secularism in Indian polity simply means, India first. Nationalist fervor is the hall-mark of Narendra Modi's campaign for a resurgent India.
Relax, Economist. Mind your own goofed-up European economy and do not meddle in the body polity of India.
Kalyanaraman
Hindu Lobby
U Mahesh Prabhu
'In a country that prides itself on its religious diversity and its secular constitution, may see the rise of Modi and his pro Hindu agenda as a terrifying chapter of intolerance. They say he is dangerous fire brand and too comfortable inciting the politics of hatred and violence.' States Sam Dolonick in his article published in the recent issue of 'The Economist'. Besides holding Narendra Modi solely responsible for the riots of 2002 he also makes the baseless and completely concocted allegation that 'The RSS was influenced by 1930s German fascism."
It's not that he doesn't acknowledge the unparalleled achievements of Gujarat Chief Minister. In fact he does when he says 'Modi has attracted more than 20% of the India's total investment of $69 billion last year' but he makes a foul attempt of trying to make it irrelevant by adding 'But despite his achievement, for may of India's 1.1 billion people – 14 per cent of who are Muslims – Modi will always be defined by the anti-Muslim violence…' The 'cause of hate' against Modi is, frankly speaking, owing to his Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) background, the organization which is today whipping boy of the mainline media and, so called, 'secular' organizations.
'The Economist says is influenced by the Fascist ideology. Need I say how concocted is this idea, i.e. of RSS being influenced by Fascist? Absolute bunk! RSS is, in fact, in response to the brutal history of Islamic Conquest, that which American Historian Mr. Will Durant called 'the bloodiest in history'. The current aspersions against the RSS mostly by the media, Congress and Communist followers to the effect that it is a 'communal organization, most dangerous to the country than even communism' are a complete travesty of fact.
The Ideology of Hindutva which is propounded by the RSS, and followed by Modi, offers a room for all minorities on a condition of their whole hearted submission to the supreme value of the nation in their lives. The nation is a vehicle of universal truths and is not an entity above them. This is no chauvinist nationalism of the kind associated with Mussolini or Hitler. It teaches loyalty and devotion to the national society in the national homeland under the image of the mother. The unity and solidarity of the motherland taught to claim the highest sacrificial devotion from the citizen body.
Whoever enters into this spirit of devotion to the nation as a spiritual unity of the land and people are Indians or Hindus in essence. The mental commitment should be final and supreme. The Muslims and Christians have perfect freedom of worship, so long as they do not destroy and undermine the faith and symbolism of the national society. They should subordinate their exclusive claims for final and sole revelation vis-à-vis the national society. They could bear witness to their faith in life and speech but they should not indulge in any unfair and unspiritual modes of conversions. The national identity requires that the whole of the national society, including minorities, should share in the best values of the past. They should appreciate national Dharma – the code of ethical principles and ways of life. The cultural history, they should all give their mind and hearts whole-heartedly to an appreciation of the best types.
Rama and Krishna may be appreciated by non-Hindus as secular examples while the Hindus will see them as full spiritual exemplars, or avatars. Now considering this ideology, I wonder as to what is so 'dangerous' about it, so as to look at it dangerous than communism? I would be delighted if the people who put in such allegation help me to understand. Be that as it may. Let's consider the following case: In the late 1980s, Abdul Latif was the underworld king of Gujarat. Later, he became Dawood Ibrahim's business manager in the state and was one of criminal dons to make what now seems to be the shameless transition from organized crime to terrorism. Latif was also the suspect in the Mumbai blasts case of 1993; the RDX and other explosive devices for that operation landed, remember, on the Gujarat coast. In November 1997, Latif was killed in an encounter with the Ahmadabad police.
Many of the Latif's cohorts were put under watch. One of them was his driver, apparently responsible for, in one daring move,hiding a huge cache of weapons meant for terrorist groups. This was part of the consignment that had arrived before Mumbai blasts of 1993. Latif was under surveillance so his driver had hidden the arms in a well in his (the driver's) native village near Ujjain. The driver eventually faced over 50 cases including some under the National Security Act; He was arrested at various stages, by the Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh police, but avoided conviction. When not facilitating terror networks, he was engaged in extortion rackets in Rajasthan, acting almost certainly on behalf of others. His principals, the police believe, may be linked to terror funding groups. The Latif's driver's name was Sohrabuddin Sheikh. Yes this was the same Sohrabuddin for whose encounter Modi was being scrutinized by his political rivals and the media. 'A nationalist is being harassed for having exterminated a terrorist!' by the media that calls itself 'secular' and 'nationalist'.
What a pity. If you may observe in detail of the propaganda carried on by the Media in Gujarat and in other part of the world, at the same time, you would find that: While Dr. Haneef, a doctor who flew from Glasgow in UK to Australia under mysterious circumstances, and who was arrested by the Australian authorities was given such a terrific support by the media as if they were convinced and simply wanted to convince the world that he wasn't a terrorist. It may be noted that simply because he was allowed to return to India on benefit of doubt the media almost declared his victory as theirs, before even he was tried in the court of law. Our Prime Minister, Mr. Manmohan Singh, went on record to say that he 'lost his sleep' for Haneef. On contrary to this when ethnic Hindus in Malaysia made a peaceful demonstration against the destruction of their temples by pro-Islamic-fundamentalist regime and were sabotaged ruthlessly and put to jail, our very own Karunanidhi's grievances, put forth the Central Government, were simply brushed aside, he was asked to lay off the issue rather ruthlessly. Media made little publicity of the issue. When it\'s a question of Hindus getting unfair treatment in a Muslim majority region, the 'civil, sophisticated and articulate' Muslim intellectuals take refuge in the statement that it's a matter concerning a foreign country. But when it\'s a question regarding a cartoon or a fatwa for beheading a writer, they say - we are a global Ummah, anything happening anywhere to Muslims is our common concern! All big lies and a bigger hypocrisy traded in the name of a religion. So much for their hypocrisy! But why is it so? Let's go in to a bit detail. When Muslims are in trouble there is a cry of intolerance from the whole of the Islamic world led by the Arabs.
The Pope cries foul when there is problem facing Christians. Communists in India are supported by their comrades in China. But why is it that none cries or express even a word of concern when Hindus are in trouble? Today thousands of Kashmiri pundits, who were driven out of their homes by Jihadi Muslims after torturing them and even raping the women, are living as refugees in their own country. No media cares for them. Instead more special privileges are given to the Kashmir as an incentive and they continue to play lame politics of 'Azad Kashmir' (read Independent Kashmir) with Indian Government. Our forces who risk their lives are blamed and abused for unproven allegations. Recently, in Kashmir, an Army Jawan was stripped off and made to walk nude in the public for attempting to rape a woman.
Is it so? Then why is it that the same people were sitting so silently when those terrorists were killing and raping their people? Why didn't they ever boycotted them and gave a similar treatment? Why doesn't a Maulvi, anywhere in India, issue a fatwa against a Jihadi terrorist? No answers. But that is understandable. The pure hypocrisy, of the Muslim Clergy and Politicians, is the answer. But why is the media sitting mum? Why aren't they speaking? Have you ever thought of a reason? I did. The reason is because Hindus don't have a strong Lobby of their own. If you take the case of Israel, you will find that though it is a small land they continue to live against all odds surrounded by their enemies from all the directions with rightful support of Americans. Americans are under obligation to support Israel because Jews, who also form a majority in Israel, control American Economy.
Palestinians though haven't been anywhere successful to have a worthwhile economy for themselves and having spend six decades in building a legacy of hatred and violence continue to gain 'sympathy' and 'support' from the Media as a result of the financial expenditure by the Arab Lobby Supported by Arab Nations. When Christians are persecuted in Pakistan Pope cries foul and American along bring in their pressure to put a halt on it. But what is the case with Hindus? Who are they to look for? As Arabs for the Muslims, Vatican for the Christian and Israel for the Jews who is for Hindus? It's sad but true that Hindus have none to look far. The only Hindu country, Nepal, is today under the clutches of Communists, with its King virtually in exile. India has, what it is proudly called, a 'Free Press' that which is run by private organization without governmental controls. We have series of Television News Channels in various languages. And not a single one ever clarifies its source of income. They never specify who funds them in their websites do they? Yet they have with them millions of dollars. Where did this money come from? You must agree with me that a majority of funding comes from international sources. But why would any organization invest in a media organization? Yes it would be for profitability, if you say it just like that. But there is more than profitability, don't you think? Every journalist has with him/her an inclination towards the Arab or the American or the European world. Don't they? Isn't it possible then that they also subscribe to ideologies of that part of the world? Certainly they will, and beyond doubt. So if they have with them an ideological inclination then it is very much possible that they would have hardly any chance to criticize those people who are of interest to their principals. So when you have so many Medias everyone is certain to have one kind of the ideology or the other, except Hindu, represented. Thus the only favorite whipping boy available is the RSS and its allied organizations. Isn't it so? So there you are. These different lobbies have a phenomenal financial power. The Jews gain their financial power, as said before, through the various business enterprises that are vital for American Economy including the press. Jews are said to be controlling the American Economy virtually.
Muslim Lobby led by Arabs gain their financial muscle through petro economy, where billions of dollars are earned by them almost without any efforts and also invested in Global Terrorist endeavors. Since true journalistic spirits exists hardly anywhere in the modern day, media corporations are exclusively concentrated on financial profitability. Given this it's not a great deal to make these Lobbies to run the propaganda of their kind in their supported Medias. And given there isn't any Lobby for the Hindutva faction; they are to be the easy target of such propaganda. Won't you agree? This is high time for Hindus to organize an internationally influential Hindu Lobby. Do you think that it is difficult to form one? Certainly not! Consider this: When NDA government had organized 'Pravasi Bharatiya Divas' there were so many Non Resident Indians, most of whom were Hindus who had expressed their interest to be of some use to their land. When, after Pokharan II, India was showered with various international sanctions, let us never forget it was our fellow NRI's who came to the rescue by subscribing to Yashwanth Sinha's, then Finance Minister's, Resurgent India Bonds. Before NDA regime was over India had with it a Foreign Exchange in excess of $100 billion. Doesn't this portray the willingness of our Diaspora? The only thing that would be needed is desire, first, followed by unrelenting determination. Simply put 'Creating a Pro Hindu Lobby is not an option… but a sheer necessity.'
The author is the Editor-in-Chief of Aseemaa: Journal for National Resurgence.
'In a country that prides itself on its religious diversity and its secular constitution, may see the rise of Modi and his pro Hindu agenda as a terrifying chapter of intolerance. They say he is dangerous fire brand and too comfortable inciting the politics of hatred and violence.' States Sam Dolonick in his article published in the recent issue of 'The Economist'. Besides holding Narendra Modi solely responsible for the riots of 2002 he also makes the baseless and completely concocted allegation that 'The RSS was influenced by 1930s German fascism."
It's not that he doesn't acknowledge the unparalleled achievements of Gujarat Chief Minister. In fact he does when he says 'Modi has attracted more than 20% of the India's total investment of $69 billion last year' but he makes a foul attempt of trying to make it irrelevant by adding 'But despite his achievement, for may of India's 1.1 billion people – 14 per cent of who are Muslims – Modi will always be defined by the anti-Muslim violence…' The 'cause of hate' against Modi is, frankly speaking, owing to his Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) background, the organization which is today whipping boy of the mainline media and, so called, 'secular' organizations.
'The Economist says is influenced by the Fascist ideology. Need I say how concocted is this idea, i.e. of RSS being influenced by Fascist? Absolute bunk! RSS is, in fact, in response to the brutal history of Islamic Conquest, that which American Historian Mr. Will Durant called 'the bloodiest in history'. The current aspersions against the RSS mostly by the media, Congress and Communist followers to the effect that it is a 'communal organization, most dangerous to the country than even communism' are a complete travesty of fact.
The Ideology of Hindutva which is propounded by the RSS, and followed by Modi, offers a room for all minorities on a condition of their whole hearted submission to the supreme value of the nation in their lives. The nation is a vehicle of universal truths and is not an entity above them. This is no chauvinist nationalism of the kind associated with Mussolini or Hitler. It teaches loyalty and devotion to the national society in the national homeland under the image of the mother. The unity and solidarity of the motherland taught to claim the highest sacrificial devotion from the citizen body.
Whoever enters into this spirit of devotion to the nation as a spiritual unity of the land and people are Indians or Hindus in essence. The mental commitment should be final and supreme. The Muslims and Christians have perfect freedom of worship, so long as they do not destroy and undermine the faith and symbolism of the national society. They should subordinate their exclusive claims for final and sole revelation vis-à-vis the national society. They could bear witness to their faith in life and speech but they should not indulge in any unfair and unspiritual modes of conversions. The national identity requires that the whole of the national society, including minorities, should share in the best values of the past. They should appreciate national Dharma – the code of ethical principles and ways of life. The cultural history, they should all give their mind and hearts whole-heartedly to an appreciation of the best types.
Rama and Krishna may be appreciated by non-Hindus as secular examples while the Hindus will see them as full spiritual exemplars, or avatars. Now considering this ideology, I wonder as to what is so 'dangerous' about it, so as to look at it dangerous than communism? I would be delighted if the people who put in such allegation help me to understand. Be that as it may. Let's consider the following case: In the late 1980s, Abdul Latif was the underworld king of Gujarat. Later, he became Dawood Ibrahim's business manager in the state and was one of criminal dons to make what now seems to be the shameless transition from organized crime to terrorism. Latif was also the suspect in the Mumbai blasts case of 1993; the RDX and other explosive devices for that operation landed, remember, on the Gujarat coast. In November 1997, Latif was killed in an encounter with the Ahmadabad police.
Many of the Latif's cohorts were put under watch. One of them was his driver, apparently responsible for, in one daring move,hiding a huge cache of weapons meant for terrorist groups. This was part of the consignment that had arrived before Mumbai blasts of 1993. Latif was under surveillance so his driver had hidden the arms in a well in his (the driver's) native village near Ujjain. The driver eventually faced over 50 cases including some under the National Security Act; He was arrested at various stages, by the Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh police, but avoided conviction. When not facilitating terror networks, he was engaged in extortion rackets in Rajasthan, acting almost certainly on behalf of others. His principals, the police believe, may be linked to terror funding groups. The Latif's driver's name was Sohrabuddin Sheikh. Yes this was the same Sohrabuddin for whose encounter Modi was being scrutinized by his political rivals and the media. 'A nationalist is being harassed for having exterminated a terrorist!' by the media that calls itself 'secular' and 'nationalist'.
What a pity. If you may observe in detail of the propaganda carried on by the Media in Gujarat and in other part of the world, at the same time, you would find that: While Dr. Haneef, a doctor who flew from Glasgow in UK to Australia under mysterious circumstances, and who was arrested by the Australian authorities was given such a terrific support by the media as if they were convinced and simply wanted to convince the world that he wasn't a terrorist. It may be noted that simply because he was allowed to return to India on benefit of doubt the media almost declared his victory as theirs, before even he was tried in the court of law. Our Prime Minister, Mr. Manmohan Singh, went on record to say that he 'lost his sleep' for Haneef. On contrary to this when ethnic Hindus in Malaysia made a peaceful demonstration against the destruction of their temples by pro-Islamic-fundamentalist regime and were sabotaged ruthlessly and put to jail, our very own Karunanidhi's grievances, put forth the Central Government, were simply brushed aside, he was asked to lay off the issue rather ruthlessly. Media made little publicity of the issue. When it\'s a question of Hindus getting unfair treatment in a Muslim majority region, the 'civil, sophisticated and articulate' Muslim intellectuals take refuge in the statement that it's a matter concerning a foreign country. But when it\'s a question regarding a cartoon or a fatwa for beheading a writer, they say - we are a global Ummah, anything happening anywhere to Muslims is our common concern! All big lies and a bigger hypocrisy traded in the name of a religion. So much for their hypocrisy! But why is it so? Let's go in to a bit detail. When Muslims are in trouble there is a cry of intolerance from the whole of the Islamic world led by the Arabs.
The Pope cries foul when there is problem facing Christians. Communists in India are supported by their comrades in China. But why is it that none cries or express even a word of concern when Hindus are in trouble? Today thousands of Kashmiri pundits, who were driven out of their homes by Jihadi Muslims after torturing them and even raping the women, are living as refugees in their own country. No media cares for them. Instead more special privileges are given to the Kashmir as an incentive and they continue to play lame politics of 'Azad Kashmir' (read Independent Kashmir) with Indian Government. Our forces who risk their lives are blamed and abused for unproven allegations. Recently, in Kashmir, an Army Jawan was stripped off and made to walk nude in the public for attempting to rape a woman.
Is it so? Then why is it that the same people were sitting so silently when those terrorists were killing and raping their people? Why didn't they ever boycotted them and gave a similar treatment? Why doesn't a Maulvi, anywhere in India, issue a fatwa against a Jihadi terrorist? No answers. But that is understandable. The pure hypocrisy, of the Muslim Clergy and Politicians, is the answer. But why is the media sitting mum? Why aren't they speaking? Have you ever thought of a reason? I did. The reason is because Hindus don't have a strong Lobby of their own. If you take the case of Israel, you will find that though it is a small land they continue to live against all odds surrounded by their enemies from all the directions with rightful support of Americans. Americans are under obligation to support Israel because Jews, who also form a majority in Israel, control American Economy.
Palestinians though haven't been anywhere successful to have a worthwhile economy for themselves and having spend six decades in building a legacy of hatred and violence continue to gain 'sympathy' and 'support' from the Media as a result of the financial expenditure by the Arab Lobby Supported by Arab Nations. When Christians are persecuted in Pakistan Pope cries foul and American along bring in their pressure to put a halt on it. But what is the case with Hindus? Who are they to look for? As Arabs for the Muslims, Vatican for the Christian and Israel for the Jews who is for Hindus? It's sad but true that Hindus have none to look far. The only Hindu country, Nepal, is today under the clutches of Communists, with its King virtually in exile. India has, what it is proudly called, a 'Free Press' that which is run by private organization without governmental controls. We have series of Television News Channels in various languages. And not a single one ever clarifies its source of income. They never specify who funds them in their websites do they? Yet they have with them millions of dollars. Where did this money come from? You must agree with me that a majority of funding comes from international sources. But why would any organization invest in a media organization? Yes it would be for profitability, if you say it just like that. But there is more than profitability, don't you think? Every journalist has with him/her an inclination towards the Arab or the American or the European world. Don't they? Isn't it possible then that they also subscribe to ideologies of that part of the world? Certainly they will, and beyond doubt. So if they have with them an ideological inclination then it is very much possible that they would have hardly any chance to criticize those people who are of interest to their principals. So when you have so many Medias everyone is certain to have one kind of the ideology or the other, except Hindu, represented. Thus the only favorite whipping boy available is the RSS and its allied organizations. Isn't it so? So there you are. These different lobbies have a phenomenal financial power. The Jews gain their financial power, as said before, through the various business enterprises that are vital for American Economy including the press. Jews are said to be controlling the American Economy virtually.
Muslim Lobby led by Arabs gain their financial muscle through petro economy, where billions of dollars are earned by them almost without any efforts and also invested in Global Terrorist endeavors. Since true journalistic spirits exists hardly anywhere in the modern day, media corporations are exclusively concentrated on financial profitability. Given this it's not a great deal to make these Lobbies to run the propaganda of their kind in their supported Medias. And given there isn't any Lobby for the Hindutva faction; they are to be the easy target of such propaganda. Won't you agree? This is high time for Hindus to organize an internationally influential Hindu Lobby. Do you think that it is difficult to form one? Certainly not! Consider this: When NDA government had organized 'Pravasi Bharatiya Divas' there were so many Non Resident Indians, most of whom were Hindus who had expressed their interest to be of some use to their land. When, after Pokharan II, India was showered with various international sanctions, let us never forget it was our fellow NRI's who came to the rescue by subscribing to Yashwanth Sinha's, then Finance Minister's, Resurgent India Bonds. Before NDA regime was over India had with it a Foreign Exchange in excess of $100 billion. Doesn't this portray the willingness of our Diaspora? The only thing that would be needed is desire, first, followed by unrelenting determination. Simply put 'Creating a Pro Hindu Lobby is not an option… but a sheer necessity.'
The author is the Editor-in-Chief of Aseemaa: Journal for National Resurgence.