Islam and Christianity share ‘idea of conquest’, says Pope Francis – Stephanie Kirchgaessner

Pope Francis

Stephanie Kirchgaessner“It is true that the idea of conquest is inherent in the soul of Islam. However, it is also possible to interpret the objective in Matthew’s Gospel, where Jesus sends his disciples to all nations, in terms of the same idea of conquest,” Francis said. – Stephanie Kirchgaessner

Islam and Christianity share an inherent “idea of conquest”, and those who refer to Europe’s roots as Christian often veer into colonialism, Pope Francis said in a wide-ranging interview about the the migration crisis and the ability of Christians and Muslims to live together harmoniously.

Speaking to the French Catholic newspaper La Croix, the Argentinian pope also hailed the election of Sadiq Khan in London, saying that a Muslim mayor personified the idea of integration within Europe.

The pope said it was “fair and responsible” to ask whether Europe had the capacity to accept millions of refugees from the Middle East and Africa. But he said it was more important to ask why there were so many, pointing to war, the unfettered free market, unemployment, the arms trade, underinvestment in Africa and income inequality.

He appeared to reject any link between Islamic extremism within Europe and Islam itself. Instead, he condemned the way in which migrants were “ghettoised” rather than integrated into society.

“In Brussels, the terrorists were Belgians, children of migrants, but they grew up in a ghetto. In London, the new mayor took his oath of office in a cathedral and will undoubtedly meet the Queen. This illustrates the need for Europe to rediscover its capacity to integrate.”

He said integration was even more necessary today than in the past because of the “grave problem” of Europe’s declining birth rate, saying a “demographic emptiness is developing”.

When he was asked why he never referred to Europe’s roots as Christian—he has often spoken of Europe having a multicultural identity—Francis, the leader of the Roman Catholic Church, said he spoke of roots in the plural because there were so many.

“When I hear talk of the Christian roots of Europe, I sometimes dread the tone, which can seem triumphalist or even vengeful. It then takes on colonialist overtones,” he said. Christianity’s contribution to the culture was of service—of “Christ in the washing of the feet”—and not a “colonial enterprise”, he Constantine the Greatsaid.

When Francis was asked by La Croix whether fear of Islam was justified in Europe, he said people’s real fear was of Islamic State. He then drew parallels between perceptions some non-Muslims may have of the Islamic faith, and of Christianity.

“It is true that the idea of conquest is inherent in the soul of Islam. However, it is also possible to interpret the objective in Matthew’s Gospel, where Jesus sends his disciples to all nations, in terms of the same idea of conquest,” he said.

He said it was important for Christians to ask themselves whether an “overly western model of democracy” has been exported to countries such as Iraq, where a strong government existed before military intervention led to the ousting of Saddam Hussein. Francis also pointed to Libya, where he quoted someone as saying recently: “We used to have one Gaddafi, now we have 50”.

He said the co-existence between Christians and Muslims was still possible, pointing to his native Argentina, pre-war Central Africa, and Lebanon as models.

When asked about the role religion ought to play in society and government, Francis strongly backed the separation between church and state, saying states must be secular, although they also needed strong laws guaranteeing religious freedom and needed to ensure individuals, including government officials, had a right to conscientious objection.

“If a Muslim woman wishes to wear a veil, she must be able to do so. Similarly, if a Catholic wishes to wear a cross,” Francis said. “People must be free to profess their faith at the heart of their own culture not merely at its margins.” He then expressed a “modest critique” of France, saying the country’s laws exaggerate laïcité—the separation between church and state.

“This arises from a way of considering religions as subcultures rather than as fully fledged cultures in their own right. I fear that this approach, which is understandable as part of the heritage of the Enlightenment, continues to exist. France needs to take a step forward on this issue in order “to accept that openness to transcendence is a right for everyone,” he said. – The Guardian, 17 May 2016

Goa Inqusition

OLD GOA : Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, and backsliding Christian victims of the Goa Inquisition stand with their hands nailed to posts as a Portuguese padre reads out their alleged crimes and a Portuguese nobleman on a horse watches. They will be burned at the stake later in Old Goa’s central square and their confiscated lands will be shared between the Portuguese nobles and Roman Catholic Church. The Inquisition was called to Goa by St. Francis Xavier, a Portuguese-employed Spanish missionary whose hatred of Hindus and Hinduism amounted to an obsession. He was known to Tamil Hindus as the  Scourge of the Coromandel Coast.

Why M. K. Narayanan and P. Chidambaram must be tried for treason – Radha Rajan

P. Chidambaram & M. K. Narayanan

Radha Rajan is the editor of Vigil Online“M. K. Narayanan and P. Chidambaram actively presided over the most evil conspiracy in post-independent India—one, to undermine and compromise national security by passing off a Muslim female suicide bomber as a sweet young thing who … was gunned down by the … Gujarat Police in what UPA I labelled was a “fake encounter”; and two, to label Hindus as terrorists on their own bhumi.” – Radha Rajan

In April 2016, two English news channels “broke” news on the same day about the two most heinous crimes against Hindus and the Hindu nation perpetrated by Sonia Gandhi’s puppet regimes UPA I and II; not that this was any deep and dark secret. This article provides an overview of the twin conspiracies and revisits what I wrote in 2008 immediately after 26/11, and what I wrote in 2011 when the NSAHome Minister duo had successfully implemented the twin plot. Revisiting what I wrote in 2008 and 2011 is necessary because they were written at the very time these events were unfolding using news as reported in newspapers and television news channels. When I connected the dots of what was not reported as “news” and what I gathered from my talks with several persons, what took shape looked like the most heinous crime against Hindus on Hindu bhumi since vivisection of the Hindu nation in 1947.

M. K. Narayanan and P. Chidambaram actively presided over the most evil conspiracy in post-independent India—one, to undermine and compromise national security by passing off a Muslim female suicide bomber as a sweet young thing who with three of her young and innocent companion-jihadis was gunned down by the Crime Branch of the Gujarat Police in what UPA I labelled was a “fake encounter”; and two, to label Hindus as terrorists on their own bhumi. Notwithstanding the cancerous public discourse of secularists and anti-Hindu intellectual establishment which refers to this timeless Hindu civilization as “idea of India”—this is Hindu bhumi. The carefully plotted and successfully implemented twin conspiracies became a desperate necessity for Sonia Gandhi and the Generic Church in the context of several scandals plaguing the Congress party and its political allies in the government, and the rise and rise of Narendra Modi and consequently the BJP.

This Rasputinesque plot was hatched to entangle Narendra Modi and Amit Shah in the “fake encounter” legal mesh and also to incapacitate Hindu society and any future BJP government from dealing appropriately with domestic or foreign Muslim terrorism against the nation. The conspiracy to label Hindus as terrorists and coin a new phrase “saffron terror” was to force Hindus to stop using the phrase “Muslim terrorists” or “Islamic terrorism” and worse, to introduce the patently false and unconvincing axiom in national security thesis—terrorism has no religion. And all this was successfully accomplished by Sonia Gandhi’s two principal henchmen M. K. Narayanan and P. Chidambaram by railroading/sabotaging/misdirecting the investigation into the June 15, 2004 Ishrat Jahan killing, Malegaon blasts 2006 and 2008, and the 18 February, 2007 Samjhauta Express train blasts which killed 68 persons besides injuring many others. Herein is the answer to P. Chidambaram’s “purpose served” cryptic response in August 2010 when asked by journalists why he coined the phrase “saffron terror”.

M. K. Narayanan became National Security Adviser in 2005 replacing J. N. Dixit who died suddenly and in the most mysterious circumstances. M. K. Narayanan was a permanent fixture in the Rajiv Gandhi household and like all Nehru family minions transferred his loyalty after Rajiv Gandhi died, to Sonia Gandhi for which he was handsomely rewarded when Sonia Gandhi made him the NSA. Hindu nationalists have never doubted that Sonia Gandhi had an agenda of her own when she married the eldest son of the Indian Prime Minister. After all, her mother-in-law’s climb to the top of the power ladder in the Congress party had more to do with whose daughter she was than any past reputation for political astuteness or even experience; and Sonia Gandhi knew an opportunity when she saw one. M. K. Narayanan and P. Chidambaram with deliberate intent hatched and executed the plot in alignment with Sonia Gandhi’s agenda for the country; senior ministers in UPA I and II who remained mute witnesses to this anti-Hindu plot were no less guilty than the evil duo, of what is now unfolding to be treason against the nation; but most tragic of all was B. Raman’s endorsement of P. Chidambaram’s “saffron terror” slur. While B. Raman bemoaned the fact that the investigations into the Malegaon blast case of 2006 and 2008 and the Samjhauta blasts case was botched up by the CBI and NIA and regretted that the central investigating agencies had two different yardsticks by which they dealt with Muslim and Hindu suspects in the case, it is nevertheless a fact that Raman did add strength to Sonia Gandhi’s “saffron terror” plot.

B. RamanWhen investigations into the above mentioned acts of terror had been fouled and tainted beyond repair, P. Chidambaram let loose the phrase “saffron terror” in August 2010 at a meeting of police chiefs in New Delhi, secure in the knowledge that important sections even among Hindu organizations had been persuaded to believe that Hindus had turned terrorists. P. Chidambaram banked on the fact that Hindus could be terrorised, victimised and frightened into silence and there was little danger of any spontaneous or organized protest by Hindus against being labelled terrorists, exactly as was the case when Jayalalithaa arrested Pujya Kanchi Acharyas in 2004 and almost destroyed the matham with no Hindu resistance and therefore with total impunity. Unlike Muslims and Christians who can let loose violence on the streets and/or bring international pressure to bear upon the country’s government, India’s Hindus have little political sense and no sense of the power of their sheer numbers to respond to any slight, insult, humiliation and threat. M. K. Narayanan and P. Chidambaram banked on Hindu cowardice and powerlessness and used Hemant Karkare and Col. Purohit to execute their dirty tricks. Soon after P. Chidambaram injected the “saffron terror” venom into the nation’s public discourse, B. Raman wrote thus in the January 17 issue of Indian Defence Review:

I am proud to have sounded the wake-up call as early as in 2006 to the dangers of some angry members of the Hindu community taking to reprisal acts of terrorism against our Muslims if the Government does not take note of the perceptions in sections of the Hindu community that it has been soft towards the jihadi terrorists. I have been writing and speaking on this from time to time since then. (Indian Defence Review, 17 January, 2011)

not only gave credence to P. Chidambaram’s “saffron terror” pink elephant, Raman in fact designed and prepared the blueprint for “Hindu terror” when earlier he described ULFA as Hindu terrorists.

B. Raman like Karkare saw the truth behind the evil plot only after the damage had been done and like Karkare carried the burden of his belated realization to the grave, a sad, disillusioned man whose scrupulous honesty and fearlessness to speak the truth proved to be his Achilles heel. If the Army, Military Intelligence, MATS, CBI, NIA, and above all else, B. Raman’s integrity and fidelity to truth was just so much collateral damage, then Swami Aseemanand, Sadhvi Pragya and Col. Purohit were the evil duo’s prey.

Overview of unfolding evil

  1. J. N. Dixit who was made National Security Adviser in 2004, died in January 2005.
  2. M. K. Narayanan, who was made Special Adviser on Internal Security to the Prime Minister in May 2004, replaced Dixit as NSA; with M. K. Narayanan was born the Dirty Tricks Department of the Indian intelligence services; what is yet to be established is whether the CIA Dirty Tricks Department had any hand in creating the Indian variant.
  3. If Sonia Gandhi had an agenda, then M. K. Narayanan was the first and most powerful instrument of the agenda. Narayanan began to move the pieces step by measured step almost immediately after he took charge as NSA.
  4. The three agencies involved in the plot to create “Hindu terror” were the CBI, Maharashtra ATS and NIA while the Army and Military Intelligence (MI) were dragged into the evil plot, knowingly or unknowingly, which fact is yet to be placed in the public domain.
  5. The Maharashtra ATS (MATS) was formed in 2004 and K. P. Raghuvanshi was the first chief of MATS; Raghuvanshi was previously with the CBI.
  6. In January 2008, NSA M. K. Narayanan hand-picked Hemant Karkare to head MATS replacing Raghuvanshi.
  7. MATS and Mumbai police, before Karkare replaced Raghuvanshi, arrested several members of SIMI for the Malegaon blasts of 2006 while the Indian Mujahideen had proudly admitted that it was responsible for the Samjhauta Express train blasts; but after M. K. Narayanan took over as NSA and after P. Chidambaram took over as Home Minister and after Hemant Karkare replaced Raghuvanshi as Chief of MATS, investigations into the same acts of terror was transformed into a witch-hunt for Hindu terrorists.
  8. Immediately after M. K. Narayanan took over as NSA and totally out of the blue, a new Hindu organization, Abhinav Bharat was formed in Pune in 2006 and Himani Savarkar, niece of Nathuram Godse who is also married to the nephew of Vinayak Savarkar, is elected President of Abhinav Bharat.
  9. Lt. Col. Shrikant Purohit, a serving officer in Military Intelligence (which fact was almost certainly kept secret) is one of the founders of Abhinav Bharat and is made Permanent Trustee of Abhinav Bharat Trust; which fact alone points all fingers in the direction of Sonia Gandhi and M. K. Narayanan.
  10. How can a serving officer in Military Intelligence be associated with founding a new Hindu organization explicitly intended to give Hindus military training as counter-measure to increasing jihadi terror attacks against Hindus and Hindu temples? A Hindu organization which bore the name of Veer Savarkar’s Abhinav Bharat and whose first President was not only Nathuram Godse’s niece but was also related by marriage to Savarkar.
  11. Lt. Col. Purohit almost certainly was tasked to float this new Hindu organization which was intended to be the launching pad for Purohit to establish contact with the RSS eventually to infiltrate the RSS and other parivar organizations.
  12. The NSA or the Army or MI or MATS or NIA or all of them convinced the RSS that they had credible intelligence reports that members of Abhinav Bharat had plotted to kill Mohan Bhagwat and other important RSS pracharaks. This was done to pre-empt and silence any protest when Sonia Gandhi and her henchmen would arrest Hindu religious leaders and members of Hindu organizations for the Samjhauta Express blasts and for Malegaon blasts of 2006 and 2008.
  13. The ploy worked exceedingly well. When M. K. Narayanan’s dirty tricks department dragged the Army and MI into the sordid conspiracy and arrested Sadhvi Pragyna, Swami Aseemanand and Lt. Col. Purohit, violating all due processes of law, the RSS was mute; as was the BJP and the VHP; exactly as calculated by the Congress government  and exactly as they were silenced earlier when catastrophe befell the Kanchi Matham in 2004.
  14. Lt. Col Purohit was used by Sonia Gandhi’s puppet regime to do two things—convince the most powerful Hindu organization, the RSS that it was the target of Hindu terrorists and simultaneously spread the canard that Swami Aseemanand, an RSS man was responsible for the Samjhauta train blasts. In one brilliant stroke the RSS was both victim of Hindu terror and Hindu terrorist outfit.
  15. And close on the heels of arresting “Hindu terrorists” in October 2008, totally unexpectedly, 26/11 happened in November 2008; Hemant Karkare died in the line of duty.
  16. Shivraj Patil resigned owning moral responsibility for the Mumbai terror attack and inexplicably, P. Chidambaram, not Pranab Mukherjee was made Home Minister.
  17. Speaking soon after taking charge as Home Minister, Chidambaram said he will put in the same principles and work ethic that he had used in the Finance Ministry.
  18. Knowing what we do now about P. Chidambaram’s unscrupulous and downright treasonous decision to rewrite the entire Ishrat Jahan story where with a sleight of hand Chidambaram made Modi and Amit Shah the villains and Ishrat and her co-jihadis innocent victims, and knowing what we do now about the sordid corruption in the Agusta Westland VVIP chopper case, if P. Chidambaram by his own admission has said he will put in place the same principles and work ethic in the Home Ministry as in the Finance Ministry, Modi Sarkar must now investigate P. Chidambaram’s tenure as Finance Minister.
  19. In December 2008 the NIA was constituted by an act of Parliament and the newly formed NIA, conveniently had P. Chidambaram for boss.
  20. If M. K. Narayanan presided over inventing Hindu terrorists, P. Chidambaram presided over letting off known jihadis and jihadi outfits for terror acts and pinning them all on Narayanan’s newly minted Hindu terrorists.
  21. Having accomplished what they were tasked to do—create and arrest Hindu terrorists the Indian Intelligence Dirty Tricks Department had no more use for the fiction that Mohan Bhagwat and other senior RSS leaders were the specific targets of Hindu terrorists belonging to Abhinav Bharat and they allowed the fiction to melt in the darkness. The RSS in its letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh dated February 8, 2011 raises this issue in no uncertain terms: But despite being in possession of such explosive, critical and specific evidence of the plot the MATS took a ‘conscious decision’ and told the Bombay High Court in July 2010 that, as there was nothing ‘specific’, ‘no further action is required to be taken’ on the alleged plot to kill the RSS leaders, ‘except to wait for the outcome of the pending trial.'”

I rest my case.

Cicero QuoteWhat I wrote in 2008

Hemant Karkare is dead allegedly while bravely fighting the terrorists and so we may never know the truth. But we can connect the dots and the picture it makes causes grave disquiet. Some say he died of bullets to the chest, some say to the neck, some say bullet proof vests are useless against AK 47s and Kalashnikovs while others say Karkare had removed his bullet proof vest and was killed when he was seated in his car. Long before the Mumbai terror attack, I had expressed the view to two of my friends that the thrust of the investigations into the Malegaon blasts is not to find the accused guilty but to weaken any future BJP government’s measures to deal with jihad, jihadis and religious conversion undertaken by Islam and the Church and to question the government’s motives. Whoever master-minded the investigations and was directing the ATS did not want any change in the public discourse on terror or on the issue of the basis of nationhood. The entire investigation had the following fall-out:

  1. Bring disrepute to stringent laws like POTA by using a state law like the MCOCA against innocent Hindus to demonstrate cynically and contemptuously to the RSS and the BJP that we have shown you how a law can be misused.
  2. Bring disrepute to narco-analysis by forcing Hindus to discredit the method because Hindus perceived it as being used against Hindus to arrest them allegedly on the basis of what they “confessed” under the influence of psychotropic drugs.
  3. Bring army intelligence agencies (Lt. Col. Purohit) into disrepute so that any action resulting from army intelligence against jihadis and jihad-sponsoring outfits and nations can be laid at the door of “Hindu extremists” in the army.
  4. The resultant disrepute is that the Indian Army is communalised and anti-Muslim by nature.
  5. Label Hindu sadhus and sanyasis as terrorists so that any resistance from Hindu society to jihad and religious conversion may, in future be labeled as acts of terror by “Sangh Parivar outfits”. The national debate on Bangladeshi Muslims, the pan-national loyalty of all Muslims to the Ummah and religious conversion would thus conveniently acquire “Hindu terror” dimensions.
  6. Undermine people’s faith in all institutions and organizations wielding great moral authority and influence, and this includes our police and armed forces.

To put it bluntly, the nature and direction of the Malegaon blasts investigation, which had become a witch-hunt for “Hindu terrorists”, was intended to weaken, defame and ultimately neutralise all centers of Hindu resistance to jihad and the Evangelical Church. The media has been reporting that Hemant Karkare died a very unhappy man. He is alleged to have expressed his deep unhappiness about “political interference” into the Malegaon blasts investigations to two media persons of two English TV news channels. Karkare is also reported to have asked the Maharashtra Home Minister R. R. Patil, on the very day he died, to be transferred out of the ATS. Such was his unhappiness.

We have it from one of the media persons who spoke to Karkare the day before he died that Karkare told him that over 90% of the ATS had been diverted into the Malegaon blasts probe. This witch-hunt for Hindu terrorists has all the hallmark of having been conceived in the mind of a strategist for the Congress party or its President, and who was probably himself/herself being manipulated by string-pullers located elsewhere. The questions and suspicions that come to our mind:

  1. The Times of India, dated 27th November, 2008, on page 11 reported that Hemant Karkare met the National Security Adviser (NSA) M. K. Narayanan in Delhi.
  2. When the Prime Minister refused to accept the NSA’s resignation in the wake of the Mumbai terror attack, a functionary in the PMO declared that the NSA is “not expected to micro-manage national security”.
  3. If that be so, why was the NSA taking such intense interest in the Malegaon blasts probe?
  4. Why did the NSA summon the ATS chief Karkare to Delhi unless it was to seek an explanation as to why the ATS failed to get custody of Sadhvi Pragya and Lt. Col. Purohit in the MCOCA court.
  5. Why was M. K. Narayanan so anxious to know why the accused Hindus will not continue to remain in ATS custody?
  6. If Karkare had seven years of experience in R&AW, almost all of them overseas appointments, why was he removed from R&AW and appointed chief of ATS?
  7. Who chose Karkare for the job and why was he chosen when he had little or no field experience in tackling terror in Mumbai?
  8. If Karkare was unhappy about political interference in the Malegaon blasts probe, why did he not resign instead of submitting to lead the ATS on a wild-goose-chase?
  9. If Karkare was heading the ATS why did he not equip the ATS with battle gear appropriate for fighting jihadis possessing sophisticated and contemporary arms, explosives and technology? After all the city of Mumbai has always been the chosen target of jihadis, besides Hindu temples.
  10. Why was Shivraj Patil made Home Minister and why was he not removed until the very end when the UPA is on its way out of Delhi
  11. Who chose M. K. Narayanan as National Security Adviser when he had worked for the Ford Foundation funded American think-tank, Center for Security Analysis, just prior to his appointment?

UK US FlagsWe get the sinking feeling that the FBI and the Scotland Yard are here to “take charge” of the investigations only to make sure that their readings of all evidence will not point to Pakistan. The US and the UK need Pakistan for more reasons than one and it is my conjecture that their conclusions are going to be different from those of Indian investigating agencies. And M. K. Narayanan has been retained as NSA probably because this government wants to make sure that the FBI and Scotland Yard are unhindered in their dubious mission. The UPA government too does not want war with Pakistan, jihad, jihadis or the Evangelical Church. The silence about why India permitted the non-reciprocal measure of foreign investigating agencies to come to India to “assist in the investigations” is also mystifying. While the media is going after Vilasrao Deshmukh, Achutananthan, Ramgoal Verma and Shivraj Patil, it has kept its hands off the NSA. Who is pulling the media strings? (Mumbai Terror Probe: Silence of the Conspirators)

What I wrote in 2011

The Congress-led UPA government is climbing up a neck-breaking slippery slope—to label Hindus terrorists on their own bhumi. B. Raman was the first to blow this soap-bubble into public discourse when he described ULFA as Hindu terrorists. A retired bureaucrat and well-known counter-terrorism expert, Raman’s outlandish claim went unchallenged although the writer, in a private email to Raman expressed great disappointment over the thoughtless expression with the observation that ULFA could be labeled a Hindu outfit only if they claimed to be acting in the name of Hinduism to serve a Hindu cause. The writer carried the discussion further with the argument that if there was no Hindu objective to ULFA’s actions and if Raman’s bizarre logic were to be applied across the board then we would henceforth have to name all offences with a prefix indicating the offender’s religion: Hindu smuggler, Christian molester, Muslim history-sheeter, Jain shoplifter, Parsi goonda and so on. That effectively popped Raman’s ULFA Hindu terrorist soap-bubble.

It is a pity to stick a pin into Raman’s pride for what he thinks was his original insight; perhaps Raman should now seriously consider the possibility that the idea of Hindu terror may have been cleverly implanted in his mind from as early as 2005 by his own fraternity—either by intelligence officials in India or foreign intelligence officials with clever suggestions, bogus facts and disputable, even fabricated “evidence”. After all this is the most satanic, most functional and one of the busiest networks in the world as exposed by Julian Assange to whom the sane world of ordinary people owes an eternal debt of gratitude.

Considering that Raman first floated this soap-bubble in 2006, had all this been above-board, logically speaking, for a counter-terrorism expert like Raman there ought to have been at the very least two or three terror attacks prior to or up until 2006 with a discernible pattern which compelled him to conclude “as early as in 2006” that there existed a pink elephant called Hindu Terror.

  • Attack on Indian parliament – 13 December 2001
  • Godhra Train burning – 27 February, 2002
  • Attack on Akshardham Temple, Gujarat – 24 September 2002
  • Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, terror attack – 28 December 2005
  • Varanasi bombings – A series of bombings that occurred across Varanasi on 7 March 2006
  • Mumbai Train Bombings – 11 July 2006 were a series of seven bomb blasts that took place over a period of 11 minutes on the Suburban Railway in Mumbai
  • Malegaon blasts – September 28, 2006
  • Incendiary explosion, Samjhauta Express – 18 February, 2007
  • Mecca Masjid, Hyderabad blasts – 18 May, 2007
  • Ajmer Sharif blasts – 15 October 2007
  • Malegaon blasts – September 29, 2008

The UPA government and Sonia’s minions have held Sadhvi Pragya and Pujya Swami Aseemanand guilty (without an ounce of proof so far) only for the Malegaon blasts and the terror acts in 2007, as shown in the list above; but as per this list for Raman to have arrived at his original conclusion on Hindu terror in 2006, he could only have studied the attacks on the Indian Parliament, the burning alive of karsevaks in the Sabarmati Express at Godhra, the terror attack on Akshardham Temple, the IISc terror attack, the Varanasi bombings and the Mumbai suburban train serial explosions; these were the only acts of terror that preceded the Malegaon blasts of 2006.

The Malegaon blasts of 2008 were followed by blasts in Modasa in Gujarat, serial blasts in Jaipur, on Ramjanmabhumi, last year in the German Bakery in Pune, and another near the Dasashwamedha Ghat in Varanasi and the nation is holding its breath waiting for the UPA government to pin these too on the RSS since no arrests have been made so far and no charge-sheet has been filed.

So much for prior cases and precedents; now let us look at the nature of these attacks and see if there is any pattern to them. Some of the striking features of these acts of terror are:

  1. Gun-toting and maybe explosives carrying terrorists as in the Indian parliament attack case, in IISc Bangalore and Mumbai 26/11;
  2. Terror acts using explosives;
  3. Terror acts using incendiary matter and inflammable cocktails containing RDX, ammonium nitrate and fuel oil;
  4. Low intensity explosives like crude bombs;
  5. High intensity explosives like RDX;
  6. Pressure cookers;
  7. Low casualty mortality rate as one or two individuals;
  8. Medium casualty mortality rate between 10 and 50;
  9. High rate of mortalities in the hundreds.

The writer is not a terrorism or counter-terrorism expert but has enough intelligence which does not see a pattern here that points in the direction of Hindu terror. Crude bombs do not cause extensive damage and cause nil or very low mortality while medium and high rates of mortality are caused by use of two devices: high intensity Improvised Explosive Device (IED) or Timed Incendiary Device (TID). As their names suggest, the first uses explosives improvised to cause maximum damage accompanied by killing metal shrapnel and glass splinters; the second causes maximum damage by fire.

German Bakery Bombing Pune 2010The Mumbai suburban train blasts and the Jaipur serial blasts were caused by IEDs while the terror attack in the Sabarmati Express at Godhra and Samjhauta Express have been caused by TIDs. Islamic jihadis seem to have used both IEDs and TIDs when they took Mumbai hostage in November 2008. Even before investigating agencies could determine what caused the Malegaon blasts in 2006, and notwithstanding the fact that SIMI took credit for the same, Raman gave credence to the Hindu terror fiction. One reason why other terrorism experts dismissed the Hindu terror theory was the fact that Hindus as individuals and Hindu groups do not have access to RDX and this is a critical factor in the argument. It is around this critical factor that the diabolic plot to label Hindus as terrorists on their own bhumi has been crafted and executed.

  • RDX is a high intensity explosive and use of RDX even in miniscule quantities causes immense damage and destruction;
  • RDX can be used not only in bombs but also as a component along with ammonium nitrate and fuel oil, as reports suggest, to make TIDs;
  • RDX is therefore only available with the army in India and is under army lock and key;
  • Every ounce is strictly accounted for and it is in the army’s interest and in the interest of the nation to declare any theft of RDX no matter how small a quantity;
  • Some Islamic states which use jihad as a weapon of foreign policy to serve Islam’s political objectives, allow non-state groups to possess RDX to be used in acts of jihad against target nations and peoples;
  • Therefore while it is possible for jihadi groups in India to get hold of RDX through the seamless global jihadi network and the nation’s porous borders, it is next to impossible for Hindu groups to access RDX from jihadis or from the Indian army;
  • The Indian state and army have so far not allowed non-state actors to possess RDX in any quantity.

When Raman blew the soap-bubble of Hindu terror in 2006 without a shred of hard evidence in which to root his claim, the time had come to put substance into the soap bubble. J. N. Dixit, a distinguished and highly regarded career diplomat whom the writer knew personally to be a well-cloaked fierce nationalist, was the UPA’s National Security Adviser when the UPA came to power in Delhi in 2004. After Dixit’s unexpected and sudden death in January 2005, M. K. Narayanan was appointed NSA. One of the first things that Narayanan did was to hand-pick Hemant Karkare as chief of Maharashtra ATS; a position for which Karkare had no experience. These questions deserve to be asked:

  • Why did Sonia Gandhi appoint M. K. Narayanan, Intelligence Bureau (IB) man and more important, her family loyalist, to the extremely sensitive post of NSA? (The writer is not even going into the mysterious circumstances causing J. N. Dixit’s sudden death which made it possible for Narayanan to be appointed to the post.)
  • Why did M. K. Narayanan appoint the inexperienced Karkare as chief of Maharashtra ATS?

The second question is significant because the most important scene in the Hindu terror plot was shot in locales in Maharashtra, in Malegaon. Read this together with the RSS alleging that Col. Purohit, a serving army officer with Military Intelligence (first Intelligence Bureau, now Military Intelligence in the Hindu terror plot), began his machinations to divide and weaken the RSS from within in 2005[i] and what we get is no clichéd conspiracy theory but a diabolic plot to move India in the direction of post-Hindu India. We also read it in the context of Sonia Gandhi’s towering ambitions to become prime minister being foiled by an active campaign by Hindu nationalists opposing her on grounds of her foreign nationality, then what we get is a determined decision by who ever planted Sonia Gandhi on this unsuspecting nation, to politically dis-empower and decimate Hindu nationalists as was done in 1908. As in 1908, so in 2005 when the plot to label Hindus as terrorists was hatched, Hindu nationalism was sought to be annihilated only with the complicity of shameless Hindus in polity.

The core objective of the satanic plot to break the Hindu spirit and keep Hindus in a state of turmoil seems to have been to launch a full-scale attack against Hindu sanyasis, to defame and defile them and to physically annihilate the RSS—two institutions which best represent the Hindu nation and sense of nationhood and may be termed to be our immune system. Weakening any one of them is guaranteed to weaken the entire Hindu society vis-a-vis the Abrahamic religions and their agenda for a non-Hindu/post-Hindu Indian polity.

What follows is the writer’s interpretation of the facts which have been put in the public domain. The only note of caution that the writer sounds is that no corroborative evidence, has so far been presented by any of the state ATS, the CBI or the NIA to back these “facts” which have been given to us; nevertheless, it is possible as the writer hopes to prove, to present the same facts in a different fact-sheet. If the government has a better explanation, let it pass muster in the courts. (“Purpose served” Chidambaram, but not the way you think)

Narendra ModiConclusion

There is growing feeling among the BJP’s staunchest supporters that the party and Modi Sarkar for some reason are not willing to make Pakistan, Sonia Gandhi, P. Chidambaram and M. K. Narayanan pay for their crimes of omission and commission against the country and against Hindus. Like Aurobindo remarked astutely a hundred years ago, our beginnings are great and mighty but Hindus lack the stamina and the will to sustain the momentum and all mighty beginnings come to a whimpering stop. For Modi Sarkar to align itself with the aspirations of ordinary Hindus and Hindu nationalists it must do some very big things to restore the faith of Hindus in Modi and the BJP:

  • Modi Sarkar must make Pakistan pay in a manner that ordinary citizens understand to be justice.
  • This government must neutralise/liquidate Dawood Ibrahim, Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi and Hafiz Saeed either inside Pakistan or remove them with force from Pakistan and bring them to India where they will face our courts and our law for their crimes against India and her people.
  • Investigate the twin heinous conspiracies labelling Hindus as terrorist and letting off known jihadis and jihadi organizations for their acts of terror from 2004 when Sonia Gandhi ruled the country till 2014 when Narendra Modi became prime minister and fix blame where it lies and punish the guilty for not only compromising the nation’s efforts to deal with terrorism but also for high treason.
  • Finally, Modi personally and his government must know that Pakistan is backed, funded and encouraged in its anti-India terrorist ways not just by China but by America too. America, more than China, gives Pakistan the temerity to take pride in being a terrorist state. Modi Sarkar must move out of the American orbit, must stop chasing its tail on foreign policy issues because the Generic Church sees India as a potential destination for their capital and goods besides an important nation in their end-of-the-world Kingdom of God on Earth, while Islam sees India as Dar-ul-Harb destined to become Dar-ul-Islam. Pakistan-America partnership is the historical Church-Islam partnership against Hindus and Hindu India.
  • As always the Hindu nation was betrayed only by renegade Hindus from within. – Vigil Online, 12 May 2016

» Radha Rajan is an author, political analyst and animal rights activist in Chennai.

Arun Jaitley & P. Chidambaram

 

Why does India breed so many traitors? – Mrinal Suman

India Flag

Mrinal Suman“History stands testimony to the fact that a nation infested with the virus of treachery, deceitfulness and perfidy has always been an easy prey for foreign subjugation. No one knows this bitter truth better than India. Yet, our leaders, media and intelligentsia keep discrediting and harming the country through their seditious utterances and activities.” – Major General Mrinal Suman

While studying Indian history in school days, one was repeatedly told that the foreign invaders resorted to ‘divide and rule’ policy to gain control over India. They were painted as unscrupulous schemers who exploited the simple, trusting and gullible Indians.

It is only at a much later stage that one realised the hollowness of the above assertion. The truth is that we are adept at producing hordes of traitors who revel in India’s ruin. Every victory of the foreign invaders was facilitated by the local collaborators who betrayed their kings for some devious reward or to settle personal scores. No fort was ever conquered without the infidelity of a trusted minister/commander.

Unfortunately, centuries of slavery has taught us nothing. We carry on spawning throngs of people who can stoop down to any level (even imperil national security) for their petty gains. Our leaders, media and intellectuals appear to have a single point agenda: how to generate innovative issues to keep the nation divided and embroiled in petty bickering and internal dissentions; and thereby impede progress and bring a bad name to the country. They abhor India’s rise. Let me elucidate.

First, the leaders: They are the fountainhead of all fissiparous tendencies. For them, vote bank politics take precedence over everything else. One does not have to be a visionary to predict the danger of abetting illegal migration from Bangladesh for garnering votes. But unscrupulous political leaders carry on unconcerned.

One hangs one’s head in shame when political leaders extend their support to a delinquent student leader who seeks destruction of India. Comparing him with martyr Bhagat Singh is by far the most perfidious act.

Perhaps, India is the only country that has an ignominious track record of producing Home Ministers who reveled in shaming the country. One concocted theories of saffron terrorism to please his party bosses.

In so doing, he presented a convenient propaganda tool to Pakistan. Another Home Minister did the unthinkable. He declared a terrorist to be innocent in an affidavit to the court. The aim was to ensnare the opposition leaders in a false case. Sadly, India’s intelligence gathering apparatus suffered immense damage in the process.

When a leader declares ‘it’s safer to be a cow than to be a Muslim in India today’, he puts the whole country to shame. The world media flashes such headlines with sinister pleasure. India’s image takes a terrible beating. Just to score a brownie point against the government, he presents a convenient propaganda handle to the hostile forces. How low can a leader stoop!

Circero QuoteRecently, a renowned advocate and a former law minister told a TV channel that shouting slogans for the destruction of the country is not debarred in the constitution.

According to him, freedom of expression was of paramount importance. Even demand for secession (azadi) was justified. As the interview progressed, one was not only amazed by his perverted reasoning but also shocked to see the brazenness with which he was arguing. Survival of India appeared to be of no concern to him. One wondered if one was watching an Indian or a Pakistani channel.

Secondly, the media personnel: The less said the better. From their conduct, it appears that many of them are foreign plants and India means little to them. When a leading media house invited a vicious and remorseless enemy like General Pervez Musharraf and groveled before him, it marked the lowest depths of shamelessness to which journalism could sink. Instead of castigating him for the Kargil war, he was treated as a peace-loving guest.

Both the electronic and the print media never report ‘positives’ about the country. Ugly India sells (a la ‘Slumdog Millionaire‘); and not progressive India. Remember how a TV reporter failed to digest the popularity of Modi in the US and tried to incite the crowd with provocative remarks. But then they get paid to demean India, and not to extol it.

Immense damage is also being inflicted on the unity of the country by the media through its Machiavellian and skewed reporting. Every news item is deliberately reported with a religious, caste or creed slant—‘a dalit girl molested in a Delhi bus’ (as if other women are not molested in Delhi buses) or ‘church guard killed’ (in reality an argument between two security guards had turned violent) or ‘Muslim driver runs over a boy’ (as if his being a Muslim is of any relevance).

Recently, in a case of cattle stealing, a leading newspaper could not resist the temptation to add that ‘one of the five thieves is learnt to have had connections with a cow protection group in the past’. How cunningly, a simply case of robbery was given a communal taint.

Petty vandals are given the coverage befitting a mass leader. It was obnoxious to see two TV channels airing their interviews with a student leader charged with sedition. The worst was the indulgent demeanor of the TV anchors; as if a national hero was being eulogized. The interviews were repeatedly telecast at prime time.

Did these channels think of interviewing war heroes or martyrs’ families? Forget it; that would have been a pro-India act and that is an act of sacrilege for them.

Thirdly, the self-proclaimed secular intelligentsia: It has done the maximum damage to India’s prestige and standing. Some of them appear to be fifth columnists masquerading as progressive intellectuals. In which country of the world would the intelligentsia write to the US government not to receive their Prime Minister?

Honestly, it is simply loathsome: duly elected representative of 1.25 billion Indians being subjected to indignities by a shameless bunch of foreign-educated and foreign-paid anti-national elements. Unfortunately, their protests get huge publicity abroad, thereby undermining all efforts to raise India’s standing in the world forum.

It can be said with certainty that the well-orchestrated campaign of intolerance was totally malicious in intent. The sole objective was to stall all progressive reforms by tarnishing the image of the government. How else can anti-nationalism be defined? As expected, having dented India’s reputation, sold-out media chose to ignore the true facts as they emerged.

Hundreds of Christians, led by the church leaders, marched in protest on the roads of Delhi against the alleged vandalism of churches and a theft in a Christian school. Routine cases of petty crimes were cited to suggest an anti-minority conspiracy.

They ensured extensive coverage of their protests by the foreign and Indian media, thereby damaging India’s secular image. Foreign channels are only too eager to shame India. Unwisely, even Obama got carried away with his uncalled for advice, losing considerable goodwill in India. Reportedly, he said so on the prodding of an Indian leader, a la J-MJ.

Finally, soldiers and the national symbols: the national flag, the national anthem and the national salutations are representative of a country’s national identity and pride. They symbolize ancient heritage, current challenges and future aspirations. For soldiers, their sanctity is incontestable.

Bharat MataThousands of soldiers have sacrificed their lives to plant our tricolor on the enemy strongholds, thereby earning the ultimate honor of having their bodies draped in the national flag.

Notes of the national anthem make every soldier get goose pimples. The response is instantaneous and the effect is electrifying. Even in their homes, they stand up with their families when the national anthem is played on TV during Independence/Republic Day ceremonies.

Similarly, national salutations like ‘Hindustan Zindabad’, ‘Jai Hind’ and ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ make adrenalin surge through their bodies. The salutations act as a rallying call to inspire the soldiers for the ultimate sacrifice. All military functions conclude with full-throated renditions of ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’.

Therefore, the current controversy regarding national salutations is highly painful to the soldiers. They fail to understand as to how an Indian can have difficulty in hailing the country. How can ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ be assigned religious overtones.

Finally: History stands testimony to the fact that a nation infested with the virus of treachery, deceitfulness and perfidy has always been an easy prey for foreign subjugation. No one knows this bitter truth better than India. Yet, our leaders, media and intelligentsia keep discrediting and harming the country through their seditious utterances and activities. Under the garb of freedom of speech, they support those felonious speakers who vow not to rest till India is destroyed.

When Paris was hit by the terrorist attacks, the whole country gave a unified response. Compare it with our Batla House encounter against Indian Mujahdeen where two terrorists were killed and two arrested. A brave police officer lost his life. Yet, many seditious elements had the impudence to term the encounter to be ‘fake’.

Therefore, the mystery remains unsolved. Why does India continue to produce so many Jaichands and Mir Jafars? Is India a cursed nation or is treachery a part of our DNA? One wonders. – Sify, 29 March 2016

» Major General Mrinal Suman, AVSM, VSM, PhD, commanded an Engineer Regiment on the Siachen Glacier, the most hostile battlefield in the world. A highly qualified officer (B Tech, MA (Public Administration), MSc (Defence Studies) and a Doctorate in Public Administration) he was also the Task Force Commander at Pokhran and was responsible for designing and sinking shafts for the nuclear tests of May 1998.

Cicero denounces Catiline in the Senate

Cicero Quote

Why the BJP will never send Sonia Gandhi to jail – Syed Firdaus Ashraf

Chief of India's Congress party Sonia Gandhi, her daughter Priyanka Vadera, son-in-law Robert Vadera, and son Rahul Gandhi, walk at Rajiv Gandhi's memorial on the occasion of former Prime Minister's 18th death anniversary in New Delhi in this May 21, 2009.

Syed Firdaus Ashraf“The media trial against Sonia, Rahul Gandhi or for that matter against Sonia’s son-in-law Robert Vadra will yield no results. Two years have passed since the Modi government came to power, but the Gandhi family remains untouched.” – Syed Firdaus Ashraf

While watching the news last night, my phone kept buzzing.

Unable to ignore the constant buzzing, I checked my phone to find pro-Narendra Modi friends bombarding me about the revelations about Congress President Sonia Gandhi’s alleged role in the AgustaWestland chopper scam.

Message after message informed me of how finally achche din had arrived now that Sonia’s name had been mentioned in the Rs 3,600 crore (Rs 36 billion) VVIP chopper scam.

The messages were more or less identical: ‘AgustaWestland scam—Rs 250 crore paid as bribes to Sonia Gandhi and her aides to clinch deal.’

“Italian court convicts AugstaWestland Chief Guiseppe Orsi for paying bribes to top Congress leaders in India,” the messages read further, “Sonia Gandhi struck the deal and used her puppet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to loot public money.”

Initially, I felt the urge to ignore the messages, but later I responded that despite my friends’ delight, nothing would happen to Sonia and that she would not land up behind bars.

My phone went quiet. My Modi bhakt friends fell silent.

The media trial against Sonia, Rahul Gandhi or for that matter against Sonia’s son-in-law Robert Vadra will yield no results. Two years have passed since the Modi government came to power, but the Gandhi family remains untouched.

From 1998 to 2004, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was prime minister, the issue of Sonia’s foreign origin kept being raised by many in the government and the Bharatiya Janata Party. But the Vajpayee government did not do anything during those six years. Why?

Because if Sonia, the “Italian,” was at the helm of the Congress party, it would only serve the BJP well.

Today, the Modi government does the same thing. It keeps highlighting the alleged scams that the Congress is involved in. But the people of India did not elect Modi just to talk about scams and to let Congress leaders go scot-free.

If some Indians elected a prime minister with a self-professed 56-inch chest, they want to see some action against the Gandhis, which is not happening.

Check out the allegations against the Congress party and check what action the Modi government has taken. The answer? Zilch.

Sonia Gandhi & Rahul GandhiThe Adarsh scam. The 2G scam. The coal scam. The Delhi CNG fitness test scam. The Delhi Jal Board tanker scam. The Delhi power scam. The Uttarakhand liquor licence scam. The Tatra truck scam. And now AgustaWestland.

Newspapers and television channels report one scam or another, but there is little follow-up government action.

The sole exception is the National Herald case, undertaken by Subramanian Swamy who dragged the Gandhis to court and for which, it appears, Modi rewarded him with a nominated Rajya Sabha seat.

The BJP believes the Gandhis are a liability for the Congress party which is a huge advantage for Modi come the 2019 election. I believe none of the Gandhis will see a prison cell, at least till an election year.

Modi knows the Congress without the Gandhis is a more formidable and more dangerous adversary.

After the back and forth with the Modi bhakts on the phone last night, guess the answer from them.

“There is no person fit to be PM than Modi today. If you have any alternative leader, convince us—maybe we will vote for him in 2019.” – Rediff.com, 27 April 2016

» Syed Firdaus Ashraf reports for Rediff.com in Mumbai.

Robert Vadra

Rajiv Malhotra heckled by US academics at Columbia University lecture (with video)- The Chakra

Prof Tyler Williams

Rajiv MalhotraDuring the lecture, Rajiv Malhotra was constantly heckled by a small group of adults in the audience and even faced a verbal attack by a professor who asked to be anonymous. This professor … was later identified by online viewers as Professor Tyler Williams from the University of Chicago. – The Chakra

Indologist and renowned US-based author Rajiv Malhotra was recently invited to give a guest lecture at Columbia University in New York on the topic  of “Hinduism in Academia”. In light of his forthcoming new book, titled, Academic Hinduism, this was a key topic for him and one that has acquired a growing interest among many intellectuals lately. There is currently a significant gap of scholarly papers and studies on Hinduism and Hinduphobia in western academia, especially vs. studies on other faiths.

During the lecture, Rajiv Malhotra was constantly heckled by a small group of adults in the audience and even faced a verbal attack by a professor who asked to be anonymous. This professor constantly tried to change the topic of the lecture by asking irrelevant questions—criticized as bigoted and Hinduphobic—towards the speaker and was later identified by online viewers as Professor Tyler Williams from the University of Chicago.

Tyler Williams at JNUAfter a look at Tyler Williams’ Twitter feed, we came across many tweets with an anti-Hindu tone. Archived issues of the Times of India also state Tyler Walker Williams (a JNU grad) as being the first American student to be elected as the VP of AISA—the ultra-left student wing of the Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist) Liberation. AISA and the Communist Party of India are often criticized for their strong public anti-Hinduism stance and have called for the banning of the celebration of many Hindu festivals at various Indian universities. The irony is that the lecture by Rajiv Malhotra included Hinduphobia in academia and the need for a fair non-biased debate with inclusion of all perspectives.

After the video of the lecture was seen trending, many viewers were alarmed of how hateful and Hinduphobic some professors are in American universities are, and continued to write comments suggesting the University of Chicago should call for Professor Tyler Williams to resign.

One comment even read, “If this prof has so much hate & bigotry against 1 billion Hindus, then what does he teach his Hindu-American students, I mean 2nd class backwards sub-human Hindu-American students.

Some interesting tidbits of information that can be seen in the video are:

  • Hinduphobia 101: What it is, the history of how the term was coined and why it matters a great deal today.
  • A live example of a Hinduphobic scholar, how they are driven by agendas and not by an open-minded spirit of inquiry.
  • Live example of how Indian students are being brain-washed into sepoys that undermine fair discussions on ancient and current Indian civilization with a public agenda being to exploit India’s internal fault lines.

The entire lecture on “Hinduism in Academia” by Rajiv Malhotra at Columbia University can be viewed in this video below. If you are short on time to watch the entire video, we recommend you watch from 30m onwards. – The Chakra, 28 April 2016

 

Vice-President Hamid Ansari speaks only for Muslims – R. Jagannathan

Hamid Ansari

R. Jagannathan“The real tragedy is that Ansari has reduced himself to a spokesman for his community rather than the Vice-President of all of India. And this is not the first time he has done so. In September last year, he made a specific plea to give Muslims reservations in jobs, when the constitution does not allow quotas based on religion.” – R. Jagannathan

The Vice-President of India, like the President or the Prime Minister, represents the whole country—all the people, and not just some of them, or the community he or she comes from. Unfortunately, the Vice-President of India, Hamid Ansari, has sometimes been talking like a spokesman for Muslims in India. This is not his job.

On 2 April, Ansari must have raised hackles all around when he called on the Supreme Court to reflect on how minorities can be protected from majoritarianism and clarify “the contours within which the principles of secularism and composite culture should operate with a view to strengthen their functional modality and remove ambiguities.”

He also wondered aloud, without any sense of irony, whether Indian democracy may not be better served with a “more complete separation of religion and politics”—when this is precisely what Muslim organisations oppose. Throughout India’s journey from 1947, Muslim institutions have opposed a uniform civil code, the triple talaq and several other things. Recently, the Jamiat-e-Islami-e-Hind had the effrontery to tell the Supreme Court it had no business looking into triple talaq, a simple gender rights issue that should have nothing to do with religion. Nor has he spoken aggressively against the Haj subsidy, something that directly brings the state into a religious activity.

Mylapore MLA R. Rajalakshmi, Secretary HR & CE M. Rajaram (second from left) and HR & CE Commissioner M. Kalaivanan (right), are in the picture.Also, is Ansari unaware of recent history, where Hindus have been ethnically cleansed from two neighbouring countries, and also from a Muslim majority state in India (J&K)? Majoritarianism, if it existed, would never have allowed the majority community to be cleansed from one of its states. Ansari also didn’t stop to think whether India’s brand of secularism is impacting Hindus more than Muslims, where states directly control major temples (Tirupati in Andhra, Siddhivinayak in Maharashtra, and Sabarimala in Kerala). The state directly controls thousands of temples in the south, and even in some places in the north. Nor does he even seem aware that courts happily intervene in Hindu religious practices, but never those of Muslims or Christians. The constitutional protections given to minorities to run their own religious and cultural institutions excludes Hindu institutions in practice.

It is possible to take a more charitable view of Ansari’s speech, but given the context in which he asked for these clarifications, it is obvious that he is only talking about Muslim concerns when the state is run by the BJP, which has obvious links to Hindu organisations.

At the outset one must make it clear that the Sangh Parivar has not helped matters by making “nationalism” a big issue, especially its narrow view of it, including the need for Indians to chant “Bharat Mata ki Jai” or “Vande Mataram.” The beef controversy was not only avoidable, but needed opposing. What people will eat, wear or speak cannot be imposed from above, whichever be the party in power. This statement applies equally to narrow definitions of secularism, where the Sangh alone is designated as communal, excluding many parties that are caste-based or based on support of minority communities (as in Hyderabad, Assam, J&K, Kerala and elsewhere). “Sickularism” is as bad as narrow nationalism.

However, Ansari has shown that he too is not above sectarian thinking from the way he is voicing the concerns of Muslims to the exclusion of the so-called majority.

Consider his various other statements, made at the 16th convention of Jammu University:

He said “any public discourse on India being a ‘secular’ republic with a ‘composite culture’ cannot overlook India’s heterogeneity…. A population of 1.3 billion comprising over 4,635 communities … religious minorities constitute 19.4 percent of the total…. Our democratic polity and its secular state structure were put in place in full awareness of this plurality. There was no suggestion to erase identities and homogenise them.”

Muslim mother with son on JanamashtamiOne must ask: who is seeking to erase plurality? It is not the Sangh or the BJP government, despite the outlandish statements made by some members of the Sangh on “Bharat mata ki jai”. It is interesting that till some time ago, the Left used to proclaim India’s “composite culture” in order to deny its Hindu underpinnings; now Ansari is rubbishing the whole idea of a “composite culture” and says India is about “4,635 communities”.

Then he contradicts himself by referring to 19.4 percent minorities, as though they are some solid block that needs defending from the remaining 80-and-odd percent majoritarians. If India is a composite of 4,635 communities, we are all minorities and Hindus are not one solid phalanx of religious unity. There is no majority or minority. And certainly a Muslim population of 180 million cannot by any stretch of imagination be called a minority.

Ansari also failed to look at his own community’s efforts to erase plurality, with organisations like the Tabligh seeking to weed out any traces of Indian influence in Islam—worship at dargahs, veneration of pirs, etc. In Tamil Nadu, where Muslims were till recently more Tamils than Muslims, there is a concerted effort to Wahhabise them.

Elsewhere too, Muslims are learning to grow beards to emphasise difference rather than common citizenship, and even something as basic as “Ramzan” is being Arabised as Ramadan in some quarters. Ansari’s silence on this deliberate effort to separate Muslims from Indian syncretism is eloquent.

If attempts to homogenise Indians are reprehensible, surely attempts to homogenise Muslims are equally reprehensible?

Ansari also said that the “three accepted characteristics of a secular state were liberty to practise religion, equality between religions in state practice, and neutrality or a fence of separation between the state and religion.”

Muslims and Hindus play HoliThere is no bar on anyone practising any religion in India. So the first point exists in India. The second, equality between religions, does not exist, because Indian politicians have used the rights of minorities under Articles 25-30 (to run their own institutions without state interference) to ring-fence minority institutions but Hindu institutions have become personal fiefs of politicians to run their rackets. We have made a mockery of Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law, by excluding Hindu institutions from the right to administer their own institutions. And some laws primarily apply to Hindus. A recent case in point is the Bombay High Court decision to force the Shani Shingnapur temple to give women the same rights as men (…) to enter the sanctum sanctorum. But the same is not explicitly applicable to the Haji Ali Dargah or other mosques.

And then Ansari made this remark: “The difficulty lies in delineating, for purposes of public policy and practice, the line that separates them from religion…. The ‘way of life’ argument, used in philosophical texts and some judicial pronouncements, does not help … identify common principles of equity in a multi-religious society. Since a wall of separation is not possible under Indian conditions, the challenge is to develop a formula for equidistance and minimum involvement. For this purpose, principles of faith need to be segregated from contours of culture since a conflation of the two obfuscates the boundaries of both.” (italics mine)

Since it is obvious that only Hinduism describes itself as a “way of life”, Ansari’s target is clear: he wants the state de-Hinduised. Not objectionable in itself, but Ansari seems to want not only separation of state from religion, but also culture from religion. This is the only interpretation one can give to his statement that “principles of faith need to be segregated from contours of culture since a conflation of the two obfuscates the boundaries of both.”

Can faith really be hermetically sealed from the culture in which it grows? Is there no such thing as Indian Islam, where elements of local culture are inextricably mixed with elements of Islam?

Is Ansari a closet fundamentalist, who wants his faith to be untainted by local culture?

In fact, he contradicts himself again when he uses a quote from Left historian K. N. Pannikar, who said: “Whether India developed as a melting pot of cultures or only remained a salad bowl is no more the issue. The crucial question is whether Indian culture is conceived as a static phenomenon, tracing its identity to a single unchanging source, or a dynamic phenomenon, critically and creatively interrogating all that is new.”

This Pannikar observation was meant to tell Hindus to stop looking only at their past for identity validation, but Ansari seems to want to retain Indian Islam is a pure state that has nothing to do with local culture. Does he want to deny the right of Islam in India to Indianise by “critically and creatively Reservation for Muslimsinterrogating all that is new?” If Muslims want to sing Vande Mataram, as A. R. Rahman did, would Ansari think this is an unwarranted mixture of culture and religion?

The real tragedy is that Ansari has reduced himself to a spokesman for his community rather than the Vice-President of all of India. And this is not the first time he has done so. In September last year, he made a specific plea to give Muslims reservations in jobs, when the constitution does not allow quotas based on religion.

Ansari has to make up his mind whether he is just a Muslim or the V-P of India who happens to be a Muslim. – Firstpost, 3 April 2016

Turning Temples into Courts: Judges should not dictate religious practices – David Frawley

Vamadeva Shastri / David Frawley“Judges should not dictate religious practises. Political activists should not be allowed to use temples for political agitation.” – Dr David Frawley

Visiting Hindu temples is an amazing experience, an inner journey through history, culture and cosmic dimensions. Each temple is profoundly unique with its own identity. Such temples represent one of the most important cultural heritages of all humanity.

As a Western Hindu visiting Hindu temples for several decades, each temple has been a transformative event in sacred time and space.

Unfortunately, there are a few temples where as a Westerner I have been unable to enter. Having an Arya Samaj certificate of conversion to Hinduism does help, but is not always enough. Yet there are many Hindu temples that let everyone in. Often we are taken to the front of long queues in respect of having come so far in our pilgrimage.

Some complain that there are not enough Hindu women priests, though that situation is improving, or that women cannot enter certain temples, though they can get into most. These are areas of genuine concern. Hindu dharma honours Shakti and this should extend into the society overall.

Yet my wife, who is an Indian and a Hindu religious teacher, always receives special respect at any temple she visits, often from the head pujari, even at temples that I am not able to enter. But she approaches temples with genuine heartfelt devotion, not as an angry activist.

I know something of history, how thousands of Hindu temples were destroyed by Islamic invaders, and how the British belittled Hinduism. I can sympathise with temples that do not want non-Hindus to enter as mere tourist sites. Temples, just as churches, have dress and codes of conduct that should be followed and security concerns in this age of terrorism.

Supreme Court of IndiaPolitics of temple going

It is sad to see temple entry in India being made into a political football. It is strange to see the Indian judiciary ruling on who can go into temples and how far, as if temples should be under court jurisdiction.

This is compounded by the fact that churches and mosques in India are exempt from such interference and regulation. In addition, temple revenues are taken by state governments for their own usage, while church and mosques receive state subsidies.

Clearly, there is a tremendous prejudice against the majority religion in India that is unparalleled in any country. In other countries majority religions are treated as well or better than minority religions. In Islamic states like Pakistan and Bangladesh, Islam is given precedence and prestige over all other religions.

In the secular USA, there is a strict separation of church and state, and the judiciary does not rule on church practises. On the contrary, the government grants extensive and equal tax benefits to all approved religious groups, with majority Christianity granted the most regard.

Devendra Fadnavis & Trupti DesaiThe sanctum sanctorum

Going into temples should be an act of devotion, not of political assertion. Allowing political activists into the sanctum sanctorum of temples can be a gross violation of religious respect. That is an area of the temple reserved for the priests, not for the general public.

There are Hindu temples and festivals for men or women only. There is nothing wrong with this, any more than gyms or clinics that cater to male or female only concerns. There is a strict separation of men and women in certain temples. That is also fine and creates a different type of energy than the free mingling of the sexes.

Hindu temples have a vast array of deity forms and worship at special times and in distinctive ways. There is no single standard church service or namaz. Such local variations of practise should be honoured and preserved. They reflect the richness of Indian civilisation.

Judges should not dictate religious practises. Political activists should not be allowed to use temples for political agitation.

At the same time, temple entry policy should be respectful of different types of devotees in terms of age, sex or ethnicity—but this can be done without destroying the sanctity of the temple or curtailing the myriad forms of temple worship. – Daily-O, 22 April 2016

» Dr David Frawley (Pandit Vamadeva Shastri) has a D. Litt. (Doctor of Letters), from SVYASA (Swami Vivekananda Yoga Anusandhana Samsthana), the only deemed Yoga university recognized by the Government of India.

Hitopadesha Quote

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,375 other followers

%d bloggers like this: