Govt must act fast, firm, get us back our kids and have them reunited with parents.
Date : February 18, 2012
Dear Friends,
Today, we are enclosing press statement issued by BJP National Spokesperson and MP, Shri Tarun Vijay. Kindly cover.
Thanking you.
With warm regards,
BJP Central Media Cell
11, Ashok Road
New Delhi – 110001
Press Statement
UPA govt failing disgracefully to protect the Indian children in Norway from the clutches of the insensitive and barbaric Norwegian authorities has added another episode in its long list of failures. This episode shows that UPA government has only one family in the billion plus Indians to protect, and rest of the Indians do not matter to it at all. The UPA led govt is more interested to please Terror exporter countries than to protect Indian common citizen. Govt. should have done better to send a cabinet minister to Norway to help the little kids reunited with their parents, who were allowed, shockingly, just for an hour to meet their distraught parents after months of indescribable pain of separation .
If Indian government would not help common Indians in such trying times of their life, would they go to a foreign land for seeking justice? While we are witnessing a family drama in UP elections, none of the so called family members have found it fit to speak for the Indian parents being emotionally tortured in Norway for the last nine months.
Government must make international community aware of this incident and create a world opinion against the Norwegian authorities. A report in the Hindu today clearly describes the inhuman behaviour of the Norwegian authorities to kids as little as one year. Helping Indian parents to get re united with their little kids in Norway seems to be nowhere on the priority radar of this government which is running helter skelter, to loan a description from one of its envoys, who was recently awarded Padma award, like headless chicken.
We demand government be very firm to Norway, even tell them if they don't behave in a civilised manner and handover the kids immediately to the Indian parents, we will snap diplomatic ties with such a rude government unfit to be included in the comity of new era modern civilised nations.
Tarun Vijay
Friday, February 17, 2012
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
BJP expresses solidarity with Israeli people; condemns the cowardly attackers, terms them a blot on humanity
Cowardly attacks won’t deter Israel, neither will alter close India Israel ties
BJP expresses solidarity with Israeli people; condemns the cowardly attackers, terms them a blot on humanity,
Tarun Vijay meets Israeli ambassador and conveys Party President’s concern and message of support and sympathies.
14th Feb 2012- Shri Tarun Vijay, BJP MP and National Spokesperson, met the Ambassador of Israel in India Mr. Alon Ushpiz to convey party’s deep solidarity with Israeli people and government on the dastardly act of attack on their diplomatic car yesterday. Mr. Tarun Vijay said that India Israel relations are too deep and extraordinarily unique and their close friendship has stood the test of time which cant be altered with such cowardly attacks of terrorists who are a blot on humanity. He said that BJP expresses confidence that both countries would continue their joint fight against the terrorism. He conveyed to the ambassador the deep sympathies of the party president Mr Nitin Gadkari, who had visited Israel sometime back and had fond memories of the affection and support he received there.
The ambassador expressed gratitude to the BJP and the people of India and said that the Tsunami of support and sympathies that this incident has attracted from the common Indian citizen is a positive side of the terror attack. Such attacks won’t change the age long India Israel relations which are very very unique and special, not existing with any other country. He said that the injured lady, wife of an Israeli diplomat has taken the attack very courageously and she is now out of danger. The Ambassador was all praise for the brave driver of the diplomat’s car wand said that he was the ‘real hero’ of the incident who didn’t fear and brought the injured lady to the embassy's safe zone.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
Trashing India's honour
rediffNEWS.com
February 1, 2012
What kind of a nation have we become where the commanders of the country's armed forces and satellite mission are trashed without a whimper, asks Tarun Vijay.
Image: Army chief General V K Singh at an Indian Peace Keeping memorial in Colombo, Sri Lanka
Photographs: Dinuka Liyanawatte/Reuters
Image: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with United Progressive Alliance Chairperson Sonia Gandhi
Photographs: B Mathur/ Reuters
Image: India's Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle C-12 blasts off from Sriharikota near Chennai in 2009.
Photographs: Babu/ Reuters
Image: Former ISRO chairman G Madhavan Nair with a miniature of India's first unmanned moon mission 'Chandrayaan-1'
Photographs: Babu/ Reuters
February 1, 2012
What kind of a nation have we become where the commanders of the country's armed forces and satellite mission are trashed without a whimper, asks Tarun Vijay.
Like Draupadi disrobed and appealing to the mighty warriors sitting silently in the Kaurav Durbar, veteran space scientist G Madhavan Nair issued a letter to the prime minister of an ancient civilisation, saying -- 'Please restore my honour.'
The chief of the army staff of this billion plus-strong nation, publicly asks -- 'Why is the government doing this to me? As if I am a Pakistani?'
What kind of a nation have we become where opposing an anti-national movie by a director who falsifies history, fuelling mistrust in the already divided Kashmir valley becomes a sacrilegious act; while the commanders of the nation's armed forces and satellite mission are trashed without a whimper?
Firstly, the United Progressive Alliance government compelled a highly decorated serving army chief to go to court to seek redress on a routine issue. This has happened despite his continuous pleas for the last two decades to correct his date of birth on the basis of impeccable proof.
Earlier, the government dropped an Indian Air Force officer from a China-bound delegation to accommodate Beijing's obstinate stand on Arunachal Pradesh.
Thus, the Raksha Mantralaya has failed in defending those who defend us all.
The chief of the army staff of this billion plus-strong nation, publicly asks -- 'Why is the government doing this to me? As if I am a Pakistani?'
What kind of a nation have we become where opposing an anti-national movie by a director who falsifies history, fuelling mistrust in the already divided Kashmir valley becomes a sacrilegious act; while the commanders of the nation's armed forces and satellite mission are trashed without a whimper?
Firstly, the United Progressive Alliance government compelled a highly decorated serving army chief to go to court to seek redress on a routine issue. This has happened despite his continuous pleas for the last two decades to correct his date of birth on the basis of impeccable proof.
Earlier, the government dropped an Indian Air Force officer from a China-bound delegation to accommodate Beijing's obstinate stand on Arunachal Pradesh.
Thus, the Raksha Mantralaya has failed in defending those who defend us all.
Is this the way a government should treat a highly decorated army chief?
When Vijay Kumar Singh was admitted to the National Defence Academy, his father Major Jagat Singh had sent the correct birth date, as mentioned on his Class XI mark sheet.
In all military records, formally maintained by the Indian Army's official record keeper, the Adjutant General's Branch, General V K Singh's date of birth is recorded as May 10, 1951.
His decorations, citations, promotion letters and autobiography, as is officially required by the army, all bear May 10, 1951 as his birth date.
Still, for years the correction that was required was not done due to the government's apathy and negligence. I have seen the papers and also the expert opinion of former Chief Justice of India R C Lahoti favouring General V K Singh.
Former army chief General Shankar Roychowdury has also supported General Singh. Yet the army chief is publicly admonished by the government through the charade of ordering the Adjutant General's office to have the date of birth 'tampered' with and record the wrong one in its place.
Is this the way a government should treat a highly decorated army chief? Is there a mysterious reason behind this episode? To accommodate a favourite, perhaps?
Or is there some manipulation by an arms dealers' cartel? The government is tying itself up in knots and more questions are being generated.
In all military records, formally maintained by the Indian Army's official record keeper, the Adjutant General's Branch, General V K Singh's date of birth is recorded as May 10, 1951.
His decorations, citations, promotion letters and autobiography, as is officially required by the army, all bear May 10, 1951 as his birth date.
Still, for years the correction that was required was not done due to the government's apathy and negligence. I have seen the papers and also the expert opinion of former Chief Justice of India R C Lahoti favouring General V K Singh.
Former army chief General Shankar Roychowdury has also supported General Singh. Yet the army chief is publicly admonished by the government through the charade of ordering the Adjutant General's office to have the date of birth 'tampered' with and record the wrong one in its place.
Is this the way a government should treat a highly decorated army chief? Is there a mysterious reason behind this episode? To accommodate a favourite, perhaps?
Or is there some manipulation by an arms dealers' cartel? The government is tying itself up in knots and more questions are being generated.
Image: Army chief General V K Singh at an Indian Peace Keeping memorial in Colombo, Sri Lanka
Photographs: Dinuka Liyanawatte/Reuters
This government has lost all sense of balance and grace to govern
Another unsavoury controversy involves senior scientists from the Indian Space Research Organisation, seriously damaging the reputation of one of the country's best and highly respected institutions.
While the humiliation of the army chief and the senior air force officer has dented the image of the armed forces and has lowered the morale of our soldiers, the ISRO controversy, blacklisting top scientists who have given their best in scientific achievements, is a clear signal that this government has lost all sense of balance and grace to govern.
It has failed to uphold the Constitutional principles of law, justice and fairness and has systematically ruined the institutions that have held aloft these basic foundations.
The nature of the agreement between Antrix, ISRO's commercial arm, and Devas Multimedia on S-band allocation remains shrouded in mystery. There is a strong speculation that the government is trying to hush up the matter by inventing some scapegoats and then carpeting it in the name of secrecy.
Nobody knows how the deal was arrived at, how was the valuation done. Almost exactly a year ago, on February 17, 2011, in a hurriedly called press conference Union Law Minister M Veerappa Moily had announced the Cabinet Committee on Security's decision to annul the controversial deal between the Indian Space Research Organisation's commercial arm Antrix Corporation and Bangalore-based Devas Multimedia.
No reasons were given except that the government would not be able to provide the orbit slot in S-Band to Antrix for commercial purposes, including for its existing contractual obligations, in view of strategic requirements.
While the humiliation of the army chief and the senior air force officer has dented the image of the armed forces and has lowered the morale of our soldiers, the ISRO controversy, blacklisting top scientists who have given their best in scientific achievements, is a clear signal that this government has lost all sense of balance and grace to govern.
It has failed to uphold the Constitutional principles of law, justice and fairness and has systematically ruined the institutions that have held aloft these basic foundations.
The nature of the agreement between Antrix, ISRO's commercial arm, and Devas Multimedia on S-band allocation remains shrouded in mystery. There is a strong speculation that the government is trying to hush up the matter by inventing some scapegoats and then carpeting it in the name of secrecy.
Nobody knows how the deal was arrived at, how was the valuation done. Almost exactly a year ago, on February 17, 2011, in a hurriedly called press conference Union Law Minister M Veerappa Moily had announced the Cabinet Committee on Security's decision to annul the controversial deal between the Indian Space Research Organisation's commercial arm Antrix Corporation and Bangalore-based Devas Multimedia.
No reasons were given except that the government would not be able to provide the orbit slot in S-Band to Antrix for commercial purposes, including for its existing contractual obligations, in view of strategic requirements.
Image: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with United Progressive Alliance Chairperson Sonia Gandhi
Photographs: B Mathur/ Reuters
If the agreement was right, why was it hurriedly annulled?
As media reports revealed, under the deal Antrix was to provide 70 MHz of the scarce S-band space segment to Devas for its digital multimedia services.
This was to be done by leasing 90 per cent of the transponders in the satellites GSAT-6 and GSAT-6A that are proposed to be launched by ISRO.
Devas, in turn, was to pay Antrix a total of $300 million over 12 years. The agreement was signed on January 28, 2005. Consequently, the Department of Space got Cabinet approval for the building of GSAT-6 at a cost of Rs 269 crore (Rs 2.69 billion) and GSAT-6A at a cost of Rs 147 crore (Rs 1.47 billion) under the commission's delegated powers.
There were complaints about the manner in which the deal was entered into, and the way in which it was being operationalised. It was found that the Department of Space got the approvals for building the satellites without making any reference to the fact that they were to be utilised primarily for Devas' benefit.
If the agreement was right, why was it hurriedly annulled after the media and Opposition outcry?
If something went wrong, why were the details not revealed in spite of having formed several committees to probe the 'scam'?
In the Rajya Sabha, I asked the prime minister pointed questions regarding the deal and the answer given on August 4, 2011 by Minister of State, PMO, V Narayansamy on behalf of the PM, skirted the whole issue.
My question was:
There was a Parliament's Committee on Estimates to study Antrix-Devas deal chaired by Congress MP Francisco Sardinha.
What happened to it?
This was to be done by leasing 90 per cent of the transponders in the satellites GSAT-6 and GSAT-6A that are proposed to be launched by ISRO.
Devas, in turn, was to pay Antrix a total of $300 million over 12 years. The agreement was signed on January 28, 2005. Consequently, the Department of Space got Cabinet approval for the building of GSAT-6 at a cost of Rs 269 crore (Rs 2.69 billion) and GSAT-6A at a cost of Rs 147 crore (Rs 1.47 billion) under the commission's delegated powers.
There were complaints about the manner in which the deal was entered into, and the way in which it was being operationalised. It was found that the Department of Space got the approvals for building the satellites without making any reference to the fact that they were to be utilised primarily for Devas' benefit.
If the agreement was right, why was it hurriedly annulled after the media and Opposition outcry?
If something went wrong, why were the details not revealed in spite of having formed several committees to probe the 'scam'?
In the Rajya Sabha, I asked the prime minister pointed questions regarding the deal and the answer given on August 4, 2011 by Minister of State, PMO, V Narayansamy on behalf of the PM, skirted the whole issue.
My question was:
There was a Parliament's Committee on Estimates to study Antrix-Devas deal chaired by Congress MP Francisco Sardinha.
What happened to it?
Image: India's Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle C-12 blasts off from Sriharikota near Chennai in 2009.
Photographs: Babu/ Reuters
We look like a rudderless 'Scamistan'
A high-powered committee headed by Planning Commission member B K Chaturvedi to review the controversial Antrix-Devas deal submitted its report to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
The prime minister asked Cabinet Secretary K M Chandrashekar to make recommendations on the follow-up action within 15 days after examining the report. What happened to it?
What were the recommendations and the outcome of it?
Then suddenly we saw the government blacklisting four eminent scientists. Is that a punishment?
Did the government find out that these scientists were the real scamsters? Could they have done what the government found was wrong, on their own, singlehandedly?
Has the government any answers to the issues raised by Madhavan Nair in his 'restore my honour' letter to the prime minister? Why did the government give signals to review its decision to blacklist the scientists?
Do we know who Madhavan Nair is? He is an internationally renowned technologist in the field of rocket systems who made multi-stage satellite launch vehicles a possibility, achieving self-reliance through swadeshi technologies.
As project director, he was responsible for the launch of the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle used extensively for launching Indian remote sensing satellites.
He was director of ISRO's largest R&D Centre, the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, and helped develop India's Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle. As director of ISRO's Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre, he played a central role in the design and development of the crucial cryogenic engine for GSLV.
And this is the man being projected by this government as a key person in an ugly scandal. Why can't the government come out clean and with firm facts and transparent details?
The principle this government seems to be applying is -- all are bad except me and mine. And as a result of its confusion, India's image and its top professionals are being trashed, making us look like a rudderless 'Scamistan'.
Tarun Vijay is a Bharatiya Janata Party member of the Rajya Sabha. The views expressed here are his own.
The prime minister asked Cabinet Secretary K M Chandrashekar to make recommendations on the follow-up action within 15 days after examining the report. What happened to it?
What were the recommendations and the outcome of it?
Then suddenly we saw the government blacklisting four eminent scientists. Is that a punishment?
Did the government find out that these scientists were the real scamsters? Could they have done what the government found was wrong, on their own, singlehandedly?
Has the government any answers to the issues raised by Madhavan Nair in his 'restore my honour' letter to the prime minister? Why did the government give signals to review its decision to blacklist the scientists?
Do we know who Madhavan Nair is? He is an internationally renowned technologist in the field of rocket systems who made multi-stage satellite launch vehicles a possibility, achieving self-reliance through swadeshi technologies.
As project director, he was responsible for the launch of the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle used extensively for launching Indian remote sensing satellites.
He was director of ISRO's largest R&D Centre, the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, and helped develop India's Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle. As director of ISRO's Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre, he played a central role in the design and development of the crucial cryogenic engine for GSLV.
And this is the man being projected by this government as a key person in an ugly scandal. Why can't the government come out clean and with firm facts and transparent details?
The principle this government seems to be applying is -- all are bad except me and mine. And as a result of its confusion, India's image and its top professionals are being trashed, making us look like a rudderless 'Scamistan'.
Tarun Vijay is a Bharatiya Janata Party member of the Rajya Sabha. The views expressed here are his own.
Image: Former ISRO chairman G Madhavan Nair with a miniature of India's first unmanned moon mission 'Chandrayaan-1'
Photographs: Babu/ Reuters
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Liberating India
THE TIMES OF INDIA
26 January 2012
Tarun Vijay
26 January 2012
Tarun Vijay
Come Republic Day and we begin trumpeting the oft-repeated phrases of freedom and the greatness of our age-old civilization, patriotic values and the glory to the motherland. We speak about the lofty ideals of pluralism and freedom of expression and repeat ad nauseam how we had had a Charvak, an atheist, who spoke against the Vedic principles and yet received honours as a great seer, finding an exalted position in the highest echelons of great philosophers. The Hindus did not "ban" him or his philosophy or his followers. The ancient Hindus received the Barhaspatya Sutras of Charvaka, quoting the sutras respectfully as the Purva Paksha, and then went on to logically refute his arguments. Sincerely learning from the opponent too, debating, and then refuting what was considered false was the way of the Hindus. Learn even from the enemy, respectfully, was the message Ram gave to Lakshman when he sent him to Ravana to gather the gems of his wisdom.
Yet, at the end of the day, we have become followers of a new religion, the Pratibandh-Sampraday, the religion of banning. Going against the basic tenets of Hindu dharma, we love to use extreme language, ugly and abusive words are littered on the social networks against those whom we disapprove of and exhortations to become intolerant are finding new audiences and applause.
If at all anyone was supposed to speak against such a trend and firmly assert the position of the Indian values, values of freedom, of appreciating the most gruelling and seemingly unacceptable, with aplomb, that voice, and those people would have been us, the claimants to the Hindu heritage.
We could have presented the Hindu assertion that expressed the spirit of understanding the various facets of the truth and agreeing that the truth can never be presented as an absolute, but can only be understood in parts, and everyone of us lives with our own understanding of our part of the truth. The other person, standing in opposition to us, can also have a part of the truth, and the dialogue should never be shunned. The basic condition for a dialogue is to be ready to receive the person from the other side, with respect and the patience to hear him. These are the values and the attitude that makes the planet more livable and validates a society’s claim to be civil and humane. These are, to me, nothing but the continuation of the great Hindu thread that made us free and liberated, to withstand the vicissitudes of history and the barbarism of the invaders. This spirit of knowing the limitations of our periphery of knowledge powered the sages to declare with amazing humility, "Neti, neti (I know only this much, not beyond this)", in the tradition of the highest civilisational enrichment humanity has ever witnessed or experienced.
We truly did this, practised most honestly such traits all these centuries and lived the values we had internalized through our scriptures and the smriti tradition. And all these years, while we continued practicing the dharma and struggling to reform the ill-practices and the blinding ritualism, we got attacked by those who considered our dharmic traditions as a sign of cowardice and backwardness and assaulted to convert us to their faith through sword and deceit. We were declared heathens and pagans. And the perpetrators of massacres wore the titles of Ghazi and Sir. The art of ‘banning’, ‘secluding’, ‘delisting’ and ‘blacklisting’, the enthusiasm of using abusive labels against the non-conformist, against those who refused to be converted is a gift to us by the crusaders, jihadis and the red revolutionaries. They have taught us that those who do not yield to your ‘one book, one prophet one ideology’ path are to be treated as untouchable, exterminated, to be sent to labour camps and get ‘corrected’ in Siberias. These are the people who man our exclusivist regions of candle marches for peace, harmony and freedom of expression, controlling centres of public opinion and mass expression. And freedom of expression means freedom to hurl abuses and stones at those who are unyielding on their point of view. It means freedom of camouflaging your real intentions and forming cartels to suffocate, ban, marginalize and colour the other voices, the other people, the different and unacceptable.
Why ban anyone? Listen and reply. Is that not a better Indian way? But at the same time, should there be no need to ask why the only newsmakers and the uplifters of the festival spirit are supposed to be those who are either firang or represent their western territory of values and worldview? True, goodness is universal and we are the first to give the message -- let noble thoughts come to us from all sides. Still the hangover of a slave, colonial mentality running down our own national ethos can’t be accepted as fair and just approach.
It certainly hurts to see desi Anglo-Saxons going gaga over those for whom India remains a slum where babies eat from the garbage and feel a heavenly bliss when gifted a car and compared with the African experience.
Hence forget the humiliation that turns into a state instrument against those who are cursed to be different, forget the Kashmiri Pandit, forget the women who get targeted for displaying a dot on their forehead in the land of their ancestors. The pain and the anguish and the frustration of a mother or a wife of a security person killed by red revolutionaries in Dantewada, get submerged in the ‘sane, acceptable’ voices of Mr Democrat Doctor. Suppose 11 "Muslims" are assaulted by a lunatic with a declaration of liberating society from the scum of Islamist terrorism. How rapidly would it become part of a passionate discussion among the ‘concerned and peace-loving pluralistic secular literati’, sending the mad men pink chaddhis. But if 11 "Indians" are targeted and brutally killed in Bastar by red revolutionaries, that must be taken differently.
Again mark the difference. We never banned the publishing and sale of books that were offending to us — this banning business began near Rome. Vatican officially had the institution for preemptive censorship of books, called "Index Librorum Prohibitorum", banning and censoring of books that were in any way critical of, or divergent from, their dogma. And this hallmark of institutionalized curtailing of intellectual liberty was only abolished officially as recently as June 14 1966 by the pope. Hindus never had any Index Librorum Prohibitorum banning even scientists like Kepler and Galileo, but Hindus are being given the lessons of tolerance!
Hindus did not burn the books and libraries -- that is also a legacy of the Jihadis and crusaders. Was it not the Christian fanatic emperor Jovian in the fourth century, who burnt the entire library of Antioch, which was carefully curated and populated by his learned and scholarly, if non-Christian, predecessor Emperor Julian? Was it not the Christian Saint Athanasius who in the same century ordered the burning of all "heretical" literature in Egypt? Was it not the Christians again in the same century that burned elsewhere the books of a famous theologian-philosopher Priscillian? Was it not the Bishop Fray Diego de Landa who ordered the mass burning of the sacred books of the Mayans after the conquest of Yukatan by the Spanish? And this book burning business is a Christian legacy all the way to this very decade when various Churches have, funnily, ordered the burning of Harry Potter series! Not to mention the notorious case of attempted Quran burning of last year by a recognized, if notorious, church leader in America.
And what to say of the marching Islamic hordes? Bakhtiar Khalji, when conquered Nalanda, had only one question to its chief librarian, whether there was a copy of the Quran on the shelves, before ordering the mass burning of the library -- a library of such a massive collection, that the fire continued for several months, that the “smoke from the burning books of Kafirs hung for days like a dark pall over the hills”, says Persian historian Minhaj in his chronicle Tabaqat-i-Nasiri. (see the details-http://bharatendu.com/2008/12/03/handful-gazi/) And the third Khalifa of Islam himself ordered burning of extraneous copies of the Quran that did not conform to the official version, not to mention the guttering of the great library of Ctesiphon by Saad ibn Abi Waqas, commander of another Khalifa, Umar. And in Maldives it was the newly converted zealots to Islam who burned down all the Buddhist books of their ancestors, of great historical worth, to ashes in the 12th century.
No, this business of book burning is not a Hindu thing. The Hindus believed in sincere debate, the parties learned the viewpoint of the opponent, and then tried to refute each other. The honest loser of the debate, we have records, went to the extent of letting go of his own books by throwing those in a river as a mark of his defeat, and accepting the winner as one's preceptor! If the extremist, ‘ban cries' from among the Hindus are an aberration and unacceptable so should be the secular extreme which thrives on state support and a blind hatred for anything Indic.
It's the secular Stalinism that helps breed Shri Ram Senes and an intolerant attitude we find negating the Indianness. We were never like that. The mainstream Hindu still remains the last bastion of tolerance and pluralism on this planet. And not all of them vote for those who take up their cause in politics or in any other segment of social activity. I don't know about the fate of Katherine Mayo's Mother India, but Ambedkar's book, Riddles of Ram and Krishna, was never banned.
The mischief began with the Anglicized elite that was ignorant of Indian realities and hit the characters of Savarkar, Vivekananda, Laxmibai and Shivaji on the basis of half-baked hearsay. People are neither blind nor deaf and dumb. They see the daily doses of political spaghettis doled out to the various sections of ‘minorities (read Muslims). Not just the oft-repeated case of grants to Haj and the negligible amount spent on Kailas Manasarovar yatra, or the Shahbano case, the scholarships, extension of the campuses of universities considered as Muslim in character, bank loans, special provisions for Muslim dominated areas and for minority institutions, like no compulsion to apply reservation policy of the government, and now the demand to exempt them from RTI Act too add up to the already accumulated load of being deprived inspite of being at the receiving end for the last several centuries for just being a Hindu.
That springs up comparisons with Aurangzeb's jijiya and the Gazhnavi loot and discrimination resulting in the extreme postures and extreme reactions. Suppose five Muslims are ousted just for being Muslims by a hateful section of the society and their women insulted in a village of any state of the country. Try to imagine the wild reaction it would attract not just within India but abroad too, with UN being roped in and a strong comment from the Capitol Hills. Now, don't imagine but see the harsh reality. Five lakh, sorry for being indigenous, half a million Hindus have been in a forced exile from Kashmir for the last two decades. Not even the anniversary of the day when they were ousted through the loudspeakers blaring from the pulpits of the mosques in the Valley is observed. Everyone has accepted it as a fait accompli. ‘Gujarat' has become a national anthem of hate among the secular Staliists. With an oath that Godhra will never be mentioned. This has put a large section of the Hindus in a quandary. They want to remain as Hindus as a Hindu should be, as a Hindu had always been. But they are being pushed to become Islamists in their responses in order to be heard.
The banning business is an un-Hindu act. But we have developed a love for it. Hopelessly, we are Talibanising or minority-sing voices that would have otherwise spoken of sanity and reason. A friend researched for years, and found neither Husain was anti-Hindu or Akbar a bad king for the Hindus. Even though I have deep respect for his impeccable scholarship and unquestionable integrity, and over and above everything else, he is one of us, a strong Hindutva votary, I found it very uncomfortable to support his findings publicly. But should I remain so? Should I hide my support for the new facts just out of fear of the unknown and losing a stand I had been nursing for so long? I feel, if my pride for being a Hindu is genuine, I must come out openly in support of the truth, even at a high cost of losing some friends. And it is this point of departure that I feel strongly to stand for India and for our Indianness. Savarkar did it on his stand on temple entry and cow slaughter, Vivekananda hit hard at the ill-conceived practices of the so-called high-caste Hindus, Hedgewar conceived and implemented the most revolutionary movement India has ever witnessed by introducing a new idiom and order to consolidate and reform Hindus. If Indianness means respect for dialogue and belief in winning the opponent through a civil exchange of views, it must be visible in our behaviour too.
This virtue, that defines India, that interprets our essence of being Indians, whether Muslims or Christians or Hindus, can't be mortgaged to the vote bank traders of UP and Rajasthan or of any other state. We must be ready to hear voices that are not music to us and rebut with confidence if untruth is blared by the opponent. Liberating India means reasserting our Indianness, without being apologetic for the quintessential Hindu character of the nation and unshackling from the gora log complexes and burdens of superiority. It's more important than making a temple or winning an election.
Yet, at the end of the day, we have become followers of a new religion, the Pratibandh-Sampraday, the religion of banning. Going against the basic tenets of Hindu dharma, we love to use extreme language, ugly and abusive words are littered on the social networks against those whom we disapprove of and exhortations to become intolerant are finding new audiences and applause.
If at all anyone was supposed to speak against such a trend and firmly assert the position of the Indian values, values of freedom, of appreciating the most gruelling and seemingly unacceptable, with aplomb, that voice, and those people would have been us, the claimants to the Hindu heritage.
We could have presented the Hindu assertion that expressed the spirit of understanding the various facets of the truth and agreeing that the truth can never be presented as an absolute, but can only be understood in parts, and everyone of us lives with our own understanding of our part of the truth. The other person, standing in opposition to us, can also have a part of the truth, and the dialogue should never be shunned. The basic condition for a dialogue is to be ready to receive the person from the other side, with respect and the patience to hear him. These are the values and the attitude that makes the planet more livable and validates a society’s claim to be civil and humane. These are, to me, nothing but the continuation of the great Hindu thread that made us free and liberated, to withstand the vicissitudes of history and the barbarism of the invaders. This spirit of knowing the limitations of our periphery of knowledge powered the sages to declare with amazing humility, "Neti, neti (I know only this much, not beyond this)", in the tradition of the highest civilisational enrichment humanity has ever witnessed or experienced.
We truly did this, practised most honestly such traits all these centuries and lived the values we had internalized through our scriptures and the smriti tradition. And all these years, while we continued practicing the dharma and struggling to reform the ill-practices and the blinding ritualism, we got attacked by those who considered our dharmic traditions as a sign of cowardice and backwardness and assaulted to convert us to their faith through sword and deceit. We were declared heathens and pagans. And the perpetrators of massacres wore the titles of Ghazi and Sir. The art of ‘banning’, ‘secluding’, ‘delisting’ and ‘blacklisting’, the enthusiasm of using abusive labels against the non-conformist, against those who refused to be converted is a gift to us by the crusaders, jihadis and the red revolutionaries. They have taught us that those who do not yield to your ‘one book, one prophet one ideology’ path are to be treated as untouchable, exterminated, to be sent to labour camps and get ‘corrected’ in Siberias. These are the people who man our exclusivist regions of candle marches for peace, harmony and freedom of expression, controlling centres of public opinion and mass expression. And freedom of expression means freedom to hurl abuses and stones at those who are unyielding on their point of view. It means freedom of camouflaging your real intentions and forming cartels to suffocate, ban, marginalize and colour the other voices, the other people, the different and unacceptable.
Why ban anyone? Listen and reply. Is that not a better Indian way? But at the same time, should there be no need to ask why the only newsmakers and the uplifters of the festival spirit are supposed to be those who are either firang or represent their western territory of values and worldview? True, goodness is universal and we are the first to give the message -- let noble thoughts come to us from all sides. Still the hangover of a slave, colonial mentality running down our own national ethos can’t be accepted as fair and just approach.
It certainly hurts to see desi Anglo-Saxons going gaga over those for whom India remains a slum where babies eat from the garbage and feel a heavenly bliss when gifted a car and compared with the African experience.
Hence forget the humiliation that turns into a state instrument against those who are cursed to be different, forget the Kashmiri Pandit, forget the women who get targeted for displaying a dot on their forehead in the land of their ancestors. The pain and the anguish and the frustration of a mother or a wife of a security person killed by red revolutionaries in Dantewada, get submerged in the ‘sane, acceptable’ voices of Mr Democrat Doctor. Suppose 11 "Muslims" are assaulted by a lunatic with a declaration of liberating society from the scum of Islamist terrorism. How rapidly would it become part of a passionate discussion among the ‘concerned and peace-loving pluralistic secular literati’, sending the mad men pink chaddhis. But if 11 "Indians" are targeted and brutally killed in Bastar by red revolutionaries, that must be taken differently.
Again mark the difference. We never banned the publishing and sale of books that were offending to us — this banning business began near Rome. Vatican officially had the institution for preemptive censorship of books, called "Index Librorum Prohibitorum", banning and censoring of books that were in any way critical of, or divergent from, their dogma. And this hallmark of institutionalized curtailing of intellectual liberty was only abolished officially as recently as June 14 1966 by the pope. Hindus never had any Index Librorum Prohibitorum banning even scientists like Kepler and Galileo, but Hindus are being given the lessons of tolerance!
Hindus did not burn the books and libraries -- that is also a legacy of the Jihadis and crusaders. Was it not the Christian fanatic emperor Jovian in the fourth century, who burnt the entire library of Antioch, which was carefully curated and populated by his learned and scholarly, if non-Christian, predecessor Emperor Julian? Was it not the Christian Saint Athanasius who in the same century ordered the burning of all "heretical" literature in Egypt? Was it not the Christians again in the same century that burned elsewhere the books of a famous theologian-philosopher Priscillian? Was it not the Bishop Fray Diego de Landa who ordered the mass burning of the sacred books of the Mayans after the conquest of Yukatan by the Spanish? And this book burning business is a Christian legacy all the way to this very decade when various Churches have, funnily, ordered the burning of Harry Potter series! Not to mention the notorious case of attempted Quran burning of last year by a recognized, if notorious, church leader in America.
And what to say of the marching Islamic hordes? Bakhtiar Khalji, when conquered Nalanda, had only one question to its chief librarian, whether there was a copy of the Quran on the shelves, before ordering the mass burning of the library -- a library of such a massive collection, that the fire continued for several months, that the “smoke from the burning books of Kafirs hung for days like a dark pall over the hills”, says Persian historian Minhaj in his chronicle Tabaqat-i-Nasiri. (see the details-http://bharatendu.com/2008/12/03/handful-gazi/) And the third Khalifa of Islam himself ordered burning of extraneous copies of the Quran that did not conform to the official version, not to mention the guttering of the great library of Ctesiphon by Saad ibn Abi Waqas, commander of another Khalifa, Umar. And in Maldives it was the newly converted zealots to Islam who burned down all the Buddhist books of their ancestors, of great historical worth, to ashes in the 12th century.
No, this business of book burning is not a Hindu thing. The Hindus believed in sincere debate, the parties learned the viewpoint of the opponent, and then tried to refute each other. The honest loser of the debate, we have records, went to the extent of letting go of his own books by throwing those in a river as a mark of his defeat, and accepting the winner as one's preceptor! If the extremist, ‘ban cries' from among the Hindus are an aberration and unacceptable so should be the secular extreme which thrives on state support and a blind hatred for anything Indic.
It's the secular Stalinism that helps breed Shri Ram Senes and an intolerant attitude we find negating the Indianness. We were never like that. The mainstream Hindu still remains the last bastion of tolerance and pluralism on this planet. And not all of them vote for those who take up their cause in politics or in any other segment of social activity. I don't know about the fate of Katherine Mayo's Mother India, but Ambedkar's book, Riddles of Ram and Krishna, was never banned.
The mischief began with the Anglicized elite that was ignorant of Indian realities and hit the characters of Savarkar, Vivekananda, Laxmibai and Shivaji on the basis of half-baked hearsay. People are neither blind nor deaf and dumb. They see the daily doses of political spaghettis doled out to the various sections of ‘minorities (read Muslims). Not just the oft-repeated case of grants to Haj and the negligible amount spent on Kailas Manasarovar yatra, or the Shahbano case, the scholarships, extension of the campuses of universities considered as Muslim in character, bank loans, special provisions for Muslim dominated areas and for minority institutions, like no compulsion to apply reservation policy of the government, and now the demand to exempt them from RTI Act too add up to the already accumulated load of being deprived inspite of being at the receiving end for the last several centuries for just being a Hindu.
That springs up comparisons with Aurangzeb's jijiya and the Gazhnavi loot and discrimination resulting in the extreme postures and extreme reactions. Suppose five Muslims are ousted just for being Muslims by a hateful section of the society and their women insulted in a village of any state of the country. Try to imagine the wild reaction it would attract not just within India but abroad too, with UN being roped in and a strong comment from the Capitol Hills. Now, don't imagine but see the harsh reality. Five lakh, sorry for being indigenous, half a million Hindus have been in a forced exile from Kashmir for the last two decades. Not even the anniversary of the day when they were ousted through the loudspeakers blaring from the pulpits of the mosques in the Valley is observed. Everyone has accepted it as a fait accompli. ‘Gujarat' has become a national anthem of hate among the secular Staliists. With an oath that Godhra will never be mentioned. This has put a large section of the Hindus in a quandary. They want to remain as Hindus as a Hindu should be, as a Hindu had always been. But they are being pushed to become Islamists in their responses in order to be heard.
The banning business is an un-Hindu act. But we have developed a love for it. Hopelessly, we are Talibanising or minority-sing voices that would have otherwise spoken of sanity and reason. A friend researched for years, and found neither Husain was anti-Hindu or Akbar a bad king for the Hindus. Even though I have deep respect for his impeccable scholarship and unquestionable integrity, and over and above everything else, he is one of us, a strong Hindutva votary, I found it very uncomfortable to support his findings publicly. But should I remain so? Should I hide my support for the new facts just out of fear of the unknown and losing a stand I had been nursing for so long? I feel, if my pride for being a Hindu is genuine, I must come out openly in support of the truth, even at a high cost of losing some friends. And it is this point of departure that I feel strongly to stand for India and for our Indianness. Savarkar did it on his stand on temple entry and cow slaughter, Vivekananda hit hard at the ill-conceived practices of the so-called high-caste Hindus, Hedgewar conceived and implemented the most revolutionary movement India has ever witnessed by introducing a new idiom and order to consolidate and reform Hindus. If Indianness means respect for dialogue and belief in winning the opponent through a civil exchange of views, it must be visible in our behaviour too.
This virtue, that defines India, that interprets our essence of being Indians, whether Muslims or Christians or Hindus, can't be mortgaged to the vote bank traders of UP and Rajasthan or of any other state. We must be ready to hear voices that are not music to us and rebut with confidence if untruth is blared by the opponent. Liberating India means reasserting our Indianness, without being apologetic for the quintessential Hindu character of the nation and unshackling from the gora log complexes and burdens of superiority. It's more important than making a temple or winning an election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)