Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
case filed by youths against Geelani and Roy in New Delhi
Press Brief by Aditya Raj Kaul
28th October 2010
On October 21st, 2010 a group of separatists and their symathisersfrom all over the country took part in a seminar titled Azadi:The OnlyWay at LTG Auditorium, Copernicus Marg in the heart of nationalcapital. The contents of the said seminar were inflamatory in natureand instigated communal passions. Since it could harm communal harmonyin our country we had informed the local DCP Police in advance aboutthe event, who assured us action. Unfortunately, those who protestedagainst this communal anti-India gathering waving the tri-colour wereforcefully evicted out of the venue during the course of the seminar.
For last seven days we waited for the Government to take formalaction. The Ministry of Home Affairs has lately shown no keen interestto move ahead with the case. We therefore decided to move as privatecitizens who attended the said event to the Tilak Marg Police Stationto file a formal complaint. The concerned SHO has assured us enquiryinto our complaint and further action. We expect him to file an FIRover the complaint that he has accepted. If there is no action withinnext 72 hours, we'll use further legal rights available with us to getthe accused booked.
We were outraged to see anti-national elements abuse our nation. Weare dismayed by Government inaction into the case.
Case filed by Sushil Pandit - 9811111088.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
The Times Of India
23 October 2010
Mafiosi, their lies and a fake state
Tarun Vijay
Delhi witnessed a scene which would have been unimaginable in any other country with a governance that speaks for the land and its people. A person known as Syed Ali Shah Geelani, allegedly a known hawala racketeer and a backstabber Kashmiri who is a qualified Pakistani agent demanding "Azadi" from India, was allowed to speak at a meeting on "Azadi the only way". And the patriotic Indian protesters were arrested while the traitors were given law’s khaki protection.
Geelani, even by a modest definition, is a traitor who has no qualms about accepting Indian money for his medical treatment and getting Indian security for his life, and still abusing Indian democracy and people. He is the one who had more than a hundred Kashmiri youth killed by instigating them to pelt stones while his own kith and kin are enjoying foreign jaunts and a secure future abroad.
And lo and behold, this is what our home minister, P Chidambaram, said, "Geelani will be punished if sedition charges proved". He added that the proceedings of Thursday's seminar had been videographed and the footage was being checked to see if there was any violation of law in Geelani's speech at the seminar organized by sympathizers of Kashmiri separatists.
It’s like taking a picture of a caged jackal and sending it to wildlife experts to "have it examined" and figure out whether it’s a jackal or a rodent.
The seminar’s subject was clear. The organizers and the speakers were known anti-India schemers who abuse Indian democracy and guarantees of freedom of speech. The speeches made at the meeting were dismissive of the Indian state and insulted the spirit of the tricolour. In spite of the evident sedition, the Sonia-Rahul government has decided to go soft and further cause injury to the morale of those soldiers who have been sent to Kashmir by the state power to protect the Constitution and India’s integrity. Why should a soldier fight and die for such an enemy-friendly government? If the voices of sedition are to be allowed to spread venom against the armed forces and patriotic people of India and then the home minister, confused and much-maligned by the Sonia loyalists, issues such ridiculous statements that reflect his "mazboori" to placate the traitors, then at least the armed forces should be spared the humiliation of being the target of both the traitors and the rulers in the valley.
Except during the emergency, I have never seen such a terrified media and a fearful section of the opposition that feels scared to call the bluff of the ruling elite putting Indian security and morale of the forces at its lowest ebb. It was left for the fighting spirit of an opposition leader, Arun Jaitley, to come out with a statement that reflected the anguish of the Indian patriotic people. Where have all other leaders gone? Is the tricolor and its honour the responsibility of just one party? Can the rest can speak in favour of secessionists or maintain silence, looking for the right kind of vote-gathering opportunity? The professor who should have been sent to the gallows for conspiring against the Indian state is seen leading the attack on the nation’s integrity again, rather than feeling grateful to the democratic ironies of our society where the social secular sirens helped him to get a new lease of life.
Freedom of speech cannot be an absolute right etched in stone. Those who made use of this freedom in Delhi to assault the sentiments of millions of Indians do not give this right to anyone in their respective areas of influence. Geelani not only instigates his hired hoodlums to silence the other voices in the valley but is the main instigator to push Kashmir into the black alley of backwardness and Talibanism. He is, by any modest definition, a traitor, who has no qualms about accepting Indian money for his medical treatment and getting Indian security for his life and still abusing Indian democracy and the people.
Freedom of speech has limitations. Hence hate, secessionism and pornography do not constitute essential parts of the right to speak and write. As Stanley Fish puts it, "free speech, in short, is not an independent value but a political prize". No society has yet existed where speech has not been limited to some extent.
I must quote a few lines from the invitation that was circulated for the "Azadi" meeting. It said, "The happenings in Kashmir over the past few months need no retelling. The situation has deteriorated to extreme levels with unarmed civilians, mostly young teenagers, being killed by the Indian armed forces with impunity. The toll from June 11 has reached 109, with the numbers of injured, maimed, and blinded much more. Curfews, bullets, tear smoke have become a routine to suppress the peaceful democratic protests.
"It is important at this juncture to bring the attention towards the fact that the basic issue at hand regarding the Kashmir dispute is the Self-Determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir, for which they have been steadfast and hence been the target of the repressive military machine of the Indian State. The people of Jammu & Kashmir are clear about the fact that what they want is Azadi, which they have time and again defined in coherent terms of letting them decide their own future.
"The latest people’s resistance — which forms part of recently launched ‘Quit Jammu & Kashmir Movement’ — needs to be viewed as a continuity of the Resistance movement (Tehreek) which the people of Kashmir have been sustaining for over six decades.
"The political dispute vis-a-vis Kashmir need not be confused with the superficial measures like the removal of AFSPA, human rights violations, other draconian acts, stopping of unlawful killings, torture, enforced disappearances, etc. Though all these things do exist and need to be stopped at any cost, they manifest only symptoms of a broader and deeper malaise — militarized governance used to maintain a military occupation of the region by the Indian state, through its armed forces, numbering at least 7,00,000."
Lies, absolute lies. You can talk to an honest enemy. You may have a dialogue with a secessionist who is sticking to his guns with some integrity and conviction. But how can you have a debate with a dishonest pleader?
Who are the people of Jammu & Kashmir waging this "Tehreek"? Is it true that "unarmed civilians" are being killed by the Indian armed forces? Or the violent and hateful stone pelters fell victim to Geelani’s instigations to attack Kashmir police, which is 95% Kashmiri Muslim? Why is the name of Indian armed forces being falsely dragged by these stone pelters' Delhi shields?
Aren't they playing the game of Pakistan by attacking the Indian armed forces, while everyone knows they are not at all at ground zero in the valley and all the active assignments of enforcing the law are being executed by J&K police or by CRPF, that too at the instructions of the state government, which is headed by Omar Abdullah, the "confused Indian and an uncertain Kashmiri" CM.
Who are these people, working as journalist in a mainline paper or dollar gatherer jugglers of words of an anglicized tribe to hold a brief for the "self-determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir"? Do they know what constitutes J&K? Do they even know where Ladakh is? Do they know the patriotic people of Ladakh? And Jammu? And of the valley too? A small pro-Pakistan coterie of the Wahhabism, not more than 10% of the entire population of the state, is trying to grab the centre stage through violence and forcefully exiling its minority Hindu community. Why is this factor never discussed by or seen on the radar of "Azadi" seekers and their traitor friends in Delhi and Aligarh Muslim University?
Who is this Wazahat Habibullah, the backroom boy of the ruling family, speaking for the secessionists? Is he trying to repay some kind of a debt to his mentors?
India has fallen victim to a fake state - rulers who are taking the angst and patriotism for granted - inviting an unavoidable storm.
Mafiosi, their lies and a fake state
Tarun Vijay
Delhi witnessed a scene which would have been unimaginable in any other country with a governance that speaks for the land and its people. A person known as Syed Ali Shah Geelani, allegedly a known hawala racketeer and a backstabber Kashmiri who is a qualified Pakistani agent demanding "Azadi" from India, was allowed to speak at a meeting on "Azadi the only way". And the patriotic Indian protesters were arrested while the traitors were given law’s khaki protection.
Geelani, even by a modest definition, is a traitor who has no qualms about accepting Indian money for his medical treatment and getting Indian security for his life, and still abusing Indian democracy and people. He is the one who had more than a hundred Kashmiri youth killed by instigating them to pelt stones while his own kith and kin are enjoying foreign jaunts and a secure future abroad.
And lo and behold, this is what our home minister, P Chidambaram, said, "Geelani will be punished if sedition charges proved". He added that the proceedings of Thursday's seminar had been videographed and the footage was being checked to see if there was any violation of law in Geelani's speech at the seminar organized by sympathizers of Kashmiri separatists.
It’s like taking a picture of a caged jackal and sending it to wildlife experts to "have it examined" and figure out whether it’s a jackal or a rodent.
The seminar’s subject was clear. The organizers and the speakers were known anti-India schemers who abuse Indian democracy and guarantees of freedom of speech. The speeches made at the meeting were dismissive of the Indian state and insulted the spirit of the tricolour. In spite of the evident sedition, the Sonia-Rahul government has decided to go soft and further cause injury to the morale of those soldiers who have been sent to Kashmir by the state power to protect the Constitution and India’s integrity. Why should a soldier fight and die for such an enemy-friendly government? If the voices of sedition are to be allowed to spread venom against the armed forces and patriotic people of India and then the home minister, confused and much-maligned by the Sonia loyalists, issues such ridiculous statements that reflect his "mazboori" to placate the traitors, then at least the armed forces should be spared the humiliation of being the target of both the traitors and the rulers in the valley.
Except during the emergency, I have never seen such a terrified media and a fearful section of the opposition that feels scared to call the bluff of the ruling elite putting Indian security and morale of the forces at its lowest ebb. It was left for the fighting spirit of an opposition leader, Arun Jaitley, to come out with a statement that reflected the anguish of the Indian patriotic people. Where have all other leaders gone? Is the tricolor and its honour the responsibility of just one party? Can the rest can speak in favour of secessionists or maintain silence, looking for the right kind of vote-gathering opportunity? The professor who should have been sent to the gallows for conspiring against the Indian state is seen leading the attack on the nation’s integrity again, rather than feeling grateful to the democratic ironies of our society where the social secular sirens helped him to get a new lease of life.
Freedom of speech cannot be an absolute right etched in stone. Those who made use of this freedom in Delhi to assault the sentiments of millions of Indians do not give this right to anyone in their respective areas of influence. Geelani not only instigates his hired hoodlums to silence the other voices in the valley but is the main instigator to push Kashmir into the black alley of backwardness and Talibanism. He is, by any modest definition, a traitor, who has no qualms about accepting Indian money for his medical treatment and getting Indian security for his life and still abusing Indian democracy and the people.
Freedom of speech has limitations. Hence hate, secessionism and pornography do not constitute essential parts of the right to speak and write. As Stanley Fish puts it, "free speech, in short, is not an independent value but a political prize". No society has yet existed where speech has not been limited to some extent.
I must quote a few lines from the invitation that was circulated for the "Azadi" meeting. It said, "The happenings in Kashmir over the past few months need no retelling. The situation has deteriorated to extreme levels with unarmed civilians, mostly young teenagers, being killed by the Indian armed forces with impunity. The toll from June 11 has reached 109, with the numbers of injured, maimed, and blinded much more. Curfews, bullets, tear smoke have become a routine to suppress the peaceful democratic protests.
"It is important at this juncture to bring the attention towards the fact that the basic issue at hand regarding the Kashmir dispute is the Self-Determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir, for which they have been steadfast and hence been the target of the repressive military machine of the Indian State. The people of Jammu & Kashmir are clear about the fact that what they want is Azadi, which they have time and again defined in coherent terms of letting them decide their own future.
"The latest people’s resistance — which forms part of recently launched ‘Quit Jammu & Kashmir Movement’ — needs to be viewed as a continuity of the Resistance movement (Tehreek) which the people of Kashmir have been sustaining for over six decades.
"The political dispute vis-a-vis Kashmir need not be confused with the superficial measures like the removal of AFSPA, human rights violations, other draconian acts, stopping of unlawful killings, torture, enforced disappearances, etc. Though all these things do exist and need to be stopped at any cost, they manifest only symptoms of a broader and deeper malaise — militarized governance used to maintain a military occupation of the region by the Indian state, through its armed forces, numbering at least 7,00,000."
Lies, absolute lies. You can talk to an honest enemy. You may have a dialogue with a secessionist who is sticking to his guns with some integrity and conviction. But how can you have a debate with a dishonest pleader?
Who are the people of Jammu & Kashmir waging this "Tehreek"? Is it true that "unarmed civilians" are being killed by the Indian armed forces? Or the violent and hateful stone pelters fell victim to Geelani’s instigations to attack Kashmir police, which is 95% Kashmiri Muslim? Why is the name of Indian armed forces being falsely dragged by these stone pelters' Delhi shields?
Aren't they playing the game of Pakistan by attacking the Indian armed forces, while everyone knows they are not at all at ground zero in the valley and all the active assignments of enforcing the law are being executed by J&K police or by CRPF, that too at the instructions of the state government, which is headed by Omar Abdullah, the "confused Indian and an uncertain Kashmiri" CM.
Who are these people, working as journalist in a mainline paper or dollar gatherer jugglers of words of an anglicized tribe to hold a brief for the "self-determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir"? Do they know what constitutes J&K? Do they even know where Ladakh is? Do they know the patriotic people of Ladakh? And Jammu? And of the valley too? A small pro-Pakistan coterie of the Wahhabism, not more than 10% of the entire population of the state, is trying to grab the centre stage through violence and forcefully exiling its minority Hindu community. Why is this factor never discussed by or seen on the radar of "Azadi" seekers and their traitor friends in Delhi and Aligarh Muslim University?
Who is this Wazahat Habibullah, the backroom boy of the ruling family, speaking for the secessionists? Is he trying to repay some kind of a debt to his mentors?
India has fallen victim to a fake state - rulers who are taking the angst and patriotism for granted - inviting an unavoidable storm.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Harvard and the Indian Billionaires
by Rajiv Malhotra
Oct 15, 2010.
This morning, Times of India celebrates the headlines that, "Harvard gets biggest international donation in 102 yrs, from Tata Group." http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Harvard-gets-biggest-international-donation-in-102-yrs-from-Tata-Group/articleshow/6752185.cms The timing on the eve of Obama's India visit has strategic importance. This whopping $50 million gift is part of a massive trend that deserves some thought, so here I go...
Many years ago, when RK Mishra (Dhirubhai Ambani's right-hand man) was alive, he and his wife stayed a weekend with me specifically to get briefed on what to do about Harvard's request for funding chairs there. I brought in 6 scholars who were part of my team studying the state of South Asian Studies in the west. The data we supplied were eye-openers for Mishra, as they had never been made aware of the anti-India tilts in places like Harvard. One talk I gave compared how harvard studies China with great respect, while India is seen through the human rights lens - caste, women's "oppresion", minority "oppression", etc... Others gave specific areas of biases as well - from Aryan theory on. The result was that Mishra went back and advised the Ambanis to NOT give Harvard a dollar, until they would make changes to their stance on India. China, I was able to show, gets treated as a serious civilization. One factor was that China studies is done largely in Mandarin while India is studied in English. Also, China regulates visas for western scholars such that it blacklists those it finds troubling, whereas India is open and welcomes everyone without supervision, and fails to do any analysis after the fact as to whats being produced. In fact, Indians find it a compliment when westerners study them, as though suffering from an inferiority complex of feeling left out. Finally, a key difference is that Indian intellectuals are heavily anti-India because of pseudo-secularism and marxism deeply entrenched in Indian intellectual circles, and most important Indian scholars are western trained and/or funded and/or craving to be in their good books for fame and prestige. Chinese do not suffer such complexes, which in India are the after-effects of colonization. This is because Gandhi got superseded by Nehru in defining the elitist Indian ethos. Gandhi was emphatic about his Indianness, whereas Nehru bragged to John Kenneth Galbraith that he was the "last white man to rule India."
This intervention by me through R.K. Mishra did put a temporary dampener on their crusade to dip into the pockets of rich Indians. It also put me on the hit list of harvard. I also ended Infinity foundation's annual sponsorship of the Indology Roundtable at Harvard which was my "listenind device" of what they were up to. As a follow up to this saga, my friend, JC Kapur in Delhi, called up the head of FICCI at the time, and told him point-blank to stop supporting Harvard's PR campaign with Indian industry for such funding. This too worked, and grudgingly the FICCI head at that time stopped opening doors for harvard in India. But the lure to become famous in harvard and dine with the who's who of white american establishment is too powerful for Indians to resist. The real "success" for most is when they are recognized by the west. This is what the west knows well, having studied Indian culture for centuries, and used precisely this knowledge to manage, control and topple one raja after another in the 17th and 18th centuries. Take the kids to Cambridge, play polo with them, have western women to flirt, etc. - so they can feel like admitted to the club as honorary whites in front of other Indians. After independence, the brits got replaced by the americans, hence the strategic importance of places like harvard.
Some years later, there came a call from a prominent Indian that Anand Mahindra was being roped in by Harvard, and he had given them office space in his Mumbai HQ. So I was set up for a persional one-on-one meeting with Anand Mahindra. He is a very decent, gentle, open-minded executive for sure. He listened to my frank talk. He was unaware of these issues which clearly bothered him. But he made clear that he owed a lot to harvard, as they had given him a scholarship to study there when his father had refused to support him go there. So it was payback time for him, nothing more. Not to worry, he said, because he was giving only very small sums of money, such as $20,000 at a time, and that too for Indian students to go there as scholars. He suggested that I write to him my objections concerning harvard, so he could pass it on, and make sure they change their approach. I also suggested to him that Indians who want to fund Harvard should fund their business school, which has become pro-India, but NOT the humanities which are the nexus of this "south Asian" nonsense. A few days later, at Mr. Mahindra's suggestion I had a brief phone chat with Harvard's Sugata Bose who was visiting India as harvard brand ambassador to raise funds. I have publicly criticized Sugata Bose for his writings that depict pre-Mughal India as uncivilized, his idea of colonial problems focusses only on British but exempts the islamic colonizers, and he sees de-colonization as the return to a unified south asia under quasi-islamic civilization (positioned as "secularism"). This, of course, his girlfriend and co-author, Ayesha Jalal, has very skillfully managed to make into the core curriculum on south asia at places such as Harvard. (Jalal while not on the Harvard faculty was on the committee of their South Asia program until I pointed this strange anomaly out, and then she suddenly left that visible spot.) Prof Bose was cordial and frank, and we agreed to continue to chat later - which never materialized. Bose also lashes out against his great grand-uncle, Subhash Chandra Bose, the freedom-fighter, portraying him as a fascist. Music to the ears of the harvard establishment. These folks bring in Kashmir separatists, Maoists, "abused Hindu women", Dalit activists, etc. routinely as the "voices of the real India." Anand Mahindra announced last month that he is donating $10 million to Harvard specifically designated for the Humanities.
About 5 years ago, my colleague at Infinity Foundation, Krishnan Ramaswamy, and I went to see Rajat Gupta (McKinsey) to meet privately for several hours. I raised the topic that before Indian philanthropists give funding to US unversities, people like Rajat should do "due diligence" on what a given program has produced, how it fits into the image of India that the philanthropist has. After all, no management consultant proposes an investment by his wealthy client in any venture without due diligence. It struck a chord with him. Then I pointed out that nobody other than me had attenpted any such arms-length critical study of South Asian Studies in USA. I mentioned that Chinese government and Chinese private donors do an annual report on the state of China Studies in the west, just like any industry analyst would do for an indistry, and this guides them where and how to invest. This gives them the basis for evaluating a given program and negotiating from a position of knowledge about what is what in the discipline. He was candid in confessing that he had not studied the south asia studies discipline to be able to tell me what went on in depth. But, he remarked in typical India style, he thinks the persons involved in such studies seem like "nice guys" and decent folks. I responded that in evaluating a business investment, the due dligence would not be based on whether the management team were "nice guys" or decent folks in their personal lives, but that it would look for hard-hitting data and evidence to evaluate. Had he or anyone else studied the writings of such departments over the past 50 years, to be able to evaluate what was going from the Indian point of view? The answer then reamins the same today - no, they have not!
In one meetng after another for 15 years, I have raised such issues. One example of such an article I wrote in 2003 is on Rediff.com, titled, "Does South Asia Studies undermine India?" (See: http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/dec/08rajiv.htm ) I have also proposed that India could use its own India Studies and even South Asian Studies based in Indian universities (as a way to study neighbouring countries with an India-centric lens). I have argued that the money used to fund one Harvard chair (at least $5 million) could fund a whole department of scholarship in India. The irony is that even those who claim to be patriotic, nationalists, including those being described as "Hindu nationalists," seem confused and mixed up. The GOI has given major funding to western studies of South Asia - including both BJP and Congress led governments. Yet there is not a single government or private philanthropist report on the state of this "industry" that studies India, which consists of several thousand scholars full-time who come from various disciplines - religious studies, history, anthropology, sociology, political science, human rights, women's studies, etc. On the other hand, China Studies in the academy is secure in China's hands, with western scholars are "outsiders" craving to be allowed entry.
Before spending money, one must have a strategic clarity as to what ideas of India are to be promoted. Otherwise, well formulated ideas of India by various other institutions get to dominate - such as ideologies of seminaries, US government thinktanks, academic south asian marxists-islamists, etc. Indians participate but not on their own rules. Tragically, Indians do not even have clarity on this amongst themesleves much less being able to project it. At a gathering at Ram Jethmalani's house last year, I was invited as the featured speaker for the evening. I spoke on this very issue that Indians must take control of India Studies. One prominent woman activist (Madhu Kishwar) diverted the issue by asking whether the studies would be done in Hindi! The whole gathering easily got distracted by any odd and irrelevant idea, that should not have diverted them from the core proposition being discussed. Some others asked "whose idea of India" would be studied, would it be the Muslims' idea and dalit idea, or would brahmins dominate? Indians do not even have a consensus on what is India as we want to see it.
Earlier this year, there was a rumor that Infosys founder Narayan Murthy was giving $15 million to harvard to translate and publish ancient Indian texts into English, for popular reading. On the surface this seems good for us. But the details count and such details are typcially glossed over by Indians. The editor appointed for the series is none other than Prof. Sheldon Pollock (Columbia), even though he takes an explicitly Marxist view of Sanskrit - explotation by brahmins of dalits, women, muslims, etc. His famous writing, "The Death of Sanskrit" laid out his idea of its history as a source of power in the hands of a few. He has been editor of the CLAY series of Indian Classics already, and one has to see that to get an idea of his biases. (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_Sanskrit_Library ) While doing a great job bringing out the "beauty" of the indian materials, the fact remains that he simply assumes and states the Aryan invasion/migration theory as a given without even raising any issue with it. Very elegant and beautifully produced, this series already has 46 volumes in print, and its influence is considerable. My concern was that the Murthy family might not have invested time and resources to go into the details of the issues at stake in the translation of Indian classics in the west. The Murthy donation will also take this new series from harvard, and send it back into Indian education, making this "Made in USA" depiction of Indian Classics the canon for Indians to study as their definition of themesleves. This is what max Mueller's works did a century ago. It is their money and they have a right to do what they please with it. But wouldn't it have been wiser if they had funded something to do with their area of expertise and competence, so they could at least evaluate and monitor professionally, and not depend on "they are nice fellows" level of naivete. When this rumor was critiqued by me, the head of the Hindu American Foundation inquired and concluded that the runor was false based on his "inside" information from the Murthy's. A few days later the official announcement was made. Also, Prof. Pollock was awarded the Padma Shri award by GOI at a Republic Day ceremony in Rashtrapathy Bhavan, for his great contributions to the study of sanskrit.
None of the reactions from the "Hindu activists" have made any sense either, be it issuing petitions or writing angrily to the parties concerned. They have failed to understand the deeper mechanisms at work. You dont fight a patient's infection by holding playcards shouting slogans against the germs! The doctor has to understand the mechanisms of the disease and how/where to intervene. But a lazy, incompetent man (despite his good intentions) would have no time to go to med school and learn all that, and THEN be competent to defeat the disease. He is in too much of a hurry, wants to make a big splash in public to look important; and hence he stands outside the hospital shouting slogans against the germs. This sounds like a strange analogy, but if you examine closely the "activists" at work, it is a fairly accurate one.
The author
Rajiv Malhotra is an author and the founder of Infinity Foundation. He is also a former telecommunication entrepreneur. After a career in the software, computer, and telecom industries Malhotra took an early retirement to pursue philanthropic and educational activities. He founded the Infinity foundation in 1995.The Infinity Foundation is an organization based in New Jersey promoting Indic studies. According to Prema Kurien, since 2003 it is one the most prominent and active Indic studies organization in the United States.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajiv_Malhotra
Oct 15, 2010.
This morning, Times of India celebrates the headlines that, "Harvard gets biggest international donation in 102 yrs, from Tata Group." http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Harvard-gets-biggest-international-donation-in-102-yrs-from-Tata-Group/articleshow/6752185.cms The timing on the eve of Obama's India visit has strategic importance. This whopping $50 million gift is part of a massive trend that deserves some thought, so here I go...
Many years ago, when RK Mishra (Dhirubhai Ambani's right-hand man) was alive, he and his wife stayed a weekend with me specifically to get briefed on what to do about Harvard's request for funding chairs there. I brought in 6 scholars who were part of my team studying the state of South Asian Studies in the west. The data we supplied were eye-openers for Mishra, as they had never been made aware of the anti-India tilts in places like Harvard. One talk I gave compared how harvard studies China with great respect, while India is seen through the human rights lens - caste, women's "oppresion", minority "oppression", etc... Others gave specific areas of biases as well - from Aryan theory on. The result was that Mishra went back and advised the Ambanis to NOT give Harvard a dollar, until they would make changes to their stance on India. China, I was able to show, gets treated as a serious civilization. One factor was that China studies is done largely in Mandarin while India is studied in English. Also, China regulates visas for western scholars such that it blacklists those it finds troubling, whereas India is open and welcomes everyone without supervision, and fails to do any analysis after the fact as to whats being produced. In fact, Indians find it a compliment when westerners study them, as though suffering from an inferiority complex of feeling left out. Finally, a key difference is that Indian intellectuals are heavily anti-India because of pseudo-secularism and marxism deeply entrenched in Indian intellectual circles, and most important Indian scholars are western trained and/or funded and/or craving to be in their good books for fame and prestige. Chinese do not suffer such complexes, which in India are the after-effects of colonization. This is because Gandhi got superseded by Nehru in defining the elitist Indian ethos. Gandhi was emphatic about his Indianness, whereas Nehru bragged to John Kenneth Galbraith that he was the "last white man to rule India."
This intervention by me through R.K. Mishra did put a temporary dampener on their crusade to dip into the pockets of rich Indians. It also put me on the hit list of harvard. I also ended Infinity foundation's annual sponsorship of the Indology Roundtable at Harvard which was my "listenind device" of what they were up to. As a follow up to this saga, my friend, JC Kapur in Delhi, called up the head of FICCI at the time, and told him point-blank to stop supporting Harvard's PR campaign with Indian industry for such funding. This too worked, and grudgingly the FICCI head at that time stopped opening doors for harvard in India. But the lure to become famous in harvard and dine with the who's who of white american establishment is too powerful for Indians to resist. The real "success" for most is when they are recognized by the west. This is what the west knows well, having studied Indian culture for centuries, and used precisely this knowledge to manage, control and topple one raja after another in the 17th and 18th centuries. Take the kids to Cambridge, play polo with them, have western women to flirt, etc. - so they can feel like admitted to the club as honorary whites in front of other Indians. After independence, the brits got replaced by the americans, hence the strategic importance of places like harvard.
Some years later, there came a call from a prominent Indian that Anand Mahindra was being roped in by Harvard, and he had given them office space in his Mumbai HQ. So I was set up for a persional one-on-one meeting with Anand Mahindra. He is a very decent, gentle, open-minded executive for sure. He listened to my frank talk. He was unaware of these issues which clearly bothered him. But he made clear that he owed a lot to harvard, as they had given him a scholarship to study there when his father had refused to support him go there. So it was payback time for him, nothing more. Not to worry, he said, because he was giving only very small sums of money, such as $20,000 at a time, and that too for Indian students to go there as scholars. He suggested that I write to him my objections concerning harvard, so he could pass it on, and make sure they change their approach. I also suggested to him that Indians who want to fund Harvard should fund their business school, which has become pro-India, but NOT the humanities which are the nexus of this "south Asian" nonsense. A few days later, at Mr. Mahindra's suggestion I had a brief phone chat with Harvard's Sugata Bose who was visiting India as harvard brand ambassador to raise funds. I have publicly criticized Sugata Bose for his writings that depict pre-Mughal India as uncivilized, his idea of colonial problems focusses only on British but exempts the islamic colonizers, and he sees de-colonization as the return to a unified south asia under quasi-islamic civilization (positioned as "secularism"). This, of course, his girlfriend and co-author, Ayesha Jalal, has very skillfully managed to make into the core curriculum on south asia at places such as Harvard. (Jalal while not on the Harvard faculty was on the committee of their South Asia program until I pointed this strange anomaly out, and then she suddenly left that visible spot.) Prof Bose was cordial and frank, and we agreed to continue to chat later - which never materialized. Bose also lashes out against his great grand-uncle, Subhash Chandra Bose, the freedom-fighter, portraying him as a fascist. Music to the ears of the harvard establishment. These folks bring in Kashmir separatists, Maoists, "abused Hindu women", Dalit activists, etc. routinely as the "voices of the real India." Anand Mahindra announced last month that he is donating $10 million to Harvard specifically designated for the Humanities.
About 5 years ago, my colleague at Infinity Foundation, Krishnan Ramaswamy, and I went to see Rajat Gupta (McKinsey) to meet privately for several hours. I raised the topic that before Indian philanthropists give funding to US unversities, people like Rajat should do "due diligence" on what a given program has produced, how it fits into the image of India that the philanthropist has. After all, no management consultant proposes an investment by his wealthy client in any venture without due diligence. It struck a chord with him. Then I pointed out that nobody other than me had attenpted any such arms-length critical study of South Asian Studies in USA. I mentioned that Chinese government and Chinese private donors do an annual report on the state of China Studies in the west, just like any industry analyst would do for an indistry, and this guides them where and how to invest. This gives them the basis for evaluating a given program and negotiating from a position of knowledge about what is what in the discipline. He was candid in confessing that he had not studied the south asia studies discipline to be able to tell me what went on in depth. But, he remarked in typical India style, he thinks the persons involved in such studies seem like "nice guys" and decent folks. I responded that in evaluating a business investment, the due dligence would not be based on whether the management team were "nice guys" or decent folks in their personal lives, but that it would look for hard-hitting data and evidence to evaluate. Had he or anyone else studied the writings of such departments over the past 50 years, to be able to evaluate what was going from the Indian point of view? The answer then reamins the same today - no, they have not!
In one meetng after another for 15 years, I have raised such issues. One example of such an article I wrote in 2003 is on Rediff.com, titled, "Does South Asia Studies undermine India?" (See: http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/dec/08rajiv.htm ) I have also proposed that India could use its own India Studies and even South Asian Studies based in Indian universities (as a way to study neighbouring countries with an India-centric lens). I have argued that the money used to fund one Harvard chair (at least $5 million) could fund a whole department of scholarship in India. The irony is that even those who claim to be patriotic, nationalists, including those being described as "Hindu nationalists," seem confused and mixed up. The GOI has given major funding to western studies of South Asia - including both BJP and Congress led governments. Yet there is not a single government or private philanthropist report on the state of this "industry" that studies India, which consists of several thousand scholars full-time who come from various disciplines - religious studies, history, anthropology, sociology, political science, human rights, women's studies, etc. On the other hand, China Studies in the academy is secure in China's hands, with western scholars are "outsiders" craving to be allowed entry.
Before spending money, one must have a strategic clarity as to what ideas of India are to be promoted. Otherwise, well formulated ideas of India by various other institutions get to dominate - such as ideologies of seminaries, US government thinktanks, academic south asian marxists-islamists, etc. Indians participate but not on their own rules. Tragically, Indians do not even have clarity on this amongst themesleves much less being able to project it. At a gathering at Ram Jethmalani's house last year, I was invited as the featured speaker for the evening. I spoke on this very issue that Indians must take control of India Studies. One prominent woman activist (Madhu Kishwar) diverted the issue by asking whether the studies would be done in Hindi! The whole gathering easily got distracted by any odd and irrelevant idea, that should not have diverted them from the core proposition being discussed. Some others asked "whose idea of India" would be studied, would it be the Muslims' idea and dalit idea, or would brahmins dominate? Indians do not even have a consensus on what is India as we want to see it.
Earlier this year, there was a rumor that Infosys founder Narayan Murthy was giving $15 million to harvard to translate and publish ancient Indian texts into English, for popular reading. On the surface this seems good for us. But the details count and such details are typcially glossed over by Indians. The editor appointed for the series is none other than Prof. Sheldon Pollock (Columbia), even though he takes an explicitly Marxist view of Sanskrit - explotation by brahmins of dalits, women, muslims, etc. His famous writing, "The Death of Sanskrit" laid out his idea of its history as a source of power in the hands of a few. He has been editor of the CLAY series of Indian Classics already, and one has to see that to get an idea of his biases. (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_Sanskrit_Library ) While doing a great job bringing out the "beauty" of the indian materials, the fact remains that he simply assumes and states the Aryan invasion/migration theory as a given without even raising any issue with it. Very elegant and beautifully produced, this series already has 46 volumes in print, and its influence is considerable. My concern was that the Murthy family might not have invested time and resources to go into the details of the issues at stake in the translation of Indian classics in the west. The Murthy donation will also take this new series from harvard, and send it back into Indian education, making this "Made in USA" depiction of Indian Classics the canon for Indians to study as their definition of themesleves. This is what max Mueller's works did a century ago. It is their money and they have a right to do what they please with it. But wouldn't it have been wiser if they had funded something to do with their area of expertise and competence, so they could at least evaluate and monitor professionally, and not depend on "they are nice fellows" level of naivete. When this rumor was critiqued by me, the head of the Hindu American Foundation inquired and concluded that the runor was false based on his "inside" information from the Murthy's. A few days later the official announcement was made. Also, Prof. Pollock was awarded the Padma Shri award by GOI at a Republic Day ceremony in Rashtrapathy Bhavan, for his great contributions to the study of sanskrit.
None of the reactions from the "Hindu activists" have made any sense either, be it issuing petitions or writing angrily to the parties concerned. They have failed to understand the deeper mechanisms at work. You dont fight a patient's infection by holding playcards shouting slogans against the germs! The doctor has to understand the mechanisms of the disease and how/where to intervene. But a lazy, incompetent man (despite his good intentions) would have no time to go to med school and learn all that, and THEN be competent to defeat the disease. He is in too much of a hurry, wants to make a big splash in public to look important; and hence he stands outside the hospital shouting slogans against the germs. This sounds like a strange analogy, but if you examine closely the "activists" at work, it is a fairly accurate one.
The author
Rajiv Malhotra is an author and the founder of Infinity Foundation. He is also a former telecommunication entrepreneur. After a career in the software, computer, and telecom industries Malhotra took an early retirement to pursue philanthropic and educational activities. He founded the Infinity foundation in 1995.The Infinity Foundation is an organization based in New Jersey promoting Indic studies. According to Prema Kurien, since 2003 it is one the most prominent and active Indic studies organization in the United States.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajiv_Malhotra
Monday, September 27, 2010
Bharat Vani weekly of Tarun Bharat
Nagpur, 26th Sept 2010
Shri Tarun Vijay with Shri Nitin Gadkari at the inauguration of Bharat Vani weekly in Nagpur. They were given great welcome in Nagpur.
Shri Tarun Vijay with Shri Nitin Gadkari at the inauguration of Bharat Vani weekly in Nagpur. They were given great welcome in Nagpur.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Garhwal Post
Monday, September 20, 2010
The Times Of India
14 September 2010
Whose man is that soldier fighting in Kashmir?
Tarun Vijay
Whose man is that soldier fighting in Kashmir?
Tarun Vijay
India must be the only country in the world where being an antinational murderer means a person or organization getting invitations for talks with the government. Mir Waiz and Geelani should have been booked months ago and punished for their anti-India activities. They not only instigated Kashmiri youth to attack our patriotic people and soldiers but also vitiated the entire atmosphere in the valley bringing normal life to a halt and using Kashmiri youth as fodder for their Pakistani plots, resulting in so many killings of young boys. The fact of the matter is that the killers in Kashmir are these two pro-Pakistani elements, who would have been taken to task by any government with a spine much earlier than their fangs grew more poisonous. In such a situation, instead of talking tough and straight, the government is not only giving confused signals to ‘soften’ (whatever that means) the Armed Forces Special Powers Act but making gestures to terrorist supporters to come to talk. Talks, always a welcome way to find a solution, can be held or even an indication for a discussion can be sent only when the atmosphere is ripe for it and the other side, offenders in this case, show a willingness to come to terms. I must say Prime Minister Manmohan Singh sounded reasonable at the Armed Forces commanders’ meet on September 13 when he said: "The youth of Kashmir are our citizens and their grievances have to be addressed….We are willing to talk to every person or group which abjures violence, within the framework of our Constitution." But is this the time to extend an olive branch?
Have they ever thought what effect these gestures by the government have on the morale of the soldiers?
For whom is the Indian soldier fighting the battle in Kashmir?
It pains me immensely to see how our secular media sirens show their undiluted love for the separatists on TV screens and they go to the streets of Srinagar only to interview the unpatriotic people. When they invite any of the antinational separatists on their shows, they display an utter lack of sensitivity towards those who love their country and give all the space and time to those voices of insanity and violence with a soft, affectionate anchoring you seldom witness when they put on trial any leader showing patriotic leanings. There was hardly a time, except during the Kargil war, when the voices representing the soldiers were given a chance to come to the TV studios or have their say on the editorial pages of the media empires. He is despised, hated and made responsible for all the bad happenings, in a sweeping manner. No one has treid to see the hardened daily routine a soldier is subjected to from 6am to sunset, and after that the night vigil. Anything untoward happens and rogue actors like Salman Khan say meekly to the Pakistan media: Oh, it was the fault of the Indian security personnel. Salman should have been tried for treason. But we have people who lovingly go to his house and try to ‘settle the issue’. These very people and their governors make this day possible when anyone feels free to speak against the soldiers, against the national psyche of patriotism. A soldier is not a daily wage earner like the stone pelters. He is a representative of the nation’s time-honoured traditions. He is nurtured and nourished on a family's "khandaani izzat" - "Mera beta fauji hai". Ask any politician acting as an apologist for the separatist murderers, has he ever thought of sending his child to the forces? A family offers mannats at the feet of their wahe guru over devatas to ensure their son gets selected in the "fauj". He is trained by the best of the warriors at the National Defence Academy or the Indian Military Academy. Some lucky ones get selected early and go through the National Defence School route and see the pictures when they recommissioned - after a thrilling passing out parade in Dehradun. Their caps in the air and their moms and dads hugging them with moist eyes. Years of training and a life of a great Indian patriotic goes waste before the gang of rogue pro-Pakistan elements who have hardly any idea what they are demanding.
Whether he is in the Army or in CRPF, BSF or ITBP, the story is the same. He is there not because he wanted to loot and rape and maim people. He was sent by the Indian government to safeguard the interests of the nation and the Constitution. He is a uniformed gentleman. Those who blow the case of rights violation must be heard definitely. But can an individual's fault be attributed to the olive green or the khaki fraternity of the soldier? I absolutely agree with Manmohan Singh when he says "The youth of Kashmir are our citizens and their grievances have to be addressed". But this should be done through good governance and a mechanism that can win their trust and not through "Srinagar-CM-living-in-Delhi" type Omars who never find time to place a wreath on the body of a soldier martyred in Kashmir.
In fact, the killers of Kashmir are people like Mir Waiz and Geelani. The angst of Kashmir must be directed against them. The soldier would be too happy to go back to his barracks and celebrate Diwali and Eid with family.
In the secular sultanate of Delhi’s power brokers, a soldier is just another babu, another employee to be denied a justifiable demand of "one rank-one pension" by those politicians who raise their salaries 300% in a jiffy. And in the media he is a punching bag. Just read a poem an Indian soldier wrote (saw it on a blog; Ali, perhaps, was his name).
Why do I still serve you?
How you play with us, did you ever see?
At Seven, I had decided what I wanted to be;
I would serve you to the end,
All these boundaries I would defend.
Now you make me look like a fool,
When at seventeen and just out of school;
Went to the place where they made "men out of boys"
Lived a tough life …sacrificed a few joys…
In those days, I would see my "civilian" friends,
Living a life with the fashion trends;
Enjoying their so called "college days"
While I sweated and bled in the sun and haze…
But I never thought twice about what where or why
All I knew was when the time came, I'd be ready to do or die.
At 21 and with my commission in hand,
Under the glory of the parade and the band,
I took the oath to protect you over land, air or sea,
And make the supreme sacrifice when the need came to be.
I stood there with a sense of recognition,
But on that day I never had the premonition,
that when the time came to give me my due,
You'd just say, "What is so great that you do?"
Long back you promised a well-to-do life;
And when I'm away, take care of my wife.
You came and saw the hardships I live through,
And I saw you make a note or two,
And I hoped you would realise the worth of me;
but now I know you'll never be able to see,
Because you only see the glorified life of mine,
Did you see the place where death looms all the time?
Did you meet the man standing guard in the snow?
The name of his newborn he does not know...
Did you meet the man whose father breathed his last?
While the sailor patrolled our seas so vast?
You still know I'll not be the one to raise my voice
I will stand tall and protect you in Punjab Himachal and Thois.
But that's just me you have in the sun and rain,
For now at twenty-four, you make me think again;
About the decision I made, seven years back;
Should I have chosen another life, some other track?
Will I tell my son to follow my lead?
Will I tell my son, you'll get all that you need?
This is the country you will serve
This country will give you all that you deserve?
I heard you tell the world "India is shining"
I told my men, that's a reason for us to be smiling
This is the India you and I will defend!
But tell me how long will you be able to pretend?
You go on promise all that you may,
But it's the souls of your own men you betray.
Did you read how some of our eminent citizens
Write about me and ridicule my very existence?
I ask you to please come and see what I do,
Come and have a look at what I go through
Live my life just for a day
Maybe you'll have something else to say?
I will still risk my life without a sigh
To keep your flag flying high
but today I ask myself a question or two…
Oh India…. Why do I still serve you?
Monday, September 13, 2010
The Times Of India
10 September 2010
A colonial invite must be spurned by Aamir
Tarun Vijay
A colonial invite must be spurned by Aamir
Tarun Vijay
“Bollywood superstar Aamir Khan and his filmmaker wife Kiran Rao Khan have been officially invited to dine with the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles at the Marlborough House in Westminster, London. A source says, "Aamir is honoured and has accepted the invitation from Prince Charles inviting him to cocktails and dinner being hosted for a select gathering."
I would have loved Aamir saying he is having dinner with the Thai king or a Nepalese democratic leader. Or a Sri Lankan, even a Pakistani would have been a welcome host. But who is this Charles anyway? What's there in him to feel honoured at his invite? Forget what he did to Diana or even the fact that Charles had any known or unknown affection for us Indians except a ‘Ramu’ attitude, exhibited in cuddling coloured Indian kids for a photo op, what do these British rulers have that Indians should advertise a sense of elation receiving their invites?
Lagaan and 1857 forgotten, the British remain the most barbaric rulers India has ever seen. They cheated us, looted us, raped the country, stole our most valuable jewels and books and documents and the Saraswati statue. They built their industrial revolution on our money. Aamir must read Dadabhoy Naoroji’s thesis and Will Durant’s book – A Case for India. Aamir must know that British rulers were rogues and savages. Durant writes, "Until 1918 the total expenditure on public health, of both the central and the provincial governments combined, was only $5,000,000 a year, for 240,000,000 people — an appropriation of two cents per capita. Sir William Hunter, once Director-General of Indian Statistics, estimated that 40,000,000 of the people of India were seldom or never able to satisfy their hunger. Weakened with malnutrition, they offer low resistance to infections; epidemics periodically destroy millions of them. In 1901, 2, 72,000 died of plague introduced from abroad; in 1902, 5000,000 died of plague; in 1903, 800,000; in 1904, 1,000,000. In 1918 there were 125,000,000 cases of influenza, and 12,500,000 recorded deaths...”
The British never apologized for the crimes they committed against Indians. The Vatican apologized to Australian victims of paedophile priests. The majority of people in Australia agree with their government’s decision to apologize to Aboriginal communities for what is known as the Stolen Generation. For over 60 years and into the 1970s, the Australian government — and Catholic church missions — forcibly removed Australia’s Aboriginal children from their families and placed them in institutions or with foster families.
In November 2001, the Vatican issued a formal apology for the Church’s role in the Stolen Generation. In October 1998, in preparation for the Millennium, Pope John Paul II, the spiritual leader of about one billion Christian Roman Catholics, indicated that he and the Vatican were reviewing past Church sins and preparing a global apology statement.
The British government apologized on a recent issue of child abuse this year on February 10. A headline ran thus: UK apologizes over 'shameful' child migration program. Even the Pope received an apology from the British government for an issue that would look so trivial before what they did to fellow Indians of Aamir Khan. See this: Pope receives apology from UK Foreign Office for 'condom' memo. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/25/pope-apology-condom-memo).
But they never apologized to us for hanging Bhagat Singhs, Rajgurus and Sukhdevs and ‘disposing of’ their dead bodies clandestinely, against all laws, in kerosene oil, at Satlaj, or for their crimes post 1857.
Did Aamir ever feel he should be more honoured having daal-roti with villagers of Khatkar Kalan? (What’s Khatkar Kalan anyway? It’s the birth place of Bhagat Singh). The Tribune in 1931 , giving news of Bhagat Singh and his revolutionary colleagues’ hanging said: ‘Dead bodies secretly disposed of’, 'no last interview with relations’.
Those were the British who did Jalianwala Bagh massacre. They did everything to insult, humiliate and belittle whatever India possessed.
Should it be an honour to dine with the inheritor of such a barbaric legacy who remains unrepentant on what his predecessors did to us?
I love Aamir and his films. Especially after Tare Zameen Par, Lagaan,1857 and Peepli Live, he has risen to unprecedented heights of glory and respect, very justifiably, not just amongst Indians but in the esteem of a global audience. In fact, Charles would be gaining more to have Aamir with him and Camila Parker Bowles on dining table. But should Aamir, a proud Indian, oblige them?
I would have loved Aamir saying he is having dinner with the Thai king or a Nepalese democratic leader. Or a Sri Lankan, even a Pakistani would have been a welcome host. But who is this Charles anyway? What's there in him to feel honoured at his invite? Forget what he did to Diana or even the fact that Charles had any known or unknown affection for us Indians except a ‘Ramu’ attitude, exhibited in cuddling coloured Indian kids for a photo op, what do these British rulers have that Indians should advertise a sense of elation receiving their invites?
Lagaan and 1857 forgotten, the British remain the most barbaric rulers India has ever seen. They cheated us, looted us, raped the country, stole our most valuable jewels and books and documents and the Saraswati statue. They built their industrial revolution on our money. Aamir must read Dadabhoy Naoroji’s thesis and Will Durant’s book – A Case for India. Aamir must know that British rulers were rogues and savages. Durant writes, "Until 1918 the total expenditure on public health, of both the central and the provincial governments combined, was only $5,000,000 a year, for 240,000,000 people — an appropriation of two cents per capita. Sir William Hunter, once Director-General of Indian Statistics, estimated that 40,000,000 of the people of India were seldom or never able to satisfy their hunger. Weakened with malnutrition, they offer low resistance to infections; epidemics periodically destroy millions of them. In 1901, 2, 72,000 died of plague introduced from abroad; in 1902, 5000,000 died of plague; in 1903, 800,000; in 1904, 1,000,000. In 1918 there were 125,000,000 cases of influenza, and 12,500,000 recorded deaths...”
The British never apologized for the crimes they committed against Indians. The Vatican apologized to Australian victims of paedophile priests. The majority of people in Australia agree with their government’s decision to apologize to Aboriginal communities for what is known as the Stolen Generation. For over 60 years and into the 1970s, the Australian government — and Catholic church missions — forcibly removed Australia’s Aboriginal children from their families and placed them in institutions or with foster families.
In November 2001, the Vatican issued a formal apology for the Church’s role in the Stolen Generation. In October 1998, in preparation for the Millennium, Pope John Paul II, the spiritual leader of about one billion Christian Roman Catholics, indicated that he and the Vatican were reviewing past Church sins and preparing a global apology statement.
The British government apologized on a recent issue of child abuse this year on February 10. A headline ran thus: UK apologizes over 'shameful' child migration program. Even the Pope received an apology from the British government for an issue that would look so trivial before what they did to fellow Indians of Aamir Khan. See this: Pope receives apology from UK Foreign Office for 'condom' memo. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/25/pope-apology-condom-memo).
But they never apologized to us for hanging Bhagat Singhs, Rajgurus and Sukhdevs and ‘disposing of’ their dead bodies clandestinely, against all laws, in kerosene oil, at Satlaj, or for their crimes post 1857.
Did Aamir ever feel he should be more honoured having daal-roti with villagers of Khatkar Kalan? (What’s Khatkar Kalan anyway? It’s the birth place of Bhagat Singh). The Tribune in 1931 , giving news of Bhagat Singh and his revolutionary colleagues’ hanging said: ‘Dead bodies secretly disposed of’, 'no last interview with relations’.
Those were the British who did Jalianwala Bagh massacre. They did everything to insult, humiliate and belittle whatever India possessed.
Should it be an honour to dine with the inheritor of such a barbaric legacy who remains unrepentant on what his predecessors did to us?
I love Aamir and his films. Especially after Tare Zameen Par, Lagaan,1857 and Peepli Live, he has risen to unprecedented heights of glory and respect, very justifiably, not just amongst Indians but in the esteem of a global audience. In fact, Charles would be gaining more to have Aamir with him and Camila Parker Bowles on dining table. But should Aamir, a proud Indian, oblige them?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)