The politics of fear
By M.V. Kamath

We must learn to take on anyone whether it is China, the United States or Raj Thackeray or Project Joshua, the last being the largest, most pervasive global evangelical network ever to exist, which is playing havoc in India’s tribal areas.

When will India stop living in fear and wake up to the fact that it is on its way to be a great power in its own right? We are afraid to defend our own rights. We show lack of self-confidence. We allow ourselves to be exploited by all and sundry unprotestingly. We go out of our way to please—some would say pamper—minorities. We hesitate to hang a terrorist responsible for a murderous attack on our Parliament because he is a Muslim. We are unwilling to take on the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) because our Intelligence Services haven’t enough evidence to ban it. Indeed, politicians like Lalu Prasad and Mulayam Singh Yadav have gone to the extent of defending SIMI as a harmless organisation.

Recently columnist Tavleen Singh wanted to know why Kashmiri Muslims are allowed to commit treason and to take out a procession flying Pakistani colours, in addition to demanding secession. The Government has no answer. One of the world’s richest evangelic outfits, World Vision India, is allowed freely to operate in Kandhamal, Orissa and carry on conversion with impunity, on the grounds that no force is used. The evangelists hurl the Constitution in the face of the government and get away with their well-planned intentions. We—the Hindus among us—are ashamed to declare ourselves as Hindus lest we are mocked at as communalists.

In a recent issue of Dialogue Quarterly (Jan-March 2008) Francois Gautier, a distinguished French journalist stationed in India noted that while as a young student in France he was taught in his school about the “greatness of France, greatness of Christianity”. Let any school in India start teaching about the “greatness of Hinduism” and the secularists would shout murder.

In Indonesia which is a predominantly Muslim country, Lord Ganesha is held in high reverence to the point that his image is etched in currency notes. Let India do it and there will be hell to pay. Our secularists will take strong umbrage.

We have to satisfy ourselves with a portrait of Gandhi and one has to thank god for small mercies. We are afraid of China, when we should be telling it off in no uncertain terms. India’s envoy to Beijing, Nirupama Roy, was woken up from her sleep well past midnight to be handed over some protest. It was beastly act showing utter indifference to diplomatic norms. We didn’t take action.

“Why is it that New Delhi is so sensitive about stepping on Beijing’s toes when China has no compunction about stepping on Indian toes and with hobnailed boots at that?” Columnist Jug Suraiya wants to know. According to him China makes us apologetic and ashamed of what is, and ought to be our most prized advantage over the Middle Kingdom: our democracy. “Our democracy” according to Suraiya, “ought to be our biggest pride”. But democracy does not—and should not—mean that anybody can do what the Thackerays do in Mumbai, terrorise shopkeepers into putting up signboards in Marathi, when there is no such thing as a Marathi script: there is only a Devnagari script, or insist that everyone living in Mumbai should be conversant—and converse—only in Marathi. Indian is a multilingual country and so are most major cities: multilingual. The Thackerays should have been called to account by the Congress Government but it is obviously scared of losing the lower middle class parochial vote in the elections. Mumbai may be the capital of Maharashtra but that is no reason why Marathi should be inflicted on everyone who has made it his home, any more than every citizen of Bangalore, no matter what his mother tongue is, should be conversant in Kannada and every citizen of Chennai, irrespective of his linguistic origin should address meetings only in Tamil.

One can be loyal both to one’s own mother tongue as well as the language the locals speak whether in Kolkata, Manipur or Chandigarh. The Navnirman Sena has no right to impose Marathi on Mumbai’s rainbow citizens who hail whether from Uttar Pradesh or Rajasthan or anywhere else. Mumbai, reflects India’s heterogeneity. It is every body’s city. In all these sixty years of Independence the governments at Delhi have been seared of taking decisive steps whether at the international level or at state levels out of sheer fear of the unknown. It comes as a shock that China should protest at the visit of Dr Manmohan Singh to Arunachal Pradesh. That is some check.

China had even dared to refuse visas to two Indian officials hailing from Arunachal who were part of a large group, saying that since the region is party of China, its inhabitants do not need visas. India has kept quite over China’s continued operation of Aksai. Chin region by force since the 1962 War. China has virtually annexed the territory. Then there is the question of the United States refusing a visa to Narendra Modi who is an elected Chief Minister of a State. If, in the future, Modi becomes the Prime Minister or even Home Minister of India, will the US continue to refuse a visa to him? He is charged with contriving killing of Muslims during the Godhra riots. Can we charge Henry Kissinger with wholesale killing of millions in Vietnam and on that basis refuse him a visa? Can a similar charge be made against George Bush for the killings still going on in Iraq? America’s record in that country is hardly a glorious one. The trouble with India is that it is not assertive enough. It literally invites a slap on its face.

Aliens use our Constitution to our own disadvantage. We must disabuse ourselves of the self-denigrating attitude that to be gracious to our enemies or recalcitrant friends is according to the highest standards of behaviour set by Mahatma Gandhi. This only betrays our lack of self-respect and is reflective of cowardice. We must learn to take on anyone whether it is China, the United States or Raj Thackeray or Project Joshua, the last being the largest, most pervasive global evangelical network ever to exist, which is playing havoc in India’s tribal areas. It may be smart-alecky to make a sophisticate distinction between ‘propagation’ and ‘conversion’ but for India not to be aware of what is going on can only be described as pusillanimous.

The evangelists are taking the government for a ride. Evangelists must be banned and Delhi must have the courage to do so. In this matter it can take a lesson from France and form China. In trying to get a pat on the back from foreigners, we have been in the past selling our heritage.

Let foreigners say what they will. We need not succumb to their treachery. As President Franklin D. Roosevelt said in a classic address, the only thing to fear is fear itself. The world may not love us but it will respect us if we are strong and self-assertive. It is not secularism to succumb to evangelist double-speak or look the other way for minority terrorism and misuse of constitutional niceties. Unless India regains it national manhood it will be regarded as a push-over and an effete nation that lacks the courage of its convictions—if, that is, it has any.

http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=257&page=12

Nationalism-A Concept Alien to Islam

U. Mahesh Prabhu, ivarta

As an egalitarian nation, India has the constitutional obligation to guard the religious liberties of every citizen. Hence, recently, when Mohammad Zubair, a corporal with the Indian Air Force, was ordered to shave off his beard to maintain uniformity, he took no time in moving the country”s judicial system. “A true Muslim must keep his beard”, contended Zubair”s attorney, stating that it was an essential part of his faith as per the “Hadith” and “Sunna” (recorded customs). “We have the constitutional right to belief and practice of religion,” he said, seeking protection of his “right” to grow a beard.

But is growing a beard really mandatory in Islam? Yes, the Prophet has said, as reported by Abdullah-ibn-Umar, “Act against the polytheist, trim closely the moustache and grow your beard”. Thus, following these directives of the Prophet, Zubair is following his faith. But didn”t the Prophet, in the same statement, also say “act against the polytheist.”? Then, if promoted through the ranks, would Zubair not work against the “polytheist” Hindus? Would he not follow the directives of his Prophet then also and seek to kill his “polytheist” countrymen?

For years now, Muslim scholars, intellectuals, and journalists, have complained of “deprivation” and the “lack of special privileges”. They have presented in a very viable way as to what it is that they lack. But have they ever spoken gratefully of the privileges they have received? Not that I can remember of!

What people don”t know is that in the righteous context, Islam is totally opposed to the idea of Nation. Nationalism as a concept is absolutely alien to Islam, because it (nationalism) calls for unity based on family and tribalistic ties, whereas Islam binds people together on “aqeedah” (belief in Allah and His last messenger). Islam seeks ideological bonds.

Abu Dawood narrates that the Prophet said, “He is not one of us who calls for “assabiyyah” (nationalism/tribalism) or who fights for “assabiyyah” or who dies for “assabiyyah”. In another Hadith, the Prophet is found stating, “Leave it (nationalism, racism, and patriotism), it is rotten.” [Muslim and Bukhari] and in the Hadith recorded in Mishkat al-Masabith, the Prophet is found saying “Undoubtedly, Allah has removed from you the pride of arrogance of the age of “Jahilliyah” (ignorance) and the glorification of ancestors. Now people are of two kinds-either believers who are aware, or transgressors who do wrong. You are all the children of Adam, and Adam was made of clay. People should give up their pride in nations because that is a coal from the coals of hellfire. If they do not give this up, Allah will consider them lower than the lowly worm which pushes itself through “Khara” (dung).” [Abu Dawood and Tirmidhi]

There are many examples in the “Seerah”, where the messenger of Allah rebukes those who upheld nationalism. On one occasion, a party of Jews conspired to bring about disunity in the ranks of the Muslims after seeing the “Aus” and “Khazraj”, within Islam. A youth was sent to incite remembrance of the battle of “Bu”ath” where the Aus had been victorious over the Khazraj, and he recited poetry to bring about differences between them. As a result, there was a call to arms.

When the news reached the Prophet, he is said to have exclaimed, “O Muslims, remember Allah, remember Allah. Will you act as pagans while I am present with you after Allah has guided you to Islam, and honored you thereby and made a clean break with paganism; delivered you thereby from disbelief; and made you friends thereby?”

Not only does Islam forbid people from grouping on nationalistic ties, but it also prohibits the establishment of more than one state, irrespective of whether these states are based on nationalism or otherwise. The only state that is allowed for Muslims is the Islamic State, one which is governed exclusively by Islam.

Given this, it is clear that Islam is completely against any nation, and this includes Indian nationalism.

The essential question, that which baffles my mind is: would not tomorrow those “devout” Muslims claim, as their constitutional right, to abstain from their nationalist commitments on the ground that Islam directs them to be so? What would be the stand of our Judiciary then?  http://www.blogs.ivarta.com/india-usa-blog-column165.htm

DO WE LACK THE WILL TO FIGHT TERROR?  @ http://www.blogs.ivarta.com/india-usa-blog-column169.htm

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Godhra_fire_a_conspiracy_Nanavati_panel/articleshow/3526816.cms

Godhra fire was a conspiracy: Nanavati panel
Sept. 26, 2008 

The report on the carnage that killed 59 people, mainly Hindu activists, absolved the Modi administration of any lapse in providing “protection, relief and rehabilitation to the victims of the communal riots”.

The report on the carnage, which trigerred statewide riots that left more than 1,000 people dead, was tabled in the Gujarat assembly on Thursday amid a walkout by the Congress and cheers from BJP MLAs.

Six-and-a-half years after it was set up, retired Supreme Court judge, Justice G T Nanavati, who probed the anti-Sikh riots of 1984 not only agreed with the government view that the incident was the outcome of a conspiracy but also said, “It was a part of a larger conspiracy to create terror and destablise the administration.”

Relying mainly on the investigations by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) set up by Modi, and headed by inspector-general of police Rakesh Asthana, the commission also absolves the kar sevaks.

The commission says at one point, “The kar sevaks had not done anything and no incident had happened earlier which could have led to the incident which later on happened at Godhra.”

The Godhra carnage also led to Gujarat’s first Pota case, which booked 131 accused of whom two died in judicial custody and some are out on bail. Two prime accused, Salim Panwala and Farukh Bhana, are absconding and presumed to be in Pakistan.

Based mainly on the Gujarat Forensic Science Laboratory reports and statements recorded by the SIT, the commission holds Maulvi Hussain Umarji of Godhra as the mastermind of the incident.

Justice Nanavati completely dismisses the theory that a Muslim girl was attacked on Godhra railway platform provoking the attack on the train. He says, “Because the train was running late, they had to make some changes in tier plan and circulate a false rumour regarding abducting of a Ghanchi Muslim girl.

That was done in order to collect large number of persons near the train and induce them to attack it, so that they get sufficient time to go near the train with petrol.”

Justice Nanavati also asserts that “the train did not stop on its own but it was made to stop by pulling the alarm chain from outside”, thus disputing claims that the chain was pulled from inside to stop the train.  

Whos the real Hindu? -2: Response to Karan Thapar

Chanchal Malviya, ivarta

(This is a response by Ms Chanchal Malviya to the article written by By Mr. Karan Thapar, “Who”s the real Hindu?” Hindustan Times, August 30, 2008)

There are people who think they are literates of highest order, when actually, they do not understand even the A B C D of life. From this article Mr. Karan Thapar proved that he is also one among them. Dr. Arindam Bandyopadhyay already gave a good reply to him. Yet I am sure, Mr. Thapar is not that matured enough to understand Dr. Arindam”s reply. So, I am trying to put things in a manner which a child can understand.

Which is good - a united family or a divided family? I would not be surprised if Dr. Tapar says in a loud voice - a divided family. It is clear from his writing. He advocates the division created in Hindu society by Christians and Muslims and he ensures that division is their right and retaliating VHP is condemned. Dr. Thapar further divides VHP from common Hindus. So division is his principles and I do not want to comment what he has installed in his own family. As Dr. Tapar, the devil”s advocate would have by heart in his mind the verses:

New Testament, Luke 12; 51-53: Jesus said, “Do you suppose that I came to bring peace to the World? No, not peace, but division. From now on a family of five will be divided, three against two and two against three. Fathers will be against their sons, and sons against their fathers; mothers will be against their daughters and daughters against their mothers; mothers-in-law will be against their daughters-in-law, and daughters-in-law against their mothers-in-law.”

But for those, who understand that united family is good, we cannot deny that unity is established by regard towards our elders. This respect extends to the forefathers and ultimately shapes the culture of the family. It is actually the culture that establishes the unity. If a few people group like family requires culture to hold on to each other, how is it possible that the whole nation can remain united by abusing the culture? Who will deny that the culture of India, since eternity, is “Sanatan Dharma” or Hinduism? And is Hinduism a religion? Can Mr. Thapar show me the word “Hindu” in any of the Hindu scriptures? The culture of India is to respect, but that doesn”t include abusing ourselves. Our identity is that we are Hindus. Is VHP doing Bomb Blast at Dr. Thapar”s residence or anywhere in the world? Is the Devil”s Advocate trying to support killing of Swami Laxminananda? Does he want to say that a Hindu getting converted to Christian or Islam is right of the people but the vice-versa is not the right of the people?

Let us also understand the Devil”s Advocate. He says that if someone lures you with food and money, it is your right to convert to his faith. We can understand what Mr. Thapar is saying. This is a clear indication that people like Mr. Thapar can say and do anything if lured for money and hence he advocates this.

Graham Staines in Orissa is important for Mr. Thapar, but our own Laxminananda do not find a place in his country. He says: “I”m sorry but when I read that the VHP has ransacked and killed I”m not just embarrassed, I feel ashamed.” Probably, Dr. Thapar takes pride and feels happy when hundreds are killed in Bangalore, Ahmedabad, Delhi, Jaipur, Mumbai and all over India. Dr. Thapar has every reason to take pride of Lakhs of Kashmiri Hindus thrown out of their own home and thousands massacred and their women raped. Now and then, this is happening at all places in the name of Dr. Thapar”s advocated God.

Mr Thapar, you are wrong, completely wrong to think that millions of Indians are with you. Yes, all Indians who are non-Hindus are surely with you. After all, the lure of money might be there with you too which you are advocating.

Hindus have their only homeland left to survive - India. They are abolished from their neighboring countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh. They are abolished from their own homeland dominated by Muslims. They are being killed, harassed, their women raped now and then throughout the nation. If Hindu does these things, it is surely a criminal offense. But this is all done in the name of Dr. Thapar”s advocated God.

I would follow you Dr. Thapar, if you will dare to give shelter to even a single Hindu Kashmiri family in your home, who are now migrating as refugee from Kashmir towards India. For you, 80 million lives are of no importance even though they are peaceful. You want them to shut their mouth and wait for their turn to die. And those who show courage to retaliate like VHP against murderous action, you write such a scrap.

Please, look at the news published by your own newspaper in past to get the details of data mentioned here. And your Devil”s Advocate will surely change to Angel”s Advocate, of course only if the Devil is not lured for food and money.http://www.blogs.ivarta.com/india-usa-blog-column161.htm

———————————————————-

http://www.blogs.ivarta.com/india-usa-blog-column153.htm

“Whos the real Hindu? -1″ - Response to HT article

Dr. Arindam Bandyopadhyay

(This is a response by Dr. Arindam Bandyopadhyay to the article by By Mr. Karan Thapar, “Who”s the real Hindu?” Hindustan Times, August 30, 2008)

Dear Mr. Thapar,
I am responding to your recent article “Who”s the real Hindu?” Hindustan Times. Hope you will have the opportunity to see it - Dr. Arindam Bandyopadhyay.

(Definitely not for you, even if I am to assume that you are a Hindu, may be accidentally by birth, as was claimed by our first Prime Minister.)

“Do they reflect our views? Do we endorse their behaviour? They call themselves the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, but who says they represent all of us?”

(I agree. They definitely do not represent people like you and your journalist - intellectual crowd like Vir Sanhgvi, Rajdeep Sardesai, Sagarika Ghose and Barkha Dutt, nor the activists of the kind of Teesta Setalvaad, or the politicians like the Lalus and the Mulayams.)

“This Sunday morning, I want to draw a clear line of distinction between them and everyone else. My hunch is many of you will agree.”

(Now where did you get the right for doing that? Did we give you the right? How did you imagine that even if we do not agree with VHP, we will agree with you?)

“Let me start with the question of conversion - an issue that greatly exercises the VHP”

(and, for your information, a certain Mr. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi who said “proselytizing under the cloak of humanitarian work is unhealthy, to say the least” and “If I had the power and could legislate, I should stop all proselytising…. it is the deadliest poison that ever sapped the fountain of truth.”)

“I imagine there are hundreds of millions of Hindus who are peaceful, tolerant, devoted to their faith, but above all, happy to live alongside Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and Jews.”

(Smart move - lump all the non-Hindu religions together. Please leave the Sikh, Buddhist, Jains and Jews alone - they do not belong to the faiths you seem to represent- the “peaceful, tolerant, devoted to their faith” Muslims and Christians.

And “happy to live alongside”?

Yes, we did live happily alongside for the 700 years of Muslim rule. Only we lost maybe just a 100 million Hindus and had to accept, Jizya tax and put up to few atrocities such as having our daughters and sisters raped, our temples vandalized and razed and our properties taken away, but mostly we were happy to live like a second or third class citizen - we sure lived alongside.

Are you also representing the Hindus of Pakistan and Bangladesh, in your hundreds of millions? May be they don”t count since they are not Indians. Should I, say, include Hindus of Jammu and Kashmir or do Hindu minorities matter like their Islamic and Christian brethren?

And what about the 200 years of British rule, which Will Durant described as the most sordid and criminal exploitation of one nation by another in all recorded history.

Let me remind you what Lord Curzon, the late Viceroy of India, had said about India, “Powerful Empires existed and flourished here while Englishmen were still wandering painted in the woods, and while the British Colonies were a wilderness and a jungle. India has left a deeper mark upon the history, the philosophy, and the religion of mankind, than any other terrestrial unit in the universe.”

And when the British left after a successful “loot” of over a trillion dollar (in today”s value) that funded the British Industrial revolution, India was transformed from a producer of about 25 percent of world GDP in 1750, to only 2 percent in 1900. Those 200 years of “benevolent” Christian British rule, left India with 20 million famine-related deaths, a literacy rate of 11% (1947) and a life expectancy of 25yrs (1921).

Sure some people did happily live alongside at that time and some still do praise the Christian British for “civilizing” us.

How about Goa under Inquisition from the Portuguese Church- requested by the venerated St. Francis Xavier himself, an unmatched saga of mayhem for over two centuries that outlasted even the inquisition in Europe and left less than 20,000 adherents to the their Pre-Christian faith from an original 250,000.)

“If any one of us were to change our faith how does it affect the next man or woman? “

(Now let”s start to look at some opinions of a few famous people about Christianity and Conversions.

Let me start with Swami Vivekananda. I hope he passes your scrutiny as an original Hindu of a Non- VHP kind. He was sent to represent Hindu Dharma to Chicago over a century ago - thankfully he had no secular media to face. And these are his words, “They come to my country and abuse my forefathers, my religion, and everything; they walk near a temple and say “you idolaters, you will go to hell” … “If all India stands up, and takes all the mud that is at the bottom of the Indian Ocean and throws it up against the Western countries, it will not be doing an infinitesimal part of that which you are doing to us.”

How about some westerner”s comment? Thomas Jefferson, the former US President, had mentioned, “Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. …were the Pope, or his allies, to send in mission to us some thousands of Jesuit priests to convert us to their orthodoxy, I suspect that we should deem and treat it as a national aggression on our peace and faith.”

This is what Pitrim Sorokin, a Harvard sociologist had said, “During the past few centuries the most belligerent, the most aggressive, the most rapacious, the most power-drunk section of humanity has been precisely, the Christian Western world..During these centuries western Christendom had invaded all other continents; its armies followed by priests and merchants have subjugated, robbed or pillaged most of the non-Christians. Native Americans, African, Australian, Asiatic populations have been subjugated to this peculiar brand of Christian “love” which has generally manifested itself in pitiless destruction, enslavement, coercion, destruction of the cultural values, institutions, the way of life of the victims and the spread of alcoholism, venereal disease, commercial cynicism and the like.”

And this is what thy holy Pope John Paul II, in 1999, on his visit to India said, “Just as in the first millennium, the Cross was planted on the soil of Europe, and in the second on that of the Americas and Africa, we can pray that in the third Christian millennium a great harvest of faith will be reaped in this vast and vital continent (of Asia).”

I could expand or should l trust your journalistic curiosity to do some search yourself?

In case you still do not get the message - it is about preservation of dharma, of righteousness, of choosing between good and evil, of standing against atrocities, of pride and self-esteem, of patriotism and liberty.)

“And even if that happens with inducements, it can only prove that the forsaken faith” Do you mean “Hinduism? Did your mask slip for a moment? “had a tenuous and shallow hold.” (on people of your stripe). “So why do the VHP and its unruly storm troopers, the Bajrang Dal, froth at the mouth if you, I or our neighbours convert? What is it to do with them? Let me put it bluntly, even crudely. If I want to sell my soul - and trade in my present gods for a new lot - why shouldn”t I? “

(Sure you can sell your soul and you proved it well. But let me reinforce the basics, never taught or learnt by you.

The reason is the concept of Bhartvarsha, the land later named as India, and her over 8000 yrs old Civilization, called the Indus - Saraswati Civilization. It is the purity of Bharat”s religion and culture and the tradition of her indigenous people who later came to be labeled as “Hindus” by foreigners. People of different faiths, languages and customs, lived and survived in this civilization. Jews and Parsis got their shelter after been persecuted everywhere. Tribes and sects lived happily in remote places without fear of their identity being trampled. And that was all because the “forsaken faith” of Hinduism did not preach proselytizing.

India is not a Muslim or Christian country even after 900 years of invasion, torture and annihilation because of the Hindus. You may not agree but there are many who do agree with what Annie Besant had to say, “After a study of some forty years and more of the great religions of the world, I find none so perfect, none so scientific, none so philosophical and none so spiritual than the great religion known by the name of Hinduism. Make no mistake, without Hinduism, India has no future…And if Hindus do not maintain Hinduism who shall save it? If India”s own children do not cling to her faith, who shall guard it? India alone can save India and India and Hinduism are one.

So if by this time you do not understand, Mr. Thapar, let me tell you once more clearly that the true Hindus, who have not sold their souls and who do not trade their gods, feel that the existence of Bharatvarsha and her Spiritual soul is threatened.

It is the only country in the world where the majority of the population are actually fighting for their right to live peacefully without being terrorized, to safeguard their culture and tradition, to prevent their history from being wiped out, to save their temples from being taken over, to defend their faiths in their religious deities and icons, to save their saints from being humiliated and murdered, to preserve their heritage from being destroyed, to pray to their own God of faith and to visit their own pilgrim sites, in their own country and with their own money.

Their unity is deliberately being divided. Their elected government and politicians are deaf to their needs. Taxes paid by them are openly and specifically allocated for the prosperity and development of their adversaries. Their newspaper and television media, by and large, ridicule them and identify with foreign faiths with foreign masters. Atrocities committed on them are not even reportable or “narrated objectively” whereas a mere allegation against them is good for headline news and warrants unqualified condemnation, without investigation or verification.

There is no body that they can trust. They have no spokesmen, no Government to ensure their welfare, no media to express their anguish, no academic to pen their chronicle.

They have their backs to the wall.

Their country has already been broken down to pieces - they cannot allow any further fragmentation.

They have realized that they have to fight back.

And that is what has started to happen - if you can put your ears to the ground - be it in Orissa or Jammu, you can hear the reverberations.)

“Even if the act diminishes me in your eyes, it”s my right to do so. So if thousands or even millions of Dalits, who have been despised and ostracized for generations, choose to become Christian, Buddhist or Muslim, either to escape the discrimination of their Hindu faith or because some other has lured them with food and cash, it”s their right. “

(I was sure waiting for this topic to surface.

Have you ever heard of Dalit Christian Mr. Thapar? A little enquiry on your part will tell you that the Dalit Christians, who account for over 70% of the 25 million Christians in India, have been largely converted by exploitation, coercion and the false hopes of egalitarian status but still suffer from the segregation, oppression and discrimination, only now at the hands of their fellow Christians of the upper castes. Conversion into the new faith has not redeemed them from the stigma of “untouchablity”. A Dalit Christian has minimal say in the leadership and control, has minimal access to education (despite a wide network of Christian missionary schools and colleges), job opportunities and entrepreneurship development. Even in the local church communities, controlled by Christians of the “upper castes”, Dalit Christians often have separate entries, separate place to sit, separate cups at the Eucharistic celebration, separate communion rails, and even separate cemeteries. Thus ends the Christian promise of equality, human dignity and egalitarian status through conversion

Have you ever criticized the Christian organizations for their Dalits and why they are “ostracized”?

You are fully aware that caste discrimination is a degenerated, socio-political evil manifestation of an ancient vocational order according to mental inclinations and unrelated to birth right. You also know this has been declared illegal in modern India. India had a President, a deputy Prime Minister, a Chief Justice, and currently has the Chief Minister of its largest state belonging to the lower caste. India is also the only country that has had religious minorities as its head of state not once but repeatedly, after its modern birth. But give me an honest answer. Who do you think perpetuates this social evil any more than our politicians and our media? So why is it that this ill politics of contemporary Indian society, of its lawlessness, exploitations and dominations, conveniently blamed primarily on Hindu religion?

Have you ever demonized the “faith of Christianity” for its Crusades, Inquisitions, anti Semitisms, witch burnings, black slaveries and the destructions of Mayans, Incas and Australian aboriginal civilizations, the African and Asian Colonization, besides the two world wars.

As a leading media personality, what have you or your clan done to eradicate this system, other than parroting the same politicians and laying the blame on Hindu Dharma that ensured a just state for thousands of years, with no caste problem, until the British landed on its soil?

And how does that justify Christian proselytizing and domination over the lower castes and tribes of the Indian populace?

At least bring a modicum of integrity to your profession, Mr. Thapar. Can you, for once, clear the web of lies, half-truths and disinformation that clouds your thoughts and write a “truthful” article on any of the topics like Joshua project, the 10/40 window, the Project Thessalonica, the Maranatha Volunteers, etc.)

“Arguably you may believe you should ask them to reconsider, although I would call that interference”( so conversion, by hook or by crook is okay but asking to reconsider is “interference”,) “but you certainly have no duty or right to stop them. In fact, I doubt if you are morally correct in even seeking to place obstacles in their way. The so-called Freedom of Religion Acts, which aim to do just that, are, in fact, tantamount to obstruction of conversion laws and therefore, at the very least, questionable.”

(So, the law of the nation is now incompatible with your Christian sympathy. How patriotic? Can you tell me why the church leaders including the holy one at Vatican, while saying that they do not indulge in forced conversions, are so worked up and demand the revocation of the law?)

“However, what”s even worse is how the VHP responds to this matter. Periodically they resort to violence including outright murder”

(So when an octogenarian VHP leader and his associates are killed brutally by mercenaries, it is not really violence or murder. It was the evangelist way of giving the message of their only God to a “heathen” idolator. It is okay to do so because they are subhuman Hindus of the VHP kind.)

“What happened to Graham Staines in Orissa was not unique”

(I am sure you know very well that it had nothing to do with VHP or Bajrang Dal, but you had to make your “anti VHP case”. If you honestly do not know, I request that you consider an alternative profession.

Keeping in mind your selective amnesia and incompetence, I seriously doubt whether you remember the unique, sister Abhaya “suicide” case, who was “blessed” by the father in the Kottayam convent. It is been reported that a former Congress Prime Minister had tried hushing up the case and that the High court, had reprimanded the CBI for tampering with some relevant CDs. The case remains undecided for 16yrs.

Funny, no body called this a failure of the “Hindu” judicial system.)

“Last week it happened again. Apart from the utter and contemptible criminality of such behavior, is this how we Hindus wish to behave? Is this how we want our faith defended? Is this how we want to be seen? I have no doubt the answer is no. An unequivocal, unchanging and ever-lasting NO!”

(Depends on what kind of Hindu you represent.

In case you do not know, protest and violence is a natural instinct of all life forms, especially to defend the integrity of their being. Surely, you cannot be dreaming of depriving Hindus of their right to self defense. Though the world likes to believe and promote the “Gandhi” image of Hindus, there are other icons of Hindus - starting from the “mythological” Ram and Krishna to the Shivaji and Rana Pratap and the Subhas Bose and Bhagat Singh.)

“The only problem is it can”t be heard. And it needs to be. I therefore believe the time has come for the silent majority of Hindus - both those who ardently practice their faith as well as those who were born into it but may not be overtly religious or devout - to speak out.” (They are speaking out - listen to the people of Jammu ,Orissa and Gujarat). We cannot accept the desecration of churches, the burning to death of innocent caretakers of orphanages, the storming of Christian and Muslim hamlets even if these acts are allegedly done in defense of our faith.”

(But we should gladly accept the desecration of our temples, the Christian - Marxist mercenaries killing our Hindu monks and the Islamic terrorist bombing our hospitals.

We should accept the diversion of temple funds for churches and mosques, and the subsidy from the Hindu majority”s money to visit pilgrimages to Mecca and Jerusalem.

We should also accept the largest state subsidy to those secessionists of Kashmir, who howl anti-India slogans and hoist Pakistani flag, and yet successfully clamor to disallow the temporary use of a mere 40 hectares of land for the Hindus, on way to a pilgrimage in their own country.

We need to assure them that Hindus will take it lying down.

Why don”t you show us the way, Mr. Thapar?

Why don”t you announce Mr. Thapar, that the next time a Christian or Muslim wants to kill some Hindu that you choose to be the sacrificial cow; if they want to rape somebody they can pick her up from your family; and if they want to practice the art of “suicide bombing” they can go to your office address?)

“Indeed, they do not defend but shame Hinduism. That”s my central point.
I”m sorry but when I read that the VHP has ransacked and killed I”m not just embarrassed, I feel ashamed. Never of being hindu but of what some Hindus do in our shared faith”s name.”

(You already expressed a solution - sell your soul and trade your god. Have you considered the possibility that the majority of one billion Hindus may be embarrassed by people like you or actually consider the VHP inadequate to meet the challenge of defending India”s honor.)

“This is why it”s incumbent on Naveen Patnaik, Orissa”s Chief Minister, to take tough, unremitting action against the VHP and its junior wing, the Bajrang Dal.”

(What kind of action Mr. Thapar? The one you prescribed for Mr. Modi, some time ago after the foolish, rabid Hindu fanatic Gujaratis elected him again as their Chief Minister? Do you remember writing, “Only the sudden removal of Narendra Modi can stop this…”
How many Modis are you willing to stop? How do you propose to derail the progressive Gujrati in his march towards his freedom - economic and spiritual? Did you not hear the five crore voices speaking through the ballot in Gujrat or the voices in Himachal and Karnataka?)

“This is a test not just of his governance, but of his character. And I know and accept this could affect his political survival. But when it”s a struggle between your commitment to your principles and your political convenience is there room for choice? For ordinary politicians, possibly, but for the Naveen I know, very definitely not.
So let me end by saying: I”m waiting, Naveen. In fact, I want to say I”m not alone. There are hundreds of millions of Hindus, like you and me, waiting silently - but increasingly impatiently. Please act for all of us.”

(It is said that during the British rule there was never more than 20-30 thousand British national in India at any one particular time. The British managed to rule for 190 years with the help of the “brown sahibs” who, as Thomas Macaulay defined, are a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern, a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, words and intellect.

Today how much we wish that the British had taken their pet brown sahibs along with them.

Max Muller, more than a century ago, while translating the Vedas, had wished that his translation “will tell to a great extent… the fate of India, and on the growth of millions of souls in that country. It is the root of their religion, and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last 3000 years.”

If he was alive today, Mr. Muller could have been a very happy man to know you Mr. Thapar.

May Jesus and Allah together bless you, since you have chosen to forsake, the shallow faith of your forefathers.

We pray that may each member of the billion strong community, that you have chosen to misrepresent and misguide, find you and your ilk, worthy of pardon.

May India once again rise to forgive her own treacherous brood?)

RELATED STORIES:

Invasion thru Conversion @ http://www.crusadewatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=630&Ite%20mid=132

FOR CHRIST’S SAKE @ http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist&file_name=mitra%2Fmitra326%2Etxt&writer=mitra

Pro-Muslim to anti-Hindu

Praful Goradia, Pioneer

A perverse Government rules India

Radical Universalism - By Dr. Frank Morales

Voice of India, pp 56, Rs 100.00

Book Review: By Manju Gupta

Does Hinduism Teach that All Religions are the Same?

THIS is a booklet in which the author, a practicing Hindu considered America’s leading authority on Hinduism, reiterates his important message that Sanatana Dharma must be understood and practiced only in its original form if it is to survive and thrive as the world’s most important and relevant spiritual tradition.

All human beings have a common religious urge—a seeking to contact the Divine or a higher spiritual reality—which has had different expressions according to the time, place, culture and the individual himself or herself.

Due to different beliefs and practices in existing religions, something that is regarded as holy in one religion may be considered unholy in another. As a result, religion has often prevented the spread of unity among human beings; it has instead, led to disagreement, hatred, war and even genocide in the world.

In an effort to be tolerant and more inclusive than others, Hinduism has made “the blanket that all religions are true, valid and equal and lead to the same goal—what could be called a ‘radical universalism’,” says the author.

It is this radical universalism that promotes acceptance of all religions as same in order to lead us to unity behind our religious strivings—it is immaterial what religion one follows or whether one goes to a church, mosque or a temple.

One needs to have full faith in the religion that one has adopted to reach the highest truth.

Different religions of the world contain various doctrines and teachings that cannot all be equally valid. Here the author states that the law of karma and rebirth, for example, is either true or false. “If it is true, then religions which do not teach it are flawed. If it is not true, then the religions that teach are incorrect. Both cannot be true at the same time.”

He says that similarly there can be no final guru, prophet or saviour for all humanity. Religion should, in its real import, be a quest for eternal truth and “seeking to realise it within our own consciousness.” This means that we question everything and accept only that which is proved by our experiences.

Hindu Dharma “teaches us pluralism relative to the spiritual life, which can both tolerate many points of view but also discriminate between them and find out what is best for each individual.”

Thus an enlightened pluralism must rest upon a higher sense of discrimination.

In this book Dr Morales bases his views on a rationality reflecting the great principles of Vedanta, which insist upon a clear understanding of the issue and not just the imposition of one’s belief as the answer.

He shows how the Hindu tradition does not teach us blind equation of all religions, but instead emphasises on enlightened pluralism.

This not only allows the existence of many paths but insists that only a razor-sharp path can take us to our highest goal.

It is heartening to read a Western scholar of Hinduism say that a traditional Hindu has always been the most tolerant of all religious persons and that Hindu India has been the sole nation on earth where the Jewish community was never persecuted and who have lived in India for over 200 years.

Similarly Zoroastrian refugees, escaping the destruction of Persian civilisation at the hands of Islamic conquerors, were greeted with welcome refuge in India over 1,000 years ago. The Zoroastrian community, now known as Parsis, has thrived in India in all these many centuries, living together as they do with their Hindu neighbours in peace and mutual respect.

He says that in keeping with the Vedic adage that the guest in one’s home is to be treated with as much hospitality as a visiting divinity, Hindus have always lived peacefully with indigenous Indian religions like Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism and even the foreign religions like Christianity and Islam.

Radical Universalism ( in detail) @ http://www.dharmacentral.com/universalism.htm

http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=238&page=23

Slokas On The Mount

Outlook India Magazine

May 12, 2008

Om Namah Jesu could well reverberate inside hundreds of Catholic churches in India very soon, if the changing physical face of these places of worship is anything to go by.

The Vatican-blessed process of ‘inculturation’ being implemented by the 168 Catholic dioceses in India has already seen Jesus acquiring the form of a Hindu sage, St John the Baptist with a ‘kamandalu’, grottos in the shape of conch shells, and a church in Bangalore that can easily be mistaken for a temple. 

‘Inculturation’, broadly speaking, is the indigenisation of the Church through the process of assimilating local culture and symbols in construction, layout, interior design, furniture and religious fixtures like the tabernacles. 

What’s in a Name? @ http://indiasecular.wordpress.com/2007/08/22/what-is-in-name/

Interview of Evangelist @ http://indiasecular.wordpress.com/2007/10/07/interview-of-anevangelist/

Evangelism for Sikhs @ http://www.info-sikh.com/PageChris1.html

Tsunami Muslims Christianized @ http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2005-01/13/article05.shtml

Religious Harmony @ http://www.crusadewatch.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=928

Inculturation Danger @ . http://newstodaynet.com/col.php?section=20&catid=29

An LTTE-Sonia family link?

She became loyal bit late: by Gurumurthy@ http://indiaview.wordpress.com/2007/06/14/she-became-loyal-to-india-a-trifle-late/

Demo-narchy of India @ http://indiaview.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/de%e2%80%99mo-narchy-of-democratic-india/

Secularism encouraging terrorism

Organiser Weekly

Former Punjab Director General of Police, K.P.S.Gill made the point that India was being ruled by pseudo-secularists who did not have the will to fight terrorism. At a meeting organised by the Forum on Integrated National Security (FINS), Gill said that “intellectuals and some political establishments are wedded to weaken the country consciously and as a programme, in the name of secularism.” As Gill saw it, Islamic fundamentalism backed by Pakistan is growing.

Something is terribly wrong not only with our national law and order system, but the distribution of prosperity throughout the length and breadth of the country. The distribution is very uneven, but that is only one aspect of the situation.

The other aspect is the growth of jehadism in the country and it has now been discovered that Karnataka has become a centre of recruitment. What comes as a shock is that the recruits are not illiterate or poor Muslims eking out a bare living, but well-educated youths among whom were noticed a civil engineer, a software engineer, a mechanical engineer with a Ph.D in computational fluid dynamics and a doctor.

Apparently there is growing radicalisation of educated Muslim youth who have pursued their education in Britain and the United States.

What has India done to these youths that they should turn into jehadis and antinationals? India has gone out of its way to do what it can—including subsidising Haj visits—to the so-called minorities in the name of secularism. Even where they are in a majority, as in Jammu and Kashmir, Muslims get preference.

The damage done by Islamic terrorists in other parts of India, speaks for itself. From March 2006 to December 2007, in a space of 18 months, jehadi acts of terrorism are just unimaginable.

Consider this list:

In March 2006 there was twin bombing in Varanasi, one at the railway station and the other at the Kashi Vishwanath Temple killing 20 people.

In July 2006, seven serial bombings of a Mumbai railway station killed more than 200 and injured 700 others.

In September 2006 at least 30 persons were killed and 100 injured in twin blasts at Malegaon in Maharashtra. Not even Hyderabad, which has a large Muslim population, was spared.

On August 25, 2007, bombs ripped through crowded public areas killing at least 42 persons. It is as if these deaths do not matter. The brutal incidents are quickly forgotten.

Speaking in Bangalore on August 4, 2007, former Punjab Director General of Police, K.P.S.Gill made the point that India was being ruled by pseudo-secularists who did not have the will to fight terrorism.

At a meeting organised by the Forum on Integrated National Security (FINS), Gill said that “intellectuals and some political establishments are wedded to weaken the country consciously and as a programme, in the name of secularism.”

As Gill saw it, Islamic fundamentalism backed by Pakistan is growing with its sleeper cells increasing across the country, while extremist political leaders are posing a larger danger of dividing the society in the pretext of advocating welfare of Muslims and OBCs.

Now—believe it or not—the UPA government has decided to provide a relief package to dependents of terrorists—those very men who fought in the past against the integrity of India and were killed by the security forces in Jammu and Kashmir.

Is anybody aware of the damage done by terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir?

A souvenir of the Jammu and Kashmir police released in 2003 and quoted by another senior officer, Joginder Singh (Pioneer, February 11) provides the facts. According to the souvenir, between 1990 and December 2002 there were 56,041 incidents of violence including 10,093 explosions, 29, 931 firing incidents, 5,561 cases of arson, 763 rocket attacks, 4,597 abductions, 229 cases of hanging to death, 275 arms snatching cases and 4, 592 other acts of violence.

During those 14 years, more than 30,000 civilians were killed and security forces seized 24,785 AK—type rifles, 9,387 pistols and revolvers, 58 carbines, 91 light machine guns, 6,865 kgs or RDX , 742 rocket launchers and the list grows.

Worst, due to terrorism, 3.70 lakh Hindus and Sikhs were forced to leave the Valley and there has been total ethnic cleaning. Can we call it genocide?

So what do we do?

In the period between 2000-2003, the state got Rs 13, 188 crore as grant which is three times what Bihar, one of the poorest states in India, received—about Rs 4,047 crore.

On November 17, 2004, our kind Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh announced an “Economic Revival Plan” of Rs 24,000 crore for Jammu and Kashmir.

 Incidentally, according to Joginder Singh “no one really knows what was spent where and who got what”, since the state’s accounts have not been audited for our a decade.

Par for the course, one might add. Never question a Muslim majority state how it spends money. That would not be secular.

And all this, when, according to Army sources, over 2000 militants of Lashkar-e-Toiba were trying to sneak into the Valley in August 2007. Major-General Ramesh Halgali, G-O.C of the 19th Infantry Division told PTI that many militants had been brought to the border by Pakistan to wreak terror.

Pakistan gets away with murder and its patron in Washington turns a blind eye to what is going on. Pakistan is fighting terrorism, isn’t it? So what is India complaining about, is the US response. But does the large Muslim community say a word of what’s going on? Hardly.

In any event, where are the Muslim community leaders who can speak with authority? If there are any, their argument would be that one does not have to apologies every time a jehadi indulges in violence.

They become self-defensive, quoting figures to show how poor the Muslims are, and how important it is for them to attend a madrasa and the secularists lap it up, not wishing to recognise that there are poor among Hindus who do not complain, and yet they attempt to give their children as much education as is within their capacity.

A Muslim writer, Ed Hussain, in his book The Islamist, notes that Islamic extremism did not descend from another planet or was imposed on the community by outside forces. “It breeds within the community and is the product of a certain kind of interpretation of Islam”, wrote Hussain, quoting Zia-ud-din Sardar, one of Europe’s most prominent Muslim scholars.

According to Zia-ud-din, Islamists were “ nourished by an Islamic tradition that is intrinsically inhuman and violent in its rhetoric, thought and practice”.

Commenting on this Husan Suroor, writing in The Hindu (July 17, 2007) said that “more Muslims need to realise that Islamic terrorists are not simply ‘misguided’ individuals acting on a whim but that they are people who know what they are doing and they are doing it deliberately in the name of Islam.”

And that has has been most noticeable in Karnataka in recent times when police caught terrorists and one of them spilled the beans, saying eight fidayeens are presently on the loose in India and could strike any time.

All that our secularists would say is, that is not a Big Deal. http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=228&page=15

Related story -> 

Aiding Communalism @ http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=221&page=5

INDIA’S  SECULARISM @ http://indiasecular.wordpress.com/2008/03/06/india-and-secularism/

Rewriting Indian History
by Francois Gautier

Book Review: C.J.S. Walia

“From my perspecive as a secular humanist, and my own experience, I regard a typical liberal Indian Muslim to be as good a human being as any other Indian.” c.j.s. wallia

Rewriting Indian History is a provocative new book by the French writer Francois Gautier, who currently serves as the political correspondent in India for France’s top newspaper, Le Figaro, and for Switzerland’s leading daily, Le Nouveau Quotidien.

Having lived in India for 25 years has helped him “to see through the usual cliches and prejudices in India to which I subscribed for a long time, as most foreign (and sometimes, unfortunately, Indian) journalists, writers, and historians do.”

Rewriting Indian History,the author prefaces, “might well be called an antithesis” for it questions many of the assumptions in the “standard” treatises by Euro-centered colonialist historians and their imitations by Indian Marxist writers.

Gautier focuses mainly on the Muslim period of India’s history. “Let it be said right away: the massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”

However, the British, in pursuing their policy of divide-and-rule, colluded “to whitewash” the atrocious record of the Muslims so that they could set up the Muslims as a strategic counterbalance to the Hindus.

During the freedom struggle, Gandhi and Nehru went around encrusting even thicker coats of whitewash so that they could pretend a facade of Hindu-Muslim unity against British colonial rule.

After independence, Marxist Indian writers, blinkered by their distorting ideology, repeated the big lie about the Muslim record.

Gautier cites two eminent historians who wrote free of any colonialist or ideological agendas, basing their accounts on documents by contemporary Muslim chroniclers themselves: Alain Danielou in Histoire de la Inde: “From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoilations, destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilisations, wiped out entire races.”

And the well-known American historian Will Durant in The Story of Civilization: “…the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without and multiplying from within.”

(From my perspecive as a secular humanist, and my own experience, I regard a typical liberal Indian Muslim to be as good a human being as any other Indian.)

Gautier should have continued with the Will Durant quote: “The Hindus had allowed their strength to be wasted in internal division and war; they had adopted religions like Buddhism and Jainism, which unnerved them for the tasks of life; they had failed to organize their forces for the protection of their frontiers and their capitals, their wealth and their freedom, from the hordes of Scythians, Huns, Afghans and Turks hovering about India’s boundaries and waiting for national weakness to let them in. For four hundred years (600-1000 A.D.) India invited conquest; and at last it came.

This is the secret of the political history of modern India. Weakened by division, it succumbed to invaders; impoverished by invaders, it lost all power of resistance, and took refuge in supernatural consolations; it argued that both mastery and slavery were superficial delusions, and concluded that freedom of the body or the nation was hardly worth defending in so brief a life.

The bitter lesson that may be drawn from this tragedy is that eternal vigilance is the price of civilization. A nation must love peace, but keep its powder dry.”

About Gandhi’s whitewash of Muslims, Gautier observes: “Ultimately, it must be said that whatever his saintliness, his extreme and somehow rigid asceticism, Gandhi did enormous harm to India… The British must have rubbed their hands in glee: here was a man who was perfecting their policy of divide-and-rule, for ultimately no one contributed more to the partition of India, by his obsession to always give in to the Muslims; by his indulgence of Jinnah, going as far as proposing to make him the prime minister of India.”

Worse yet, Gandhi’s anointed disciple, Nehru, propagated false readings of Indian history in his books and speeches. Gautier quotes Nehru’s “amazing eulogy” of the tyrant Mahmud Ghazni, the destroyer of Mathura’s great Hindu temples, Gujarat’s Somnath, and numerous other Hindu and Buddhist temples.

When Nehru, the arrant appeaser of Muslims, became India’s first prime minister, he appointed a fundamentalist Muslim, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, as the first education minister.

Under Nehru’s pseudo-secular rule, “Hindu-bashing became a popular pastime.”

Moreover, Nehru “had a great sympathy for communism…. He encouraged Marxist think-tanks such as the Jawaharlal Nehru University [JNU] in New Delhi, which has bred a lot of ‘Hindu-hating scholars’ who are adept at negating Muslim atrocities and running to the ground the greatness of Hinduism and its institutions.”

These Marxist “historians,” well-ensconced at JNU, have long been masterminding the politically correct textbooks of India’s history used in Indian schools. No wonder, JNU is also known as “the Kremlin by the Jumna.”