** LTTE-Sonia link ?

An LTTE-Sonia family link?

S. Gurumurthy,Newindpress
April 29 2008
 
The LTTE suicide squad did plan and eliminate Rajiv Gandhi. But, why did the LTTE do it? Was there a larger conspiracy that extended beyond the LTTE as the strike force?
Was the LTTE the author of the crime or the mercenary for some one else or for some purpose that yielded some benefit to it? These questions persisted even after the actual assassins were brought to book.
The Narasimha Rao government appointed the Jain Commission to go into the conspiracy angle to the murder.In its interim report the commission did exceedingly good work to bring on record evidence about the political forces involved in promoting the LTTE in Tamil Nadu that made the crime possible.
Yet it made a mockery of its main work, the conspiracy angle. It floated dubious and wild theories, involving Mossad! CIA! Besides adding confusion, it ended up trivialising a very serious exercise. This also robbed the commission of its credibility.
As the commission’s final report proved a flop, the Vajpayee government appointed a Multi- Disciplinary Monitoring Agency (MDMA) in 1998 to unearth the conspiracy angle.
But the person who first demanded, but, ultimately made, investigation into the conspiracy to murder Rajiv Gandhi irrelevant was none other than his widow Sonia Gandhi.
Her attitude to the investigation and suspected actors in the murder dramatically changed. Her conduct in 1997 when she was working to enter active politics was a stark contrast to her attitude after taking over the congress leadership on the Jain Commission issue.
In 1997, she demanded that the DMK which, the Jain commission had said, was part of the conspiracy, be sacked as a partner of the UF alliance and pulled down the government when the demand was not met. Her party insisted the entire facts about the conspiracy be investigated and revealed.
Addressing a meeting at Amethi, Sonia hinted that the DMK was a fan of the LTTE and charged that those who doubted the Jain commission report were diverting the attention from the investigation into the conspiracy to murder Rajiv and demanded that the probe be completed expeditiously (Indian Express 2.2.1998).
 
But, once she took over the party leadership, she not only ceased to evince any interest in pursuing the Rajiv Gandhi murder conspiracy, but also began allying with the alleged conspirators themselves.
The developments, put together, reveal a shocking picture.The year after taking over the Congress, Sonia Gandhi makes a secret move.
In the year 1999, she told then President Dr K R Narayanan privately that ‘neither she nor her son and daughter wanted any of the four convicts’ sentenced to death for Rajiv’s assassination ‘to be hanged’, and pleaded that no child should be orphaned by an act of the State.
Noted the Indian Express (Nov 20, 1999) that before her plea for mercy to the Rajiv killers the Congress party was the leading opponent of mercy to them. This silenced the party once and for all.
What transpired at her private meeting with the President was revealed not by Sonia, but by Mohini Giri (the former chairperson of the National Women’s Commission) and on that basis Nalini’s death sentence was commuted to life. (Frontline Nov 5-18, 2005).
Then, in February 2004, there were reports, editorially commented by the Island newspaper in Colombo on Feb 20, 2004, that Eduardo Faleiro, her emissary, had a secret meeting with the LTTE chief Prabhakaran at Killinochi. Island had also referred to reports that Sonia’s mother Ms Paula Maino had met Anton Balasingham, LTTE’s point man in London, in connection with the electoral alliance between the DMK and the Congress. While Eduardo Faleiro at least made a feeble attempt to deny the meeting, Paulo Maino would not even deny that.Third, the Paulo Maino meeting preceded, and the Faleiro meeting succeeded, the unbelievable U-turn of Sonia Gandhi to forge alliance with the DMK which was accused by her own party in 1997 of being part of the conspiracy to murder her husband. The DMK-Congress alliance seems to have been agreed upon sometime in December 2003. In January 2004, Sonia met the DMK chief and concretised the alliance.

The coming together of one of the alleged conspirators and the victim of the conspiracy made a mockery of any further investigation into Rajiv Gandhi murder.

For the last four years there is not a single word spoken by Sonia on pursuing the Rajiv Gandhi murderers and on unearthing the conspiracy or for the extradition of Prabhakaran or Pottu Amman.

This is despite the fact that, when, on April 10, 2002, Prabhakaran met the press at Killinochi, he did not even deny that LTTE was involved in Rajiv assassination.

Fourth, the LTTE too responded favourably to signals from Sonia that she was not against LTTE.

On January 27, 2006, Anton Balasingham, told an Indian TV news channel that the Rajiv killing was ‘monumental tragedy’ and asked the people of India to be ‘magnanimous to put the past behind’ and deal with the LTTE.

Fifth, Sonia did not object to the inclusion of the DMK woman MP in whose house Sivarasan the main killer of Rajiv Gandhi had stayed for which she was detained under the TADA, as a minister in the UPA government.

Sixth, the MDMA which was appointed by the NDA government after Sonia rejected the Action Taken Report on the Jain Commission, has virtually become defunct under the UPA regime.

Since 2004, she has not uttered a single word asking what the MDMA is doing.

And finally now in March 2008, Priyanka Vadra, Sonia’s daughter makes a secret visit to Vellore jail and meets the first accused in the murder of Rajiv, for over an hour.

Media reports say that they sat by each other’s side, cried and professed goodwill towards each other! No one knows what transpired between them. The meeting clearly illegal, looks almost a conspiracy, would have remained a secret had the media not exposed it.

Priyanka said that neither Sonia nor Rahul or Priyanka believe in hate or anger, and that the visit was her way of coming to terms with the Rajiv Gandhi murder.

Moral high ground seems to be a cover for undisclosed political strategies. But where was this high moral ground when Sonia angrily pulled down the UF government on the ground that DMK, a suspected co-conspirator with LTTE, was part of the alliance?

Is Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination a personal affair between the Sonia Gandhi family and the LTTE for the former to punish or pardon the latter?

LTTE has neither confessed nor regretted its action for the Gandhis to pardon. The LTTE is even today unrepenting.

The prosecution case is that the LTTE supremo decided to avenge Rajiv Gandhi for sending IPKF to Sri Lanka and betraying the LTTE. But that was no personal decision of Rajiv Gandhi. The assassination was an act against the state of India.

This is how it should be seen and pursued. Neither Sonia nor Priyanka nor the Congress has the right to pardon the criminals who have challenged the sovereignty of India.

QED: Sonia Gandhi family and the LTTE connection is mysterious. Is the maverick Dr Subramanian Swamy right after all in his theory that LTTE and the Maino family have had links before?  http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IEM20080428231348&Title=Main+Article&rLink=0  
RELATED STORIES:   

 

Do you know Sonia : Subramanian Swamy @ http://www.saveindi aforum.com/ dynamic/
Sonia Cong’s blitzkrieg evangelisation thru RBI: V. Sundaram @ http://www.newstodaynet.com/2007sud/may07/230507.htm  

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

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

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

** NEVER forget History

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.”

For a long time, the Indian Marxists had been so brainwashed that whenever it rained in Moscow — the capital of their “only true fatherland”– they opened their umbrellas in Delhi.

To be sure, dissenting voices were raised against Gandhi’s whitewash of Muslims. Before the partition of India, Aurobindo Ghosh, the great Hindu poet-philosopher, posed the question about Islam: “You can live with a religion whose principle is toleration. But how is it possible to live with a religion whose principle is ‘I will not tolerate you’? How are you going to have unity with these people?… I am sorry they [Gandhi and Nehru] are making a fetish of Hindu-Muslim unity. It is no use ignoring facts; some day the Hindus will have to fight Muslims and they must prepare for it. Hindu-Muslim unity should not mean the subjection of Hindus. Each time the mildness of the Hindus has given way. The best solution would be to allow the Hindus to organise themselves and Hindu-Muslim unity will take care of itself, it will automatically solve the problem. …I see no reason why the greatness of India’s past or its spirituality should be thrown into the waste basket, in order to conciliate the Muslims who would not be conciliated by such policy.”

Another strong dissenter was Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. Seeing through Nehru’s pseudo-secularism, Patel commented, “There’s only one nationalist Muslim in India: Jawarharlal Nehru.”

Gautier warns: “Even today, there is no doubt that Islam has never been fully able to give up its inner conviction that its own religion is the only true creed and that all others are kafirs, infidels. In India it was true 300 years ago, and it is still true today. Remember the cry of the militants in Kashmir to the Pandits: ‘convert to Islam or die!’ … The Hindu-Muslim question is just plainly a Muslim obsession, their hatred of the Hindu pagans, their contempt for this polytheist religion.

This obsession, this hate, is as old as the first invasion of India by the original Arabs in 650 AD. After independence, nothing has changed: the sword of Allah is still as much ready to strike the kafirs, the idolaters of many gods.”

The source of Muslim’s fanatical aggression, Gautier points out, is the Koran itself, from which he quotes: “Slay the infidels, wherever ye find them and prepare them for all kind of ambush”; and “Choose not thy friends among the infidels till they forsake their homes and the way of idolatory. If they return to paganism then take them whenever you find them and kill them.”

In the section on Ayodhya, Gautier says that demolishing the Babri Masjid has proved that Hindus too can fight.

He criticizes Nehruvian “secularism” as interpreted by the Congress party to mean “giving in to the Muslims’ demands, because its leaders never could really make out if the allegiance of Indian Muslims is first to India and then to Islam or vice-versa.”

For many of India’s Hindu journalists, this pseudo-secularism has meant “spitting on their own religion and brothers.” Curiously, Gautier does not mention Arun Shourie’s well-researched, lucidly articulated columns, which, in recent years, have laid bare the pretentions of Nehruvian pseudo-secularism.

From my own perspective as a secular humanist, I believe that any whitewashing of historical record is counterproductive. No matter how lofty the ideals of a current cause, any whitewash of history tempts the fates. To forget history will always be fateful; to forgive its horrendous facts can be redemptive. Forgive — but never forget — history.

A salient example of making sure that the horrors of history are not forgotten is the contemporary German state’s law prohibiting any World War II history that whitewashes the holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis on the Jews, Gypsies, and Poles.

The Jews rightly insist that the world must never forget what happened to them.

Where is the Hindu Holocaust Museum?

The historical record of the Muslim rule in India is soaked in blood — just take a look at the documents left by contemporary Muslim chroniclers.

Yet, as a secular humanist, I would like to make a distinction between an ideology and its adherents, especially those born into it. From my own experience, I regard a typical liberal Indian Muslim to be as good a human being as any other Indian.

In the opening chapter, Gautier briefly examines the “tainted glasses” which made Euro-centered historians expound gross “disinformations” about ancient India: the discredited Aryan invasion theory; the deliberate mistranslations of the Vedas; and the erroneous theory of the origin of the caste system.

Throughout the book, Gautier quotes Sri Aurobindo, and in the concluding chapter, “The Final Dream,” pays an inspired homage to the great visionary’s writings.

Like Konraad Elst’s Negationism in India: Concealing the Record of Islam, Francois Gautier’s Rewriting Indian History contributes to the growing literature of dissent against the “standard” textbooks of India’s history. http://www.indiastar.com/wallia10.htm

UPDATE :

1)Censoring History?? @ http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=238&page=28

2) Negationism in India: Concealing the Record of Islam @ http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.org/books/negaind/index.htm

3) “Genocide” of Hindus @ http://www.hinduholocaust.com/Articles/islamicgenocide.htm

4) “Chittor” by Ishtiaq Ahmad @ http://www.hinduholocaust.com/Articles/chittor.htm

6) Demons from Past @ http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_30-8-2004_pg3_4

9 Comments

Filed under Indian History, Indologists, Whitewashing Indian History

** MOTIVATION of Indologists

Early Indologists – a Study in Motivation

Svami B.V. Giri

The First Pioneers of Indology

indology indiaIt may be surprising to learn that the first pioneer in indology was the 12th Century Pope, Honorius IV. The Holy Father encouraged the learning of oriental languages in order to preach Christianity amongst the pagans.

Soon after this in 1312, the Ecumenical Council of the Vatican decided that-

“The Holy Church should have an abundant number of Catholics well versed in the languages, especially in those of the infidels, so as to be able to instruct them in the sacred doctrine.”

The result of this was the creation of the chairs of Hebrew, Arabic and Chaldean at the Universities of Bologna, Oxford, Paris and Salamanca. A century later in 1434, the General Council of Basel returned to this theme and decreed that –

“All Bishops must sometimes each year send men well-grounded in the divine word to those parts where Jews and other infidels live, to preach and explain the truth of the Catholic faith in such a way that the infidels who hear them may come to recognize their errors. Let them compel them to hear their preaching.” 1

Centuries later in 1870, during the First Vatican Council, Hinduism was condemned in the “five anathemas against pantheism” according to the Jesuit priest John Hardon in the Church-authorized book, The Catholic Catechism. However, interests in indology only took shape when the British came to India.

A Short History of the British in India
Whilst the 17th century marked the zenith of India’s mediaeval glory, the 18th century was a flagrant display of degradation, misery, and anarchy. The Moghul Empire was at its end, the nobility had become corrupt and oppressive, and intellectual curiosity had given way to superstitious beliefs. The country was in a state of military and political turmoil, and literature, art and culture could hardly flourish in such an atmosphere. Into this scenario came the European traders.

It was the Portuguese and the Dutch who were the first Europeans to arrive in India. When the French and the British came on the scene, all parties began vying for commercial power over India’s ports. Through financial aid from their governments, treaties with local rulers and huge armies of mercenaries, the foreign trading companies gradually became more powerful than the deteriorating Moghul empire.

The turning point came in 1757 when the British East India Company defeated an Indian army at the Battle of Plassey, and thus gained supremacy. Through treaties and annexation, the Company soon took full control of the subcontinent and ceded it to the British government.

At first, the British government remained cautious in forcing any religious change upon the Indians. This policy seemed to be practical in ruling several hundred million Indians without sparking off a rebellion.

Or as one tea-dealer Mr.Twinning put it –

“As long as we continue to govern India in the mild, tolerant spirit of Christianity, we may govern it with ease; but if ever the fatal day should arrive, when religious innovation shall set her foot in that country, indignation will spread from one end of the Hindustan to the other, and the arms of fifty millions of people will drive us from that portion of the globe, with as much ease as the sand of the desert is scattered by the wind”.

Another point of view in support of that policy was by Montgomery.

“Christianity had nothing to teach Hinduism, and no missionary ever made a really good Christian convert in India. He was more anxious to save the 30,000 of his country-men in India than to save the souls of all the Hindus by making them Christians at so dreadful a price”.

Thus, under the authority of Lord Cornwallis (1786-1805) a mood of laissez-faire dominated the British attitude towards the Indian and his religious practices. The Governor-general in 1793 had decreed to –

“…preserve the laws of the Shaster and the Koran, and to protect the natives of India in the free exercise of their religion.”

However, one year before this law was put into effect, the author Charles Grant wrote,

“The Company manifested a laudable zeal for extending, as far as its means went, the knowledge of the Gospel to the pagan tribes among whom its factories were placed.”

In 1808 he described the opening of Christian missionary schools and translations of the Bible into Indian languages as “principal efforts made under the patronage of the British government in India, to impart to the natives a knowledge of Christianity.”

Despite this, the British showed little interest in Vedic scriptures. Doubtless this was in part a reflection of the usual British attitude to India during most of the period of the Raj – that India was simply a profitable nuisance.

Back home in England the various political parties had different opinions in how India should be managed. The Conservatives, though they accepted that to overthrow Indian tradition would be a difficult task, were interested in improving the Indian way of life, but stressed extreme caution for fear of an uprising. The Liberal party felt the gradual necessity of introducing western standards and values into India. The Rationalists had a more radical approach. Their belief was that reason could abolish human ignorance, and since the West was the champion of reason, the East would profit by its association.

It would be accurate to say that to the 18th century Englishmen, religion meant Christianity. Of course, racism played its part also. This attitude of Europeans toward Indians was due to a sense of superiority – a cherished conviction that was shared by every Englishman in India, from the highest to the lowest.

Upon his arrival in 1810, the Governor-general Marquis of Hastings wrote:

“…the Hindoo appears a being merely limited to mere animal functions, and even in them indifferent…with no higher intellect than a dog…”

European Evangelism in India: William Carey

Christian evangelists were horrified that the Company could take the idolatry and improprieties of a pagan culture seriously. In their eyes, any kind of support or appreciation for the religion of the ‘pagans’ was tantamount to blasphemy.

In 1825 the British scholar John Bentley wrote of his conflict with the scientist John Playfair, who was an admirer of Indian culture –

‘By his [Playfair’s] attempt to uphold the antiquity of Hindu books against absolute facts, he thereby supports all those horrid abuses and impositions found in them, under the pretended sanction of antiquity….Nay, his aim goes still deeper; for by the same means he endeavors to overturn the Mosaic account, and sap the very foundation of our religion: for if we are to believe in the antiquity of Hindu books, as he would wish us, then the Mosaic account is all a fable, or fiction.’ 2

Seeing India as an unlimited field for missionary activity, and insisting that it was part of a Christian government’s duty to promote this, Christian missionaries came to India without any government approval.

William Carey (1761-1834) was the pioneer of the modern missionary enterprise in India, and of western (missionary) scholarship in oriental studies. Carey was an English oriental scholar and the founder of the Baptist Missionary Society.

From 1801 onward, as Professor of Oriental Languages, he composed numerous philosophical works, consisting of ‘grammars and dictionaries in the Marathi, Sanskrit, Punjabi, Telugu, Bengali and Bhatanta dialects. From the Serampor press, there issued in his life time, over 200,000 Bibles and portions in nearly 40 different languages and dialects, Carey himself undertaking most of the literary work. 3

Carey and his colleagues experimented with what came to be known as Church Sanskrit. He wanted to train a group of ‘Christian Pandits’ who would probe “these mysterious sacred nothings” and expose them as worthless.

He was distressed that this “golden casket (of Sanskrit) exquisitely wrought” had remained “filled with nothing but pebbles and trash.” He was determined to fill it with “riches – beyond all price,” that is, the doctrine of Christianity. 4

In fact, Carey smuggled himself into India and caused so much trouble that the British government labeled him as a political danger. After confiscating a batch of Bengali pamphlets printed by Carey, the Governor-general Lord Minto described them as –

“Scurrilous invective…Without arguments of any kind, they were filled with hell fire and still hotter fire, denounced against a whole race of men merely for believing the religion they were taught by their fathers.”

Unfortunately Carey and other preachers of his ilk finally gained permission to continue their campaigns without government approval.

Other Preachers
Another preacher, William Archer, wrote in his book, India and the Future

“The plain truth concerning the mass of the [Indian] population — and the poorer classes alone — is that they are not civilized people.”

Reverend A.H. Bowman wrote that Hinduism was a –

“…great philosophy which lives on unchanged whilst other systems are dead, which as yet unsupplanted has its stronghold in Vedanta, the last and the most subtle and powerful foe of Christianity.”

In 1790, Dr.Claudius Bucchanan, a missionary attached to the East India Company, arrived in Bengal. Not long after his arrival, the good doctor stated-

“Neither truth, nor honesty, honor, gratitude, nor charity, is to be found in the breast of a Hindoo.”

Bucchanan traveled to Puri in Orissa and witnessed the annual Ratha-yatra (or as Bucchanan called it, ‘The horrors of Juggernaut’). His description of Jagannatha – ‘The Indian Moloch’, has been recorded by the historian George Gogerly as- “…a frightful visage painted black, with a distended mouth of bloody horror.” Perhaps, by seeing the face of Lord Jagannatha, the British hallucinated and saw a projection of their own international destiny of bloodshed and carnage.

In any case, from the time the British observed the ‘terrifying’ sight of the Lord on His gigantic chariot, the word ‘juggernaut’ entered the English language and became synonymous with any great force that crushes everything in its path.

Gogerly went on to write –

“The whole history of this famous god (Krsna) is one of lust, robbery, deceit and murder…the history of the whole hierarchy of Hindooism is one of shameful iniquity, too vile to be described.”

The prominent missionary, Alexander Duff (1806-1878) founded the Scottish Churches College, in Calcutta, which he envisioned as a “headquarters for a great campaign against Hinduism.” Duff sought to convert the Indians by enrolling them in English-run schools and colleges, and placed emphasis on learning Christianity through the English language.

Duff wrote –

While we rejoice that true literature and science are to be substituted in place of what is demonstrably false, we cannot but lament that no provision has been made for substituting the only true religion-Christianity – in place of the false religion which our literature and science will inevitably demolish… Of all the systems of false religion ever fabricated by the perverse ingenuity of fallen man, Hinduism is surely the most stupendous.”

Duff received remarkable success in his educational and missionary activities amongst the higher classes in Calcutta. The number of students in the mission schools was four times higher than that in government schools.

It is an axiomatic truth that the aim of missionaries like Duff was not so much education than conversion.

They were obliged to use the excuse of education in order to meet he needs of the converted population, and more importantly, to train up Indian assistants to help them in their proselytizing.

Duff remained unsatisfied with converting Indians belonging to low-castes and orphans – his chosen target was the higher castes, specifically the brahmanas, in order to accelerate the demise of Hinduism.

Many Englishmen patronized missionary schools such as Duffs. Charles Trevelyan, an officer with the East India Company asserted in a widely circulated tract-

” The multitudes who flock to our schools … cannot return under the dominion of the Brahmins. The spell has been forever broken. Hinduism is not a religion that will bear examination… It gives away at once before the light of European sciences.”

J.N. Farquhar, a Scottish clergyman, preached in India from 1891 to 1923, during which time he wrote a book called The Crown of Hinduism. In this work he says that although Hinduism may have some good points, ultimately true salvation can only be achieved through Christ, who is the ‘crown of Hinduism’.

Reverend William Ward, an English missionary, wrote a four-volume polemic in which he characterized the Hindu faith as “a fabric of superstition” concocted by Brahmins, and as “the most complete system of absolute oppression that perhaps ever existed”.

Richard Temple, a high officer, said in an 1883 speech to a London missionary society:

” India presents the greatest of all fields of missionary exertion… India is a country which of all others we are bound to enlighten with external truth…But what is most important to you friends of missions, is this – that there is a large population of aborigines, a people who are outside caste….If they are attached, as they rapidly may be, to Christianity, they will form a nucleus round which British power and influence may gather.”

He addressed a mission in New York in bolder terms:

“Thus India is like a mighty bastion which is being battered by heavy artillery. We have given blow after blow, and thud after thud, and the effect is not at first very remarkable; but at last with a crash the mighty structure will come toppling down, and it is our hope that someday the heathen religions of India will in like manner succumb.”

Indian religion was thus perceived by the British missionaries as an enemy waiting to be conquered by the army of Jesus.

It was a doctrine of Satan which provided Christianity with devils to exorcise and which, in their view, was “at best, work of human folly and at worst the outcome of a diabolic inspiration.” 5

In the word of Charles Grant (1746-1823), Chairman of the East India Company:

“We cannot avoid recognizing in the people of Hindustan a race of men lamentably degenerate and base…governed by malevolent and licentious passions…and sunk in misery by their vices.”

One Professor McKenzie, of Bombay found the ethics of India defective, illogical and anti-social, lacking any philosophical foundation, nullified by abhorrent ideas of asceticism and ritual and altogether inferior to the ‘higher spirituality’ of Europe. He devoted most of his book ‘Hindu Ethics‘ to upholding this thesis and came to the conclusion that Vedic philosophical ideas, ‘when logically applied leave no room for ethics’; and that they prevent the development of a strenuous moral life.’

All efforts were made by the missionaries to portray Hinduism as backwards, illogical, debauched and perverse. As one preacher exclaimed,

‘The curse of India is the Hindoo religion. More than two hundred million people believe a monkey mixture of mythology that is strangling the nation.’ ‘He who yearns for God in India soon loses his head as well as his heart.’

The missionaries opposed the government’s efforts to take a neutral stand towards Indian culture and worked with more zeal for the complete conversion of the natives. Thus India became an arena for religious adventure.

The First Scholars: Sir William Jones
Sir William Jones (1746-1794) was the first Britisher to learn Sanskrit and study the Vedas. He was educated at Oxford University and it was here that he studied law and also began his studies in oriental languages, of which he is said to have mastered sixteen.

After being appointed as judge of the Supreme Court, Jones went to Calcutta in 1783. He founded the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal and translated a number of Sanskrit texts into English. Jones was not prone to criticize other religions, especially the Vedic religion, which he respected and adored.

He wrote –

“I am in love with Gopia, charmed with Crishen (Krishna), an enthusiastic admirer of Raama and a devout adorer of Brihma (Brahma), Bishen (Vishnu), Mahisher (Maheshwara); not to mention that Judishteir, Arjen, Corno (Yudhishtira, Arjuna, Karna) and the other warriors of the M’hab’harat appear greater in my eyes than Agamemnon, Ajax and Achilles apperaed when I first read the Iliad” 6

However, Jones was a devout Christian and could not free himself of the restraints of Biblical chronology. His theories of dating Indian history, specifically Candragupta Maurya’s reign up to the invasions of India by Alexander were certainly dictated to him through religious bias.

He also described the Srimad Bhagavatam as “a motley story” and claimed that it had it’s roots in the Christian Gospels, which had been brought to India and, ‘repeated to the Hindus, who ingrafted them on the old fable of Ce’sava, (Kesava)’.

Of course, this theory has been debunked since records of Krsna worship predate Christ by centuries. (See Heliodorus Column)

In 1840 Jones was appointed Chief Justice in the British settlement of Fort William. Here, in 1846, he translated into English the famous play ‘Sakuntala’ by Kalidasa and ‘The Code of Manu’ in 1851, the year of his death. After him, his younger associate, Sir Henry Thomas Colebrooke, continued in his stead and wrote many articles on Hinduism.

The eminent British historian James Mill (father of the philosopher John Stuart Mill) who had published his voluminous History of British India in 1818 heavily criticized Jones.

Although Mill spoke no Indian languages, had never studied Sanskrit, and had never been to India, his damning indictment of Indian culture and religion had become a standard work for all Britishers who would serve in India. Mill vehemently believed that India had never had a glorious past and treated this as an historical fantasy.

To him, Indian religion meant, ‘The worship of the emblems of generative organs’ and ascribing to God, ‘…an immense train of obscene acts.’ Suffice to say that he disagreed violently with Jones for his ‘Hypothesis of a high state of civilization.’

Mill’s History of British India was greatly influenced by the famous French missionary Abbe Dubois’s book Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies. This work, which still enjoys a considerable amount of popularity to this day, contains one chapter on Hindu temples, wherein the Abbe writes:

“Hindu imagination is such that it cannot be excited except by what is monstrous and extravagant.”

H.H. Wilson
Horace Hayman Wilson (1786-1860) has been described as ‘the greatest Sanskrit scholar of his time’. He received his education in London and traveled to India in the East India Companies medical service. He became the secretary of the Asiatic Society of Bengal from 1811 to 1833 and published a Sanskrit to English dictionary. He became Boden professor of Sanskrit at Oxford in 1833 and the director of the Royal Asiatic Society in 1837.

He translated the Visnu Purana, Rg Veda and wrote books such as Lectures on the Religious and Philosophical Systems of the Hindus. He edited a number of translations of eastern texts and helped Mill compile his History of India, although later Wilson criticized Mill’s historiography, stating –

“Mill’s view of Hindu religion is full of very serious defects, arising from inveterate prejudices and imperfect knowledge. Every text, every circumstance, that makes against the Hindu character, is most assiduously cited, and everything in its favor as carefully kept out of sight, whilst a total neglect is displayed of the history of Hindu belief.”7

Wilson seemed somewhat of an enigma; on one hand he proposed that Britain should restrain herself from forcing Christianity upon the Indians and forcing them to reject their old traditions.

Yet in the same breath he exclaimed:

“From the survey which has been submitted to you, you will perceive that the practical religion of the Hindus is by no means a concentrated and compact system, but a heterogeneous compound made up of various and not infrequently incompatible ingredients, and that to a few ancient fragments it has made large and unauthorized additions, most of which are of an exceedingly mischievous and disgraceful nature. It is, however, of little avail yet to attempt to undeceive the multitude; their superstition is based upon ignorance, and until the foundation is taken away, the superstructure, however crazy and rotten, will hold together.”

Wilson’s view was that Christianity should replace the Vedic culture, and he believed that full knowledge of Indian traditions would help effect that conversion.

Aware that the Indians would be reluctant to give up their culture and religion, Wilson made the following remark:

“The whole tendency of brahminical education is to enforce dependence upon authority – in the first instance upon the guru, the next upon the books. A learned brahmana trusts solely to his learning; he never ventures upon independent thought; he appeals to memory; he quotes texts without measure and in unquestioning trust.

It will be difficult to persuade him that the Vedas are human and very ordinary writings, that the puranas are modern and unauthentic, or even that the tantras are not entitled to respect. As long as he opposes authority to reason, and stifles the workings of conviction by the dicta of a reputed sage, little impression can be made upon his understanding. Certain it is, therefore, that he will have recourse to his authorities, and it is therefore important to show that his authorities are worthless.”

Wilson felt hopeful that by inspired, diligent effort the “specious” system of Vedic thought would be “shown to be fallacious and false by the Ithuriel spear of Christian truth. He also was ready to award a prize of two hundred pounds “…for the best refutation of the Hindu religious system.”

Wilson also wrote a detailed method for exploiting the native Vedic psychology by use of a bogus guru-disciple relationship.

Recently Wilson has been accused of invalid scholarship. Natalie P.R. Sirkin has presented documented evidence, which shows that Wilson was a plagiarist. Most of his most important works were collected manuscripts of a deceased author that he published under his own names, as well as works done without research.

Thomas Babbington Macaulay
Thomas Babbington Macaulay (1800-59) is best known for introducing English education in India. Though not a missionary himself, he believed that Christianity held the key to the problem of curing India’s ignorance.

Although he confessed to have no knowledge of Sanskrit and Arabic, he did not hesitate to belittle the religious works of the East. In 1838 there was some debate on India’s Supreme Ruling Council, chaired by Lord Bentinck. 8

As to the value of teaching Sanskrit and India’s classical literatures, as well as regional languages, in schools to be established by the British for the education of the Indian people, A few members of the Council were mildly in favor of it, but the elegantly expressed, fully ethnocentric and Philistine view of Macaulay prevailed. In his Education Minute, Macaulay wrote that he couldn’t find one Orientalist.

“…who could deny that a single shelf of good European library is worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia…Are we to teach false history, false astronomy, false medicine because we find them in company with false religion? The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is, indeed, fully admitted by those members of the Committee who support the Oriental plan of education…The superiority of the Europeans becomes absolutely immeasurable.”

He went on to make the outrageous assertion that –

“…all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written in the Sanscrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgements used in preparatory schools in England.”

He then made the following creatively expressed, though uneducated assertion as his central statement of belief –

“The question now before us is simply whether, when it is in our power to teach the (English) language, we shall teach language in which…there are no books on any subject which deserve to be compared to our own…whether, when we can patronize sound philosophy and true history, we shall countenance at the public expense medical doctrines which would disgrace an English farrier, astronomy which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school, history abounding in kings thirty feet high and reigns thirty-thousand years long, and geography made up of seas of treacle and rivers of butter… I would at once stop the printing of Arabic and Sanscrit books, I would abolish the Madrassa and the Sanscrit (sic) college at Calcutta.”

In a letter to his father in 1836, Macaulay exclaimed –

“…It is my belief that if our plans of education are followed up, there will not be a single idolator among the respectable classes in Bengal thirty years hence. And this will be effected without any efforts to proselytize, without the smallest interference with religious liberty, by natural operation of knowledge and reflection. I heartily rejoice in the project.”

In other words, Lord Macaulay believed that by knowledge and reflection, the Hindus would turn their backs upon the religion of their forefathers and take up Christianity.

In order to do this, he planned to use the strength of the educated Indians against them by using their scholarship to uproot their own traditions, or in his own words – ” Indian in blood and color, but English in taste, in opinion, in morals, in intellect.”

He firmly believed that, “No Hindu who has received an English education ever remains sincerely attached to his religion.”

To further this end Macaulay wanted a competent scholar who could interpret the Vedic scriptures in such a manner that the newly educated Indian youth would see how barbaric their native superstitions actually were. Macaulay finally found such a scholar in Fredrich Max Mueller.http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/vedic-age_fs.html

india indology continues with Part 2  — Max Mueller . . .

Plot to Denigrate India @ https://indiaview.wordpress.com/2007/07/29/dalit-twist-to-textbook-row/

Invading the Sacred @ http://worldmonitor.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/invading-the-sacred/

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

Offensive Conversion @ http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=219&page=7

15 Comments

Filed under Conversion by Missionaries, Indologists, Vedic History

** TRUTH OF GODHRA

The myth and truth of Godhra       
By Arvind Lavakare

Since no ‘secularist’ or ‘liberal’ or ‘objective’ person ever challenged the above sets of figures, some questions arise: Who killed 200-odd Hindus so early in those riots? Was it the police or the Hindus themselves? And what made those 40,000 Hindus rush to relief camps? Was it fear of Hindu mob violence, rape, arson and murder?

Two recent ‘news briefs’ in print are critical evidence of a reality that’s been totally ignored by our ‘liberals’ who have, for four years running, gone on and on and on about the ‘genocide’ of Muslims in Gujarat after the sudden inferno in the S-6 compartment of Sabarmati Express had consumed 58 Hindus, including 26 women and 12 children, returning home after performing kar seva at Ayodhya.

In its edition of March 19, 2006, The Sunday Express carried the following report from Ahmedabad:

“Post-Godhra riot case: 7 get lifer
The city sessions court on Friday convicted seven people in a post-Godhra riot case and sentenced them to life term for the murder of 35-year-old Mukesh Panchal, a resident of Lambha. He was attacked by the accused and went missing on November 7, 2003 from Shah-e-Alam Darwaza. His mutilated body was found near Chandoka Lake on November 11. One of the seven accused—Javed Shaukat Ali—meanwhile managed to give the cops a slip and fled from the court.”

In its edition of Wednesday, March 29, 2006 The Indian Express carried the following report, also datelined Ahmedabad:

“Nine get jail in post-Godhra riot case
The city sessions court on Tuesday convicted nine accused in a post-Godhra riot case. Additional Sessions Judge Sonia Gokani sentenced Mushtaq alias Kanio Ahmed Sheikh to 10 years in jail for murder and attempt to murder. Eight others were sentenced to 18 months in prison for unlawful assembly, possessing weapons and rioting.”

Out of the five convictions so far in l’affaire Godhra, the above two rip the blindfold on Godhra that the country was subjected to since March 2002. Those two convictions conclusively prove that even as some Hindus in Vadodra, Ahmedabad and a few other parts of Gujarat were provoked into insane killing, arson and loot by the S-6 carnage, the Muslims in that state were hardly the cattle hiding from the slaughter house that they have been made out by the “secularists” in and outside our national English media. Do you, for instance, recall reading about the mutilation of Mukesh Panchal’s cadaver in any of the English print media? Did you hear a sound byte about it on our TV?

Yes, despite all the media and the consequent political, propaganda about the ‘genocide’ of Gujarat’s Muslims, the reality is that some of that community were also engaged in murder, rioting and unlawful assembly with arms in hand.

This trend was discernible to the objective person four years ago itself. Thus, in its issue of April 28, 2002, The Times of India reporter, Sanjay Pandey, told us that of the 726 people who had been killed by then in the post-Godhra riots, 168 were Hindus. In its issue of June 24, 2002, India Today carried an article saying that the official figure of all people killed in Gujarat in the three months following the S-6 massacre was 800, of which a quarter were Hindus. The Union Home Ministry’s Annual Report 2002-03 said that about a third of the total dead in the Godhra riots were Hindus. It also said that, at one stage, 40,000 Hindus were in riot relief camps.

Since no ‘secularist’ or ‘liberal’ or ‘objective’ person ever challenged the above sets of figures, some questions arise: Who killed 200-odd Hindus so early in those riots? Was it the police or the Hindus themselves? And what made those 40,000 Hindus rush to relief camps? Was it fear of Hindu mob violence, rape, arson and murder?

More proof of the blindfold on Godhra came in 2005, when the UPA coalition (comprising the ‘secular’ friends of Muslims) made a statement in Parliament that 254 Hindus and 790 Muslims were killed in those riots.

But our national media simply refused to remove the blindfold on Godhra. Hence it was that the elites of our society continued to rant about the Gujarat ‘pogrom of genocide’; some cussed Indians even conspired to deny a US visa to the Chief Minister of one of the country’s fastest developing states.

Aiding and abetting that conspiracy were reports from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International et al. The National Human Rights Commission joined in; written lies by the likes of Arundhati Roy and fake e-mails added fuel to the fire. All of them went to town about the Gujarat ‘genocide’ with blinkers on, a blindfold underneath. None wanted to touch upon the minority community’s role in that tragedy.

But the latest criminal conviction of 16 Muslims evokes the recall of the Justice Tewatia Report on the Godhra issue published on April 26, 2002 under the aegis of the Council For International Affairs And Human Rights, based in New Delhi.

It was a report based on a six-day field study of a team headed by Justice D.S. Tewatia, former Chief Justice, Calcutta High Court and Punjab and Haryana High Court. Its other members were Dr J.C. Batra, senior advocate, Supreme Court, Dr Krishan Singh, academician, Jawahar Lal Kaul, veteran journalist, and Prof. B. K. Kuthiala, Dean, Faculty of Media Studies, G.J. University, Hisar.

The five-man team visited three affected areas and relief camps in Ahmedabad, interacting freely with the public and members of both communities, and without government interference. In Godhra, five delegations from both communities and also of mixed composition presented their views and facts to the team. Similarly, free discussions with the public and affected communities were held in Vadodra at seven affected areas and five relief camps. It collected information from the staff at the Godhra Railway Station, district administration, including the Collector and Police Commissioner, passengers traveling in Sabarmati Express on 27.02.02 in S-6 compartment as well as in other compartments, staff of the Fire Brigade, Godhra, reports in 22 newspapers and nine magazines (local, regional and Delhi) and views on media coverage articulated by some 500 persons including intellectuals like lawyers, doctors and businessmen. The site where the train was initially stopped and stoned was also visited. A high point was that 13 delegations consisting of 121 citizens met Justice Tewatia’s team and presented their viewpoints and information. The delegations ranged from the Association of Hoteliers to a group of Vanvasis and affected Muslim as well as Hindu women.

Based on the considerable oral, audio and visual evidence obtained from the above interactions, the Justice Tewatia team’s conclusions most relevant to the blindfold on Godhra were as follows:

  1. Burning of 58 Hindu pilgrims on February 27, 2002 was an act carried out at the behest of then government of Pakistan which had planned to burn the entire Sabarmati Express carrying some 2000 passengers. The primary objective was to create Hindu-Muslim communal conflagration in India. The actual perpetrators were jehadi elements in the predominantly Muslim town of Godhra where

    1. a very high traffic of telephone calls was recorded between Godhra and Pakistan, especially Karachi, before the date of the carnage

    2. an abnormally large number of passports were issued,

    3. there was a large number of persons without ration cards

    4. a large number of unemployed Muslims had mobile phones,

    5. though there is no tradition of being a Muslim pilgrim center and the local Muslims are not affluent, three istema (religious gatherings) have been held and attended by large numbers of foreigners, and

    6. an Assistant Collector (a young Muslim from eastern UP) went on leave two days before the gory incident and did not return till the middle of March though the district of his posting was aflame with communal riots much earlier.

  2. The vacuum pipe between the Coaches No. S-6 and S-7 was cut thereby preventing any further movement of the train. Miscreants threw bricks and stones at the train as soon as it left Godhra railway station. The stoning intensified after it finally stopped about 700 metres from the station. The passengers of the train, particularly Coaches S-5, S-6 and S-7, were the main targets. Burning missiles and acid bulbs were thrown on and in the coaches. One such acid missile landed in Coach S-7 and a fire started which the passengers were able to extinguish. But the attack continued and more burning missiles were thrown into the Coach S-6.

  3. In an effort to control the subsequent riots, the Gujarat government

  4. Publicly announced its decision to employ the Army on the evening of the day riots began on February 28 (Within less than 24 hours at least one brigade of Indian Army had air-landed at Ahmedabad),

  5. Made preventive arrests of over 33,000 people,

  6. Fired over 12,000 rounds of bullets,

  7. Fired over 15,000 rounds of tear gas shells,

  8. The involvement of Vanvasis in the post-Godhra riots added a new dimension to the communal violence. In rural areas the Vanvasis attacked the Muslim moneylenders, shopkeepers and the forest contractors. They used their traditional bow and arrows as also their implements used to cut trees and grass while attacking Muslims. They moved in groups and used coded signals for communication. Apparently, the accumulated anger of years of exploitation by Muslim moneylenders (interest of 50 per cent per annum), shopkeepers and forest contractors had become explosive after moneylenders sexually exploited their womenfolk.

  9. The media selected, distorted and added fiction to prove their respective points of view. The code of ethics prescribed by the Press Council of India was violated by the media with impunity. It so enraged the citizens that several concerned citizens in the disturbed areas suggested that peace could return to the state only if some of the TV channels were closed for some weeks. Even the Vanvasis complained that the media had no time to hear their agony and was spreading canards against the Hindus. Newspapers published in English from Delhi invariably editorialised the news. Direct and indirect comments in the news writing were so telling that the personal likes and dislikes of the news reporters were too obvious to be missed. They appeared to have assumed the role of crusaders against the State Government from day one. It coloured the entire operation of newsgathering, feature writing and editorials.

Conclusions 1 to 4 above are indicators as to why our national media, ever afraid to criticise the Muslim and ever ready to indulge in BJP/Hindu bashing, bypassed the Justice Tewatia Report, despite its high credentials and the fact that it was publicly released at a press conference in New Delhi. After all, our ‘secular’ national media simply could not have tolerated giving even a line to report’s conclusion 5 above. Hence, they simply buried the whole report itself, put a blindfold on the country vision of it. After all, they had found their Hindu-bashing agenda in the post-Godhra riots and they were hell-bent in pushing it full steam, right up to the Supreme Court and beyond to the United Nations.

Will the criminal conviction of 16 by two separate sessions judges in Ahmedabad remove the blindfold on Godhra that the ‘monster media’ put on the people of this country?

(The writer can be contacted at 202, Dosti Erica, Antop Hill, Wadala (E), Mumbai 400 037.)  URL: http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=129&page=17

Ayodhya and After – by Koenraad Elst @ http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.org/books/ayodhya/ch1.htm

——————-More below ———————-

Gujarat has outgrown riot

 – Swapan Dasgupta, Pioneer

A decade ago, during President Clinton’s embarrassment over his relationship with Monica Lewinsky, the White House spin doctors excelled themselves. At a time when the world was eagerly awaiting the publication of the Starr inquiry report, the President’s image handlers put out the word that this was a hurdle he would find extremely hard to negotiate. Soon the beltway was agog with speculation of an extremely damaging report and Clinton’s imminent resignation.
 
The Starr report, when it was released, was certainly an indictment of Clinton’s waywardness. However, it was nowhere as damaging as the political grapevine anticipated. In the backdrop of soaring expectations, the Starr report came to be viewed as a virtual exoneration of the President and provided him a much-needed political respite. Clinton’s handlers successfully created a mismatch between promise and delivery and neutralised the potentially damaging effects of the Starr inquiry.
 
The editors of Tehelka certainly succeeded in creating a buzz over a sting operation they promised would be “the most important story of our time” — a claim that invoked visions of Bob Woodward emulating what the Google advertisement suggested the Indiana Jones’ of the world do: Retire. It was also known that the story would centre on Gujarat and the one man who has defied the stormtroopers of secular fundamentalism. With Assembly elections a few weeks away, Tehelka’s hype suggested that this was the end of the road for Narendra Modi.
 
There was never any ambiguity over the central aim of the sting: To secure the downfall of Modi. The covert filming of half-crazed killers and braggarts had one objective: To somehow implicate Modi. The reporter Ashis Khetan quite openly admits that he was initially despatched to Gujarat to do “a sting operation on Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s involvement in a spate of fake encounter killings.”When that pre-judged investigation failed, Tehelka fell back on the riots of 2002. It successfully exposed the warped minds of those who participated in the killings. However, there is no question that the sting was driven by the sole aim of securing the downfall of Modi by non-electoral means. Journalism was the means to a political objective.
 
Journalists are not historians; they live for the moment. The bloodshed that began with the jihadi arson in Godhra has been in the public domain for five years.The butchery at Naroda Patiya and the Gulbarga Housing Society in Ahmedabad has been dissected and some of the perpetrators identified and charged in the courts. Activists have made films on the 2002 riots and been showered with awards by a grateful Congress establishment.
Novels centred on the Gujarat riots have routinely filled the remaindered sections of warehouses and “academic” studies have argued that “Hindu militancy” poses a greater threat than Al Qaeda.
 
 
The only problem with this inspired activism was that it left Modi politically unscathed. In the five years since the riots, Modi has established a few things. First, he has conclusively demonstrated that he has the popular mandate. Second, that despite loony voices on both sides of the sectarian divide, he is not going to be bogged down by identity politics.There have been no riots in the past five years and hopefully this track record will persist. The thrust of his administration has been rapid economic growth, administrative efficiency and modernisation. In five years, Modi has not only aroused regional pride, he has made Gujarat the best governed State.
 
The riots — horrible as they were – are fast becoming history. The people of Gujarat, both Hindus and Muslims, have moved on. No one, and certainly not the Congress, wanted the forthcoming elections to be dominated by sectarian tensions. There are other pressing concerns. By resurrecting the riots, without at the same time being able to nail Modi personally, the sting has raised the communal temperature needlessly and fuelled minority victimhood.
 
This is not to suggest that Tehelka shouldn’t have exposed the monsters; it should just have avoided the desperate search for a high political dividend.
URL:
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist&file_name=SWAPAN171%2Etxt&writer=SWAPAN&validit=yes

Related Story: 

A Requiem for Godhra  @ http://voxindica.blogspot.com/

 

BOGUS MEDIA ON SALE    @ http://indowave.tripod.com/AntiHinduMedia.html

 

7 Comments

Filed under Anti-Hindu/ Bias, Burning Issues, POLITICS

** Where’re Human Rights?

Where’re Human Rights Advocates?

Re: Taslima Nasreen

Where are Arundhati Roy, Romilla Thappar, Teesta Setalvad, Ram Puniyani, Kuldip Nayyar, Dinesh D’Souza, Praful Bidwai, Biju Matthew, John Dayal etc.…human rights advocates?

And how about “mother of all human rights advocates“: Sonia Gandhi? Why is she quiet? Is she thinking about words to say which can be called “politically correct”?

And what happened to “TEHELKA” ??

These so-called advocates speak only to degrade Hindus?

Why don’t they speak against these Muslim fundamentalists who want to behead Taslima? All of these so-called human rights advocates seem to be advocates of anti-Hinduism.

How come M.F. Husain can have freedom of expression, but Taslima can not have it?

Why her freedom is being compromised under pressure from Imams? Why these double standards?

When it comes to speak against Muslims or Christians, they are mute.

They wanted movies like Parzania, Water and M.F. Hussain’s nude paintings of Hindu Gods/Goddesses to be shown because it is against freedom of expression to ban these.

Then why they wanted to ban DaVinci Code and Danish comics of Muhammad?

If Hindu Gods/Goddeses can be painted nude by M.F. Husain, why can’t we see Danish cartoons of Muhammad? Why ban those?

And why Taslima’s freedom of expression is being compromised under pressure from Islamic Fundamentalists?

Does she not have freedom of expression too?

Why they have these double standards? Who are they trying to fool?

How come these Human Rights Advocates keep repeating Gujrat riots but have conveniently forgotten Sikh riots of 1984? Is it because then they have to expose duplicity of Congress?

Riots of Gujarats are still being publicized but riots of Mau are never mentioned. Killings of Sikhs and Hindus in Kashmir are glossed over. Gujrat riots victims are compensated, but not the Kashmiri victims of Islamic Terrorism? This is a reverse discrimination against majority Hindus by India’s minority-ruled UPA.

How come movies to reform Hindu customs can be made ( e.g. Zakhm, Lajja, Water,Bawander etc.) but no one dares to make any movie on Honour Killings and Oppression of Muslim Women in Islamic societies or Islamic Terrorism? So much for freedom of expression! Its freedom to insult Hinduism under the disguise of so-called SECULARISM.

** Media on Video @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCEO4Rw9Zd8&feature=related

** A Must Watch @ http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6644225536753124845&hl=en

** Bias in Media?  @ http://indowave.tripod.com/AntiHinduMedia.html

** SECULARISM  dies in J&K

**   The myth and truth of Godhra

**   Ayodhya and After – K. Elst

**   Is Secularism: A fraud?

** SACHAR’S  BLUFF

**   Zakir Naik’s Minoritism @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jYUL7eBdHg&feature=related

**   Teesta Setalvad @ http://teesta.blogspot.com

14 Comments

Filed under Human Rights in India, Islamists, Taslima, world news

** De’mo-narchy Of India

De’mo-narchy Of Democratic Republic of India

By Seshachalam Dutta and Shree Vinekar

Indians are proud to declare theirs is the largest democracy in the World –undisputedly so. The question in this article is – is it the best, or how good is Indian Democracy, not how large. The answer is depressing for all of us, who grew up dreaming during British occupation of India, that one day we would form a great democracy the envy of the world. Westerners claim that democracy is inherent to their culture with the beginnings of Roman State- albeit it was limited to a few thousand elite, the rest being slaves. Indian political theorists claim that we had even richer history of democracy from Vedic times as illustrated in village panchayats.
( See: http://tinyurl.com/9fnxk) 

However, current trends in Indian constitutional democracy are disheartening.
 
The real threat to Indian democracy is from the new breed of politicians who are taking advantage of the institution of democracy to create dynasties, a form of demonarchy such as that perpetuated by the Nehru Dynasty. There was an interesting editorial in Wall street Journal prior to UPA’s election to power in India.

The editorial starts with a quote from Jawaharlal Nehru: “HISTORY TELLS US THAT HEREDITY BREEDS FOOLS IN POLITICS AND EMPIRES.”  What a profound quotation! The editorial was in reference to Sonia Gandhi of India who claims entitlement to power, because her mother-in-law, Prime Minister Indira, died in her lap!

The editorial cites others as well, Sukarno Putri of Indonesia for one who has a similar hold on the literate and semiliterate citizenry of Indonesia. She claims that her father shows up in her dreams to advise her. Then, of course, we have Sirimavo Bandaranaike, Benazir Bhutto, all from fledgling democracies. Little did poor Jawaharlal Nehru dream that heredity breeding fools would apply to his family too after his demise! It is unthinkable that Jacqueline Kennedy would even remotely be proposed to succeed her fallen husband or Itzak Rabin’s wife to succeed her assassinated husband. Indian politics so deteriorated after Nehru’s death that Socialist Party leader Ram Manohar Lohia called Indian Democracy “A Brahmin-Baniya Oligarchy.” We will explore whether he was correct or hyperbolic. There are four conditions that are required for demonarchy: 1. Government control of media 2. Dictatorial laws, and/or non-enforcement of law and order, 3. Control of economy (centralized), and 4. Manipulation of electoral process. For example, by first appointing candidates from top to bottom by party hierarchy at the apex and then electing them.  All these conditions prevail in Indian democracy which makes it demonarchy.
 
Let us examine demonarchy of Nehru/Gandhi dynasty first. Kuldip Nayar outlines the events surrounding Nehru’s terminal days and the succession to the prime minister’s position.  One of his loyalists, Kamaraja Nadar, approaches Nehru and asks whether he should install his daughter as the Prime Minister (P.M.). Nehru was supposed to have said “not now” which implied “later.” Nehru could not degrade himself to ask that his daughter be chosen to succeed him. He had the dignity and cognizance of his place in Indian History and reputation in the world. Then the Congress party operatives elected Lal Bahadur Shastry to Prime-minister-ship as a stop-gap.  After his untimely death in a short time Nehru’s daughter Indira Gandhi was elected as the P.M. with the help of party operatives. She had no legislative experience. The socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia called her a sugar doll – gudia ki daal (it would melt away if he licked it!).  She was not a natural democratic leader by popular assent, although she mastered political intrigue under the tutelage of her father for 17 years. The very first time she encountered a threat to her power, she resorted to tyranny by declaring the state of Emergency, the only emergency being nothing but a threat to her power.
 
Nehruvian Democracy Vs Jeffersonian Democracy
 
 Jeffersonian constitutional democracy sets the constitution as supreme law of the land, which is pledged to be protected and defended by the president, legislature and judiciary severally.  It is a sacred document that embodies civil liberties and basic human rights that protects the minority, even a single man, in the land against the tyranny of majority rule and against the might of the overbearing Government. The US constitution had been amended only 27 times in 200 years history. (The amendment on child labor is still not ratified after 82 years!).  The founding fathers of the U.S could envision such a constitutional democracy because of inherence in their culture of tolerance for -in fact, respects for – minority positions. People who lightly talk of spreading the democracy all over the world forget that it should be ingrained in the culture and be defended by patriotic people with eternal vigilance; America is still in the process of achieving the ideal set by the founding fathers.
 
Indian constitution has the same lofty ideals as the American written by Thomas Jefferson including its preamble and the fundamental rights. But Nehru, as unchallenged leader of his Congress party, and the leader of modern India wielding enormous power since Emperor Ashok and commanding enormous adulation of his countrymen, never established democratic traditions; it is not that he did not know how to construct a democracy but he was impelled to secure unchallenged power. His generation of leadership, though was educated in the West, was weak and helpless to stand up to him. He was so drunk with power after suffering a stroke in 1963 and having ruled for 17 years, he would not give up his power.
TIME magazine reported once that Lohia “gracelessly” remarked whether India needed an invalid as its P.M., when the P.M. did not gain his gait after a stroke. While Gandhiji was an example of complete self-sacrifice, none emulated him amongst his followers, alas, except ironically Nelson Mandela of South Africa who abdicated power after one term.  Leaders of India had a different story.  Media were controlled by the state with only one government owned radio station. Every day the news papers carried photo opportunity of the P.M. creating a myth that only he could carry out the foreign affairs, for he alone knew the world. His sister was appointed ambassador to the Soviet Union. The Ministry of External affairs under the single-handed and tight-fisted control of Jawaharlal Nehru was not subject to audit nor the treaties with other countries subject to ratification by the parliament, precisely the root cause for the problem India is facing today with Manmohan Singh’s agreements with the U.S regarding the nuclear treaty.Travel to outside world under Nehru regime was a privilege for a few and not a right.  Passport could be denied with no explanation! The senior author waited four months to get a passport in 1962 to study abroad. It is not that Nehru did not know the rights enjoyed by the free world that he had to be forced by the decision of Supreme Court to admit that Citizens of India are entitled to the freedom to travel abroad. His Government tried to restrict study abroad on need basis, with exception made for two of his grandsons who were privileged to study as under-graduates in England with no special distinction, as though India then could not provide quality undergraduate training in India.

All other “commoners” were to prove their merit to pursue only post-graduate training before being “licensed” by the Nehru-Gandhi “democratic” government to qualify for the passport. Such double standards are the order of the day in implementing lofty “equality” establishing policies of the UPA government even today and are not considered a form of nepotism even by the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty when it comes to judging the privileges extended to their own family members. Of course, the concept of “conflict of interest” is absent even on the ethical scene of Indian politics.
 
Dictatorial laws of India
 
Nehru ruled the country by the same arbitrary laws by which British controlled India, including the notorious preventive detention act, by which anyone could be arrested. It is under this act that he arrested and kept Sheik Abdullah of Kashmir, his friend whom he called “Lion of Kashmir,” in jail for years.  Of course, Abdullah could not be defeated after his release. It is the same law used indiscriminately by his daughter Indira in arresting and throwing Jaya-Prakash Narayan in Jail, a man regarded as one of  the founding fathers of Indian democracy, venerable leader respected by her own father as his equal. Indira Gandhi arrested student leaders from the college classes without revealing their hidden locations or their fate to their parents. Nehru dared not go that far as it would tarnish his image as a Great democratic leader in the world. But he was very close. He surreptitiously let the dirty job be done by state governments without ever criticizing them publicly.  Chief Minister of Bombay, ignoble Morarji Desai, opened fire on unarmed protesters during Nehru regime and was later rewarded with the Ministerial post by the Congress High Command and later as a P.M. by Janata Government!  Communist party was banned in several States (not by central government, though!). The members and affiliates were arrested and in extreme cases released and shot in forests as terrorists (in encounters). This continued for years during Nehru’s and the subsequent Nehru-Gandhi regime. Consequently, the communists won the election contesting from jails in Andhra! An event rarely heard of in the history of any democratic country!
 
The political immaturity of the Indian leadership is evident in that not a single voice was raised by the other opposition parties not subjected momentarily to such treatment.
After Gandhiji’s assassination several RSS leaders and intellectuals were arrested, many lost their jobs, and the rest were released after prolonged incarceration. Guruji Golwalkar wrote to Nehru that he was unfairly, illegally, and without due process kept in Jail even without any charges being filed or affording any trial.  Nehru simply referred him to the Home Ministry as though he had nothing to say about the incarceration of a leader of one million followers.
The communists and socialists regaled in the pleasure this man was sinking in jail, not knowing that when the bells toll they toll for them too and their time would come. When their day came nobody was there to raise voice.
 
Indira Gandhi used a very rare legal provision, never used before her time in Independent India, “the law of sedition,” violation of which is a very serious offense. It was enacted by the British. Lokamanya Tilak was punished by the British charging him under this law although Tilak protested that “Swarajya” did not have the connotation of sedition. When Bindranwala, who was indeed a true seditionist, was killed along with other terrorists in Amritsar, an Indian correspondent of a foreign paper reported that some of the victims were shot in an assassination style while their hands were tied behind their backs. The law of sedition ridiculously states that such a serious allegation can only be leveled after verifying facts with the Government officials (“Collector”!). No other modern democracy would accept such a law. Provisions of search and seize in this law justified by Indira included ransacking the Indian Express office and Printing Press in Delhi during the emergency. The leaders of Janata who succeeded Indira Gandhi found all this “no big deal.” The reason perhaps is that they had a similar mind-set. 

Such practices in Communist China caught international attention but in the democratic Republic of India these atrocities went unnoticed without any ado.  The word democracy can thus be seen to provide a cover for many injustices. Such state of affairs tempts one reconsider democracy in India as a masquerading form of demonarchy.
 
 
Indian Socialism:
 
While Indian political leadership was not allowed to develop, flourish, and to be perpetuated by using the tactic of controlling the media and all means of communication, and also by exercising arbitrary laws, there was more pernicious factor in setting back Indian democracy and paving the way for dynastic succession. That was the tactic of controlling the economy without facilitating free enterprise.

Nehru was an ideologue but not necessarily an idealist. He was excellent in creating slogans. His most powerful slogan was “socialism.” Later many African countries used this slogan. His practice of socialism can be summarized from his own observation of Sir Stafford Cripps, who according to Nehru enunciated a strategy, “tell the poor that they will get wealth distributed from rich and tell the rich they would be protected from the poor.” 

The poor never got anything of substance in 60 years from the government of India, no effective land reforms, welfare, any advancement, or betterment until recently when the economy was liberalized. However, monopolistic capitalism was encouraged, with only one car manufacturer for a long time and later second one headed by the members of the Nehru-Gandhi family, licensed to produce cars, and only one major drug company was licensed to package the drugs produced in the West. Still with all liberalization and propaganda, government tight control of the economy is transparently evident even today.

During Nehru’s rule, one had to register a purchased radio and get a license to use it! Even today, Government permit is needed to open a gas station (“petrol pump”) in India. One of the grand schemes of Nehru to socialize the farmland was by bringing the farms under cooperatives, which would have eliminated any free enterprise remaining. This initiative failed because of wide spread opposition. Still the entire production and distribution, and all entrepreneurial activity were tightly controlled by the Indian Government leading to wide-spread corruption.

This set India decades behind China economically. It will continue to cause India to lose its race with China in the competitive world economy.  Only recently is a beginning made to minimally use private initiatives in building infrastructure in India which is in a dismal state in comparison to China, leave alone the evening entertainment for the hard working foreign born business executives.  Solid good infrastructure and quality of life for its employees are two main factors attracting multinational manufacturing industries and other multinational corporate headquarters or business establishments to India.  Nehru-Gandhi dynasty has failed terribly in these two areas namely the building of infrastructure, improving the standard of living for all citizens and not just a few (one third), to compete with non English speaking China that can easily learn English.
 
With the rise of Janata Party and the agitation for separation of Punjab, Indira Gandhi bemoaned the rise of the middle class as responsible for the growing strength of Janata Party and its viable opposition.  Early on Nehru was very much aware of the overall social and economic structure of India. On a visit to Mongolia, a reporter asked him whether India would become Communist. His answer was that it was not possible, because India was essentially a feudalistic country. The ruling class was thus the landed aristocracy with no interest in democratic reform but only loyalty to the idolized leader. India had no Jefferson or Jeffersonian concepts of democracy.
 
With centralized economy and with Government as major employer, press depended on the favors from the Government as a major source of revenue and thus lost its freedom to report unbiased. Together with the state controlled radio, all means of communication were so monopolized that the only way public dissent was frequently expressed was by massive demonstrations, at times violent, leading to burning of buses and trains, naturally, joined by antisocial elements confusing the issue of meaningful dissent. Even today every party organizes bundhs (forcibly closing shops and disrupting traffic) in India.   There are instances in which the ruling Congress party organized such demonstration in the states ruled by opposition party and removed the government by presidential decree claiming the breakdown in law and order! The main media in India, especially English language ones, are seen as the stooges of the ruling Congress Party, and the Government, behaving so for the entire period of Congress rule, indicating a sign of lachari even in the press.
 
Congress High Command Structure:
 
The structure of the one and only one organization, the Indian National Congress, under whose banner diverse groups fought the British, had only one controlling command center called “High Command” which was totally undemocratic not unlike the Soviet inner cabinet. The leaders at the top in Delhi including, Gandhiji, Nehru, Patel and a few others controlled the party. There was no grass roots democracy. The party commanded from top to bottom. While the High Command was justified to fight the enemy, the British, it was never intended or justifiable as a model for democracy. The continuation of this structure led to idolatry of the then freedom fighting self-sacrificing leaders evolving in the current dynastic rule. Later the high command was replaced by the Congress Working Committee. There were no organizational elections in the congress party for the last 25 years. The Working Committee acting as High Command virtually rules the party and the Country. The power is so concentrated in a few hands that from one State, U.P., 9 of the 13 Prime Ministers were elected.
 
To contest for an election either at the level of State legislature or at the Center (parliament), candidates are selected at state level and approved at the center which retains the tight-fisted overall control. The selected candidates are given “tickets”, a process unheard of in the U.S. or other democracies. There were charges that these tickets were sold and the state congress party leader in Andhra Pradesh made millions in 1995. By this practice, if one party is in overwhelming majority it can control the entire leadership of the country. There are no primaries to select or elect the candidates freely nor re-runs when multiple candidates contest. Democracy is “just in name” and if not a “farce” in the Democratic Republic of India.
 
Political system creating Desperate Destitution at every level:
 
The so called Socialist Government of India by planned economy is almost a sole monopolistic employer commanding the power to distribute jobs as political patronage with very little free enterprise as an alternative.  What little free enterprise was there had to submit to the control of the State and thus the politician in power directly and indirectly controlled all private enterprises for they had to obtain licenses to start and operate a business. Even after liberalization, one cannot open a gas station without a Government license.

Early on, the political patronage controlled and interfered with all employments as well as business permits and even college admissions. Once employment is obtained, the person was still subject to the control of the state since he could be at will, without any reason, be transferred from place to place, a process reversed by begging his benefactor for whom he and his family is expected in gratitude to vote his/her way or bribe in cash or kind.  Such large-scale transfers were started during British days, un-heard-of in any free country, which affect every employee top to bottom, teachers, doctors, clerks, and bankers, except mailmen.  The consequences of “dislocation” are that the affected person can never establish lasting social or even family relationships or own investments or a home in any community. Children of such transferable job-holders developed only superficial relations with their peers, which is unhealthy psychologically during the formative period of their personality. In the U.S people forgo a job promotion in order to avoid moving for their school-age children.

This kind of control on a citizen breeds desperate destitution (“laachari” alluded to in Part I of this article on http://www.sookta-sumana.com) and sense of servility (“dasyu vritti”) stripping man’s dignity, leaving the helpless feeling in him/her that the only way to survive is to beg on ones knees.  Such laachari or desperate destitution is so endemic and ubiquitous in the British and post-colonial India that it has become an inherent ego-syntonic feature of the Indian National Character to the point that it is confused with humility (Namrata). Obsequiousness is thus seen as a virtue while it is a symptom of a toxic political system afflicting every individual in India in some measure, through unconscious cultural internalization, whether he/she knows it or not. Such “Dasyu vritti” seen in the blood and bones of majority of Indians stemming from “laachari” must not be confused with “Vinaya” or “Namrata.”
 
Sons of Indira Gandhi as Successors:
 
When Indira Gandhi was defeated after the emergency, Sen. Patrick Moynihan exulted in praise of Indian Democracy. That excitement was short-lived because of an inept Government that succeeded her.

She came back to power and got an amendment to the constitution altering the preamble to the constitution stating that “Republic of India shall have a Socialist Government with a purpose to distribute wealth.”  In actuality no sane Indian would be opposed to the slogan of “Gareebi Hatao” or “eradicate poverty.”  By implication she created an illusion for her psychological warfare with her political rivals to make them look like they obstinately preferred to keep India poor. Indian constitution was thus on a course to be amended 94 times by the Congress government in 58 years after the birth of the Republic.

Her earlier amendment exempting her election to the office to judicial review was rejected by a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of India which stated that a right to amend did not include destruction of the constitution and the amendments should conform to the preamble! So she cleverly decided to change the preamble itself to make “socialism” as the over-riding governing principle of the constitution and subject to interpretation to suit the ruling congress party. 

“Socialism” a buzz word slogan, used by her father, was thus included in the Constitution without defining it just as the buzz word “Secular” was used in the Indian Constitution without defining it, subject to being interpreted variously and indeed entirely idiosyncratically on the Indian political scene. 

Harold Laski, the author of the “Grammar of Politics,” will not recognize any true “socialism” in the Indian democracy, nor will he recognize “democracy” as the form of government in India, although Jawaharlal Nehru is said to have chosen Laski as his idol.  Indira Gandhi practiced socialism by nationalizing banks and capitalism by financing her son’s unsuccessful adventures into free enterprise, including Maruti Car manufacturing.  Unable to raise private sector capital Sanjay made a run on the banks and obtained unsecured loans after nationalization of banks.  He vindictively retaliated against those who previously questioned the loans.  In short he terrorized the bureaucracy at the Center.             

Nothing said herein needs to be interpreted as the authors being opposed to pristine socialism or secularism which are essentially lofty guiding principles if not corrupted by the politicians and the judiciary.
 
During and after the emergency, Indira’s youngest son Sanjay Gandhi was next to her directing the Government. Politicians from different states courted him. When he came to Andhra Pradesh (A.P.) a Congress M.P.  and later Minister of Parliamentary Affairs (K. Raghuramaiah) introduced him to a public gathering saying, “I served your father, I served your mother, and I am ready to serve you the rising son of India.” Such was the Indian sycophancy, an illustration of “laachari.” Sanjay Gandhi was shoe-in for the post of P.M. But fate had it otherwise. He died in reckless adventures with aircraft flying. Also, Indira Gandhi, soon thereafter, was assassinated.
 
After Indira’s death the most capable successor to the post of P.M. in the cabinet was P.V. Narasimha Rao. He was a poet, an author, linguist, statesman, and a diplomat of considerable experience. He was, however, not to succeed Indira Gandhi as it would break the succession to dynasty. The cronies of Indira Gandhi, within hours of her death, while her body was still warm, before her cremation was complete, inducted her other son Rajiv Gandhi to the position of P.M.
 
Who was Rajiv Gandhi?
 
Rajiv Gandhi, who along with his brother went to England to study, married an Italian and was content to be a pilot. Although he was the older of the two, he was initially not a candidate for the throne. He was, in stark contrast with P.V. Rao, a mediocre student and showed no signs of any distinction. In the records of Government of India listing of the Prime Ministers of India, it is stated (with some pride) that Rajiv never was interested in “studies”- which were defined in this document as “mugging for the examinations,” disparagingly implying that sincere students interested in studies are “muggers” and the elite chosen to rule the country and hold the helm of the national affairs was a cut above them during his formative years for neglecting his “studies.”  Obviously, his concept of education and learning was limited to “Mugging.”

Two of the remarkable tragedies during his brief rule were interfering in the free elections in Kashmir sparking years of terrorism, and another, sending troops to Sri Lanka to control the Tamil Freedom Movement in which effort several Tamils were killed and which finally resulted in his assassination. He was also accused of promoting the retaliatory killings of Sikhs in Delhi after his mother’s assassination.
 
P.V.N Rao, a non-dynasty leader, succeeded Rajiv Gandhi, who for the first time in the history of Independent India led India to liberalizations of economy, partly because of his own political philosophy as well as efforts and partly propelled by the World Bank conditioning the liberalization. With all his brilliance, he was perhaps the most monumental of the P.M.s India has seen. He needs to be given his due credit for initiating the process for Indian “abhyudaya,” but sadly he shared the common trait with almost all other modern congress leaders, that of “corruption.” He was accused of corruption, tried, and disgraced. In this manner the history of India will, we are afraid, deface him rather than recognize him as the father of economically strong modern day India.
 
Cronies of Nehru Family, who themselves have no ability for leadership, ganged behind Sonia Gandhi, the wife of Rajiv, and elected her as the Head of the party. Anyone opposed to her was removed from the party for ‘disciplinary reasons’.
 
They arranged Darshan (holy viewing) of her by crowds in Delhi. To show that she was the leader, they arranged dancing before her residence. One man stood on a bus and declared that he would commit suicide if Sonia was not elected a premier (P.M.). But Sonia does not or cannot give press interviews or hold a press-conference. When she came to the U.S no press correspondent including any reporter of Indian press was allowed to talk to her for the fear of exposing her.  Her only claim for leadership, – in fact entitlement, – is that she is the daughter-in-law of Indira Gandhi and the latter died in her lap! When B.J.P Government fell, she claimed the post of premier but because of certain constitutional challenges she was made to withdraw her application by the President Abdul Kalam, for which he is paying a price of not being supported by her party for the second term.
 
Although she is not the Prime Minister, she acts as one, by sitting next to the current Prime Minister.  Virtually she is in control.
 
Sonia has a son and a daughter, both of whom are spoken for leadership. A congress leader in A.P. recently called for Sonia’s son to be elected as the leader of the party. That is where the Nehru Dynasty stands at the moment.  The Indian media have been wooing Sonia’s son and daughter for many years now and building for last many years the groundwork for her succession. Thus the dynasty will be perpetuated regardless what the people want or by asserting that the dynasty is what the people actually want.
 
 
Mini Demonarchies of India:

 
If the dynasty is acceptable at the center, where, because of the distance from the states mystery can be maintained, the process can be effective in the states as well. In Andhra, N.T. Rama Rao was succeeded by his son-in-law and new attempt is made to induct his son into politics. Laalu Prasad Yadav of Bihar went to jail on corruption charges and his wife kept the court and held the fort until he returned. M.G. Ramachandran was the Tamilnadu Chief Minister succeeded by his wife Janaki Ramachandran and the “other woman” (his mistress) Jayalalitha succeeded the latter claiming that she was the wronged woman (Wikipedia). (Shashi Tarror in New York Times).  We have the other established case of Sheik Abdullah succeeded by his son Farooq in Kashmir, and in Orissa Navin Patnaik succeeded his father Biju.  In Tamil Nadu, Karunanidhi is trying to anoint his son Stalin as his successor and grooming his daughter of a second wife to be a Central Minister. In Maharashtra, Sharad Pawar of Nationalist Congress Party is grooming his daughter by making her a member of Rajyasabha. Even in Shivasena of Maharashtra aspiring to establish national presence two rivaling mini-dynasties have recently emerged.  So the phenomenon of using democracy to build dynasties keeps on going.  This is also the plight of many other fifty some political parties that are emulating the Congress party or UPA.  The phenomenon is also seen on the Bollywood scene.  That brings us to closing the circle by asking the question: Is monarchy in the eyes of the beholder because of the deep-seated fascination for the same in the population of the immature democracies or are there small groups who are exploiting the fascination for monarchy in the immature population to gain and retain the power in some influential families by manipulating the population at large and by manipulating the political system they call democracy?
 
 
WHAT IS IN FUTURE FOR INDIA?
 
The people of India despite all the abuses they suffered under the political systems of the British and the succeeding Indian aristocracy represented by Congress is resilient. Over 70% of Indian electorate vote compared to about 50% in the U.S.  The liberalization of economy has changed the picture of India rapidly. As Indira Gandhi feared the rise of Janata Party because of the emergence of a large middle class, entrepreneurship is rising, foreign investment and urbanization is changing the political landscape of India very rapidly with expanding middle class. The state does not control the fate of people, not so much as it did before. While the power is in the same segment of population still, challenge to it is bound to come. 

It is no longer easy to amend the constitution as no one party is likely to have absolute majority in the foreseeable future. Once the hold of the “Congress” is gone, because of the inability to dole out patronage, the power lost will never be regained by Congress or UPA. Thus in Bengal, congress could not defeat Communist party for the last 30 years. 

At least in India communists did not practice demonarchy as in North Korea! In the state of U.P from which nine of thirteen prime ministers were elected, a power house of politics, congress was the distant third. In Tamilnadu, congress has no hope of returning to power but content to court the regional party for alliance. The rise of regional parties according academic politicians in the U.S Universities is leading to speculation that India may break away and disintegrate like Yugoslavia and this issue will be discussed further in a sequel to this, a future article.

Because of all this it is imperative and important to support the National parties which were built by the sacrifices of so many great leaders, be it Congress, Communist, or BJP.  It is, therefore, inappropriate for the leaders of B.J.P to argue that Sonia is the problem of Congress party alone and it is an internal matter for the Congress party. Who leads a National party and by what process is of National Importance. If such national party retains power term after term, it is a reflection of immature democracy and affects every Indian’s image. 

Demonarchy cannot be allowed to replace democracy in India. It is up to the major parties to reexamine their mode of thinking and advance democracy. Why do the parties proliferate? Why did Congress split into two [Congress (O) and Congress (I)], and Communists also into two separate parties ( CPI and CPI(M))? The answer lies in the unfortunate fact that in India democratic thinking, tolerance of dissent, and respect for minority opinion were never practiced as a part of the Indian political culture, for just conducting elections on large scale is misconstrued as democracy and thus, mature democracy is a whole new culture for India. In the name of party discipline, anyone criticizing the leader or his policy is removed.

This is not any different than the Communist parties of Soviet Union or China. Meanwhile, if the youth of the country learns to distinguish between propaganda and truth, rhetoric and relevance, democracy can be secured and demonarchy can be averted.  In short, the youth of India should reflect how the ruling party in India of billion people is beholden to a foreigner (Italian) with Mafia connections such as with Ottavio Quattrocchi, after the country being ruled by the British for 200 years.  Regardless of political affiliation, all Indians, and even Indians without any political inclinations or ambition, would find this state of affairs an embarrassment.  Only a Pollyanna in Politics would justify it as a reflection of broadmindedness of the Indians and take pride in such picture. Source: http://www.india-forum.com/articles/5406/1/De%92mo-narchy-Of-Democratic-Republic-of-India—2

Congress Dynasty @ http://indiasecular.wordpress.com/2007/10/05/congress-dynasty-matrix/

How India is being lost @ http://www.india-forum.com/articles/4072/1/How-India-is-being-Lost

Academic mafia @ http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=195&page=4

Readers’ Comments:

The Congress Dynasty is a reality: starting from the Motilal Nehru to Jawahar Lal Nehru to Indira Gandhi to Rajiv Gandhi…..to eventually transferring to Italian-born Sonia Gandhi which she again wants to pass on to Rahul Gandhi. We still have to see the son or daughter of a BJP leader to get benefit of Indian politics thru dynasty. It hasn’t
happened yet, regardless of false speculations of Congress Party.

11 Comments

Filed under Corruption in Indian Govt., world news

** The British ‘caste system’

The British ‘caste system’ is more prevalent than the Indian

by Edward Hamala

 

ImageIn response to the letter by Roger Williams captioned “The Rig Veda does refer to caste” (07.07.23) I thought I might share a few points with your readers.

The Indian “caste system” that has so outraged Mr. Roger Williams, makes me wonder if he is equally outraged by the British “caste system” that is even more prevalent, although it is well hidden and “invisible” in the British and some European societies, where the nobility still exist, than it is in India today, where all noble titles have been abolished.

I would like to ask Mr. Williams when objecting to birthrights why has he failed to raise the same objection to the British Nobility and the Landed Gentry’s birthright, inheriting their title, social status while they are also guaranteed perpetual political power by inheriting a peer-ship and a seat in the British House of Lords, the highest legislative body of the land?

Few of us believe the existence of a truly egalitarian society in the west today or anywhere for that matter!When was the last time that Mr. Williams had a drink at the local pub with Lord Spencer? Or had tea with Prince Phillip?

Did you know that the English nobility are distinctly noticeable by their education and grooming in institutions such as Wetherby, Ludgrove, and Eton or the Royal Academy at Sandhurst? They even speak a different language, the King’s English, free from colloquialism and dialects distinctly separating them, and distinguishing them from ordinary commoners, as soon as they open their mouths. May I also remind you that the Indian Social Structure as it was depicted in the Vedas Millenniums ago, made it an edict to leave Tribals and Adivasis alone and not to impose Hindu religion, culture or values on them.The word “caste” my friend is an English word! The Sanskrit word for “caste” is “Varna” and it means vocation or occupation and does not mean “caste” as it does in the English interpretation or translation of the term!Likewise, “untouchable” meant not to go near them, don’t touch them, don’t intermarry with them and don’t corrupt their culture don’t try to conform them. Leave them alone!The unfortunate thing was that Mahatma Gandhi was also British educated, trained as a lawyer and had little or no knowledge about the ancient Vedic philosophy, history or culture. What little Gandhi knew about Vedic philosophy was mostly thought to him by Vinoba Bhave, an avid freedom fighter, a devoted supporter of the Mahatma who was a Hindu monk and a highly educated Brahman who among other things spoke 14 languages.It was Vinoba Bhave who connected Gandhi’s political views with Vedic values and philosophy that gained such a wide appeal and the support of the Indian masses. If Gandhi would have had a better grasp of Vedic Philosophy he would have been able to counter many of these British myths and instead of being an apologist he could have challenged and defeated the British, the most classist society, at their own game.Let me ask you, Mr. Williams, what modern country that you know of today still have primitive tribals living undisturbed, “uncivilized” and untouched by their society living around them? As they do in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands of India? Did you know that these islands are off limits to all Indian citizens, to protect these tribals?Is it done to discriminate against the tribals as “untouchables” or is it done to protect them?

The State of Assam, was a similar tribal area until it got overran by zealous Christian Missionaries that have destroyed their social fibre and their culture.
Westerners can’t seem to resist the temptation of trying to impose their political and social values and religions on other cultures!
How many societies does Mr. Williams know, where a group of refugees arrived and sought refuge as the Jews did in Kerala, India in 70 AD and were given sanctuary and freedom to practice their religion. This community lived and prospered in India without anyone trying to convert them and many returned to their homeland when the State of Israel was created!
The same holds true for the Parsi refugees arriving from Persia when the forceful Muslim conversion was taking place there and they are still practicing their own ancient religion as Zoroastrians and no one tried to convert them.
Recently, a large number of Tibetians arrived in India along with the Dalai Lama and they were all received graciously and were given sanctuary.
I suggest Mr. Williams should ask the Australian aboriginals or the American Indians if they would prefer to be untouched by their foreign invaders or if they preferred to be forced to conform to an alien culture that was imposed on them, by forcefully removing their children to place them into Christian institutions where violence and sexual abuse was rampant.
It has destroyed their self esteem, traditions and culture. The Eastern Indian social structure was designed that different castes served each other, each with a distinct duty to perform for the benefit of the whole of society.
It was a farmer’s duty to teach his son to be a good farmer and the merchant’s to teach his son his craft, while the warrior was trained to be the protector and defender of all………..It is also noteworthy that governance was the duty of the Kshatryas not to rule by whims and despotism as it was the rulers privilege in the “civilized west” but to rule in accordance with the Vedic principles.

Yet the highest caste, above them all was not the Kings who were given the highest social position. It was the Brahmans who were the custodians of all the Vedic Sciences and knowledge and their duty was to teach and to preserve the knowledge of Vedas.

The teachers, the priests, the doctors, the scientists and philosophers the poets and the writers were all Brahmans whose duty also included giving moral guidance to the Kings! It is simplistic to believe that a farmer or a potter would be capable to teach their children nuclear science or medicine or the Vedas!

This educational system assured the proper training and apprenticeship of all with a life time of gainful employment for all the participants.

This, Mr. Williams, has established an interesting value system in India, alien to the west! The most valuable asset was not money or power as it is today in the western value system! It was knowledge and wisdom that took decades to learn and a life time to acquire! And it was the society’s duty to support the Brahmans to afford their study providing food, clothing and shelter to them.

I am sure Mr. Williams is familiar with the existence of the “unwashed” wretched underclass in Dickens’s Britain or Victor Hugo’s France as it did exist in most of Europe……… Well, such a thing did not exist in India and these facts are well documented by historians all the way back to Alexander the Great’s visit to India and was minutely recorded by Greek Historians such as Arrian, Diodorus, Plutarch and Strabo, accompanying Alexander. One thing these historians also commented on, was the absence of slavery that was an integral part of Hellenic culture!

Today, most Indians are alienated and mostly ignorant about their culture, the Vedas and their history, and few understand the Vedic philosophy or its teachings or the highly advanced science it encompasses. They know little else about Hinduism, besides the ritualistic traditions. This Vedic social structure was put in place at the time when in the rest of the world slavery was rampant and pivotal to every European Empire!

Don’t forget slavery was widely practiced in the United States until the Civil War to the 1860’s and desegregation only started in the 1960’s and the prejudices still exist until today.

So I think, Mr. Williams your indignation is somewhat ill placed and perhaps it would serve a better purpose if you dealt with more dire social issues that you may be more knowledgeable about, and better qualified to deal with. url: http://hinduamerica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=206&Itemid=9

1) Europe’s Civilising Mission @ http://www.neurope.eu/articles/87642.php 

Invading the SACRED @ http://worldmonitor.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/invading-the-sacred/

Plot to Denigrate India @ https://indiaview.wordpress.com/2007/07/29/dalit-twist-to-textbook-row/

Invading the Sacred @ http://worldmonitor.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/invading-the-sacred/

 

 

 
 
 

1 Comment

Filed under Caste System

** Plot to denigrate India

The big plot to denigrate India 

By R. Balashankar

Can perversity get lower than this? In the name of religious studies, a syndicate of scholars in America is spewing muck on Hinduism.

Religions In South Asia (RISA), a department under the American Academy of Religion (AAR), has been sponsoring studies for years now to deride Hinduism.

Our gods and goddesses like Ganesha, Shiva, Parvati, Laxmi and Kali, our rituals like Upanayana our saints like Sri Ramakrishna Paramahansa and scriptures, Mahabharata, Ramayana and Gita all have come under such distasteful sexual connotation and nauseating voyeurism that one begins to wonder if it can at all be called academics.

And for the first time ever, the Hindus are replying them in an organised, cohesive manner. A recently published book Invading the SACRED   : An Analysis of Hinduism Studies in America has documented the Hindu response to this academic distortion. ( http://worldmonitor.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/invading-the-sacred/ )

Edited by Dr. Krishnan Ramaswamy, a scientist, Dr. Antonio T. de Nicolas, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the State University of New York, Stony Brook and Aditi Banerjee, a practicing attorney in New York, the book opens our eyes to the way the western mind perceives us.

The book exposes how and why the image of India as a culture of series of abuses like sati, dowry, caste conflicts and worship of grotesque deities has persisted. This is not the result of mere personal prejudices but is the result of a sustained, well-entrenched institutional mechanism. “Starting in well-respected, ostensibly ‘research based’ but culturally parochial halls of American and western academe, these images filter down into mainstream western culture where they acquire an incredible force in shaping how India is seen.” (p 2, Why this book is important).

While the American business schools view India as a nation throbbing with creativity, the academia views it as chaotic, backward looking and negative. 

Organiser cannot and will not repeat what the American scholars on Hinduism have said for which they received Ph.Ds and awards because they are lewd, below the dignity of any self-respecting Hindu to read.

In this scheme of the westerners, the Indian scholars are carefully recruited into, in the lure of foreign scholarships, degrees and placements. The Indians into the club are chosen carefully. They are the traditional looking ones—women in saree and big bindi and men in the traditional dhoti and kurta.

Says Rajiv Malhotra, one of the early persons to respond to this academic fraud, that “while Chinese, Japanese, Tibetan, Korean, Arabs and even the various European cultures such as Irish, Italian and French have actively funded and managed American academic representation of their cultural identities, Indian-Americans have been largely content with building temples, while their cultural portrayal in the education system and in the media has been abandoned to the tender mercies of the dominant western traditions.’

The book extensively quotes from Malhotra’s RISA Lila-1, Wendy’s Child Syndrome an essay that exposed the games that the Religions In South Asia played under the leadership of Wendy Doniger, a past president of the AAR. 

She is the leader of the syndicate working on the anti-Hinduism campaign and is now the director of a centre in the University of Chicago and is part of the decision making in several academic bodies.

She is influential and an “acknowledged” Sanskrit translator. Her translations are relied upon as the main source by many students of religious studies throughout America.

The studies sponsored by and under her have this to say. Ganesha and Shiva were in a war because of jealousy over Parvati. That Ganesha’s tusk represents a limp penis. That ‘tantra’ is a sexual exercise and Devi is a female with male genital, representing extreme sexuality, that Ramakrishna Paramahansa was a pedophile. We now know where M.F. Hussain got his inspiration from.

An allegedly ‘well-researched’ book on Paramahansa, written by Jeffrey Kripal, who stayed at the Ramakrishna Mutt in Calcutta to research for the book, shook the disciples of the mutt so much that they were stunned to silence initially. A student of Doniger, Kripal won an award for his book from the AAR and the Encyclopaedia Britannica listed it as the best reference on Ramakrishna.

Swami Tyagananda of the Mutt then wrote a rebuttal to this book and asked Kripal to annex it in his book, for the sake of academic ethics, but he refused. The normal course in which this material should be available—journals, university press, appointment committees, curricula development and conference—are controlled by the Wendy syndicate so that Swami Tyagananda’s rebuttal is not available for either purchase in bookstores or in universities and libraries for reference. (p. 111)

Microsoft’s Encarta encyclopaedia, one of the most widely referred sites by children, had a section on Hinduism, contributed by Doniger.

Sankrant Sahu, an independent scholar and a manager in Microsoft pointed out the biases it contained. Finally, Microsoft withdrew the entry and replaced it with a version authored by Arvind Sharma, from McGill University, Montreal.

Stanley Kurtz, an anthropologist in Indian studies, says in his book Vishnu on Freud’s Desk, co-edited incidentally by the infamous Kirpal that the mothers in India do not have “a western-style loving, emotional partnership with their babies.” (p 60)

Islam, however, does not receive this treatment from the western scholars.

They in fact struggle to reinterpret Islam and give it an emphasis of higher learning despite resistance from within Islam. “The western academic repacking and facelift of Islam is certainly a good project … Unfortunately, a different standard is being applied in Hinduism, despite the fact that its history and liberty of texts cry out loudly and clearly in favour of multiple layers of meanings and interpretations.” Probably, terror works on academics and Hindus might learn an underlying meaning in this.

In all the distorted writings on Hinduism, the Hindu scholars see the hidden hand and thread of Christianity running.

Dr. Balagangadhara, Director of the Research Centre of Comparative Science of Cultures in Ghent University, Belgium, says, “Christianity spreads in two ways: through conversion and through secularization.”

While we in India are directly familiar with the first way, we are also familiar but probably not aware of the latter way.

What secularization means he says, “is to de-de-Christianize Christianity… Christian doctrines spread wide and deep (beyond the confines of Christian believers) in the society dressed up in ‘secular’ (that is, not in recognizably ‘Christian’) clothes.” (p 129). That is the reason how we have a whole population of “secular” Hindus.

Any attempt to counter this academic cartel is branded vociferously as ‘Hindutva’, ‘saffron’ and ‘fundamentalism.’

Commenting on the kind of introductory lessons prescribed in courses, the book asks if the reverse is applied to Christianity, for example if we have an introductory lesson on that religion which states that “Catholic churches are notorious for all kinds of extreme practices from rape of children to official protection for the rapists over the decades.” Would a lesson like this ever be allowed in India, though all these can be proved by supporting data? (p 57)

For someone who has made a living out of Hinduism, Wendy Doniger accused the Hindu right in India of “shoving Sanskrit down the throat” of Indians. T. Desai, a student of University of Chicago, relates an anecdote on Wendy. While attending a lecture by her on Mahabharata, he was amazed “how she lectured on Indian politics. I wonder if they also discuss Bush’s funding of faith based organizations in Latin classes … She even described the meeting between Arjuna and Indra, (son and father) when Indra places him in his lap and caresses his arm, as ‘homoerotic.” (p 465)

Martha Nussbaum, one of the so-called scholars of the Wendy team, said this about India in the presence of Amartya Sen, at a conference in Chicago recently, “Thinking about India is instructive to Americans, who in an age of terrorism can easily over-simplify pictures of the forces that threaten democracy…In India, the threat to democratic ideas comes not from a Muslim threat, but from Hindu groups.” (p 3). Could anything be more bizarre than this?

Sen is not known to have countered this either at that forum or later.

The book also has a section devoted to how the American media, both the mainstream and the regional, have treated the Hindu stories. How the Indian and Hindu scholars have been left aghast by the twists given in the article, for which quotes were taken from them.

Invading the SACRED gives voice to millions of Hindus world over who have been hearing and suffering the abuse of our religion.

The issue is now joined and joined well.

(Invading the Sacred, An Analysis of Hinduism Studies in America; Publisher: Rupa & Co. 7/16, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi 110 002; pp 545; price: Rs. 595)  http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=195&page=2

————————-More Below: —————————

‘Dalit’ twist to textbook row

– Sandhya Jain

India’s internal affairs are increasingly witnessing an interventionist American nexus.  Even as the Supreme Court asks the Union Government to justify giving so-called ‘Dalit Christians’ a share in the quota for Scheduled Castes, it may be instructive to see how US policy has inveigled itself into our domestic discourse, while maintaining severe pressure upon its own Hindu citizens of Indian origin.
 
The manner in which these issues play out is enlightening. Harvard professor Michael Witzel’s supporters in the California textbook battle include two evangelical bodies: Dalit Freedom Network and Dalit Solidarity Forum in the USA. DFN president Joseph D’Souza also heads the All-India Christian Council; he appealed to a US Congressional Committee to get ‘Scheduled Caste’ status for India’s ‘Dalit’ Christians.
 
This utilisation of converts by overseas co-religionists for covert agendas fuels Hindu anger against conversions. The DFN’s mission is to partner Dalits in their “quest for religious freedom” (obviously these are non-Hindu Dalits), and includes upholding the “legacy of Mother Teresa who showed god’s love in word and deed… and to follow the command of Jesus Christ who called us to be ‘the salt of the earth’ and ‘the light of the world’.” Its board of directors includes only two Indians, both Christians: Mr Joseph D’Souza and Mr Kumar Swamy. The rest are white Americans, namely, Ms Melody Divine, a former adviser to anti-Hindu Arizona Congressman Trent Franks; Mr Peter Dance; Mr Bob Beltz, Ms Nanci Ricks, Mr Richard Sweeney, Mr Cliff Young, Mr Ken Heulitt and Mr Gene Kissinger (chairman).
 
The DSF-USA is run by the Rector of St Alban’s Church, Oakland, New Jersey. It works closely with Christian Aid, which sent a fax to the California State Board of Education (SBE) from the Church premises, but tries to conceal the fact that it is a proselytising group. Mr Lars Martin Fosse, a signatory of Prof Witzel’s letter to the SBE, appealed to Mr John Dayal of the All-India Christian Council for assistance in their fight with the Hindu community that is demanding proper representation of its faith in American textbooks. Sure enough, DFN and DSF-USA jumped into the fray.
 
California Parents for the Equalisation of Educational Materials (CAPEEM), which is challenging Prof Witzel’s role as content-review expert in the history-social science textbook review and adoption process, has discovered his deep involvement with evangelical groups like DFN, which can be proven through a trail of e-mails. Prof Witzel was active in erasing information about DFN’s missionary nature on the free Internet encyclopaedia, Wikipedia. DFN director Nanci Ricks said she did not want the agency to be known as a ‘missions’ organisation.
 
CAPEEM learnt Prof Witzel advised DFN how to intervene in the public hearing on the textbook adoption process in California. Here DFN directors misrepresented themselves as a group of Dalits by suppressing their Christian identity. Prof Shiva G Bajpai, the independent expert engaged by the California SBE to debate every Hindu edit/correction with Prof Witzel in a private meeting on January 6, 2006, found that Prof Witzel and his cohorts in the US and India did not want to rectify the depiction of India and Hindu dharma in textbooks.
 
As Witzel and his friends are firmly entrenched in American academia, few established scholars dared challenge their version of Indian history and culture. Prof Bajpai could wrestle more than 75 per cent of the desired changes solely on the basis of his professional acumen and status as the only historian of ancient India in California.

Prof Bajpai now believes that winning the war against the demeaning portrayal of India and Hindu dharma necessitates the rise of a new class of academics sensitive to the mission of reclaiming agency over Hindu studies and early Indian history and culture.

This also involves cracking the formidable nexus between the establishment academics and publishing industry and media, which has hitherto been virtually immune to criticism and reform.

 
America’s Hindu community has been dissatisfied with the final changes approved in 2006 as these have failed to rectify material errors about Hindu religion, culture and history. After inputs from myriad sources about Prof Witzel’s biases, CAPEEM approached the courts to subpoena him to place on record his letters/e-mail exchanges with textbook publishers about the (textbook revision) Adoption Process; with the California Board; with Stanley Wolpert, James Heitzman, Shiva Bajpai, or Steve Farmer about the adoption process; postings to the Indo-Eurasian Research List; exchanges with third parties (like DFN) about the adoption process; exchanges with racial purist Roger Pearson or anyone associated with the Journal of Indo-European Studies; exchanges with Arun Vajpayee (the mysterious ‘student’ who asked Prof Witzel to stop the acceptance of changes in the textbooks); communications passing on edits/revisions of Hindu groups; transmitting textbooks (or portions) revised as part of the adoption process; exchanges with Harvard University regarding the adoption process; communications about the purpose of the Indo-Eurasian Research List; and so on.
 
CAPEEM believes Prof Witzel’s conduct during the adoption process is central to its case as he (and others) were ‘hostile’ academic advisers and engaged in secret manoeuvres. A full disclosure of the records sought could reveal procedural improprieties by them. While the California Department of Education (CDE) barred Prof Bajpai from any contact with publishers, Prof Witzel enjoyed this freedom.
 
His exchanges with DFN are relevant to show anti-Hindu bias as many of its key figures are unabashedly antagonistic towards Hindu dharma. Prof Kancha Ilaiah, who signed a DFN letter to the CDE, claims he “hate(s) Hinduism” and calls it “a cult of worshipping certain violent figures… Hinduism is basically a spiritual fascist cult”. Prof Witzel’s exchanges with Roger Pearson, in whose journal his article was published, and certain Internet postings also establish deep prejudice.
 
The flip side of the California debate is a misconceived effort to associate American perceptions of India with the fabulous wealth of the Indian-American community, which is “buying protection” in its adopted land through bankrolling candidates for congressional and presidential elections; and the desire of corporate America to invest in India’s blooming economy. This could be the thin edge of the wedge. Any attempt to accord primacy to secular education and employment (Mammon) is counter to the Hindu ethos wherein the hierarchy of values (varnas) ranks mercantile and wealth-generating groups (Vaishya varna) as third, well after spiritual preceptors (Brahmin) and those who uphold the power of the state (Kshatriya).   Source below :

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist&file_name=jain%2Fjain120.txt&writer=jain

Motivated Indologists @ https://indiaview.wordpress.com/2007/12/26/communal-clash-13-arrested/

Invading the SACRED @ http://worldmonitor.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/invading-the-sacred/

Merit  vs. Quota @ http://ia.rediff.com/money/2006/apr/12ram.htm

6 Comments

Filed under Political News

** SONGS: Bollywood Videos

SONGS —– DOWN MEMORY LANE

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Vande  Mataram  – Lata Mangeshkar

Aao bachon tumhe dikhayein

SHAHEED(Bhagat Singh)- Ay Watan

Kar chale hum fida @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHh2z4AaCss&feature=related

Zindagi Mout na Banjaye @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xm-Zi7kMmc&feature=related

Bharat ne zero diya @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-PvyZlNtWQ&feature=related

Mann Tarpat Hari Darshan

jago mohan pyare

…………………………………………….Added 10/8/08………………………………………………………..

Ae Katibe-Taqdir (K.L. Sehgal) @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=GTI0LHHypbA&feature=related

Jab dil hi toot gaya @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=DHzaJFb3RYE&feature=related

Do naina matware @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz_Rd1jYIew&feature=related

Awaaz de kahan hai (Noor jahan) @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=tfPymO1it1E

Jawan hai Muhabbat @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=VQsGaIpY-3g&feature=related

Udankhatole mein ud jaun @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=TkhIOEpqAho&feature=related

ANMOL GHADI @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=uIJQbDtj4pg&feature=related

Begum Akhtar @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=RpmKZPJe7l4&feature=related

Begum Akhtar-2 @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=4fwP-bbQ44w&feature=related

Apni kahani chor jaa @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8YDHqpDjSLg&feature=related

Tadbir se bigri @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=nlnjEfB9lkI&feature=related

Duniya walon se door @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=aMiXD-RD7Yo&feature=related

Andaz song @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0AAA3LIPws&feature=related

Khyalon mein kisi ke @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=CN2kDfIiBbA&feature=related

Yeh raat yeh chandni @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=WRfVXUk9kFw&feature=related

Tu ganga ki mouj @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=oj3t5jOTYmw&feature=related

Insaf ka mandir @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=0XKMX31cass&feature=related

Mehfil mein jal uthi shama @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=e8eqDmhArrs&feature=related

Ae meri zindagi aaj rat @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8YseWMKIgPs&feature=related

Madhubala Basant 1942 @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=wawdQKs7VJ0&feature=related

Ek nazar @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=3uzqIjf2CRE&feature=related

Bigri bananewale @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=G4hOC0Gwo9w&feature=related

Nukta chi hai ghame-dil @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=PUPc87mIsfc&feature=related

Master Madan-1@ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Pg-nCFES9dk&feature=related

Master Madan-2 @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=5vHg5AWQ0d8&feature=related

Habib Wali Muhammad @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=tiEL_sSsQDA&feature=related

Mallika Pukhraz @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=5TjPoHnzWbw&feature=related

Humayun song @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=0WMkhTKIQno&feature=related

Kisi ki muskrahaton pe @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=awelkdyDTBc&feature=related

Woh chand khila @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=XxiGz4xhVs4&feature=related

Jap jap jap re @ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=0udhOQMhPHw&feature=related

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Aishwarya Rai(Nimbooda) Yaadein-Hrithik and Kareena

New Addition below: @@@@@@@@@@@@

Mat bhool are Insaan @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oy5_qacyhHs&NR=1

Chahe Paas ho chahe door @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPv9w1Bhyyw&feature=related

Yeh chaman hamara apna hai @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbgAWrlI-SA&feature=related

Nanhe Munne bacche teri mutthi mein @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYFgXUc_Hq4&feature=related

Choro kal ki baaten @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0PKCMhFdjk&feature=related

Chalo chale maa @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BjkbX_3N-o&feature=related

Laga chunri mein daag @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efh7sCK6njA&feature=related

Baat baat pe rutho na @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayEVN0je4Xk&feature=related

Jab liya hath mein hath @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhEz0gM-fJg&feature=related

Teri shokh nazar ka ishara @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axK_0p4bdjg&feature=related

Rang dil ki dharkan @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co9dlS7CFV8&feature=related

Kabhi tanhayion mein @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-FuMAFtw9o&feature=related

Raat ne kya kya khwab dikhaye @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYDgIfSjSeI&feature=related

Tere phoolon se bhi pyar @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLOAcOPwpE0&feature=related

Hai kali kali ke lab par @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xlm78C3720&feature=related

Dhalti jaye raat @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaIi_nD4UFE&feature=related

Yaad suhani teri @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAoWuLMcG8Q&feature=related

Akeli mat jayiyo @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gv1B2ZFyIUI&feature=related

Aaj duniya suhani hai @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ9rBN3aQkk&feature=related

Taron ki zuban par @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zilUZLM0pY8&feature=related

Jeet hi lenge baazi @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmddEDxEeqE&feature=related

Mein Tumhi se poochati hun @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mgSZtFmRgo&feature=related

Kahan le chale ho musafir @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd554_KrpgE&feature=related

Yaad rkhna chand taron @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9lLM3BW9ic&feature=related

Aapki nazron ne samjha @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz4OB0n6Juo&feature=related

Dil pukare aa ja @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEGTTvdr1_8&feature=related

Pyar par bas nahi @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRNgC5whfpM&feature=related

Lagi choote na @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHb7_7y_R24&feature=related

Sajan sang neha laga @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tnpj2zpdZM8&feature=related

Tu pyar ka sagar hai @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QM8ohMGneY&feature=related

Kahan jaa raha hai @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOLElBiG7pk&feature=related

O saba kehna mere dildar ko @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRk0T7Wq81s&feature=related

Bhala karne wale @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJOp9SXh5lA&feature=related

O chand jahan wo jayen @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGKxtqOze5M&feature=related

Aaa gupshup pyar karen @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui3menJ0qyA&feature=related

Beimaan balma maan ja @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdzborjAJ6g&feature=related

Bigdi banane wale @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4hOC0Gwo9w&feature=related

Yeh khamoshiyan @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXqZGEnrP40&feature=related

Aayiye meherban @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiQ3a-knw4I&feature=related

Mehfil mein jal uthi shama @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8eqDmhArrs&feature=related

Yeh rat phir na ayegi @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIWmNvaBtME&feature=related

Ayega aanewala @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03DXW_rV54U&feature=related

Piya jaya mein sanay gayo @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoCZJqHeJMk&feature=related

Man re tu kahe na dheer dhare @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvW7LbUidao&feature=related

Muhammat zinda rehti hai @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nk7zr9tvA9E&feature=related

Khyalon mein kisi ke @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CN2kDfIiBbA&feature=related

O janewale mudke @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vy6jtwxvS_c&feature=related

Yeh raat yeh chandni @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRfVXUk9kFw&feature=related

Tu ganga ki mouj @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj3t5jOTYmw&feature=related

Man tarpat Hari darshan ko @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyLdgQinxpY&feature=related

Insaan bano @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CfvB_8HI4Q&feature=related

Zara samne to aa chaliye @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCVma4HI8uY&feature=related

Qaid mein hai bulbul @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYa8eihXCCI&feature=related

Lara lappa layi rakhda @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bfo4EtfL5R0&feature=related

Zindagi usi ki hai @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yf8C7swHZ0&feature=related

Main koi jhooth bolya @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlEEuNw-Kwc&feature=related

Teri zulphon se @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1NmnVppWiY&feature=related

Yeh zindagi ke mele @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnKBl5nCiE8&feature=related

Mangne se jo mout mil jati @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t18jkg-RK4U&feature=related

Dil jalta hai jalne de @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gma4cQhKhUM&feature=related

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ New above @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Ankhon mein tumhare @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouHrHP0ErVc&feature=related

Chand chupa aur taare doobe @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKfw-yEDud4&feature=related

Woh chand khila @  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8aRW5Lq0dE&feature=related

Bhula nahi dena ji @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxyMw46KpMA&feature=related

Bigdi Bananewale @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4hOC0Gwo9w&feature=related

Ek Nazar @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uzqIjf2CRE&feature=related

Nukta Chi Hai Ghamedil @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUPc87mIsfc&feature=related

Vrindavan ka Krishna @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhqneAj-EQI&feature=related

Tu Pyar ka Sagar @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QM8ohMGneY&feature=related

Hamko Manki Shakti @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RLOuiX6_6A&feature=related

Nanhe Munne Bacche @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUrIJxCcXnA&feature=related

Ae Malik tere Bande @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zocUMuPcWXA&feature=related

Itni shakti Dena Daata @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w_P5Pr6eEQ&feature=related

Mera Joota Japani @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv9EzNethWM&feature=related

Tum mujhwe bhool bhi jao @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6BN6zE7IY0&feature=related

Payame-ishk Muhabbat @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIjmtbyfuP8&feature=related

Hai Kali kali ke lab par @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xlm78C3720&feature=related

Dhalti jaye raat @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaIi_nD4UFE&feature=related

Yeh mausam rangeen @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt7hLQzafL8&feature=related

Naa jane kahan tum the @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwPiPi1VRTE&feature=related

Mithi mithi baaton se @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obXObfJht6A&feature=related

Taron ki zuban @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zilUZLM0pY8&feature=related

Nigahe naaz se @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIUMtObbOC0&feature=related

Awaaz de kahan hai @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfPymO1it1E&feature=related

Phir tumhari yaad aayi @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-ApLA2I1nU&feature=related

Udankhatole pe ud jayun @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkhIOEpqAho&feature=related

Na bol pee pee more angna @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG733rSM0e4&feature=related

Aahen na bhari @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekQY-hNpDP0&feature=related

Aayega AANEWALA @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zjnG9bzNKg&feature=related

Abhi to mein jawan hun @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sj0S6FTTMw&feature=related

Kahan le chale ho @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd554_KrpgE&feature=related

Rasiya re manbasiya @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Uu9pcgTgdI&feature=related

Balma maane na @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrLezoJ8vfw&feature=related

Yaad rakhna chand taron @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9lLM3BW9ic&feature=related

Jeet hi lenge baazi @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmddEDxEeqE&feature=related

Mein tumhi se poochati hun @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suXitx8lR04&feature=related

Basti Basti Parbat Parbat @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtCsfOTVgSY&feature=related

Mera Naam Raju @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6EZLdggR5A&feature=related

Sitaro aaj to @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t81RJHD1XCg&feature=related

Kahe ko der lagai re @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_yzmkZfrZc&feature=related

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Tum Bin – chotti chotti ratein Original songChand Sifarish – Faana

Chhalkaye Jaam

Zindagi Etafak Hai

KHILTHE HEIN GUL YAHAA

Phool Aur Patthar

Ay dil-e-nadaan – Lata

zindagi pyar ka geet hai

Aap Ki Nazaron Ne – Lata

Main Zindagi Ka Saath

Dev Anand Yaad Kiya Dil ne

Hain Sabse madhur Wo Geet

“Khayalon Mein Kisi Ke” – Mukesh & Geeta Dutt

Dum Maro Dum

SOUTEN – zindagi pyar ka geet hai

Ay dil-e-nadaan – Lata – Film Song

Aap Ki Nazaron Ne – Lata

Dil Tera Deewana Hai Sanam

youn to hamne lakh haseen dekhe hai

Kahe Jhoom Jhoom Raat – Lata Mangeshkar

jawaniyan ye mast bin piye
03:22

Boy Friend Vintage Lata Mangeshkar

Vyjaythimala Pradeep kumar

Bol Re Kathputli – Lata Mangeshkar (Kathputli – 1957)

“Gujra Hua Zamana” – Lata Mangeshkar

“Zanan Zanzana Ke Apni Payal” – Lata Mangeshkar

Woh Chand Khila – Lata Mangeshkar (Anari – 1959)

Yeh Zindagi usi ki hain – Lata Mangeshkar (Anarkali – 1953)

Raja Ki Ayegi Baraat – Lata Mangeshkar – Aah

Dhire Dhire Chal Chand — Mohammad Rafi & Lata Mangeshkar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap0_DwnDjqw&mode=user&search=  taal pe jab yeh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jUBEBbhowE&mode=related&search= nimboda

*****************************

Do Sitaron Ka Zameen Par – Lata, Rafi (Kohinoor 1960)

madhuban mein radhika nache re

dilip and madhubala go to temple

Jab Raat Hai Aisi Matwali

Mehfil Me

Na shikwa hai Na milta Mushkil hai bahut Do din ke liye

Unse pyaar ho gaya Udhar tum haseen

Aayega Aane waala ( Mahal)

“Tum Rooth Ke Mat Jana ” – Asha Bhonsle & Mohammad Rafi

“Aap Yun Hi Agar Humse Milte Rahe” – Mohammad Rafi, Asha Bhosle

Mohabbat Zinda Rehati Hai –

Mohammad Rafi Jaan-E-Bahaar Husn Tera

Chhun chhun ghunghroo (Madhubala)

Aaj Kyon Humse Parda Hai (Sadhana)

Ye Mehlon Ye Taqton – PYAASA

Kahan Jaa Raha Hai – SEEMA

NAZRANA

Ghareeb Jaan Ke – Mohammed Rafi – [Azgar Khan]

Dunia Walon Say Door Jalne Walon Say Door

Babuji dhire chalna

Bhula Nahi Dena Je Bhula Nahi Dena

PUNJABI SONGS:

YouTube – BAJRAY DA SITTA (TV SPECIAL)

YouTube – MERA LOONG GAWACHA (DULARI)

YouTube – punjabi song,, hindi style

YouTube – Number One Punjabi

YouTube – Gidha (College Team) – Punjabi

YouTube – Punjabi Wedding Song (Bale Bale) – Bride & Prejudice

YouTube – New Years 2006 Gidha [FANTASTIC MUST WATCH]

YouTube – mehndi hai rachne wali

YouTube – mehndi laga ke rakhna

YouTube – Filmfare 2007- Rani Mukerji’s Performance

PUNJABI BELOW:

MERI CHUNNI DEAAN RESHMI (JATTI)

BAJRAY DA SITTA (TV SPECIAL)

MERA LOONG GAWACHA (DULARI)

Punjabi song in saraiki mela, zabardsat dance. waoo!

punjabi song,, hindi style

Number One Punjabi

Gidha (College Team) – Punjabi

Punjabi Wedding Song (Bale Bale) – Bride & Prejudice

New Years 2006 Gidha [FANTASTIC MUST WATCH]

mehndi hai rachne wali

mehndi laga ke rakhna

Rani Mukerji’s Performance

musarrat nazir

BOLIYAAN. – PUTT JATT DA. 1983

Gurdas Mann – Challa {FULL VERSION}

Punjabi Totay – Bush Chachu Da Interview

YouTube – PUnjabi Bush 4

Punjabi Totay – Bush Chachu Deh Andey

Punjabi Totay – Mr Marasi

Punjabi Totay – Husband Ah Gia

M nazir M nazir Mnazir Mnazir Mnazir

Mnazir Mnazir Mnazir Mnazir gori gori chaanani di

Masoom Chehra Ye Qatil Adayen – Rafi & Lata

Aaja Ke Intezaar Mein – Halaku – Rafi & Lata

Mohammad Rafi and Asha Bhosle

Mohammad Rafi and Sudha Malhotra

Do Lachhian

Ke Mein Jhooth Bolia

Shammi Shakila

Asha Bhosle

Asha Bhosle and Sudha Malhotra

Rajkumari – Classical (Asha Bhosle)

Yeh Raaten, Yeh Mausam – Asha, Kishore (Dilli Ka Thug 1958)

chod do aanchal

Aankhon Mein Kya Jee

achhaji main hari chalo

wahan kaun hai tera musafir jaye ga kahan

Hum Hain Rahi Pyar Ke

“Khayalon Mein Kisi Ke” – Mukesh & Geeta Dutt

YEH RAAT YEH CHAANDNI PHIR KAHAAN…

Dev Anand Chal ri sajni

Tujhe Jeevan ki Dor Se

Teen kanaster peet peet kar

dil jale tho jale

aye meri zindagi aaj rath jumale

Phaili Hui Hai Sapnon Ki

Yaad Aagayi Voh Nashili

TASVEER TERI DIL MEIN

TALAT MEHMOOD YEH NAYI NAYI PREET HAI

LEKE PEHLA PEHLA PYAR

TADBEER SE BIGDI HUI

BOOJH MERA KYA NAAM RE Go back to:  https://indiaview.wordpress.com

Site is updated periodically, check for more songs again.

1)++ http://ww.smashits.com/ads/samples/hindustandec2002frame.html

((http://ww.smashits.com/ads/samples/hindustandec2002frame.html))

2)++ http://www.bollyextreme.com/

((http://www.bollyextreme.com/album/2/Mohammad-Rafi-Collection.html))

3)++ http://ww.geetnet.com/

4)++ http://www.geetganga.org/

*** INDOWAVE @ http://indowave.tripod.com/

*****************************************************************************************
Vodpod videos no longer available.

WOW  BOLLYWOOD : DOWN  MEMORY  LANE

Vande Mataram/Matarm – Lata Mangeshkar

Aao bachon tumhe dikhayein

SHAHEED- Ay Watan

rang de basanti(video)

Bharat ki baat sunaata hoon

Mann Tarpat Hari Darshan

jago mohan pyare

New Addition below: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Tum mujhwe bhool bhi jao @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6BN6zE7IY0&feature=related

Payame-ishk Muhabbat @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIjmtbyfuP8&feature=related

Hai Kali kali ke lab par @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xlm78C3720&feature=related

Dhalti jaye raat @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaIi_nD4UFE&feature=related

Yeh mausam rangeen @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt7hLQzafL8&feature=related

Na jane kahan tum the @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwPiPi1VRTE&feature=related

Mithi mithi baaton se @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obXObfJht6A&feature=related

Taron ki zuban @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zilUZLM0pY8&feature=related

Nigahe naaz se @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIUMtObbOC0&feature=related

Awaaz de kahan hai @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfPymO1it1E&feature=related

Phir tumhari yaad aayi @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-ApLA2I1nU&feature=related

Udankhatole pe ud jayun @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkhIOEpqAho&feature=related

Na bol pee pee more angna @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG733rSM0e4&feature=related

Aahen na bhari @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekQY-hNpDP0&feature=related

Aayega AANEWALA @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zjnG9bzNKg&feature=related

Abhi tou mein jawan @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sj0S6FTTMw&feature=related

Kahan le chale ho @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd554_KrpgE&feature=related

Rasiya re manbasiya @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Uu9pcgTgdI&feature=related

Yaad rakhna chand taron @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9lLM3BW9ic&feature=related

Jeet hi lenge baazi @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmddEDxEeqE&feature=related

Mein tumhi se poochati hun @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suXitx8lR04&feature=related

Basti Basti Parbat Parbat @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtCsfOTVgSY&feature=related

Mera Naam Raju @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6EZLdggR5A&feature=related

Sitaro aaj to @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t81RJHD1XCg&feature=related

Kahe ko der lagai re @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_yzmkZfrZc&feature=related

Jai Maa Sheronwali @ http://www.youtube.com
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Chanakya -Video ————- Mahabharata -Video

yeh jo mohabbat hain- Kati Patang

Mere Dushman Tu Meri

Chhalkaye Jaam

Zindagi Etafak Hai

KHILTHE HEIN GUL YAHAA

Phool Aur Patthar

Ay dil-e-nadaan – Lata

zindagi pyar ka geet hai

Aap Ki Nazaron Ne – Lata

Main Zindagi Ka Saath

Dev Anand Yaad Kiya Dil ne

Hain Sabse madhur Wo Geet

***********************************************************************

Dum Maro Dum

Ay dil-e-nadaan – Lata – Film Song

YouTube – Aap Ki Nazaron Ne – Lata

YouTube – Dil Tera Deewana Hai Sanam

youn to hamne lakh haseen dekhe hai

Kahe Jhoom Jhoom Raat – Lata Mangeshkar

jawaniyan ye mast bin piye

Boy Friend Vintage Lata Mangeshkar

Vyjaythimala Pradeep kumar

Bol Re Kathputli – Lata Mangeshkar (Kathputli – 1957)

“Gujra Hua Zamana” – Lata Mangeshkar

“Zanan Zanzana Ke Apni Payal” – Lata Mangeshkar

Woh Chand Khila – Lata Mangeshkar (Anari – 1959)

Yeh Zindagi usi ki hain – Lata Mangeshkar (Anarkali – 1953)

Raja Ki Ayegi Baraat – Lata Mangeshkar – Aah

Dhire Dhire Chal Chand — Mohammad Rafi & Lata Mangeshkar

****your favorite link: http://indiasecular.wordpress.com

Do Sitaron Ka Zameen Par – Lata, Rafi (Kohinoor 1960)

madhuban mein radhika nache re

dilip and madhubala go to temple

Jab Raat Hai Aisi Matwali

Mehfil Me Na shikwa hai Na milta Mushkil hai bahut

Do din ke liye Unse pyaar ho gaya Udhar tum haseen

Aayega Aane waala “Tum Rooth Ke Mat Jana ”

“Aap Yun Hi Agar Humse Milte Rahe”

Mohabbat Zinda Rehati Hai

YouTube – Mohammad Rafi

Jaan-E-Bahaar Husn Tera

Chhun chhun ghunghroo

Aaj Kyon Humse Parda Hai (Sadhana)

YouTube – Ye Mehlon Ye Taqton

NAZRANA – Mohd Rafi

Ghareeb Jaan Ke

zindagi zinda dilika naam ha

Dunia Walon Say Door Jalne Walon Say Door

Babuji dhire chalna

Bhula Nahi Dena Je Bhula Nahi Dena

Masoom Chehra Ye Qatil Adayen

Aaja Ke Intezaar Mein – Halaku

YouTube – Mohammad Rafi and Asha Bhosle

Mohammad Rafi and Sudha Malhotra

Do Lachhian

Ke Mein Jhooth Bolia

Shammi Shakila

Asha Bhosle

Asha Bhosle and Sudha Malhotra

Rajkumari – Classical (Asha Bhosle)

Yeh Raaten, Yeh Mausam – Asha, Kishore (Dilli Ka Thug 195 8)

chod do aanchal

Aankhon Mein Kya Jee

achhaji main hari chalo

wahan kaun hai tera musafir jaye ga kahan

Hum Hain Rahi Pyar Ke

“Khayalon Mein Kisi Ke” – Mukesh & Geeta Dutt

YEH RAAT YEH CHAANDNI PHIR KAHAAN…

Dev Anand Chal ri sajni

Tujhe Jeevan ki Dor Se

Teen kanaster peet peet kar

dil jale tho jale

aye meri zindagi aaj rath jumale

Phaili Hui Hai Sapnon Ki

Yaad Aagayi Voh Nashili

DEV ANAND TASVEER TERI DIL MEIN

DEV ANAND TALAT MEHMOOD YEH NAYI NAYI PREET HAI

DEV ANAND LEKE PEHLA PEHLA PYAR

DEV ANAND TADBEER SE BIGDI HUI

DEV ANAND BOOJH MERA KYA NAAM RE

YouTube – Secular India — A.R. Rehman

Swadheen – Vande Mataram – Lata Mangeshakar

jago mohan pyare

Mann Tarpat Hari Darshan

Insaan Bano – Baiju Bawra

Teen kanaster peet peet kar

Mera joota hai(mukesh)

sukh aur dukh

kisi ki muskrahaton pe ho nisaar

Honton Pe Sachchai Rehti

Baje Payal Chhun Chhun

Meena Kumari

Sab kuch seekha hamne- song

mukesh & raj kapoor

Uthaaye ja unke sitam

Lata ji & Munaday

Woh Chand Khila

Mann Tarpat Hari Darshan

Kahe Jhoom Jhoom Raat – Lata Mangeshkar

YouTube – Bol Re Kathputli

Woh Chand Khila – (Anari – 1959)

“Lakhon Taare Aasman Mein”

“Khayalon Mein Kisi Ke” –

Ajeeb Dastan hai yeh

YEH RAAT YEH CHAANDNI PHIR KAHAAN…

Aaja Panchhi Akela Hai

abhi na jao chodkar

Babuji Dheere Chalna

GURU DUTT-KAAGAZ KE PHOOL

ye duniya agar mil bhi jaaye

Qaid mein hai bulbul saiyyad muskuraaye

aaiye meharbaan

Mera Naam Chin Chin Choo from Howrah Bridge

YouTube – “Tum Rooth Ke Mat Jana ”

“Woh Chale Haye Woh Chale”

Mera Prem Patra – (Sangam – 1964)

Pathar Ke Sanam

Chal Ud Ja Re Panchi

Tu Hindu Banegana Musalman Banega

Jaan-E-Bahaar Husn Tera

Chalo Sajna Jahan Tak Ghata Chale

aaj phir marne ki tamana hai

TU MERE PYAR KA.

Aurat Ne Janam Diya Mardon Ko

Apni bhi kya zindagi

husne wale tera jawaab nahin

wafa jinse ki bewafa ho gayi

Chhoo Lene Do Nazuk

Tora mann darpan kehlaye

Man Re Tu Kahe Na – Mohammad Rafi

Hothon Pe Aisi Baat

SHOLAY (1975) mein nachoo gi

Lamhe – Morni Baaga Maa – Sridevi & Anil

Lamhe – Kabhi Main Kahoon – Sridevi & Anil (Eng Subs)

Hamara Dil Aapke Paas Hai-Shukriya-Aishwarya Rai-Anil Kapoor

YouTube – Nimbooda- Aishwarya Rai

YouTube – “Desert Rose” by Sting featuring Aishwarya Rai

Inhi Logon Ne-Spanish subtitles

Aadmi Musafir Hai

Bekhudi Mein Sanam

Main Kahin Kavi Na

Yeh Tanhai Hay Re Hay

Phir Wo Bhooli Si Yaad Aayi Hai

Taj Mahal song

Hindi old songs

khilte hain gul yahan

leke pehla pehla pyar pt.2

Nazneen Bada Rangeen Hai – Phir Wohi Dil Laya Hoon

O sajana….

Amrapali-2

“Tum Agar Mujhko Na Chaho” – Mukesh

Mukesh – Diwaano Se Yeh Mat Poocho – Upkar

MUKESH ik din bik jaae ga maati ke mol

“Lakhon Taare Aasman Mein”

Neele Gagan Ke Tale – MAHENDRA KAPOOR

YouTube – Koi Sehri Babu

YouTube – Yuhi Tum Mujhse

YouTube – Zindagi Ke Safar Mein Gujar

YouTube – indian old song(mukesh)

YouTube – hum tujh se muhabbat – mukesh

YouTube – MUKESH – jo tum ko ho pasand

YouTube – Jeena Yahan Marna Yahan – Mera Naam Joker

YouTube – ankhon se jo ******************************

Beena madhur madhur kachchu bol ********

Saqia Aur Pila -sabri bros.(moti mahal)

Qawali Sabri Brothers India -Part 2

YouTube – Asha Bhosle

YouTube – Aishwarya Rai song

Jab Dil Hi Toot Gaya (K.L.Saigal)

Gham Diye Mustqil (K.L.Saigal)

Diya Jalao & Guzar Gaya Woh Zamana (Pankaj Mullick)

Babul Mora (K.L.Saigal) & Chahe Barbad Karegi (K.L.Saigal)

Aaj Kyon Humse Parda Hai (Sadhana)

***************** alisha chinai made in india ******************

Your favorite link: http://indiasecular.wordpress.com

PUNJABI BELOW:

MERI CHUNNI DEAAN RESHMI (JATTI)

BAJRAY DA SITTA (TV SPECIAL)

MERA LOONG GAWACHA (DULARI)

Punjabi song in saraiki mela, zabardsat dance. waoo!

punjabi song,, hindi style

Number One Punjabi

Gidha (College Team) – Punjabi

Punjabi Wedding Song (Bale Bale) – Bride & Prejudice

New Years 2006 Gidha [FANTASTIC MUST WATCH]

mehndi hai rachne wali

mehndi laga ke rakhna

Rani Mukerji’s Performance

musarrat nazir

BOLIYAAN. – PUTT JATT DA. 1983

Gurdas Mann – Challa {FULL VERSION}

Punjabi Totay – Bush Chachu Da Interview

YouTube – PUnjabi Bush 4

Punjabi Totay – Bush Chachu Deh Andey

Punjabi Totay – Mr Marasi

Punjabi Totay – Husband Ah Gia

M nazir M nazir Mnazir Mnazir Mnazir

Mnazir Mnazir Mnazir Mnazir gori gori chaanani di

Leave a comment

Filed under BOLLYWOOD

** She became loyal to India bit late…

http://www.newindpress.com/column/News.asp?Topic=-97&Title=S%2EGurumurthy&ID=IE620070613210038&nDate=&Sub=&Cat=& 

She became loyal to India a trifle late, by 16 years!https://indiaview.wordpress.com
S Gurumurthy(EMAIL :gurumurthy@epmltd.com)

June 14 2007

“Today, my loyalty embraces a wider family — India, my country, whose people have so generously welcomed me to become one of them.” This is Sonia Gandhi addressing the University of Tilburg in the Netherlands on June 11, 2007. It is true that the people of India who were always in awe of the Nehru-Indira family — more, who, thanks to their colonial hangover, loved things and people foreign — welcomed the Italian-born Antonia Maino, now Sonia, into the nation’s first family.The people of any other country, including the country from which Sonia hails, would have seriously objected to a foreigner in the house of the rulers. Yes, she is right. The people of India were extraordinarily generous to her and welcomed Sonia the unknown, the stranger, without knowing anything about her. But how about her claim of loyalty to them in return? How loyally did she respond to the generosity of the ordinary and unsuspecting people of India, that she now so generously acknowledges?The chronology dating back to 1968 when, many reading newspapers today, who must have been lying on the lap of their mothers. The chronology brings out what she did in response to the people of India, who she herself acknowledges, so generously welcomed her to become part of them. It shows that from the outset she had decided not to become part of them and remained so for 16 years. Her determination to marry Rajiv Gandhi and enter the Nehru family was equalled by her determination not to become an Indian citizen! She was bent on continuing to remain and remained an Italian and a foreigner in India, not for a while or a year or couple of years testing the waters in India, but, for 16 long years — yes sixteen long years — from 1968 to 1984! It was not that in her blissful merger into the Nehru-Indira family and deluged by affection of the people around her, she forgot all about the technicality of acquiring Indian citizenship. It was not a case of just an accidental omission to apply for citizenship. From day one she was determined not to apply to become an Indian. She consciously chose to remain a foreigner and retain her Italian nationality and passport. The Indian law on foreigners required her to apply for and get permission to stay in India as a foreigner and this she had to do every five years.

Determined to live in India and in the Prime Minister’s house as a foreigner, she dutifully applied every six years — first in 1968, afterwards in 1973, thereafter in 1978 and finally in 1983 — for permission to reside in India! So she was just a guest, not part, of Indians for 16 years. She must have decided to remain a foreigner in India even earlier, as she knew long before 1968 that she was to marry Rajiv Gandhi and would have to come and reside in India. Sonia finally applied for Indian citizenship in 1983 and got it in 1984, on April 30 to be precise.

Why did Sonia suddenly, and after 16 years, aspire to become an Indian and positively respond to the generosity of the Indians in welcoming her? Any one who knew a little of politics also knew that Rajiv, who became the general secretary of the Congress party after the accidental demise of Sanjay in 1980, was set to become the Number 2 to Indira Gandhi in the government after the elections in early 1985. He could never have become a Minister under Indira with a foreigner as his spouse. This is what forced Sonia to acquiesce to become an Indian.

Thus it is not the love of India or the generous Indians who welcomed her that made her to give up her Italian citizenship, but, the real reason was the prospect of her husband ascending to power, which means herself in power! Yet she tells the Amsterdam audience that power never attracted her. She would never tell the truth that she did not want to become an Indian for 16 years and remained a foreigner in India. She would never tell that, even when she applied for Indian citizenship, she applied only as Antonia Maino Gandhi, with Sonia as just a pseudonym.

She would never tell that Rahul and Priyanka were under the Italian nationality law, Italian nationals by birth and thus even now Italian nationality inheres in them inalienably. She would not tell these truths. Had she told these truths, she could not have spoken what she spoke at Tilburg University. Yet, what she spoke remains the truth on record, while what she did not speak is the real truth. So what she spoke in Amsterdam is something other than truth. QED: the sense of loyalty to India which she claims came a trifle late, by 16 years!

Read more below:

LTTE-Sonia Link @ https://indiaview.wordpress.com/2008/04/30/ltte-sonia-link/

A Visit to Sonia Gandhi’s Birth Place  @

4 Comments

Filed under Political News