The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

News and Discussions about politics, current affairs, international relations, economy, elections, state level politics etc.
This forum is strictly moderated.
chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:53 pm

On the need for making “The Judge” – A movie on Love Jihad and the typical ‘liberal’ reaction of Hindus to the issue


6 June, 2020
OpIndia Staff


The menace of ‘Love Jihad’ is widespread in India. Every day we hear about its occurrence in some part of the country. While the mainstream media and the political correctness of all political parties, governments and other mechanisms of the state machinery attempt to create an illusion that such an issue doesn’t exist, every discerning Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist and Christian knows it otherwise. In fact, the Christian community of Kerala are credited with coming up with the term, ‘Love Jihad’, after they realized the attack on their girls and subsequent conversions from Christianity to Islam.

Even when this problem is so well spread and well known all around the country, the urban educated class, particularly the rich/middle class Hindus, are more skeptical and hesitant in accepting this issue as a reality than the rest. There are many reasons for this. The widespread liberal and the left controlled education system, be it in schools and colleges or be it in media, where the barbarism and cruelties of Muslim rulers are white washed while simultaneously indulging in the demonization of Hindu religion, its culture, its traditions and its rulers, has systematically spawned generations of Hindus who have been wallowing in self guilt and self-hate for some decades now.

This has resulted in them completely alienating themselves from the problems that their community faces. The effect of other factors like state sponsored secularism that is forced down the throat of every individual and the Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb doctrine of the entertainment industry with Bollywood leading the way, has only helped this narrative become mainstream. Consequently a large portion of Hindus have shown scant interest in this disastrous conspiracy that is now knocking on their doors.

During the research for our film, ‘The Judge’, we could see a pattern in these Love Jihad cases. Based on that, these cases could be broadly classified into nine categories-

1) The Hindu female and the Muslim male are in love. They want to marry. The girl wants to remain Hindu after the wedding. The boy agrees. After marriage and especially after the child/children are born, the boy’s family starts pressuring the girl to convert, with dire consequences for the girl when she refuses.

2) The Muslim boy pretends to be a Hindu. Even goes to temples and does puja. So, the innocent Hindu girl marries him. After marriage she discovers that he is a Muslim and then she is forced by the boy’s family to convert.

3) The Muslim boy promises the Hindu girl that he is a true Muslim and that he won’t have sex with her until the marriage. The girl thinks very highly of him because of his principle and consequently marries him. A few years later he starts marrying more women as his religion allows polygamy. This happens more in semi-urban and rural areas.

4) The Hindu girl who is ignorant of her Hindu roots and philosophy is targeted and is approached by the Muslim boy. As she isn’t aware of her own religion, she is slowly made to question it. She loses faith in it, giving the boy the full opportunity to take advantage of her. After she starts living with him, she realizes her mistake. A lot of such cases have been happening in Kerala and also in other urban areas of the country.

5) The girl marries the boy voluntarily because both are in love with each other. Both are supposedly modern liberal progressives. After the wedding, boy starts to have doubts on the girl’s fidelity as she continues to be liberal even after the marriage. So, he attacks her, in most cases killing her.

6) Hindu woman has relationship with Muslim man that doesn’t end up in marriage. There could be many reasons for this. She could already be married and hence feels guilty about cheating her husband. Or after the initial excitement she could realize that she had made a mistake. Or in some cases where the women are middle aged, they come to know that the same man is also having an affair or targeting one of her younger female relatives (which could even be her own daughter). This could make them end their relationship. Angry over this, he attacks the woman and sometimes even her whole family.

7) Hindu women are just raped and/ or murdered, usually in the most gruesome way. In some cases photos or videos are taken of girls in compromising situations, and they are blackmailed to do more sexual favors. A lot of cases in rural and semi-urban areas including those that involve Dalits belong to this category.

8) Hindu woman marries Muslim man. They both follow their own respective religions even after the marriage, and there is no interference by the man or his family. But their offsprings are definitely brought up as Muslims, with a touch of secular ‘respect’ for Hindu Gods. Bollywood is full of such cases.

9) In this category, the girl is always a minor. She is seduced and made to madly fall in love with the boy. The girl’s family won’t permit their marriage. So, she is kidnapped (with her consent!). Converted to Islam. And then married to the boy as it legal under Muslim law even when she is under 18.

In many of these categories, the Muslim male tends to be already married with one or more wives and with children before he targets the Hindu girl and marries her. The Hindu girl is completely unaware about this fact.

All these categories of Love Jihad may seem disconnected at the outset, even quite extraordinary, because in many instances the kafir girls themselves participate ini it willingly. But under all this there is an underlying concept that is rooted in the Islamic ideology. And that is the need to expand the Ummah and the concept that kafir women are basically slaves and need to be treated so. Hence, they are totally dispensable. When these are the ideas that are taught in Madrassas and even in supposedly ‘modern progressive’ families as a part of the religion, then it is no wonder that boys when they grow up, end up as foot soldiers of Love Jihad. It is a system approved and sanctioned by the highest authorities of their religion: Collect as many kafir wombs as possible. Increase the Ummah and simultaneously decrease the population of kafirs. And if things don’t go as per the plan then kill or injure the woman as she is just a kafir, a slave, in status. Hence such violence.

My film ‘The Judge’ is an attempt to depict the typical liberal reaction of Hindus to this issue. It explores how blinded they are when they encounter such a situation. Though they may be given the benefit of doubt, owing to their ignorance due to the sparse media coverage and governments’ interference, their deliberate attempt to not even consider it as a serious issue, when sufficient evidence is presented is something that is despicable and which needs to be addressed. And our film attempts to do just that.

The film also explores another aspect of the liberal Hindu elites. And that is their reactions to the issues of their fellow Hindu brethren, who tend to be practicing Hindus with a better Dharmic foundation. The elites typically display a ‘holier than thou’ attitude towards them and for most part consider them with contempt. They don’t hesitate for a second to categorize such people as Bhakts, Sanghis or gaumutra drinkers etc (ignorantly believing these words/phrases are pejoratives). This Hinduphobia (yes, practiced by Hindus themselves) leads to a total rejection of the problems that normal Hindus face. And Love Jihad is typically one such problem.

This film tries to present an issue that has been neglected for so long as a result of political correctness and the power that is wielded by the liberal/left ecosystem. Bollywood wouldn’t dare to make a movie on this subject under present conditions, when it is the one of the culprits promoting Love Jihad through its films and its film stars. Although this film isn’t exactly based on any of the actual love jihad cases and the story is fictional, it has been inspired by many of them. By making and presenting this film, we are trying to create an awareness and sensitize people on this issue throughout India so that girls, parents and society at large can be more alert in fighting this menace.

The film was made on a shoestring budget and was crowdfunded with several people donating generously for the cause. We wish that people watch this film, enjoy it and share it with their friends and family. We also wish that more such issues of Dharmic communities in India (which are neglected by the mainstream media and the left/liberal/secular system), are taken up by more film makers and more films/webseries/shortfilms are made.

Author: Jithu Aravamudhan, Vak Media


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5hTERtHtBI

THE JUDGE


chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:36 pm

How Nehru’s ‘Forward Policy’ Worked And Its Lessons Look From The Vantage Point Of 2020


Venu Gopal Narayanan
Jun 9, 2020

How Nehru’s ‘Forward Policy’ Worked And Its Lessons Look From The Vantage Point Of 2020
Snapshot
The most important takeaway from the ‘Forward Policy’ is that once personal whims take the place of foreign and defence policy, then there is no estimating how much damage that will cost.
Last month marked sixty years since Jawaharlal Nehru’s ‘Forward Policy’ began to be implemented in Arunachal Pradesh with proper fervour – the decision to set up forward military posts, to deter the Chinese from advancing across the McMahon Line and claiming Indian territory as theirs.

Sixty long years, since a chain of portentous events was set in motion.

Sixty years, since the legendary 4th Indian Division began to establish itself atop impassable ridges, without equipment, support, or supply routes. And sixty years, since that augural prelude, which culminated in the unforgivable catastrophes of the 1962 Sino-Indian war.

It is a good moment to introspect upon the dynamics of that fateful decision, since two flagrant border incursions were attempted by the Chinese along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) last month; and a good lesson, on how a government might define and secure national aims within a confusing geopolitical scenario.

This is however, not so much a chronological sequencing of the gut-wrenching events which led to war, as it is a survey of that pivotal, instigating ‘Forward Policy’ which set up the whole debacle.

That is because, while we know how the story ends – in defeat, despair, humiliation and pain – we know far less of the machinations which scripted the policy basis of that entirely avoidable tragedy.

The spark to Nehru’s ‘Forward Policy’ was provided by two closely-related events.

One was the Sino-Soviet split, which began with Nikita Khrushchev’s doctrinaire repudiation of Stalin, and was cemented by his aggressive drive for Soviet control of nuclear bases on the Chinese coast.

The second was the flight of the Dalai Lama to India in March 1959, once Mao withdrew the fiction of Tibetan autonomy, and actuated a strategically vital trans-Tibetan road link passing through India’s Aksai Chin.

A Rubicon was crossed once India granted the Dalai Lama asylum, from which there has never been a turning back.

The threat of a live, safe monk, who would remain as a symbol of Chinese imperialism over Tibet – both political and cultural – was simply too potent a truth to bear.

Perhaps one of the reasons why Khrushchev tried to get Mao to back off was because he understood the wider ramifications, of such viscerally incensed Chinese impulses, to somehow neutralise this live, symbolic continuation of Tibetan resistance to Chinese occupation.

If China pushed India too hard, the possibility existed that India might be forced by desperation into the American camp.

But Sino-Soviet ties were too worn for such advice to be taken; if anything, it only spurred Mao into plowing his own furrows, to stress the point that China would chart its own course hereon, with steadfast independence.

Nonetheless, these substantial geopolitical changes appeared to make no visible impact on diplomatic functioning in Delhi. Not even with the Dalai Lama’s escape to India, when it was clear as mud to observers, that every material aspect of Sino-Indian relations, meticulous crafted by a rhapsodic Nehru, lay in tatters about his feet.

The official hope, masquerading as foreign policy, continued to be that China would respect the basic tenets of their bilateral Panchsheel treaty, of 1954, and high principles of civilised sovereign conduct, which were enshrined at the Bandung Conference the next year.

After all, wasn’t it India’s own V K Krishna Menon, who had argued that the United Nations couldn’t introduce a discussion on Chinese aggression over Tibet, for the legalistic reason that China wasn’t then a member of that international body?

Surely such altruism merited everlasting gratitude from Beijing.

The opposite happened instead: the fiction of Panchsheel was rendered redundant.

Nehru’s needless, gratingly unctuous courtship of Chinese Premier Chou En Lai, at the Bandung Conference, became a topic of caustic derision.

India’s unwavering, decade-long insistence, that China be rehabilitated into international forums, was abruptly replaced by the realisation that Sardar Patel had been right all along, about China’s mal-intentions.

And most damagingly, revelations emerged of a long-suppressed fact, that China had built a motorable road across the Indian territory of Aksai Chin, as far back as the mid 1950’s.

Nehru couldn’t even deny knowledge of the road, because the Chinese had officially invited both the Indian Ambassador and the Military Attache in Beijing, to Tibet, for the inauguration ceremony (they wisely declined to attend).

If that wasn’t bad enough, the Chinese began to violate the border repeatedly – just as they do now.

Whatever Nehru’s stature might have been then, this was not elevated foreign policy, since the Chinese were now openly goading him into a response. This was dramatically aimless vaudeville, played out behind thick curtains in South Block, with fatal consequences on both policy-making and core national interests.

Yet all that our citizens got to see on stage was a shadowy crumpling of the cloth. Within months, that gaudy fabric began to come apart at the seams.

On 28 August 1959, N G Goray of the Praja Socialist Party, and MP for Poona, stood up in the Lok Sabha to ask a simple question of his prime minister: Did Nehru mean to say that anyone could cross our borders, enter our country, build a road, apprehend our troops, release them because of ‘good relations’, and we would do nothing about that?

Nehru’s astonishing response was to wonder out loud, if the honourable member actually expected a reply, because, apparently, there was a difference between borders and frontiers.

For good measure, Nehru also informed a stunned Goray that there were also some parts of the country which ‘no one was interested in’.

Readers reeling in disbelief at such supercilious condescension would do well to read Lok Sabha records available online.

For a man of Nehru’s standing, Goray’s question must have felt like impertinence. But with the disclosure of a Chinese road crossing Indian land, whose construction took place with official Indian knowledge, past stature began to matter less, and national security more.

Flowery speeches and patronising retorts were no longer effective substitutes for right thought and right action.

So now, as much as the government needed to act decisively, the greater urgency was to appear to have acted thus.

As a result, fawning camaraderie was reluctantly replaced by empty bravado. Conciliation unwittingly became confrontation, and it was decided that the Chinese would be put in their place, at the border.

‘Runglee rungliot’ – thus far, and no further. A ‘Forward Policy’ was here. Now, if that didn’t pacify the opposition, if that couldn’t retain soaring public visages in unblemished poise, then nothing would.

There was only one problem with this abrupt volte-face: the armed forces had gone to seed during a preceding Ashokan decade of violent pacifism, and so were in no position to honour the cabinet’s fantasies of even patrolling the border, leave alone defending it.

There were no roads, there had been no modernisation of military equipment, what little equipment as available was useless at Himalayan heights, and the Army in particular, had no way of conducting combat operations in narrow river valleys that snaked through 7000 foot gorges.

General Thimayya, India’s most popular warrior and Chief of Army Staff, bluntly said as much to both Nehru, and his defence minister, V K Krishna Menon.

So did his senior army subordinates.

That put Nehru in a fix.

Now out of the blue on the one side, was a still-diminutive opposition who’d finally smelt blood, after a dozen years of waiting patiently in the great man’s shadow; on the other was a military, which professed grave incapacity, because of horrendous shortcomings caused directly by Nehru’s own pacifist policies over the preceding decade.

Talk about being trapped between a rock and a hard place.

It is in the backdrop of such dynamics, that we must understand how a disastrous policy was first successfully formulated, and then implemented, in the face of momentous internal disagreement.

The key impediment was Thimayya, whose valid obduracy was centred on an elementary point of fact – namely, that the executive should not design a political response which the military could not carry out.

But the desperation to be perceived as acting decisively, coupled with the possibility of opposition ‘impertinence’ snowballing into widespread disillusionment (at a time when the demand for reorganising states on linguistic lines was set to peak), posed a greater threat than the one on the border.

This is what propelled the insidious rise of institutional acrimony towards Thimayya.

It became full-blown when two alarming confrontations, at Khenzemane and Longju in mid-August of 1959, clearly demonstrated military inability to enforce the sovereignty of our borders.

Within a month, Thimayya was forced to submit his resignation, as good men must, and then cajoled into withdrawing it.

Amidst that confusion rose a mighty debate, on whether Timmy Sahib had done the right thing or not, by withdrawing his resignation letter.

The answer didn’t matter a fig for two reasons: the damage was already done, and focus was finally diverted – at least temporarily – from the bounden duties of a government, to the morals of an Army Chief.

The greater point made in this sordid episode, is that the more Thimayya was weakened, the less of a hindrance he was to the ‘Forward Policy’.

This was a turning point in independent India’s history.

A dangerous precedent was set.

Now, if good men refused to do the wrong thing, then the alternative was not to do the right thing, but instead, to replace those good men with the right ones.

If ever there was an example of how the system gets structurally weakened by political influence, this was it.

Still, Thimayya had a rock solid stature of his own, and it would take more than a Fabian Socialist to whittle that down to dust. So, they bided their time, quietly putting small pieces of the Forward Policy into play, until the last good men were gone. Only then did they move ahead, with new men of their own.

The irony is that the very Generals they chose to distrust, whose putsch-inclined hearts, they said, continued to beat for the Raj, polo matches, and the British Indian Army, were sidelined in favour of men, who openly believed in the undemocratic nonsense the old sort were unfairly suspected of.

One such man was BM ‘Bijji’ Kaul, a relative of Nehru’s, who, even if it cannot be proved that he was the key instigator of the ‘Forward Policy’, certainly carries the moral responsibility of having pushed this unsound political decision to breaking point, and disaster, in 1962.

Although commissioned into an Infantry regiment, Kaul spent much of his career before independence in the Army Service Corps, away from operational commands of even a battalion. He therefore missed combat experience, staff service (where you learn how to conduct battles and wars), and other prerequisites necessary to hold high military command.

After 1947, that divergence from the career path of a regular officer only increased, courtesy a relative who was now prime minister.

Kaul was gifted a series of plum foreign postings well above his rank and capacity. While they certainly allowed him to ascend the political ladder, these favours did nothing to enhance his military worth as a commanding officer.

It was a shock then, to hear that he had been given charge of the 4th Indian Division in the Punjab (where he was awarded a high medal for making the illustrious formation build staff housing).

No wonder his horoscope predicted that he would rule India one day. This was in line with his views that the military had made a mistake, by abjuring power to the civil lines (something he espoused as far back as 1947 to Jayprakash Narayan, when Kaul hinted that, perhaps, India needed a ‘strong’ government if it was to avoid the carnage of partition).

But by 1960 however, Kaul knew which side of his bread was buttered, and thus found it far more expedient to facilitate the Nehru persona, rather than contradict it.

The 4 Div was dispatched to defend an indefensible border, before finally descending into surreal absurdities, when it came to the nuts and bolts of executing such policy.

Remember this: 4 Div’s official remit under this new ‘Forward Policy’, was to defend the borders of Arunachal Pradesh from the Bhutan-India-China tri-junction to Myanmar – a 360 mile-long line, passing along the tops of the highest mountain range in the world.

And they didn’t even have boots.

But no matter; Nehru had finally found the man to execute his ‘Forward Policy’, and 1959 became the setup for an even more Alice-in-Wonderland 1960.

There could be no turning back after that; the die was cast.

Brigadier John Dalvi tells the best story of the Forward Policy’s early days, albeit with a great deal of sadness.

He would know, since he was later given key command of 7 Brigade, under 4 Div, and had to physically implement Kaul’s directives with nonexistent resources.

Dalvi was the good man on the spot in Arunachal Pradesh – a Thimayya type, if you will, but without the seniority to protest beyond a point.

He was in charge on the ground when Nehru’s wishes were forced to be carried out, and he was there on the field when his men were massacred in 1962. He then spent seven months in Tibet as a Chinese prisoner of war, before being repatriated home.

Attending a top-secret meeting to determine materiel tonnage to be flown by the Indian Air Force, as part of the ‘Forward Policy’, Dalvi found himself instead at the entrance to the rabbit hole.

There was a functionary from the Ministry of Food present, who wanted most of the available airlift to transport – hold your breath – hothouses for a research project. The man wanted to try and grow vegetables on the roof of the world.

Another attendee, from an unnamed, non-military government department, invited opinions on how to breed ponies at high altitudes.

The Survey of India was also present, not to offer new maps though, which was the crying need of the hour (the Chinese were then vigorously engaged in ‘mapmanship’ with India over boundary contours), but with a demand for tonnage – to transport their survey teams to high altitudes for routine work.

And last, there was someone from the Government of Jammu and Kashmir present – at a top-secret meeting, mind you – with a requisition for transporting pilgrims between the mountains and the plains.

This description of the dangerously guileless, ham-handed, half-baked manner in which a detrimental national policy was crafted against the advice of experts, is crucial to our story, because we then also learn that nothing changed in over half a century.

When the millennium turned, China still yearned for a secure land route to the western Indian Ocean. Their route of choice was the Karakoram Highway, which went from Sinkiang province through Takshkorgan into the Karakoram Range, rode the Khunjerab Pass, Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, West Punjab, and Baluchistan, and ended at Gwadar Port on the Makaran Coast.

It was a passage which could not be militarily threatened by either Russia or America, while remaining easily defensible by China, and her ally Pakistan.

And just like in the 1950s, Delhi watched with a blind eye for a long decade, in the early 21st century, while Chinese construction of another transmontane highway made steady progress over Indian soil.

The similarity was astounding: fifty years on, here was Dr Manmohan Singh, another prime minister of the same Congress Party, who too seemed to believe that there still existed some parts of this country, which ‘no one was interested in’.

Such a travesty could only be perpetuated because, until 2014, that essential facility for self-denial, and dangerous self-deception, was enabled by the organied relegation of good men by the right men – again, just like in the 1950s.

If it was a Thimayya then, in 1959, it was a VK Singh now in 2012.

Look at Dr Manmohan Singh’s appointment of Shiv Shankar Menon as Foreign Secretary, for example. It beggars credulity, since that key selection was made by superseding over a dozen of the Indian Foreign Service’s senior-most officers.

That is how far down the ladder Menon was.

And that’s how we got an infamous drafting error at the India-Pakistan summit of Sharm el Sheikh in 2009, by which, an unforgivable moral equivalence was drawn between the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, and unverified, alleged Indian involvement in Baluchistan.

With a keystroke, a decades-old, bipartisan foreign policy position was offhandedly rewritten, and old gains undone.

Superseding one or two officers happens at senior levels now and then, but such a leap was unprecedented.

While Singh was technically well within his right to do what he did, the selection underscored less the assumed, staggering intellectual prowess of the officer, and smacked more of forbidding ‘Forward Policy’ days.

It also scored poorly on the First Law of Bureaucratic Competence: the worth of an officer, measured on a scale of zero to one, is the cube root of the inverse, of the number of officers he/she supersedes. (In case readers are wondering, the value here is 0.437.)

The sole difference between the 1950s and the 2010s is that India was finally awake, and possessed of a vibrant political opposition, which ensured that such wilful myopia was mercifully snubbed out by the weight of a popular mandate.

But the risks of such ideology- and personality-driven tendencies, to disastrously prioritise selfish, political durability over national interest, remain extant within our socio-political framework – even if such risks are now, slowly, visibly and thankfully beginning to ebb slightly, with each passing election.

So as sad thoughts of sadder days wind down into conclusion, the key takeaway is: the only reason Nehru’s ‘Forward Policy’ ever saw sunlight, was because capricious vanity allowed the system to be broken for political purposes.

Specifically, this took the form of senior military officers being hounded out of their posts, merely because their expert, professional advice ran wildly contrary to the demonstrably-impracticable views of their political masters.

Unfortunately, much of those machinations remain unknown to us, not least because the Henderson-Brooks/PS Bhagat inquiry report into the debacle remains classified till date.

Hence, if the present dispensation is serious about new India learning from its past, then disclosing what precisely transpired sixty years ago might be a good starting point.

Until then, one can only hope that the stout men of 7 Brigade and 4 Div understand that never again will they be put in such a spot, as their military forebears once were; and, in that knowledge, also accept the remembrances and apologies of an eternally grateful nation.

Recommended reading:

Himalayan Blunder’by Brig. JP Dalvi
After Nehru Who? by Welles Hangen
India’s China War by Neville Maxwell
The Indian Army Since Independence by Maj. KC Praval

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Wed Jun 10, 2020 5:23 pm

It's the mindset of some people to not co-exist with idolators. which is still prevalent from cashmere to hyderabad. though the newspaper removed this news item after fearing a backlash, there is real apprehension even in the media.


Image


another example in another city and as is well known there are even "halal" high rise buildings in cochin with certified "halal" builders.

there are the "Indian minorities" who are "oppressed and depressed" by the majority.

BTW, there are also plenty of roler buildings in bombay where none else is allowed to buy or stay

Image

saurabh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:10 pm
Location: delhi
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by saurabh » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:31 pm

I was saying from the last few days that Kejriwal is going to destroy Delhi. Today we all can see the situation he was promising beds and hospital few days ago but now unable to manage that. Now the center is going to take care of Delhi. Kejriwal increased contentment zones 100 to 241 in last 15 days. He is asking money from the center but giving free electricity and water to Delhi people. He wants to blame the center but don't want to lose his vote bank. But now center government has promised that they are going to issue a helpline number, as well as testing rate, will be increased.

https://twitter.com/amitmalviya/status/ ... 39008?s=20

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:15 pm

no more "eminent" commie "historians" peddling false archeological "evidence" :mrgreen:

whatever happened to those deluded creeps



Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind asks Supreme Court not to admit pleas of Hindus seeking to reopen Kashi-Mathura dispute cases



Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind asks Supreme Court not to admit pleas of Hindus seeking to reopen Kashi-Mathura dispute cases


Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind asks Supreme Court to not admit pleas of Hindus to reopen Kashi-Mathura temple disputes as it will create fear in Muslim minds who are still recovering from the Ayodhya verdict.

4 June, 2020
OpIndia Staff

Image

Kashi Vishwanath temple (L) and Mathura temple (R)


The Islamic body Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind has filed a petition in the Supreme Court asking not to admit petitions filed by Hindu groups seeking to re-open cases related to reclaiming disputed religious sites at Kashi, Mathura and some other places, where Muslim religious places were built after demolishing ancient Hindu temples.

According to the reports, the Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind has filed an impleadment plea in the Supreme Court not even to admit the petition filed by the Hindu group in the Kashi-Mathura temple land dispute cases. The Jamiat also said that they should be heard before they give notices to Hindu petitioners in the case.

On Friday, Hindu organisations had moved the apex court seeking re-opening of cases pertaining to Kashi and Mathura temple disputes.

The petition was filed to challenge the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which states that the character of religious places at the time of Independence cannot be changed. The petition is being seen as an attempt to re-open cases to reclaim disputed religious sites at Kashi, Mathura and some other places.

However, in response Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind has also filed the petition demanding the Supreme Court not to entertain petitions of the Hindu side, as it claimed that such petitions not only threatened the secular fabric of the country but also will create fear in Muslim minds who are still recovering from the Ayodhya verdict.

Hindu organisation file plea in SC challenging Places of Worship Act, 1991
A Hindu organisation, Vishwa Bhadra Pujari Purohit Mahasangh, had moved the Supreme Court of India challenging Section 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 that calls for maintaining status quo of all places of worship, except the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya.

The PIL filed by Vishwa Bhadra Pujari Purohit Mahasangh had sought directions to declare Section 4 of the 1991 Act as ultra vires and unconstitutional as the law is a hindrance in the path of legally reclaiming disputed religious structures, such as Kashi and Mathura.

“The impugned Act has barred the right and remedy against encroachment made on religious property of Hindus exercising might of power by followers of another faith,” it said.

The section 4(1) of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 states, “It is hereby declared that the religious character of a place of worship existing on the 15th day of August 1947 shall continue to be the same as it existed on that day.”

According to the act, no mosque can be converted into a temple and vice-versa.

Re-opening of Kashi, Mathura land disputes attains significance
The petition to re-open cases of land disputes related to Kashi, Mathura and other places of worships attains significance as it comes just seven months after the Supreme Court in a historic verdict had paved wat for the construction of a Ram temple by a trust at the disputed site in Ayodhya.

On November 9, the Supreme Court, in a historic decision, accepted the Hindu claim and handed over the Ram Janmabhoomi site to Hindus to build Ram Mandir and finally end the century-long dispute. The five-judge bench had unanimously come to the decision after weighing the arguments presented by all sides for 40 days.

The Muslims were given a 5-acre site at an alternate location by the government of Uttar Pradesh, as per the SC order.

However, the five-judge bench, headed by then Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, had dealt with the 1991 Act and had pointed that the law is a legislative instrument designed to protect the secular features of Indian polity, which is one of the basic features of the Constitution.

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Fri Jun 19, 2020 9:43 am

Minhaz Merchant@MinhazMerchant·Jun 15

States were happy to carry on with lockdowns believing Centre was legally bound to compensate them for loss of #GST. They could be in for a shock as govt hints at invoking Force Majeure (Act of God) clause due to #Covid19. No wonder opp states are scrambling to open businesses



Image

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Fri Jun 19, 2020 2:37 pm

Abhijit Majumder@abhijitmajumder·10h




"Youth leader" Rahul Gandhi turns 50. To put things in perspective:
Amit Shah: 55
Arvind Kejriwal: 51
Devendra Fadnavis: 49
Yogi Adityanath: 48
Jagan Reddy: 47
Smriti Irani: 44
KT Rama Rao: 43

saurabh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:10 pm
Location: delhi
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by saurabh » Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:47 am

I think Cinema should also have some kind of restriction on it. The way Bollywood always abuse Hindu Dharma is really bad. You can see in every Hindi or Bollywood film has a scene of Tantriks. But they never show that a Molvi is doing crime in the movies. You can see the way PK movie is done they have only one scene for another religion but Hindu dharma targets very badly. Sharukh Khan is coming with Tipu Sultan. Even by web series, they are targeting Hindus. You can see in patal lok web series they shown bad image of Hindu culture. Now this fashion coming in other regional cinemas also. I talked to some of the Hindu organizations they all will come together and starting protest on this. Sharing an article how Kollywood is also going to prmote muslim leaders just have a look.


https://twitter.com/OpIndia_com/status/ ... 17988?s=20

saurabh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:10 pm
Location: delhi
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by saurabh » Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:23 am

A so-called secular journalist who does not have any journalism skill becomes an anchor on IBN 7. Then he thinks that he can we the minister so he joined politics with AAP. Again he realized that no one asking him in the politics so he became a political expert on other news channels. yes, I am talking about Ashutosh. He always against Hindus and BJP. He has a website also that is promoting against India articles always. You can see one on the link. And the way Anand Ranganathan washed him you can see here

https://twitter.com/ashutosh83B/status/ ... 85664?s=20
https://twitter.com/ARanganathan72/stat ... 64577?s=20

saurabh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:10 pm
Location: delhi
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by saurabh » Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:29 am

I want to Check Rahul Gandhi's degree from Harvard University.

https://twitter.com/rucha_ss/status/127 ... 58661?s=20

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:31 pm

This detailed article about how "Track II" diplomacy was responsible for almost gifting away Siachen is an eye opener.
Courtesy @RaveenKr


Image

Image

Image

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:34 pm

TikTok Banned



No new users, old users can’t access: TikTok gone completely from your phones

Chinese video sharing app TikTok has also stopped working for the existing users a day after the government of India banned the app over security concerns. Essentially, the problematic app has now completely stopped working.


As can be seen, the existing users get a notification that due to government of India directive, TikTok is in process of compliance of the same.

On Tuesday, however, the app was removed from Google Play Store and Apple store. Hence, new users cannot download the app till the ban is lifted, if it is lifted. Following that, many were wondering whether the existing users will still be able to access the app. However, later in the day, even existing users were unable to access the app.


chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Wed Jul 01, 2020 8:02 pm


Prasanna Viswanathan@prasannavishy·Jun 30


Just as Chinese apps allowed themselves to become the tools in the hands of CCP and become the target of ban in India, US platforms like Twitter and Facebook are also slowly becoming tools at the hands of radical Left in Democratic Party and setting themselves up for failure



Modi’s Ban On Tik Tok And Other Chinese Apps Is A Warning To Facebook, Twitter, Et Al Too: Be Neutral And Don’t Play Politics. These hitherto neutral platforms are being increasingly taken over by the radical Leftists in America

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:25 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCo-QOdF2q4

In this Part 1 of a 3-part series by PGurus, IRS officer Sanjay Kumar Srivastava details how he came to be involved with the activities of NDTV from 2005 onwards and how the then Finance Ministry, ensured that SKS would not get his promotion in 2007. Explaining the alleged bribe amount to the last paisa, SKS blows away the claims made by the Babus that he took any bribes. This series will give you a clue on why despite six years of the BJP coming to power, the Babus can put any number of road blocks; in the same breath, they can also work at the speed of light!



chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Fri Jul 03, 2020 2:56 pm

vinod sharma is a sold out media durbari who is close to the mafia family.
He says after pulwama/balakot incidents, an advisory team of two former foreign secretaries and one former chief of Army's Northern command had advised pappu to hold his guns back, but the all knowing and prized moron that he is, he overruled them and paid the price.




In the Congress, the dilemma on nationalism and Modi

The Congress hasn’t evidently learned much from the political costs it paid for taking on a charismatic adversary without a formidable counter-narrative.

Jul 02, 2020
Vinod Sharma
New Delhi

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had built the February, 2019 attack on a terror hideout in Pakistan into a major plank for the April-May parliamentary polls.


After the Indian Air Force (IAF)‘s Balakot strike to avenge Pulwama, the Congress had reached out to three domain experts to help it formulate its political responses. They included two former foreign secretaries and a general who once headed the northern command.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had built the February, 2019 attack on a terror hideout in Pakistan into a major plank for the April-May parliamentary polls. Broadly, the experts told the Congress leadership to hold fire and not rush into launching fusillades without getting a full sense of the complexities of the situation.

The party’s first responses in the military-diplomatic state of play were very much in order. Priyanka Gandhi cancelled a press conference scheduled in Lucknow on February 14, the day the Central Reserve Police Force convoy came under attack from a suicide bomber. She refused to talk politics, observing instead a two minute silence in memory of the jawans who died.

Rahul Gandhi was, then, the president of the Congress. His first tweet on February 26 saluted the IAF pilots who staged the airstrike. In that watershed moment, the entire political class was on the same page, barring Mehbooba Mufti who sounded sceptical on the outcome of the pre-dawn swoop.

Unravelled by the exigencies of poll-time politics, the consensus was short-lived. The Congress expended the good advice that had come its way. It forgot the lessons of the May-July Kargil war of 1999 — India’s first televised armed conflict that ran parallel to the campaign for the September-October parliamentary polls the same year. The party’s sniper shots at Atal Bihari Vajpayee — especially on the import of sugar from Pakistan — didn’t cut ice with the people. The war had happened within weeks of the Congress having toppled him as prime minister (PM), but having failed to put together an alternative regime.

The mountain battle was the result of a lax border vigil that helped Pakistani troops walk deep inside on our territory. The intelligence-security failure would have brought down the personal ratings of any prime minister. Yet, such was the principal Opposition’s crisis of credibility that it let the incumbent win as a caretaker PM. The BJP’s tally stayed static but the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) gained over a dozen seats. Its aggregate of 270 was tantalisingly close to the magic 272 that had eluded the Congress after it dislodged Vajpayee by one vote.

The Congress hasn’t evidently learned much from the political costs it paid for taking on a charismatic adversary without a formidable counter-narrative. The mistakes of 1999 that it repeated in 2019 are evident again in the face of the India-China military stand-off. The Congress-BJP duel after the June 20 all-party meeting on the Galwan valley clashes is a replay of the post-Balakot name-calling.

Coincidentally, an electoral joust is also due this year to the Bihar assembly where the NDA is seeking to grab the first-mover advantage by eulogising the men of the Bihar regiment who died fighting the Chinese. While the BJP is reaching out to the people with its story of Ladakh, the Congress struggles to cull a cogent script out of a host of issues — China’s military challenge; the pandemic; the sliding economy: loss of jobs; and human suffering of hundreds of thousands of migrant workers.

The Opposition had sound reasons to not be satisfied with the PM’s statement at the all party meet. But legitimate questions get delegitimised when posed petulantly. Little wonder then that Rahul’s ‘Surender Modi’ taunt — reminiscent of his 2019 chowkidar dig at the PM — found oblique disapprovals at the June 23 Congress Working Committee (CWC) parleys.

A major United Progressive Alliance partner and former defence minister Sharad Pawar was more in-the-face when he referred to the territory India lost in the 1962 war with China. His call against politicisation of issues of national security came after the CWC meeting.

There was a “silence of acquiescence” when a CWC member, who spoke before Rahul and Priyanka, underscored the pitfalls of personalising the political discourse. He reminded the gathering that the party defeated the NDA in 2004, not by besmirching Vajpayee but by taking down his “India shining” plank.

The short-point he made was that policy and governance-failures, for which the ruling side must be criticised, can get clouded by individual mud fights. He wasn’t contradicted till Rahul took the floor, forcefully stating that he wasn’t, unlike others, scared of taking on Modi. The assertion fetched him ‘polite support’ from others, including Priyanka.

A frontline Congress parliamentarian was prompted nevertheless to correct the impression that other leaders were loathe to dare Modi. He drew attention to the speeches he had made to make the PM accountable to the House. Another party veteran had an interesting caveat to the imperative of questioning Modi: “We must question him, but not in the manner of Mani Shankar Aiyar...” The allusion was to Aiyar’s chaiwala taunt that cost the Congress dear in the 2014 polls.

The hiatus on how to deal with the conundrum that’s Modi came out starkly when a first-time CWC member complained that Rahul’s tweets weren’t often re-tweeted by other colleagues. The irony inherent in the complaint was hard to ignore. For, many among those present believed that being led by Twitter isn’t the best way to deal with a rival who is better received across media platforms.

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Sun Jul 05, 2020 1:33 pm

Image

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Sun Jul 05, 2020 5:48 pm

In the west bank, demolishing the homes of suicide bombers had brought a dramatic drop in attempted suicide bombings.

this is straight out of israel's playbook and an effective way to reduce crime


ANI UP@ANINewsUP · Jul 4

Kanpur: House of the history-sheeter Vikas Dubey, the main accused in Kanpur encounter case, being demolished by district administration. More details awaited.

8 policemen were killed in the encounter which broke out when police went to arrest him in Bikaru, Kanpur yesterday.


Image

Image

Image

chetak
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Great Indian Political Drama - 4

Post by chetak » Wed Jul 08, 2020 12:02 pm

those five star lunches that the mafia family had with the cheeni ambassador in dilli during the doklam crisis have certainly rubbed many people the wrong way.

That was probably when some quiet investigations may have started off and some of the findings made public after the congis and pappu started to take a hardened but gaddari stance on the chinese intrusions.

the bjp guys have slowly started to master the commie naxal lootyens art of manipulating the news cycles and also now beginning to choreograph the media




Govt to probe violations by Sonia Gandhi headed Rajiv Gandhi Foundation and others, Home Ministry sets up committee

Govt to probe violations by Sonia Gandhi headed Rajiv Gandhi Foundation and others, Home Ministry sets up committee

The committee will coordinate probe into violation of various legal provisions of PMLA, Income Tax Act, FCRA etc by these foundations.

Special Director of Enforcement Directorate will head the committee.

8 July, 2020
OpIndia Staff


MHA to probe various violations of Rajiv Gandhi Foundation and others

The Ministry of Home Affairs has set up an inter-ministerial committee to probe various violations by the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, Rajiv Gandhi Charitable Trust & Indira Gandhi Memorial Trust.

BREAKING:

MHA sets up inter-ministerial committee to coordinate probe into violation of various legal provisions of PMLA, Income Tax Act, FCRA etc. by Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, Rajiv Gandhi Charitable Trust & Indira Gandhi Memorial Trust; Special Director of ED to head committee pic.twitter.com/hSENuCacXi
— DD News (@DDNewslive) July 8, 2020
The committee will coordinate probe into violation of various legal provisions of PMLA, Income Tax Act, FCRA etc by these foundations. Special Director of Enforcement Directorate will head the committee.
Sonia Gandhi-controlled Rajiv Gandhi Foundation received funds from China
Recently, shocking details had emerged wherein it was revealed how Sonia Gandhi-controlled Rajiv Gandhi Foundation had received funds from the Chinese government during the UPA era under the garb of charities.

Last month we had reported how the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation had received funds from not just the Embassy of China but also the Government of China not once but at least thrice between 2005 and 2009. One donation amounted to Rs 10 lakhs and another one amounted to Rs 90 lakhs was funded by the Chinese to the Sonia-Gandhi controlled Rajiv Gandhi Foundation.

The Annual Statements of the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation had also revealed a far more sinister agenda as it turned out, the Chinese government had not only donated to the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation in the year 2006 but subsequent years as well.

It is important to note that Sonia Gandhi is the Chairperson of the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation. Since the year 2005, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra were the trustees.

The significant disclosure had come at a time when the Congress party was caught over its secret deals with the Communist Party of China (CPC) back in 2008. There have been serious allegations against the Congress party and its interim chief Sonia Gandhi over receiving funds from not only China but also for diverting public money for her private foundation.

Not Just China: RGF received funds from other foreign governments too
Over the years, the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation has also received donations from the Governments of Ireland, Luxembourg and the European Union as well.

Apart from that, the RGF has also received donations from numerous other dubious sources. One of the sources it received a lot of funds from is the Friedrich Naumann Stiftung. FNS is a liberal organisation based in Germany that is closely associated with the liberal political establishment in the country and is a major donor for the RGF.

Rajiv Gandhi Foundation received funds from PMNRF
Addition to the funds from China, the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation had re-routed funds within the country, by deviating tax payers money from the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund.

In the year 2005-2006, the Annual Report makes a disclosure that the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation received a donation from the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund. The same disclosure is also made in the 2006-2007 report. Again in 2007-2008, the Foundation for a ‘donation’ from the PMNRF.

Though the amount of such donation is not clear yet, it is a fact that a donation was indeed made.

The Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund (PMNRF) was established in the year 1948. Initially, the purpose of the fund was to provide assistance to displaced people from Pakistan during and right after the partition of India.

The resources of the PMNRF are now utilized primarily to render immediate relief to families of those killed in natural calamities like floods, cyclones and earthquakes, etc. and to the victims of the major accidents and riots.

Ministries of Indian Government donated to RGF during UPA rule
In addition to such organisations, the RGF has also received huge donations from multiple government institutions. The Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund is one of them but their annual reports reveal that RGF received funds from multiple government ministries when the UPA was in power.

The Ministries who were partners with RGF and donated to them include the Ministries of Environment and Forest, Health and Family Welfare, Small Scale Industries and even the Ministry of Home Affairs. All of this is greatly disturbing.

Rajiv Gandhi Foundation received funds from Mehul Choksi
It was also it has later revealed that fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi too had made undisclosed donations to the Sonia Gandhi-led Rajiv Gandhi Foundation in 2014-15.

The Annual Reports of the the Rajiv Gandhi foundation received funds from an organisation named Naviraj Estates Private Limited. Mehul Choksi is one of the directors of this company. However, it is not yet clear how much fund did Rajiv Gandhi Foundation receive from Mehul Choksi.

Mehul Choksi and his nephew Nirav Modi are economic fugitives, who have fled the country in 2018 after Rs 14,000-crore PNB fraud surfaced. Choksi got the citizenship of Antigua after fleeing from the country after he was accused in the multi-crore PNB scam.

The Congress party’s foundation received funds from partners of Huawei
Further, the annual report of the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation for the year 2018-19 had disclosed that it had also received funds from Bharti Foundation. The Bharti Foundation was one of the partners with Chinese telecom giant Huawei, recognised widely as an extended arm of the Chinese state.

The annual report states that income for the RGF for the year 2018-19 from grants and donations was Rs.95,91,766 rupees.

The US intelligence officials have been raising concerns for years about the potential for Huawei to use its network access to spy, or worse, to shut down communications in the event of a cyberwar. Despite the threat posed by Huawei, the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation had managed to receive funds from Huawei’s partners as late as 2018-19.

Post Reply