Three DO's for 2010

Wishing the readers a very happy and prosperous new year and the decade 2010. In light of the ND Tiwari episode, I recommend a wish list for 2010.

Our society and nation must reconsider and lift the bans on Prostitution, Alcohol consumption, and Gambling. I am not recommeding lawlessness, I am merely recommending a regulated and moderate openness, and permissiveness. What is good for the powerful and the rich must be allowed for the cattle class as well.

Further, I am not recommending indulgence, I am merely recommending a gentle tolerance for individual freedom to indulge, at one's own risk and cost.

How to formulate a policy to do the same is a matter of debate, and let us do that too openly ....

Thayee's (Mom's) Children in Trouble?

The conflict between the Reddys and Yeddy has taken an interesting turn. The Thayee of all thayees, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi has instigated a CBI inquiry into the mining activities of Obulapuram Mining Corporation, the fund factory of the Reddys. Reddys' thayee, Mrs. Sushma Swaraj is rendered mute! Since these obedient sons have assiduously maintained that they always obeyed the dictats of their esteemed thayee, any indictment of the Reddys would implicate their thayee as well!

Santa-Banta are laughing their intestines out!

Santa's guess is that the thayee who was furious that Yeddy was not seeking her blessings, may herself be forced to seek Yeddy's blessings now!

But the question is, how can Yeddy bless the thayee? By reinstating Ms. Shobha Karandlaje and Mr. Baligar?

Banta's surmise is that now the Reddys will be looking for either a thande (Dad) or switch from thayee to ajjee.

Can my honorable readers make out who the ajjee is? By the way, ajjee in Kannada means grand-mom.

I am very happy that the things have come to this pass. I hope that these things are taken to their logical ends. The opportunistic thayees must realize that the political heights that they have attained in their career is owing to the austerity of the khaki-shorts wearing legitimate children of the RSS, and not the embezzled funds of the their even more uncouth illegitimate political children, like the Reddys.

Summary of Liberhan Ayodhya commission Report

Summary of the Conclusions of Liberhan Ayodhya commission of inquiry

Groups that are culpable

For the purpose of quantifying the culpability, the various persons and organizations named in this report at various places have been divided into three groups.

The first group represents those who bear the primary and the greatest responsibility. These people had complete knowledge of the events as they were scripted. These individuals and organizations were a part of the decision making process or were instrumental in the assault.

The second group consists of those who bear physical, ideological and intellectual responsibility. They were not decision makers and could not change the course charted by those bearing primary responsibility. These include those who portrayed the benign face of the Ayodhya campaign and gave false reassurances to the courts, the people and the nation as a whole. These are referred to as pseudo moderates. This is not to suggest that their objectives do or do not differ from the first group. The term is used to indicate the mode adopted rather than the ends they may have been trying to achieve. Pseudo-moderates had the construction of the temple on its primary agenda while the radicals were more fanatical about the demolition of what they called a national shame.

There are also those who bear tertiary responsibility. These people may or may not have been associated with Sangh Parivar or had any influence over the situation at all. Their complicity stems from their ommission rather than commission.

The blame or the credit for the movement must necessarily be attributed to Sangh Parivar. The Parivar is an extensive and widespread organic body which encompasses organization which address and assimilate just about every type of social, professional or other demographic grouping individuals. The parivar is a highly successful and corporatized model of a political party and has developed a highly efficient organizational structure.

The structure or the methods of the Sangh Parivar for aggregating substantial public base may neither be illegal nor strictly objectionable. But the use of this gargantum whole for the purpose of Ayodhya campaign was clearly against the letter and spirit of Indian law and ethos. The Sangh Parivar spent long years and mobilized its immense media clout and ensured least resistance to its designs. The attempts by pseudo moderate elements even within Sangh Parivar were predictably of little significance and were destined to fail, whether by design or otherwise.

As the inner core of the Parivar, the top leadership of the RSS, VHP, Shiv Sena, Bajrang Dal and the BJP bear primary responsibility.

The commission, having analysed tens of thousands of pages worth of press reports, books, official records and documentation, many hours of audio and video recordings and having observed witness is unable to hold psuedo moderates innocent of any wrongdoings. It can not be assumed even for a moment that LK Advani, AB Vajpayee or MM Joshi did not know the designs of Sangh Parivar. These pseudo moderates could not have defied the mandate of Sangh Parivar, and more specifically the diktat of the RSS, without having bowed out of public life as leaders of the BJP. They were not in control of the RSS and had absolutely no influence over the direction that they have been told to follow.

The BJP was an essential ingredient in the Parivar smorgasbord and essential to capture de jure power and authority, in furtherance of its goals of establishing the Hindu Rashtra. These leaders have violated the trust of the people and have allowed their actions to be dictated not by voters but by a small number of individuals who have used them to implement agendas unsactioned by the will of the common man.

Contribution of Muslim leadership

Selective communal Muslim leaders, obsessed with building personal or individual influence or following for enhancing their political influence and for self gain, were merely bystanders during the entire period and put dismal performance. The fanatic Muslim leadership were either completely complacent and had no substantial or effective leadership or were simply incompetent in projecting their own lopsided counter view to the people throughout the half century leading upto 6th December 1992. Their feeble attempts after 1983 to present a blinkered view of History were without researched substance and therefore possibly incapable of being believed.

The BMAC and later the AIBMAC never setup or presented any claim to the disputed structure in any negotiation with the intervention of any person or at any time and their stand was merely simplitor denial of the claims of the Sangh Parivar which too underwent changes and shifts and articulation with the passage of time. The Muslim and Hindu leadership's shrill cries echoed the divisive and mischievous sentiments which had been heard around 1947.

The Muslim leadership did little to counter the latent fears stoked by the RSS and VHP leadership and instead provided it with the opportunity to embark on what started as a defensive strategy. They provided rabid Hindu ideologues sufficient cause to instill fear into the common citizen of India. Whether the political Muslim leadership represented the views of the average Muslim citizen of India is highly doubtful. The elite political Muslim leadership constituted a class by itself and was neither responsible to, not caring for the welfare of those they purported to champion.

Those who pretend to speak for those who are the downtrodden, only highlight the differences between the people and prevent the integration of the people within the mainstream of the country. In any case, it is inexplicable why the people belonging to the same community which effectively ruled the country for centuries not too long ago should not endeavour, struggle, compete, thrive and succeed in all segments of national life like every other citizen of India, and without having to rely on their religious difference to seek special privilages.

The Muslim leadership wittingly or unwittingly fulfilled the requirement of an adversary role for RSS and VHP to wage war. The Muslim leadership failed the community and its electorate not only in being able to put forth a logical, cohesive and consistent pov, within and outside the courtroom, but also failed to protect the life and property of the innocent massess who got caught up in the post facto riots. The Muslim leadership was conspicuous by its absence from the national debates and its failure to protect effectively against the events which were building up to a crescendo.

The Muslim leadership failed to highlight the extremely high handed and extra-legal methods adopted half a century ago to install the idols in the disputed structure or to open the locks on the gates. The sins of ommission of the Muslim leadership made the Sangh Parivar's task easier. The organizations and individuals who failed to effectively champion the cause of their constituents and of the neutrals who failed as an effective opposition are guilty at the tertiary level.

Role of High Court, Supreme Court

The intransigent stance of the High Court of Uttar Pradesh, the obdurate attitude of Governor, the inexplicable irresponsibility of the Supreme COurt's observer and the short-sightedness of the Supreme Court itself are fascinating and complex stories.

Historians, journalists, and jurists may - and should - explore these dimensions and tell these untold stories for the benefit of the current and unborn generations.

The Central Government was crippled by the failure of the intelligence agencies to provide an analysis of the situation. Supreme Court was misled by the pretentious undertaking given to it by the UP government and the leadership of the movement and the all-is-well reports by its rapporteur Tej Shankar.

About RSS, Parivar and other Hindu organizations

The single minded agenda of the RSS and VHP, and the extremely patient and focussed manner in which the handful of ideologues and theologians manipulated the common masses and turned them into a frenzied mob, capable of acts of the greatest deprivity agenda, is unparalled in recent times.

The events leading upto the 6th December were tainted by a joint conspiratorial enterprise. A rank of leaders emerged within BJP, RSS, VHP, Shiv Sena, Bajarang Dal etc who were lured by the prospect of power or wealth, who were neither guided by any ideology not imbued with any dogma not restrained by any moral trepidation. These leaders saw the Ayodhya issue as thier road to success and sped down this highway mindless of the casualties they scattered about. These leaders were the executioners wielding the sword handed to them by the ideologues.

The RSS, Shiv Sena, Bajranga Dal, BJP etc are collectively an immense and awesome entity with a shrewd brain, a wide encompassing sweep and the crushing strength of a mob. The leadership provided by these organizations in furtherance of the suspect theories of their founders was consistent and unabased.

The RSS, BJP and VHP core have turned the tables - they have redefined seularism and turned the definition on its head to mean the exact opposite of what it has always been held to be and understood all over the world. Their version of Secularism is neither benign nor tolerant of the ideals enshrined in our constitution.

It was not a movement, Demolition was not spontaneous

Ram Janmabhoomi movement is a misnomer to Ayodhya campaign. Rabble rousing organs of Sangh Parivar and inflamatory leaders were focussed on shaming the thinking masses into inaction and suppressing any voices of sanity or moderation that might arise. They were not focussed on tugging at the emotional heartsrings of the common man and building a consensus for a temple at Ayodhya.

The mobilization required logistic support and the amounts transacted exceeded many tens of crores of Rupees. The mode of assault, small number of Karsevaks who carried out the demolition, veiling of their identities, removal of idols and the cash box from under the dome and subsequent reinstallation in the make shift temple, construction of the makeshift temple, availability of material and instruments for demolition and the swift construction of the make-shift temple categorically leads to the conclusion and finding that the demolition was carried out with great painstaking preparation and planning.

All these things does not give credence to the claim that demolition carried out by Karsevaks spontaneously.

About Kalyan Singh Government

The Chief Minister of the state of Uttar Pradesh, its ministers and its mandarins supported the destruction with tacit, open, active and material support at every step, but did not make it part of the officially stated agenda. Kalyan Singh, his ministers and his handpicked bureaucrats created man made and cataclysmic circumstances which could result in no consequences other tha andthe demolition of the disputed structure.

There is no manner of doubt admissible in the culpability and responsibility of the chief ministe, his ministers and his cohorts who were handpicked to occupy selected posts. Paramhans Ramchander Das, Ashok Singhal, Vinay Katiyar, Vishnu Hari Dalmiya, Vamdev, KS Sudarshan, HV Sheshadri, Lalji Tandon, Kalraj Mishra, Govindacharya and others named in my report formed this complete cartel lead by Kalyan Singh and supported by the icons of the movement like LK Advani, MM Joshi, AB Vajpayee.

Chief Minister Kalyan Singh stood on guard against the possibility of any pre-emptive or preventive action by the Central Government or the Supreme Court of India or the other courts or any other institution. He and his trusted lieutenants spared no lie before the highest authorities of the land to befool them and to tie their hands with the niceties of our constitutional democracy.

Chief Minister, members of the Council of Ministers, the officials of the Government of the Uttar Pradesh systematically eliminated all impediments and the RSS, BJP and their allies filled the void with malevolence.

Kalyan Singh's government was the essential component needed by the Sangh Parivar for its purposes. On assuming office, he embarked on a focussed mission to replace the administrative and police officers who were inclined to resist a change in the status quo or who demonstrated the slightestt hesitation in conniving, supporting or collaborating with the new de facto leadership which was gradually taking control in Ayodhya and Faizabad.

These postings and transfers had the singular intent, purpose and effect of smoothening the ride for the demolition which the RSS and BJP had made a part of their election campaign. This was the plank on which they had managed to secure the Chief Ministership for Kalyan Singh and this was the test case which resurgent RSS, BJP and VHP wanted to make a success of.

The second step was to ensure that the hands that wielded the battons and carried the guns were friendly to Karsevaks and did not pose any potential threat to the Karseva. This gratuitous dismantling was secured by posting raw untested personnel or trainees and sympathetic provincial armed constabulary in the twin towns. They were exposed to the religious fervor and harangues of the eloquent RSS and VHP preachers. They had been turned into uniformed karsevaks rather than protectors.

The hands of these troops were tied by the Chief Minister's unequivocal orders to the rank and file that they were to desist from the use of force or resort to firing in any circumstance against the karsevaks or their leaders. The orders were also allowed to be interpreted as a forbearance of use even of less deadly methods such as tear gas or the plain old lathis. Instead of using the riot shields to oppose the violent karsevaks, they were actually handed over willingly to them by the police personnel.

The electronic measures including closed circuit televisions, metal detectors etc were intentionally rendered inoperative and ineffective by the administration to ensure anonymity of the miscreants and easy access to the disputed structure. Senior police officers allowed the destruction and refused to identify those henchmen even before the commission.

The state government leaked the information that the police personnel had been hobbled and would not react or retaliate under any circumstances into the public domain. All the categories of Karsevaks were aware that they were at zero risk from the state's agencies.

The only non manageable variable, from the Sangh Parivar point of view was the possible deployment of central forces in the state, either at the behest of the Central Govenment or sanctioned by the Supreme Court. This threat was also neutralized by senior and well respected individuals stating blatant lies on oath before Supreme Court, apart from protesting against even the stationing of central paramilitary forces sent.

The Supreme Courts' observer, who was handpicked by the High Court of Uttar Pradesh, did not alert the Court about the unfolding duplicity. Even at the moment that the domes were being pulled down, he was not at the spot, having been delayed by his family members whom he had brought along to witness the spectacle.

To sum up, December 6th 1992 saw a state of Uttar Pradesh unwilling and unable to uphold the majesty of the law. The ennui followed from the very office of the Chief Minister downwards and infected the state's minons down till the bottom. The state had become a willing ally and co-conspirator in the joint common enterprise.

The civil service in the state actively abetted the demolition of every democratic safeguard provided in the constitution. The police and bureaucrats of the state actively connived and curried favour with the Chief Ministe and the Sangh Parivar by systematically paralyzing the state machinery. They were the executors of the designs of the RSS, VHP, BJP, Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena etc.

About media

The reporting of events in 1992 was possibly not as tactful and mature as it could have been. In reporting, some sections of the media overshot the restraints of common place prudence and were perceived as inimical to one or the other side of the dispute.The close patronage of certain newspapers, journals and other electronic media by one or the other interested groups tended to expose them to the allegation of malice and bias against others.

As soon as the assault on the structure commensed, the journalists were subjected to systematic harassment and they were not only prevented from carrying on their duties as chronicles of the events, but were also instilled with a real fear for their own safety. The reporters were confined to small rooms or molested or otherwise threatened so that their attention was less on the events they were supposed to cover, and more on their very survival.

Some small sections of the media were possibly guilty of incitement or malicious reporting. The media was a protogonist in the build up to the events of December 6th. It was also a victim of the events of the day.

The Sangh Parivar used the media masterfully in its campaign. A part of the media lent itself willingly to being used throughout the Ayodhya campaign. The inflammatory speeches of the more vocal elements were gleefully reported and sensationalized. The liberalized and newly launched mass media organizations at the time, including private satellite channels stoked the need for feretting out newsy items which could be reported. Media savvy Parivar go the maximum public exposure and canvassed its agenda - or atleast the BJP sanitized version of its agenda - to the entire country. The journalits were equally happy at having access to the material which was capable of weaning the masses away off the staid goverment run television networks or the old school print media.

The media at that time revealed a clear bias in either direction. The media was polarized to be friendly and inimical to the interests of the Parivar. The media managers of the Parivar were conscious of the fact that while their actions would be projected in a positive light by one section of the media, the other sections were going to be far more critical.

On 6th December 1992, media personnel were attacked by Karsevaks at the same time as the commencement of the assault on the disputed structure. The attack was primarily against jouranlists who were carrying recording equipment. The cameras, video recorders and the audio recorders were smashed up and even the exposed films and used tapes were systematically destroyed.

[Contributed by mksri]

Three Main Blunders in the history of Modern India

Prehistory:

The invasions began sometime in 700 A.D. A lot of historical research needs to be done to analyse the causes and effects of the period that ensued. That is not in the scope of this article.

Let us start at just about independence. In 1947, we began with a great hope. Things happened potentially rightly but not actually.

Partition:

Praising Jinnah is irrelevant and can be left to pig-heads like Lalkrishn A. and Jaswant S. What we must praise is partition. Not the geographical, but the religious. For long, fools toyed with the idea that Hindus and Muslims can live together. Note that Hindu is being used as synonym for some one who practices Sanatana Dharma, and Muslim denotes a practitioner of Islam. For once, wisdom thought that Hindus and Muslims can never live together. Nothing new in this, Muslims can never stay in peace with non-Muslims. It is another matter that often they do not live in peace with even other Muslims. But then we made the blunder of ignoring (not seeing) the fact that Hindus and Muslims cannot live together.

Hence, although partition could have happened for the good, but it did not happen rightly. It should either have been in to Muslim India and Hindu India, or into three parts Muslim India, Hindu India, and Secular India.

Just imagine! Mohandas, Jawahar, and Communists could have gone to Muslim India, or Secular India. So partition was not bad per se, it was badly done!

Post Partition:

What ensued was one DF-ness after another. Let's mention the salient ones.

1. Mohandas-ian non-violence and SP-ian Sarva-Dharma-Sambhav (applied to include Islam).

Consequence: This resulted in spineless surrender to nuisance makers, made us weak, spiritually, emotionally, mentally and physically.

2. Jawahar-ian-statism: Socialism/Central-Planning. This was propaganda based dictatorship. Not even the debacle in 1962 opened our eyes. Fools galore all over the place shouting that we must strengthen Panditji's hands post-humiliating-defeat. Emergency in 1975 evoked a knee-jerk reaction. Janata Party came, struggled, and fell. And the DF-ness continues.

Consequence: This made us dependent and unself-reliant, instead of innovating and enterprising.

3. Communistic-Secularism: Appeasement-Affirmative-Action. This blamed all evils of India on Sanatana Dharma or Hinduism. Brahminical-tyrrany, casteist-exploitation were some of the frequently used swear words. Not that we had no ills in our society.

Consequence: But it made us self-hating, self-doubting; practically suicidal.


Symptoms:

1. After 26/11 we have been furnishing "proofs" to Pakistan. Did US even have (let alone furnish) any proof to Afganistan post 9/11? We will say, but we are not as strong as US, not even as strong as China. But why? We believe in being weak! See our Manmohanian nuclear policy. DFs like K Subramanian , R Rajaraman writing that we donot need fusion bombs, because fission devises are lethal enough!! Since deterrence is not effective against irrational adversary. So what should we do? Their answer is, "nothing can be done"! Ask them what they will do if a potential irrational rapist was staying next to their holiday beach-resort.

In my opinion, India's current doctrine of no-first-use of force is useless at best. Firstly, the terrorists have already struck innumerable blows! So even if we strike now, we are only retaliating. Secondaly, even if the terrorists had not struck, and we had tangible evidence, we should have struck. One of the things that can certainly work against an irrational adversary is pre-emptive strikes.

2. In 2009, recession struck. Commies went berserk shouting at roof tops blaming free-market, and capitalism for the down slide. What they didn't shout is that the sub-prime lending crisis of the US was an outcome of central-planning (a thoroughly commie idea), and not free-market. And let me remind you that this government bail-out package too is a commie idea. And this bail-out is the cause for the second-dip that will come in 2010!

In my opinion, the more we rely on government, the more we empower the government, and thereby the more it becomes bigger and more and more wasteful and corrupt.

3. On Dec. 6, 1992 Babri-mosque was demolished, and the media has been shrieking since that Hindu-fundamentalism has been on rise. Liberhan commission has indicted numerous persons and has mentioned many causes, errors of omission and commission. As if the gravest danger to the nation comes from Hindus!

In my opinion, if Pakistan was made for Muslims (Islam followers), then India must be for non-Muslims! Importantly, the question one must be asking oneself is, if there were three partitions of the nation in 1947, namely Muslim, Secular, and Hindu; which part would one have chosen to be a citizen of? I give my answer: I would have chosen to be in Hindu India.

Remedy:

I mentioned various problems, and now I propose my preferred solution to them. In my opinion, in the place of what we have been practicing so far, we need:

1. Krishna's non-violence. Not Mohandas's

We must educate ourselves about dharma (a righteousness which alone can truly sustain us) well, so that we can discern if adharma is masquerading as dharma. Never practise tolerance, or non-violence towards adharma!

2. Chanakya's State. Not Jawahar's.

Free market with good moral values. Moral values through quality education about "Freedom, Personal Responsibility, and Wisdom of our heritage Sanatana Dharma". For the moment, we can make only a beginning with this. It may be too far fetched to talk of achieving Ram-rajya at this juncture.

3. Sanatana Dharma's open-mindedness. Not commie-secularism.

Truthful and honest recording of experiences. Learning by verifying or assimilating the wisdom of these experiences. Exploring in a spirit of freedom mellowed with a sense of responsibility. An unswerving and bold allegiance to truth. Discovering, and rediscovering truths pertaining to both Spirituality and Science and reaping benefits from them.

The Common Factor:

The answer has been given time and over again and again. Education, education, education. From the ancient times of the Vedas, to modern India's Vivekananda, to recent saints viz., Ramana, J Krishnamurti, have all emphasized one word. Education. Macaulay destroyed India by destroying its education, Communists (Jawahar to Romila thapar and company) have been destroying India by poisoning education. And now, if and when we want to rebuild our civilization, we must do it through education.

Let us begin NOW.

Do not forget the horror - A nice, albeit incomplete, piece by Aditya Sinha

Aditya Sinha of the New Indian Express wrote a very good piece on the anniversary of 26/11. It is reproduced below, the original appeared here.

There are several eye-openers in the documentary film Terror in Mumbai, a 48-minute documentary on 26/11 made by Dan Reed for Britain’s Channel 4. One is the entire narrative itself; despite non-stop television coverage of the siege of Mumbai by the Lashkar-e-Toiba, you will not find a more taut, suspenseful, poignant and frightening document of the worst terrorist attack on India. It pains me to have to say that the best film on the subject is not by an Indian, but there you have it (by the way, Dan Reed was commissioned to do this documentary by Eamonn Matthews, who had seen Reed’s 2003 award-winning documentary Terror in Moscow about the siege by Chechen terrorists of a Moscow theatre). The film is being shown in the West (HBO is telecasting it in the USA) but, ironically, it is not being shown on Indian television (though you can see it on the internet: liveleak.com/view?i=1e4 _1246490858).


Perhaps many of you will yawn, for after all there has been a mind-numbing amount of writing in observance of the anniversary of 26/11, and most of it is so paint-by-numbers that it does disservice to the gravity of the event and the innocents who lost their lives. Indeed, that is the second eye-opener of Dan Reed’s documentary: how awful the Indian media is. True, we are not as bad as the Americans: their media processed the pack of lies that George W Bush’s administration fed its people, and is to blame for misleading the American public into that ruinous war on Iraq, the consequences of which include President Barack Obama’s struggle on the direction to take in Afghanistan (this is especially important for India, since leaving Afghanistan to the Taliban means empowering the ISI, as Steve Coll’s excellent 2004 book Ghost Wars repeatedly shows; and that means more terrorist attacks on India). Yet whereas the US media is complicit in screwing the planet, the Indian media is complicit in keeping us a zombie nation. The Indian media shrieks but does not inform us, which is why even those of us whose job is to eat, breathe and live the news, would be taken aback by the Channel 4 documentary.


Dan Reed uses the interrogation of Ajmal Kasab — the only LeT attacker caught alive — and conversations of the terrorists at the Taj Mahal hotel and Chabad House with their handlers in Pakistan to help structure the narrative. He also uses testimonies by some victims, which is more effective because it does not rely on cheap maudlin effects like the weepy music you will hear on whichever TV channel you turn to today; tellingly, most of the testimony used was from the poor victims at the VT railway station where Kasab and Ismail randomly shot dead dozens of victims (in an interview to MOB magazine, Dan Reed says the wealthier of the hostages or victims did not want to be interviewed, perhaps due to their nausea at the way the Indian media treated the event, but to the detriment of maintaining a fuller record). In this documentary, however, the fact that you hear the terrorists clearly, and their conversations used in the script intelligently, makes these parts the third eye-opener.


Frankly, we all knew that our intelligence agencies had recorded the conversations between the terrorists and their LeT handlers, but I think very few of us had heard them, and even so, the snippets that did appear in TV or in print were without context. In Terror in Mumbai the fact that the handlers sound like Punjabi shopkeepers makes it even more terrifying. The LeT, according to Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid’s Descent in Chaos, is a creation of the ISI solely for Indian operations. The ISI has long been a totally ruthless organisation; for instance, during the 1990s, when current Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s father tried to speak out against the Taliban, he was shot dead coming out of a Quetta mosque, according to Coll’s book. According to Rashid’s book, when the UN imposed arms sanctions on the Taliban regime after the 2000 attack on the USS Cole, the ISI made it clear it would kill any UN monitors posted on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border to stop the arms and fuel flow. The ISI takes no prisoners.


To fully grasp the enormity of this, listen to the handlers’ voices in these conversations, congratulating the terrorists while watching them on TV; ordering them to take hostages when they learn that Kasab has been captured, because the handlers don’t want anyone taken alive (for reasons made obvious by Kasab’s confessional statements); ordering them to overcome their hesitation and kill the Holtzberg husband-wife duo at Chabad House (to the extent of ordering the terrorists to keep the phone line open so that they could listen as the execution takes place); and at the end of the film, chillingly ordering the terrorists to tell the government that 26/11 is only a “trailer”; that the rest of the picture is yet to come.


That the rest of the picture will come is in no doubt. A year after the attacks, the same people who were asleep on the job when Kasab and associates floated onto our shores are still asleep on the job. If you watch the documentary then it becomes apparent: the lower-level policemen admit that their brains “froze” when the attack happened, that they did not know what to do. Telling them what to do is the job of higher officials. Listen to Rakesh Maria in this film, and you will realise that our babudom is too self-important and self-serving to ever learn their lessons. They need to train our forces, again and again, in reacting, and in simply shooting on target. Unfortunately, 26/11 has just become an occasion to spend money on new weaponry, and you all know what happens when government servants are given money to spend. Then there are our intelligence agencies and the political management. As the Express showed last week, the less said the better.


Of course, this column does not advocate going out and bombing ISI headquarters in Islamabad (the Pakistani Taliban are already on the job), but if you watch Dan Reed’s documentary, you may feel like going out and doing the deed yourself. Which is why, despite the usual even-temper and level-headedness of this column, I urge you all to watch this film, and make your children watch Dan Reed’s documentary. In all the clamour and clutter that will mark today, this is the one testament to the horror no Indian should be allowed to forget.

Though reminding us that we must not foget 26/11, Mr. Sinha does not suggest what we must understand from 26/11. He does give his pointers: Our establishment is still asleep, media was abysmal, and so on. The mediocrity of our media was pointed out by this author recently. But I am not the first. Countless Indians have been feeling this for long now.

Administrative efficiency, media performance, etc., do need improvement. But is that enough? I feel Mr. Sinha fails in his endeavour by not pointing out that Islam is seriously, certainly, and intimately related to terror, and 26/11 was a blatant and bloody reminder of that. And unless we realize that the premise we are being fed everyday, namely Islam is a religion of peace, is a false premise, we would be far from waking up.

It is just not that the establishment, administration, and the media is sleeping,. It is also that they are also putting all of us, the Indians who finally have to suffer the consequences, to sleep by fostering propaganda of false premises.

Icons of a nation.

In early twentieth century, a demagogue inspired his followers by the adjoining image. It taught, he said, "hear no evil", "see no evil", "speak no evil". However, he thought, it said, "close your ears to warnings of evil", "close your eyes to dangers of evil", and "never talk about the causes of evil". And so his followers have become a society, which closes its eyes, very much like an ostrich burying its head in the sand, to impending dangers. It refuses to discuss about the causes of grave and horrendous events in history, and it chooses to ignore, any sane voice that strives to tell us its point of view.

Monkeys, or gorillas may not be as smart as Santa-Banta, but they are much smarter than most of the followers of this demagogue. They know how to survive, but these followers only know how to be servile.

There must certainly be an effort to chronicle and analyse some of the events epitomising the DF-titude. Let us help ourselves in this endeavour, and learn from the DF-ness of the past.

Drama-2009 in Karnataka BJP.

Thayee (Ms. Sushma Swaraj) has finally spilled the beans. Ms. Swaraj said that "The crisis has put all of us to shame!" And you know what caused it? Shhhh... don't tell anyone, "It is the lack of communication on part of Yeddy."

I am tempted to relate a grand old joke about Santa and Banta. If you already know the joke, please skip the following paragraph. It's the one about horses.

Santa and Banta buy a pair of horses, one each for themselves. They have a hard time identifying which horse belongs to who because the horses look identical. Santa comes up with a brilliant idea, and suggests that he will cut-off the tail of his horse, so that the horse without tail will be Santa's and the one with a tail will be Banta's. But the children in their neighbourhood are very mischievous. Noticing Santa-Banta's predicament they play a trick and cut-off the tail of Banta's horse as well. This brings Santa-Banta back to square one. Now it is Banta's turn to make a bold gesture, and he kindly agrees to rip-off his horse's one ear. But the neighbourhood-kids are equally smart, and they rip-off Santa's horse's corresponding ear too. This continues for a few days and finally Santa and Banta have their horses whose ears, tails are all severed. Then Santa gets the idea of the century. If you want to visualize the light on Banta's face on hearing Santa's idea, recall what-an-idea-Sirji advertisement. Santa tells Banta, "Oye Banta, you take the white horse, I take the black horse".

I know you will ask, "But what has this joke got to do with this piece of news?" The answer is simple. Santa and Banta are poor-butt-of-the-jokes blokes numbering a meagre two. Nevertheless, despite all the mutilations to their respective horses, they could finally figure it out! Here we have four geniuses from the parliamentary committee of the party-with-a-difference, and do you think that they have figured it out at all? Not an iota of a chance.

The intelligence-equation is obvious: Two poor-butt-of-the-jokes blokes have much greater intelligence than four parliamentarians of BJP put together. No points for guessing what that difference is in the party-with-a-difference.

Remember that even though horses may look ugly when their ears or tails are mutilated, they can still run or pull carts. However, can political parties run if they amputate their own slogging members?

This, by no means, implies that non-BJP parties are better off than Santa-Banta. Far, very far from it. Rather, the most difficult question that the pundits are facing is: "Who is the stupidest political party of them all?", and opinion is divided on the matter. But they all agree that none from them can better Santa-Banta.

Santa-Banta were heard discussing among themselves:

1. Santa asked Banta: If BSYeddy was not communicating, why were Mr. Baligar and Ms. Karandlaje ex-communicated?

2. Banta asked Santa: Why could thayee not order her maklu to stop illegal mining business and concentrate on minding their legitimate business?

3. Santa-Banta are not feminists but they did notice a strange phenomenon! Two "He"s get into an "ego" problem, One "She" arrives to find a solution, and the solution she imposes is: another "She" has to go! So the ego-problem between two "He"s may or may not have been solved, but the ego-problem between the two "She"s must have undeniably got aggravated.

May I ask you esteemed readers with keen intelligence to help Santa and Banta?

Should he be referred to as Dean Headley or Dawood Gilani? At the very least "Mr. David Headley formerly known as Dawood Gilani".

There have been frequent question marks about the sense of responsibility displayed by the Indian news media, who wholeheartedly subscribe to preaching Gandhian-Non-violence, Nehruvian-Socialist-Central-Planning, Communist-Secularism-(Muslim Appeasement), each thing being a DF-ness in itself.

What takes the cake, in the present situation, is their constant reference to a recent accused as Mr. David Headley. I wonder how many of us know that this person changed his name from Dawood Gilani to Dean Headley. Notice how this fact has been mentioned in the media link in a cursory reference. In view of the fact that the perpetrators of 26/11 came from Pakistan; any responsible media-person must not just mention, but rather highlight the person not as Mr. Headley but as "Mr Headley formerly known as Mr. Dawood Gilani". Better still, "Dawood Gilani who changed his name to David Headley". This way of mentioning is not only factual and not merely more complete and accurate, but rather it also helps the reader (or viewer) to place the person in a more complete perspective. Mr. Headley is not an American who converted to Islam. He is a Muslim who has recently (in 2006) assumed a western-sounding name. Imagine how our media would report if a person with a title Sharma or Singh had forbidden from defacating in front of his own home, another person with a title Koda. From NDTV to AajTak, they would harangue the viewers by referring to the incident as an "Upper-caste atrocity on a Dalit". Of course, from the perspective of our news-media, what else is there in Hinduism other than horrible practices like casteism? By the way, a somewhat sober view on casteism is presented here. So a Sharma/Singh vs. a Koda is "atrocious casteism". Whereas in the case of Headley (Dawood Gilani), his former name is irrelevant! Talk of responsible jounalism? Phew!

All right thinking people must guard against such deceptions.

W's of Hindu bashing

Hindu bashing refers to the harsh, gratuitous, prejudicial attack on Sanatana Dharma (or Hindu dharma) and anything associated with it (concepts, history, attitude and values). This article explains everything about Hindu bashing.

What?

Many Gods (Polytheism) concept is interpreted as inferior. Varna Vyavastha is condemned as something that is inherently bad. Manusmrithi is selectively quoted and willfully misrepresented. Hindu rituals are discarded as unscientific and superstitious. Many aspects of Hindu values, dress code and lifestyle becomes subject for Hindu bashing.

Where?

From coffee table discussions to parliament discussions, from news paper articles to doctoral thesis, from private exchanges to public discourses, Hindu bashing could be seen in various shades.

When?

Almost always, whenever social conditions are reviewed, national problems are discussed, personal or community problems are discussed Hindu bashing creeps in and sometimes takes the main stage.

Who?

Almost all of us. Some of us unknowingly. Involuntarily. Unconsciously. Those who have agenda of promotion of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism or Communism. Some of the Dalits who think that they are suppressed because of Hinduism and Brahmins. Some of the Brahmins who accept that Hinduism and Brahmans have exploited Shudras. Politicians who are trying to garner support of these groups. Intellectuals who are convinced of arguments built by these groups (around many distortions).

Why?

There is a belief that Hindu bashing will help promoting perceived proselytizing / Jihadi / socialistic / political / Dalit interests. Hindus take part in Hindu bashing, because it offers them the least resistance path. It is safe, non controversial and politically correct.

How?

By arguing that social problem (ills) are the result (effect) of Hinduism. Linking problems with caste system. Implying Varna Vyavastha and equating it to untouchability. Citing examples of reported atrocities on Shudras as proof. Concluding that caste as the root cause of failing electoral system (democratic system). By Brahman bashing. Through attempts to create hatred among Shudras.

Promoting inter caste marriages as a progressive tendency. Encouraging love marriages. And remarriages. Influencing young generation towards inter religion marriages. Advocating destruction of caste. Conversion to Islam or Christianity or to Buddhism is also a method of achieving this goal.

Attempts to reduce barriers to premarital sex. Considering promiscuity not as a taboo. Single mother is a new virtue. Legalizing Homosexual, lesbian, gay relationship is a mission.

Joint family system is unacceptable. Living with parents after marriage is difficult. Taking care of old aged people is not easy. Child less couple consider adoption of destitute. But they don't want to bring up parent less children in their family. These ideas are reinforced by media, policy and public discourse. By design and by imbibed value system.

Distorting Hindu concepts – Karma, dharma, moksha, Yoga, Varna and Stree Dharma. Labelling Hindu greatness – Kula and Acara, Rituals. Repeating distorted vesrions of Hindu aspects. By initiating discussion on liberating Hindu women, uplifting of Dalits and providing freedom to individuals. Implying Hinduism as inhuman, unscientific and irrational.

Attacking RSS, Sanatana Samstha, Ananda Marg and other pro Hindu organizations. Undermining Satya Saibaba, Sri. Ravishankar, Mata Amritanandamayee, Baba Ramdev and Osho. Not recognizing people of Hindu origin.

Suppressing Samskrita. Avoiding stories from Ramayana and Mahabharatha. Distorting Manusmrithi. Ridiculing Veda study. Neglecting Ayurveda and Yoga. Hiding Hindu architecture, art, literature and achievements in science, technology and Mathematics. Institutional support to Christianity, Islam, Left ideology and Buddhists. Unreasonable restriction on Hindus – unnecessary relaxation of legal restrictions to others.

Visitors

About Ram-Rajya

It was on a Vijaya-dashami day that Bhagwan Ram administered euthanasia to Ravana. The austerities of Bharat (and Shatrughna), valour of Bhagwan Ram (and Lakshaman), and devoted sacrifices by the Vanar Sena culminated in the establishment of Rama-Rajya not only in Ayodhya, but all over the world.

Rama-Rajya is not merely an “excellent system of governance”; it is a state where the citizens are so good that “no system is necessary to govern them”. It was not that “Bhagwan Ram” ruled over the world. It was an epoch wherein all over the world, irrespective of who their local king was, the people reached a citizenship where “no system” was necessary to govern them. And yet they also had peace and prosperity.

How is it, that we degenerated ourselves so much that at the present times “no system is able to govern us”? Can we recoup ourselves again? If we can, how can we? These are some of the questions that we need to address.

I came across this piece of writing in a blog. Let's hope that the blogger writes more. Nevertheless, for the moment, can we see how far removed we are from Ram-Rajya? Does our present leadership, be it in BJP, SP or anywhere else, elicit confidence in us that they can lead us, let alone lead us to Ram-Rajya? Do we really want Ram-Rajya? Who are we? What do we really want? We need to ponder over many of these questions. Or do we even need to ponder? We need to ponder at least on whether we need to ponder ...

Monotheism, RSS taking over BJP, and Crisis in BJP in Karnataka

Prologue:

I would comment on each the above points independently, but let me begin by giving my one line comment on these.

And those with weaker hearts and/or those who have delicate sensibilities, please excuse me for my explicit comments.

One Liner:

Each point epitomises, in a summary manner; thoughts, words, and actions of a Dumb Fuck, hereafter abbreviated as DF, or df.

Details:

1. On the Article on Monotheism

Fallacy:

The article is another attempt to understand Islam and Islamic point of view, with an aim to accommodating them.

Fact:

Rather than beating about the bush, we must unambiguously understand that Islam is incompatible with non-Islam, and therefore with us. Islam is non-reformable, always at WAR with others, and is mercilessly no-holds-barred including deception against non-Islamic faiths. So we rather be on our guard.

2. On RSS Taking over BJP

Fallacy:

BJP has swerved a lot from its lofty ideals while RSS, and Sangh Parivar have ideological clarity and depth to set the BJP right.

Fact:

BJP and its mentor RSS (and its family Sangh-Parivar) both have almost always been and are a buch of DFs. Time and again, they repeat the same mistakes. They have no ideological clarity, intellectual depth, or emotional understanding of the matter. They cheated people on Ram-Janmabhoomi in their hurry to form a government. Later, pig-headed leaders like Mr. Pramod Mahajan (in 2004) provided the ill-fated direction to the BJP, while Sushma Swaraj, and Arun Jaitley (in 2009) were busy enacting a Congress-like-high-command and installing L K Advani in the throne of a Sonia-of-BJP.

Indian politicians have Jawahar-meme in them, and therefore political parties have the congress-meme. Each politician is trying to become a Gandhi-Nehru of his constituency/region. And they are always sure that they have all the answers even before they even know the questions, an unmistakable symptom of a DF. Jawahar indeed was a DF, and so are his memetic clones. This is true across all political parties. Absence of fundamental and basic ingredients like intra-party democracy, a functional disagreement handling mechanism, a healthy platform to redress dissent ; all of these are symptoms of a sick political creed. Examples galore. YSR, Chandrababu Naidu in Andhra; Bal Thakery, Raj Thakery in Maharashtra, Vasundhara Raje in Rajasthan, etc., the list is almost endless.

BJP started out with claims of offering a genuinely different alternative. They may claim that they had (more so during Jansangh days) genuinely good intentions too. But we must be aware that good intentions are only a beginning, and hence they alone are not enough. But the speed with which they have replicated a congress within them is astonishing.

It is worth mentioning that an erstwhile leader of BJP (someone who was called 'the windbag' by the inimitable Sitaram Goel) took great pride in the fact that in his younger days he used to be compared with the great Jawahar.

3. On the Crisis in BJP in Karnataka

Fallacy:

B S Yeddyurappa is an honest innocent man who has been wronged by dissidence, and intra party subterfuge.

Fact:

While those at the helm of SP (both) are intellectually negligible, their state-leadership is comfortably ensconced in unmanliness. BSY wept in front of the mainstream media (MSM) like a pussy. He does not deserve any sympathy. He betrays pussillanimity, and yet seeks to be a leader! Even Baligar and Shobha would be happier if he was manly.

Suggestions:

1. We must be extremely alert against any efforts to portray Islam in a sanitized way. Islam is a sick ideology with a psychopath, mass-murderer, paedophile as its founder and eternal role-model for its followers. Its history is a story in deception and violence. Don't be deceived.

2. We, the admirers and followers of the Sanatana Dharma, need to found new political parties. We need to shift the platform of political debate, rather than eternally conceding ground to our adversaries in the name of tolerance and non-violence. We need to diligently do our home work and chalk out a lucid framework in which we can work together, where we can dissent, and also have a reasonable mechanism to redress dissent and our disagreements.

3. Karnataka situation is precariously poised and, I am afraid, doomed. After providing some more tamasha on TV, both Yeddys and Reddys will bid adieu to people and hold on to their money. May be elections again! We the people have to hold ourselves up and proceed. It is high time that we realize that politics is too serious a work to be left for Yeddys, Reddys, Gowdas, Swamys, Siddus, Prakashs etc. Don't hesitate to ask those among your friends and relatives, who promise competent performance, to contest elections, and deliver what the people vote them for, i.e. good governance. And remember, lesser government is good governance. Big government is almost always bad government. Let us move towards Freedom and Responsibility.


Epilogue:

Please do express your opinions freely. If you found what I have written to be outrageous, well that was my intention. Hindus in India have, unfortunately, become so docile and submissive, that they need a waking up. Once they are awake, I am sure they will do the needful. They have been a great civilization, and they will surely be one.

Improving Indian Democracy

Money and muscle have become part of the Indian political landscape, — the growing number of multicrore-patis in Parliament and State legislatures are witness to this as are the increasing number of politicians who have had more than a brush with the law. The amount of money spent by political parties for fighting elections has been going up steadily. If it was about a crore for a parliamentary seat a decade ago, this sum is not enough today even for contesting in an Assembly segment. It has become a general rule in national parties that wherever the party has a Chief Minister there is also a dissident faction that would like to see him or her toppled.[Neena Vyas in The Hindu]

BJP, which was considered as a party with difference is no exception. In fact, the dissidence in BJP seems to be more than that of Congress. What is the remedy for this situation?

Arun Shourie, an intellectual turned politician, advocated "RSS taking over BJP"

BJP needs radical surgery - one swift execution is better than a slow execution. The correction should be applied to whole party - Lock, stock and barrel. There should be a total transformation. RSS should take charge. Sangh had been too democratic and had given too much latitude to the party.  BJP being the most visible face, biggest instrument of RSS. It could not be left to its own devices in the current situation of drift. RSS should keep an eye on the moral conduct of the party like an eagle.[ToI, 25th Aug 2009]

The suggestion was not considered seriously. BJP considered it as an academic exercise. Even Arun Shourie did not provide the details on how RSS could take over BJP.  

The recent Karnataka political crises has again exposed the fault lines of BJP in particular and Indian politics in general. No one seems to have control over the situation and every one is help less. It appears as if no one has any role to play as the crises unfolds. Analysis of the present Karnataka situation or previous Delhi crises could be elaborately taken up. But, it is very clear that BJP will face similar crises in the near future. 

It is the duty of every one, including those who have no interest in politics, to consider suggestions and think about solutions. Nothing should be excluded without exploring. Including the suggestion of "RSS taking over BJP". 

On Monotheism

Picture: Mahmood Madani Chief, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind


The 30th general session of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind at Deoband, western Uttar Pradesh adopted a resolution on November 3, 2009 upholding a fatwa of 2006 by the Deoband Ulema, describing the singing of the Vande Mataram as anti-Islamic because some of its verses were against the tenets of Islam. the Muslim ulema said certain lines in the song violated the spirit of Islam and as such it should not be recited by the Muslims.

Vande Mataram was termed as un-Islamic even before indepenence. According to clerics, Vande Mataram violates monotheism faith that is the foundation of Islam. Muslims love and respect the mother but do not worship her. The Vande Mataram has strong Hindu connotations by depicting the Indian nation as Goddess Durga. It has explicitly Hindu and idolatrous imageries which are objected to by many outside the Hindu community.

Monotheism is the belief in one true God. Christianity, Judaism and Islam are all examples of religions based on this belief. Monotheism in Islam (Tawhid) has three aspects.


1. declaring that there is only one who holds divine functions of creating and sustaining the universe.

2. declaring God one in His names and attributes

3. declaring God one through our service

Polytheism and atheism negates the first aspect. Deitification and humanization negates second aspect. Offering worship to other than God (outward) and showing off (hypocricy or inward) acts are against the third aspect.

Place of Mother in Islam

Paradise is at the feet of mothers. The most worthy person for love and respect is Mother. Beautiful conduct to parents is the most important duty for a Muslim after worshiping Allah. They should be shown thankfulness, obedience, and gentleness towards their faults. Taking care of parents takes precedence even over hijra and jihad.

Different names for God in Islam

The Qur'an refers to the attributes of God as God's most beautiful names. All Knower, All hearing, All seeing, All forgiving, preserver, nourisher, ever living, wise, truth, witness etc are included in the list.

Interpretion of Quaran in shwing respect to Mother

Bowing to touch the feet of the parents is too close to bowing in prostration (sajdah) to Allah and therefore the scholars might consider the practice of touching one’s parents feet forbidden. Kissing the a person’s feet out of respect is similar to touching a person’s feet out of respect could be similar. Doing sajdah before any other being except Allah is haraam and is shirk. Respecting mother by touching her feet is not allowed. What about bowing as in Vande Mataram? If bowing could be interpreted as not equivalent to worshipping the God, then Vande Mataram should be acceptable.

Interpretations of Quaran in explaining Monotheism

Most of the attributes that we see are adjectives. The same adjectives translated to a different language, say sanskrit, refering to a single god should not create problems. And infact, this is the case.

Problem with national anthem

The problesm associated with Vande Mataram are also associated with Jana Gana Mana, the national anthem. Bhagya vidhata (dispenser of India's destiny) is interpreted as God in national anthem of India. How do Clerics  provide a consistent explanation of not issuing fatwa against the nationa anthem?


Fundamental Questions
Analysing further, What is the fundamental problem in idol worship or polytheism? Even if we consider that one God is more appealing, why polytheism should be opposed? Is it not true that in a pluralistic society, polytheism is natural and proves to be a superior concept as it ensures social harmony and encourage tolerance?  Monotheism if interpreted as exclusive formulation, could become divisive especially in a pluralistic society. Interpretations that disturbs social harmony must be narrow and incorrect. Secondly, why so much of opposition to Idol worship? Deitification and humanization may be a open and free approach towards God. 


Finally, why these interpretations are applied to Vande Mataram? Vande is taken as bowing and not as showing respect. Bowing is taken as Sajdah meant for the Allah. Durga is taken as a second God other than the single God.

Story of Battlefield Nursing

Up until the middle of the 19th century, there were no organized and well-established army nursing systems for casualties and no safe and protected institutions to accommodate and treat those who were wounded on the battlefield. In June 1859, the Swiss businessman Henry Dunant witnessed the Battle of Solferino. In a single day, about 40,000 soldiers on both sides died or were left wounded on the field. Henry Dunant was shocked by the terrible aftermath of the battle, the suffering of the wounded soldiers, and the near-total lack of medical attendance and basic care.

On February 9, 1863 in Geneva, Henry Dunant founded the "Committee of the Five" as an

investigatory commission of the "Geneva Society for Public Welfare". Eight months later, In October (26–29) 1863, the five men decided to rename the committee to the "International Committee for Relief to the Wounded". Only one year later, the Swiss government organized an official diplomatic conference. On August 22, 1864, the conference adopted the first Geneva Convention. Sixteen countries sent a total of

twenty-six delegates to Geneva. Govern

ments of all European countries, as well as the United States, Brazil, and Mexico, attended the conference. The Red Cross symbol was declared as the protection symbol at the conference.

National societies were founded after the Geneva Convention. In 1867, Henry Dunant declared bankruptcy and later he was removed from the movement. In 1876, the committee adopted the name "International Committee of the Red Cross" (ICRC). During the Russo-Turkish War from 1876 to 1878, the Ottoman Empire used a Red Crescent instead of the Red Cross because its government believed that the cross would alienate its Muslim soldiers. Many Muslim countries started using Red Crescent instead of Red Cross which was considered as a symbol of

Christianity.

In 1919, representatives from the national Red Cross societies of Britain, France, Italy, Japan, and the US came together in Paris to found the "League of Red Cross Societies". This move, led by the American Red Cross, expanded the international activities of the Red Cross movement beyond the strict mission of the ICRC to include relief assistance in response to emergency situat

ions which were not caused by war (such as man-made or natural disasters). In 1928, the "International Council" was founded to coordinate cooperation between the ICRC and the League, a task which was later taken over by the "Standing Commission". In the same year, a common statute for the movement was adopted for the first time, defining the respective roles of the ICRC and the League within the movement.

Turkey and Egypt were granted membership while using the Islamic Red Crescent as their emblem. ICRC aggreed to adopt Red Crescent as an additional official protection symbol for non-Christian countries. The Red Crescent was formally recognized in 1929 when the Geneva

Conventions were amended. In 1983, the League was renamed to the "League of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies" to reflect the growing number of national societies operating under the Red Crescent symbol. The name of the League was changed again in 1991 to its current official designation the "International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies". In 1997, the ICRC and the Federation signed the Seville Agreement which further defined the responsibilities of both organizations within the movement.

Israel was not happy with both Red Cross and Red Crescent symbols believed to representing Christianity and Islam respectively. It was demanding Red Star of David as the rec

ognized symbol. The Swiss government organized a conference on December 5–6, 2005, to adopt a third additional protocol to the Geneva Conventions introducing the Red Crystal as an additional symbol with equal status to the Red Cross or Red Crescent. Israel was allowed to use Red Star of David inside Red Crystal.

From 1924 to 1980, Iran used a 'Red Lion with Sun' symbol for its national society, based on the flag and emblem of the Qajar Dynasty. The Red Lion with Sun was formally recognized as a protection symbol in 1929, together with the Red Crescent. Despite the country's shift to the Red Crescent in 1980, Iran explicitly maintains the right to use the symbol. Therefore, it is still recognized by the Geneva Convention as a protection symbol with equal status to the Red Cross, Red Crescent and Red Crystal.

National Red Cross and Red Crescent societies exist in nearly every country in the world. Within their home country, they take on the duties and responsibilities of a national relief society as

defined by International Humanitarian Law. Within the Movement, the I

CRC is responsible for legally recognizing a relief society as an official national Red Cross

or Red Crescent society. The exact rules for recognition are defined in the statutes of the Movement. Article 4 of these statutes contains the "Conditions for recognition of National Societies". The rules makes the usage of official symbols mandatory.

Similar concerns of India, Ceylon and the former Soviet Union regarding the use of Christian and Islamic religious symbols were dismissed by the ICRC. In 1977, India requested Red Swastika or Red Wheel instead of Cross or Crescent. But after some time, India relented and accepted Red Cross as its official symbol in order to gain entry.

Visitors so far

BJP - Reducing internal confusions?

Immediaely after Jaswant Singh published a book on Jinnah, a meeting of the BJP Parliamentary Board in Shimla unanimously decided to remove the former Union Minister from the primary membership. Anti party activities by Jaswant against Vasundhararaje in Rajasthan, ideological deviation as revealed by the contents of the book and criticism of the central leadership were the reasons for the expulsion #.

Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi banned the book in Gujarat immediately after the expulsion for its negative portrayal of Sardar Patel. The decision is being read in the party as a stern message of zero tolerance to ideological deviation and indiscipline. These were among several messages clearly conveyed to the BJP by Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat in a television interview.

After a couple of days, the 52-year-old Mr Kulkarni, who was the co-author of Mr Advani’s June, 2005, Jinnah script ended his ``active association’’ with the party as he wanted to have the ``freedom to express,’’ his views but insisted that his decision had nothing to do with the ouster of Mr Jaswant Singh #. He did not see any difference between Mr Advani’s Jinnah appraisal, and the views expressed by Mr Jaswant Singh on the Quaid-e-Azam in his book. Mr Kulkarni was quite critical of BJP’s decision to expel the former Union minister, also alleged the party was now being controlled by “Stalinists.”

Followed by Kulkarni's departure, In an unusually candid interview another senior leader Arun Shourie described BJP as a kite without a string #. He urged RSS to take hold of the party and to watch conduct of individuals. He disapproved Jaswant's judgement on Jinnah but at the same time, differed with Narendra Modi's view on the book with respect to Patel. Arun Shourie has cited criticism of Patel in The Tragic Story of Partition by the RSS ideologue H V Sheshadri for his role in Partition of the country#. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) asked senior leader Arun Shourie to explain his statements against the party leadership #.

Commenting on Arun Shourie’s call for the RSS to intervene in BJP’s affairs, RSS leader Ram Madhav stated that the Sangh had nothing to do with the party and that it will handle its affairs on its own #.

Election 2009

It is not what they say they can do. But what they have demonstrated that they can do, that must decide who we vote for.

Remember: Performance, and not Promises matter.

Look at the Promises: 1950 (Electricity, Water, Roads), 1970 (Electricity, Water, Roads), 1990 (Electricity, Water, Roads), 2009 (Electricity, Water, Roads), 2020 (Electricity, Water, Roads ???)

Look at the Performance: 1950 (Power Cuts, Water Scarcity, Pot holes), 1970 (Power Cuts, Water Scarcity, Pot holes), 1990 (Power Cuts, Water Scarcity, Pot holes), 2009 (Power Cuts, Water Scarcity, Pot holes), 2020 (Power Cuts, Water Scarcity, Pot holes ???)

So, don't look at promises, look at performace. At the very least look at their potential to perform and then critically evaluate their performance.

Remember: Consistent non-performers won't turn into performers over-night.

If you make a wrong choice, you condemn and hurt not just yourself but also your children, your grand-children and their future.

Make Right-Choice. And exercise your choice.

They have made you pay till now, now it's your turn to make them pay.

In 2014 don't just think of voting, decide to contest in elections.

Our beloved mother-land needs not just your vote, it needs you.

If those who you elect do not perform, you must get elected and perform.