Muslim Appeaser Politicians Turning India into an Islamic State


Muslim appeaser politicians turning India into an Islamic State.

6/20/2011

Muslim appeaser politicians turning India into an Islamic State, Part 2

By FFI Contributing Editor Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari

Muslim appeasement by the UPA government:

In the previous article, it has been mentioned how the present United Progressive Alliance (UPA) coalition government in Delhi, under the leadership of Indian National Congress (INC) party is appeasing the Muslims of India with unfair, undemocratic, non-secular and even illegal privileges and concessions to Muslims and thus turning India into a de facto Islamic State. In fact, Muslims in India, despite being the minority, enjoy elevated status and much more privileges, generally offered by a typical Islamic government in a so called Islamic state.

The reader may gauge the extent of Muslim appeasement by the UPA government from the statement of its PM Manmohan Singh. He has said that the Muslims are the first to claim the produce of India. What is the basis of such a stupid comment? Does the Muslim contribute maximum share of India’s GDP? How aggressively the Congress is wooing the Muslim community nationally is evident from the a recent comment by another leader Digvijay Singh, who, while referring to the killing of Osama bin Laden, reverentially said “Osamaji” and bemoaned why the terrorist leader was not given a proper burial.

To please the Muslims further, the said UPA government has drafted a bill called “Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparation) Bill, 2011” and is intending to place the same in the Parliament in the coming Monsoon Session. If the bill gets approval of the Parliament and becomes a law, the Muslims will be supreme lords of the country while majority Hindus will be dragged into slaves of the Muslims.

It is needless to say that the UPA government is going to do this with an eye on vote-bank politics. It has been mentioned in the previous article that the Muslims cast their votes, not according to his/her personal choice but, according to the dictates of their religious and community leaders. Therefore, all Muslim votes go for a single party. When the quantum of Muslim votes becomes significant, or a deciding factor for winning or losing election, political parties start wooing Muslims for their votes by offering them unfair, and even illegal, concessions. The frantic competition that ensues among the political parties to win election and stay in power makes the politicians blind and take any sinister attempt, even at the cost of national interest, to win the Muslim block votes.  The reader may recall that the UPA government came to power for the second time in 2009, with the help of the Muslim votes and the present Communal Violence Bill is reward for their support.

The drafting of the Communal Violence Bill:

The draft of the so called Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Repatriation) Bill, 2011, has been prepared by the National Advisory Council (NAC), headed by Sonia Gandhi, the president of INC. It has been agreed by the NAC at its meeting on July 14th, 2010, the NAC Working Group on the Communal Violence Bill, has set up an Advisory Group and a Drafting Committee to develop a draft bill on communal and sectarian violence. The  draft a bill should aim to provide effective prevention and control of communal and sectarian violence, and justice and comprehensive reparations to survivors and victims of communal and sectarian violence. This would be ensured on the basis of certain essential elements accepted by people’s groups, civil society groups and the NAC, including the key principle of accountability of public officials. While framing the draft, the relevant provisions, including rules, for relief, compensation, rehabilitation, resettlement, restitution, and reparations, keeping in mind the rights of internally displaced persons.

The following are the members of the Advisory Group Members Communal & Sectarian Violence Bill, 2010 Advisory
Group
 (1) Abusaleh Shariff, (2) Asgar Ali Engineer, (3) Gagan Sethi, (4) H.S Phoolka, (5) John Dayal, (6) Justice Hosbet Suresh, (7) Kamal Faruqui, (8) Manzoor Alam, (9) Maulana Niaz Farooqui, (10) Ram Puniyani, (11) Rooprekha Verma, (12) Samar Singh, (13) Saumya Uma, (14) Shabnam Hashmi, (15) Sister Mary Scaria, (16) Sukhdeo Thorat, (17) Syed Shahabuddin, (18) Uma Chakravarty, (19) Upendra Baxi, (20) Aruna Roy, NAC Working Group Member, (21) Professor Jadhav, NAC Working Group Member and (22) Anu Aga, NAC Working Group Member
 The Joint Conveners of the Advisory Group are (1) Farah Naqvi, Convener, NAC Working Group and (2) Harsh Mander, Member, NAC Working Group

The members of the Drafting Committee are (1) Gopal Subramanium, (2) Maja Daruwala, (3) Najmi Waziri, (4) P.I. Jose, (5) Prasad Sirivella, (6) Teesta Setalvad, (7) Usha Ramanathan (upto 20 Feb 2011) and (8) Vrinda Grover (upto 20 Feb 2011).

The conveners of Drafting Committee are (1) Farah Naqvi, Convener, NAC Working Group and (2) Harsh Mander, Member, NAC Working Group

The key Guiding Principles laid down before the drafting committee are
(1) Broaden title and applicability of the law to include ‘communal & sectarian violence’,
(2) Shift from empowering the State, to seeking action & accountability of State/public officials,
(3) Basic framework of law must not rest on declaration of “disturbed areas”,
(4) Need for an independent National Authority to ensure effective compliance with the law, without disturbing the federal structure,
(5) Ensure accountability & criminal liability of public officials for acts of omission & commission, for preventing or controlling communal & sectarian violence, or extending timely and adequate rescue, relief and rehabilitation,
(6) Incorporate the doctrines of Command & Superior responsibility,
(7) Definition of communal & sectarian violence to cover both isolated incidents as well as mass crimes, against people based on religious, caste, linguistic, regional and other identities,
(8) Need to specifically define and include new crimes/offences including sexual assault, enforced disappearances, torture, long-lasting social & economic boycott, and genocide, among others,
 (9) Need to remove prior sanction requirement for Hate Speech (Sec. 153A & 153B – IPC),
(10) Statutory obligation on government to lay down national standards for the entire spectrum of provisions for victims – including rescue, relief, compensation, rehabilitation, resettlement, restitution, reparation and recognizing the rights of internally displaced persons,
(11) Implementation according to the norms in point 10 to be a statutory obligation under this law,
(12) Compensation amounts to be specified in terms of national norms under the law, and revised every 3 yrs and
 (13) Need for amendments in CrPC and Indian Evidence Act to meet extraordinary circumstance of communal & sectarian violence to protect victims’ rights. In addition to that,
(14) specific provisions for victim-witness rights to be made under this law

The list of people as given above for guiding, monitoring and preparing the draft of the Communal Violence Bill 2011, one finds that all of them are loyal to the Nehru-Gandhi family. Many of them operate several NGOs and it is well known that an NGO is very efficient instrument to siphon public money. In addition to that, these committees were formed without any approval of the Parliament. So, while commenting on the formation of the committee, Sam Rajappa, in his article  Communal Violence Bill  says, “The very fact that Parliament was bypassed and the undemocratic National Advisory Council, acting as a supra Parliament, was entrusted the task of drafting the most sensitive legislation, makes the UPA government a suspect. Harsh Mander and Farah Naqvi, conveners of the advisory group to prepare the draft Bill, are known for bashing Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujarat, and do not enjoy the confidence of the public” (The Statesman, June 4, 2011)..

“The NAC is a conglomeration of NGO members handpicked by Sonia Gandhi for their faith in the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty. Most of these NGOs are foreign-funded and they act according to the wishes of donors.  It is indirect interference in the affairs of the nation by foreign countries. The NAC chairperson has become a supra Prime Minister and an instrument for maladministration”, Rajappa adds.

Salient points of the draft:

The most crucial part of the draft for the Communal Violence Bill 2011 is the definition of the term ‘group’. The basis of such groupings may be religion, mother tongue, ethnicity and caste, e.g. schedule castes and schedule tribes. The next important step is to decide whether a group consists of the people of minority or the majority community. In India as a whole, Hindus are a majority and Muslims and Christian are a minority, on the basis of religion. Based on this criterion, the draft proceeds to designate any group consisting of Hindus as a group of majority, while a group consisting of Muslims and Christians as a group of minority community. But such identification is utterly faulty.
 There are so many states, e.g. Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, Mizoram, Manipur, Meghalaya and Nagaland, and in the Andaman and Nicobar islands, where Hindus are minorities. So, in those states Hindus are deserved to be considered a religious minority. The most astonishing as well as ridiculous part of the draft Bill is that, communal troubles are created only by members of the majority community or the Hindus. From this basic presumption it comes out that for any incident of communal violence, only Hindus will be held responsible and punished. So, for any incident of communal violence between Hindus and Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir, where Muslims constitute more than 80% of the population, they will be considered a minority group and only Hindus will be held responsible and punished. Or in other words, if the Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir persecute the Hindus and massacre them en masse, even then the Hindus will be considered offenders and punished, while Muslims will not be held responsible.

Similar is the case for the states Mizoram, Manipur, Meghalaya and Nagaland, where Christians are majority and the Hindus are minorities. In the above mentioned states the Christian missionaries are carrying on ceasasionist movements. They have formed militant terrorist gangs and oppressing the Hindus. If the draft becomes a law, only the Hindus would be held guilty of such a violence and let the perpetrators go scot free, as they have labeled as a minority group. So, the draft Bill proceeds on the presumption that communal violence is created only by the majority community (Hindus) and never by members of the minority communities.

But history tells us that, so far violence between the Hindus and the Muslims is concerned, in almost all the cases, the Muslims are the initiators of the violence. The Mopla Riot in Malabar, Kerala, is one of the most famous incident of Hindu Muslim violence, was initiated by the Muslims (called Moplahs) on August 20, 1921. Instead of calling it a Hindu-Muslim riot, it would be proper to designate it as Hindu pogrom by the Moplahs. Another famous incident of communal violence is the “Great Calcutta Killings” that took place in August, 1946. It is also called the “Direct Action Day” by the historians. August 16 was Friday and that too in the month of Ramadan according to the Arabic calendar. It was therefore the holy day of the holiest month for the Muslims. On that holy day, lakhs of Muslims gathered under the Ochterlony Monument (now Shahid Minar) to offer midday holy Jumma prayer. After finishing the prayer, Muslims started to attack Hindus, killing Hindus, looting Hindu shops, setting Hindu shops and Hindu houses on fire. The killing of Hindus went on for several days.

Vultures feed on corpses of Hindu victims in Calcutta, August, 1946

Many hold this misconception that the 2002 Gujarat violence was initiated by the Hindus. But in reality, the violence was initiated by the Muslims by setting the coach S-6 of the Sabarmati Express on fire on February 27 at Godhra and burning 59 Hindu devotees, including women and children, alive. This barbaric incident initiated the communal violence in Gujarat that claimed over 1,200 lives. So, many called this Gujarat Violence as post Godhra Violence.

The coach S-6 of Sabarmati Express burning at Godhra

So, it can be shown that in every incident of Hindu-Muslim violence, Muslims are responsible. It is due to the fact that the Islamic holy book Koran spews hatred against the non-Muslims, including the Hindus and the Islamic doctrine of jihad inspire the Muslims to kill them, set their houses on fire, loot their wealth and riches, rape their women, occupy their tilling land, convert them by force and so on and so forth. But the holy books of the Hindus do not teach such hatred and oppress the non-Hindus. So, the presumption of the Communal Violence Bill 2011 that majority Hindus should be held responsible and punished for any incident Hindu-Muslim communal violence is patently discriminatory, undemocratic and non-secular. Such a view is totally opposed to the secular principle laid down in the Constitution of India that holds ‘an offence is an offence and the offender should be punished, irrespective of to what group he belongs’.
The other devastating provision:
The other devastating provision of the draft is that, if an individual of the minority community brings an allegation of propagation of hate against an individual belonging to the majority, police will have the right to arrest him without any investigation and put him behind the bar. The victim would not even have the right to know from whom the complaint has come. During trial, the complainant would not have any responsibility to establish his allegation, and it would be the sole responsibility of the victim to prove his innocence.

It is needless to say that this provision, if it becomes a law, would equip the UPA government to victimize any of its political rivals, and send him to prison. Suppose a fictitious man brings an allegation of propagating hate speech against Narendra Modi, the chief minister of Gujarat, the police will have the right to arrest him immediately and put him in prison. He will be released if and only if he succeeds to prove himself innocent.  So, Arindam Chaudhuri, an author, has said that the bill is to kill secularism in India (The Pioneer, June 4, 2011). He has also said, “The NAC-drafted Communal Violence Bill is a recipe for unmitigated disaster. In the guise of promoting communal harmony it promotes rank communalism. In the guise of protecting minorities, it attacks Hindu rights. This Bill will strike at the very foundation of liberty and legitimise criminal misdeeds of Muslims. It must not become law.”

Conclusion:

From the discussion presented above, it appears that the draft of the Communal Violence Bill 2011 has been framed with a strong motive of Hindu bashing. The contents of the draft grossly violate the sacrosanct principle of secularism, democracy and equality enshrined in the Constitution of India and if it becomes a law, it would be a disaster for the Hindus. Though it is doubtful whether such a draconian bill could survive even a preliminary scrutiny of the Supreme Court of India, the Hindus should raise their voice across the country so that the bill gets defeated in the Parliament. If this bill is passed by the Parliament and becomes a law, it will undoubtedly push India a step towards Islamization.

Advertisements

4 Responses

  1. Who is a “minority” in the present global context? A community may be numerically small relative to the local population, but globally it may in fact be part of the majority that is powerful, assertive and well-funded. Given that India is experiencing a growing influx of global funding, political lobbying, legal action and flow of ideologies, what criteria should we use to classify a group as a “minority”? Should certain groups, now counted as minorities, be reclassified given their enormous worldwide clout, power and resources? If the “minority” concerned has actually merged into an extra-territorial power through ideology (like Maoists) or theology (like many churches and madrassas), through infrastructure investment (like buying large amounts of land, buildings, setting up training centers, etc.), through digital integration and internal governance, then do they not become a powerful tool of intervention representing a larger global force rather than being simply a “minority” in India. Certainly, one would not consider a local franchise of McDonalds in India to be a minor enterprise just because it may employ only a handful of employees with modest revenues locally. It is its global size, presence and clout that are counted and that determine the rules, restrictions and disclosure requirements to which it must adhere. Similarly, nation-states’ presence in the form of consulates is also regulated. But why are foreign religious MNCs exempted from similar requirements of transparency and supervision? (For example: Bishops are appointed by the Vatican, funded by it, and given management doctrine to implement by the Vatican, and yet are not regulated on par with diplomats in consulates representing foreign sovereign states.) Indian security agencies do monitor Chinese influences and interventions into Buddhist monasteries in the northern mountain belt, because such interventions can compromise Indian sovereignty and soft power while boosting China’s clout. Should the same supervision also apply to Christian groups operating under the direction and control of their western headquarters and Islamic organizations funded and/or ideologically influenced by their respective foreign headquarters? What should India do to improve and deliver social justice in order to secure its minorities and wean them away from global nexuses that are often anti-Indian.

    Like

  2. SLAVERY IN ISLAM
    All the Muslims of Indian subcontinent are descendants of Hindu ancestors .Hindu forefathers of subcontinent Muslims had to become slaves of Muslims first and then ultimately Muslims at the end.
    Here is what is recorded in Farishtah (when Kalinjar was sacked by Aibak in 1202) – “fifty thousand kaniz va ghulam, having suffered slavery, were rewarded with the honour of Islam.” It is seen in Masalik-ul-Absar about Muhammad Tughlaq – “The Sultan never ceases to show the greatest zeal in making war upon infidels… Everyday thousands of slaves are sold at a very low price, so great is the number of prisoners.” Similarly Ibn Battutah records – “At (one) time there arrived in Delhi some female infidel captives, ten of whom the Vazir sent to me. I gave one of them to the man who had brought them to me, but he was not satisfied. My companion took three young girls, and I do not know what happened to the rest.”
    He further writes that during the celebration of Id in the court of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, daughters of Hindu Rajas and those of commoners, captured during the course of the year were distributed among nobles , officers and important visitors from Arabia. “On the fourth day men slaves are married and on the fifth slave-girls. On the sixth day men and women slaves are married off.”
    Utbi records that when Mahmoud attacked Punjab in 1014 – “slaves were so plentiful that they became very cheap; and men of respectability in their native land (India) were degraded by becoming slaves of common shop-keepers (in Ghazni).” Similarly, it is recorded in Farishtah (the year 1015 now) – “the Muhammadan army brought to Ghazni 200,000 captives so that the capital appeared like an Indian city, for every soldier of the army had several slaves and slave girls” Can you imagine, a normal free Hindu ending up as a slave in a Godforsaken place like Ghazni?
    Slavery was a systematic enterprise in the Islamic scheme of things. Babur writes in his Memoirs that “there are two trade-marts on the land-route between Hindustan and Khurasan; one is Kabul, the other, Qandhar. (Route to Kabul was from Lahore, to Qandhar from Multan)… Down to Kabul every year …from Hindustan, come every year caravans… bringing slaves (barda)”
    Deval Devi was the daughter of Raja Karan Baghela of Gujarat and his queen Kamala Devi. Kamala Devi was captured in the sack of Gujarat (1299), and married by Alauddin Khalji. According to the Islamic law, slave women could be married to Muslims even while their husbands were alive for marriage is annulled by captivity. (this dictum can be seen in Muir, Life of Mahomet & in the book called Dictionary Of Islam).
    Later on her daughter Deval Devi was also captured in another campaign (1308) and brought to Delhi. There she was married to Alauddin’s son Khizr Khan, against her will. After the assassination of Khizr Khan in the politics of succession, she was taken as a concubine by Qutbuddin Mubarak Khalji (1316-20). With the murder of Qutbuddin at the hands of Khusrau Khan she was taken into the latter’s harem.
    In short, this princess was treated as nothing more than a transferable property in the Khalji ruling house. If this was the status of a princess belonging to a felled Hindu king, we can imagine the plight of the ordinary Hindu women that were enslaved by Islamic invaders and taken to their harems. It is for this reason that “Jauhar” of Hindu women (usually led by the surviving women folk of the felled Hindu king) started becoming a standard practice.
    In Manucci II (336 – 38), we can also see the common Muslim names that enslaved Hindu little girls were given and upon attaining puberty they became concubines of the Islamic king that enslaved them. Here are a few names – Gulab, Champa, Chameli, Nargis, Kesar, Gul-i-Badam, Sosan, Yasmin, Gul-i-Rana, Gul Andam, Gul Anar, Saloni, Sugandhara, Koil, Gulrang, Mehndi, Dil Afroz etc. And I do not even want to touch the topic of enslavement and the treatment meted out to hijras and amrads (beardless boys) by the Islamic invaders.
    Did Islam liberate “lower caste” Hindus from the clutches of caste system?
    Did these people leave Hinduism and accept Islam wishfully?
    It is often said by the apologists of these slave takers that but for the Muslim rulers, the peasants would have continued to whither under caste system and that the light of Islam saved the day and many peasants “embraced” Islam.
    We will see the hollowness of this claim through Islamic sources now.
    During Islamic invasions, the peasants scared by the prospect of enslavement, and finding the treatment by the government unbearable, sometimes left the fields and fled into the jungles. Often vanquished Rajas and aggrieved Zamindars also retired into the forests and organized resistance from there against Muslim rulers. In this confrontation Zamindars played the role of leaders and the peasants joined under their banner.
    In the early period some angry rulers like Balban and Muhammad bin Tughlaq hunted down these escapists in the jungles like wild beasts. Muhammad Tughlaq was very keen on enslaving people and converting them to Islam. The flight of peasants sent him into fits of rage. When Hindus organized armed resistance armed peasants provided contingents to Baheliya, Bhadauriya, Bachgoti, Mandahar and Tomar Rajputs in the earlier period of Hindu resistance against Isalmic invasions & to Jats, Marathas and Sikhs in the later periods. Thus labeling Islam as liberator of any Hindu group is utter foolishness. Period.
    A Sufi of the stature of Amir Khusrau wrote in the Ashiqa: “Had not the law granted exemption from death by the payment of poll-tax, the very name of Hindu, root and branch, would have been extinguished.” A few years later he asserted that “the Turks, whenever they please, can seize, buy, or sell any Hindu.”
    This should not surprise us as Sultan Sikandar Lodi’s Mother was a Hindu that was enslaved by senior Lodi but he became a Muslim bigot. Sultan Sikandar Lodi’s Mother Zeba was originally a Hindu by the name of Hema a.k.a Amba. Bahlul Lodi was attracted by her beauty while he was governor of Sarhind. He forcefully married her after ascending theafter ascending the throne of Delhi. But she could not stop her son from slaughtering Hindus – like Father, like son.

    Like

  3. […] Muslim Appeaser Politicians Turning India into an Islamic State (santoshbhatt.wordpress.com) Share this:TwitterEmailDiggFacebookRedditStumbleUponPrintLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]

    Like

  4. […] Muslim Appeaser Politicians Turning India into an Islamic State (santoshbhatt.wordpress.com) […]

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: