THE REAL DIVISIVE FORCE

Guest post from T R Ramaswami

The Congress and particularly the first family that owns the party are shouting hoarse that Modi is a divisive force. However let us examine history a little closely. It was the Congress that agreed to partition the country on the basis of religion because the paterfamilias was in a hurry to sit on the gaddi. Recollect that Attlee had given Mountbatten more than a year to transfer power but he did it in just five months. Why? After dividing the country on the basis of religion the Congress then divided the country on the basis of language. That too has proved to be futile as witnessed in Andhra Pradesh where two segments with a common language are at loggerheads. Then the Congress proceeded to divide the country on the basis of caste with the carrot of reservation, so much that everyone in this country wants to be backward so that they can go forward. In fact there have been more riots and people killed in religious, caste and language clashes during the Congress regime starting with Hyderabad in 1948 – the Sunderlal report is still under wraps. So my dear pseudo Gandhis, please tell us who is the real divisive force in this country?

TRANSGENDER ISSUES

The Supreme Court has recognized the third gender and has asked for benefits to be granted to the LGBT community. While one can understand benefits to the ‘T’ segment, why should the LGB get any benefits? Further benefits to the transgender segment are fraught with several dangers. Some transgenders are born as such and there are no opinions on these being given benefits and assimilate into society. But everyone knows that there is a criminal mafia, with tacit political support. This mafia kidnaps young boys and brutally mutilates them into transgenders, to perpetuate their community. Now with the top court’s decision this mafia may become even more active and dangerous to society. What safeguards does the court specify to ensure that only those who are born as transgenders are eligible for benefits?

Advertisements

CONSTITUTIONAL ISTRIFICATION OF HISTORY

Guest post by T R Ramaswami
What exactly is the reason for the hullabaloo raised over the cartoon? It is nothing but symbolic hypocrisy like the one on the auction of Gandhi’s possessions. The more important question that no one has the courage to ask is this – If Ambedkar is the so-called “Father” and “Architect” of the Indian Constitution as many would want it to be claimed, did he do a good job? Then let them explain why he was such a poor visionary. We have had 100 amendments in less than 65 years. That‘s a far better strike rate than that of Gayle, Afridi or Sehwag. Contrast this with the less than 30 amendments in 230 years in the US Constitution. It is evident that Ambedkar’s name has been used as a vote gathering technique while his Constitution has been mauled and raped. The question is – when will the Dalits realize that they have been taken for a ride and that their poverty and consequent illiteracy has enabled this? The sucking up to vote bank politics of the Congress compelled that he be given the title of “Father of the Constitution” with a more than deserved share of the credit. If however the contrary is true, then is it not correct that the Congress governments, under whom most of the amendments were enacted, did so only for narrow political gains, thus destroying Ambedkar’s seminal work? It would be interesting to hear the responses of the Congress and the supporters of Dr. Ambedkar. If Ambedkar’s reputation has to be restored then let the Constitution be restored to its 1950 glory and let us run the country on that basis.

Since we have been correcting history/political science text books to suit various ethnic, social and political needs, there is one correction that needs to be made. History books tell us that Nehru, a leader of the Congress “fought” for independence. But there is no information on what dates and which places he did so – and what “fighting” he really did. Making provocative speeches (which every two-bit neta does today) and sending long memorandums to the Viceroy do not count. Could the text books please carry this information? Also if he was such a great freedom fighter, then why was he not sent to the Andamans where the real freedom fighters were sent? Why was he sent to jails with all comforts where he could letters that became books and on which royalty was earned later? I am told that the only fighting that Nehru only indulged in hand-to-hand ‘combat’ – with the Viceroy’s wife on the lawns of the present Rashtrapathi Bhavan. History books also tell us of the great crime Nathuram Godse committed in assassinating Mahatma Gandhi. But they do not tell us that he committed an even greater crime – he shot the wrong man. Who should he have shot – the Great Freedom “Fighter”. History books should also tell us why the Congress that claims to be a Gandhian party did not dissolve itself as desired by the Mahatma. Will the HRD Minister answer all these questions so that our censored knowledge of history is complete? Perhaps the above is the reason why many say ‘istri’ for history. They know that inconvenient facts have been istrified.

 

WARS AND NUMBERS

Guest Post by: T.R. Ramaswami

The First World War, called the Great War acquired its premier ordinal global status only in 1939 after WW II started. Similarly when, how and why the Great Indian Mutiny aka Sepoy Mutiny acquired the appellation ‘First War of Independence’ is not very clear. But then, which was the second? Why not call it just the War of Independence? It would appear that the Congress wanted its freedom struggle to be ‘recognized’ as the ‘Second War of Independence’ though all-out wars can hardly last more than a few years. The independence ‘struggle’ proper took more than three decades.

Why did the Sepoy Mutiny fail? Compare the current nation-wide participation in the Anna Hazare campaign. The mutiny had no central leadership, identity or plan. Separate uprisings at various places on hearing of similar events elsewhere pursued their own agenda. But the most critical reason is that there was no means of mass communication. Thus the mutiny could not acquire the critical mass required for success. Telegraph came to India only in 1869. Contrast this with the manner the Anna campaign has all means of internal communications and external publicity. Without this it could have never become what it is. If JP had got this publicity in 1975, history would have been different. No wonder the Government wants to clamp down on electronic media. Let alone India, even the world is watching the Second (or is it Third?) War of Independence – with the Government being a very good comedian. Only the heroine is missing.

 

SECULAR BLAST

This is a guest post be T.R.Ramaswami

How many blasts have taken place in the last 15 years? – Here is the list which may not be complete but still sufficient – Mumbai (1993), Coimbatore, Lucknow, Jaipur, Varanasi, Mumbai (2006), Malegaon, Hyderabad, Delhi, Kabul, Bangalore, Ahmedabad, New Delhi (2008), Malegaon (2008), Modasa, Assam.
However we find that all the attention has been directed only to the Malegaon blast and we hear nothing about the rest. Why? Because the Malegaon blast was an unsecular blast. All the other blasts were evidently secular according to Secular Maataji, whose temple is said to be located somewhere in New Delhi.

SECULAR HYPOCRISY
Recall how netas and even the media scream that terrorists have no religion. Now how does this tie up with the plea that Mohammed Afzal should not be hanged during Ramzan? Here is a case where the police have been able to produce evidence to convince the court of his guilt. Now letting him go would be a blow to the police. And since he is a man convicted of a terrorist act, ipso facto he has no religion and Ramzan has no meaning for him. If secularism is so important, then why did such considerations not come into play when the Sankaracharyar of Kanchi was arrested on Diwali day, the most auspicious religious festival of Hindus? Evidently secularism is the art of boot-licking the minorities to garner votes.

SUCKULARISM
I write with reference to Mr. Balbir Punj’s article “A 17-year 48-act farce” (Asian Age 4 Dec 2009). Mr Punj is right – Muslims and Christians are able to do in Hindu majority India what they will never be able to do in each other’s country and even in their own country. India is secular not because that word is there in the Constitution but because the majority are Hindus. Secularism has become “suckularism” because certain political parties, particularly the Congress suck up to minority vote banks because they ejaculate votes every five years. Let the Congress answer one question – if Jinnah wanted a separate country for Muslims, as is taught in school history, why were all Muslims not sent to Pakistan? That’s because Nehru was worried that if this was done then Pakistan may have got Kashmir and he did not want his Kashmiri Pandit jathwallahs to become refugees. He did not mind Sikhs, Sindhis and Punjabis being thrown from their lands.

SECULAR RUBBISH
Over the past few days we heard a number of “secular” leaders mouthing inanities like how the “non- secular forces” have been defeated etc. The fact is that no party can claim to be secular, as the country itself is not yet fully secular. Secondly, if the carnage in Gujarat in 2002 was a non-secular act how about the slaughter of Sikhs in 1984. It appears that a Congress slaughter is secular while an RSS/BJP slaughter is non-secular. Incidentally will Mr. Manmohan Singh have the secular courage to ensure that some justice is done to those who lost their relatives in 1984. After all some of the alleged accused are now MPs in his own party.

SECULAR TERRORISM
At last terrorism is also going secular. The media has the courage to use headlines like “Hindu Terrorism”. Perhaps they will soon develop testicles to also write about “Islam Terrorism.” If all Muslims are not terrorists and terrorists do not have any religion then why is this rule also not applicable to Hindus? Maybe because we are secular. There is another aspect regarding the daily and front page publicity given to Col. Purohit. Evidently the ruling party is using it an election propaganda to check the BJP. It is also stated that the netas, bureaucrats and the police are using the issue to keep the armed forces silent on the Pay Commission issue. Perhaps the police and particularly the Mumbai police, which forms the ATS, need to be reminded that it was the army that held its pants up during the police mutiny in 1980. In fact the “coffee-table” book on the Mumbai police does not have one word on this as it would probably spoil the aroma.
But let me state something in defence of Hindu terrorism. I have no objection to the term provided the media also uses the term “Islamic Terrorism.” Looked at from one perspective this country has been subject to Islamic terrorism for more than 1000 years from the days of Ghazni. So what if Hindus have started retaliating? What riles the Islamic world and many Muslims in India is that even after ruling India for more than 600 years they were unable to convert more than 30% – the only country which they could not turn Islamic in entirety. Half of these converts went to Pakistan and Bangladesh. We made the mistake of not having a clean partition on the basis that is taught as history in schools – that Jinnah wanted a separate country for Muslims. If that is so then why are there more Muslims in India? That’s because Nehru did not want all Muslims to go to Pakistan. If they did then Jinnah would have been justified in asking for more land and ideally Kashmir should have been given to Pakistan with ALL Muslims. But Nehru did not want his Pandit jathwallahs to become refugees – which they are now.
To sum up we are paying for the biggest mistake in modern Indian history – that of Nathuram Godse – he shot the wrong man.

SECULARISM, JINNAH AND GANDHI
I write with reference to the letter “Not A Secular” by Mr. Shailesh Kumar (BS 8 July 2005). Mr. Kumar states that Jinnah was not a secularist although he did not want the clerics to have a say in the government. However Mr. Kumar seems to have forgotten that it was Gandhi who gave the Indian Muslim an extra-territorial identity by unnecessarily supporting the Khilafat movement. This incident, sometime in 1919, which involved the Caliph, was not even considered important by several Muslim nations. By this one act Gandhi made the Indian Muslim feel that he was a Muslim first and an Indian second. In fact, soon after came the Moplah rebellion in Kerala when several Hindus were slaughtered. Hence any incident anywhere creates an issue here even if several Muslim nations keep quiet. A case in example – the ban on Salman Rushdie’s novel.
Regarding Jinnah’s violent methods – if we had used violence to fight for our freedom, as advocated by Bose, we would have got it at least 25 years earlier and there would have been no partition. Gandhi’s non-violent method delayed independence and is the main reason for our “soft state” image.

MUSLIMS, INTELLIGENCE AND WAHHABISM
I write with reference to the article “Need to recruit Muslims in Intelligence agencies” by Mr. Mobin Pandit. It may be pertinent to note that from 1947-1977, not a single Muslim was recruited in the higher ranks of the intelligence agencies by the so-called secular Congress government as they were considered “untrustworthy”. This has been revealed in several books by spooks who worked in these agencies. In fact it was Morarji Desai who changed the policy but since he was there only for a year, one wonders whether it was again changed thereafter.
As regards the Wahhabism and the Deoband School, it may be noted that more than 50,000 Indians, concentrated in Bihar and UP have given Arabic as their mother tongue in the census. This is not surprising and the history behind this is intriguing. It goes back to the 16th. century when Naqshbandi Sufism was brought to India by Sheikh Ahmed of Sirhind (1563-1624). Thereafter the lines connect to Syed Ahmad of Rae Barreilly (1786-1831) who was influenced by both Sheikh Waliulah of Delhi and Muhammad ibn Abd-al Wahhab of Nejd, Saudi Arabia. It was Syed Ahmad who was responsible for creating the Three Patna Families, whose descendants/followers are the foremost practitioners of Wahhabism in India. In fact, during British Raj, this group funded and maintained a terrorist group in the Mahbun mountain range, west of the Indus in the present Swat province in Pakistan. This group was called the “Hindustani Fanatics” who were planning a jihad which can only be launched from dar-ul-Islam (land of Faith) on the dar-ul-harb (land of the unfaithful). For more details one should read the superbly chronicled book – God’s Terrorists – The Wahhabi Cult and the Hidden Roots of Modern Jihad – by Charles Allen.

– T.R.Ramaswami

 

INTELLIGENCE MOVES

Guest post from T.R.Ramaswami

I write with reference to your editorial “Chidambaram’s Proposals” (BS 28 December 2008). The proposals are nothing but a rehashed version on what the US did after 26/11. Faced with the problem that the FBI, CIA, NSC etc had different objectives and did not talk to each other, the US created the TTIC – Terrorist Threat Integration Centre. However post 26/11 the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, headed by Senator Richard Shelby, made some important statements that Mr. Chidambaram may do well to consider. The report, inter alia stated – the FBI has deeply entrenched mind sets that prize the production of evidence supported narratives over the drawing of probabilistic inferences based on incomplete and fragmentary information …..Law enforcement agencies just think differently from intelligence organisations…….Intelligence analysts would doubtless make poor policemen and it has become very clear that policemen make poor intelligence analysts.

Our IB and RAW consists of more than 80% IPS officers at levels higher than Assistant Director, and many of the deputationists are those who do not want to do routine police work or have been sent to these bodies because the state government does not want them. Intelligence aptitude is not their forte or even a criteria. However having spent time in the IPS they have become personal adjuncts of the government in power, keeping watch over opposition moves, helping in toppling governments and even funding the purchase of MPs/MLAs sequestered in their safe houses from the secret budgets they have. What security and intelligence the country can get from such outfits is a moot point. However to be fair it must also be stated that an intelligence body is the only one where failures become public but it cannot publicise its successes as that would alert the other side and may lead to more failures! A real Catch-22 if there was ever one.
In a recent TV interview Mr. Chidambaram slammed the state governments for not giving a tenure to key officials and admitted he could do nothing. Can he at least start with his own Congress state governments? And how about denying central police support for those who do heed to the Centre’s advisories. Other wise it appears that the Union Home Minister’s writ runs only over New Delhi, some central police organizations and the IB and RAW.

– T.R.Ramaswami

 

Art of stealing a billion dollars and escaping with it

”If there is any specific violation or complaint, we can look into it… after this settlement, I don’t think there is any need for an inquiry,” Chidambaram told a news channel after the Reliance Industries Board meeting in Mumbai.

It has been so unfortunate in India that in recent disputes financial irregularities of the tune of a billion dollars in Reliance Industries came to limelight.

A few gifts were showered on the ruling Congress party (with whom they are already very close); including aircrafts for Sonia Gandhi private use and the Finance minister gave them a clear chit.

It is unfortunate that in India firstly there is not much transparency for the investors to keep track of the management decisions and finances. Then even if some of the skeletons emerge out of the closet, promoters pull some strings and everything is back to normal.