Most now know that the Indian history we read is fabricated. It’s been a handiwork of Nehruvian academicians and Marxist scholars who fear the revival of Hinduism in a largely Hindu country. A nation without identity is easier to manipulate and confuse than the one conscious of its identity. Hinduism is older to Islam and Christianity by thousands of years but it’s in the interest of both monotheist religions to obliterate the only Pagan religion still going strong. Thus money pours in from foreign shores in the form of NGOs and aids to Masjids. Within India, not as much judiciary as media, do the damage. The goal is to keep India apart from its soul.
The revisionism of India’s history books has gained ground in recent decades. Among many such soldiers of truth is Francois Gautier, a foreign French journalist who loved India so much that he stayed put in this country since 1971. Among his many books is “A History Of India As It Happened: Not as it has been written” which is in circulation for a few years now but is worth every second of yours.
The compass of the book is huge even though in terms of pages it doesn’t count more than 236 pages. It picks up threads from the very beginning to right up to the Narendra Modi era which suggests a rather fleeting, and not reflective, approach by the author though perfectly justified if the attempt is aimed at initiating the innocents to truth, and not lose them by a dense exposition.
Though the insight into our times is no less interesting—for instance Mother Teresa’s mission was to convert India to Christianity (Did she ever say a good thing about Hinduism?) – this review would restrict itself to four epochs of India’s history which has been mutilated by Nehruvian-Marxist forces.
INDIA IN PRE-ISLAMIC ERA
Surely this was the most glorious spell of India’s history much of which has been distorted, buried or mocked at as unscientific—we all are witness to the derision our newspapers reserve for Science Congress where our glorious past is elucidated. So let’s dive straightaway into it.
American mathematician A. Seindenberg has conclusively shown that the ancient Vedic mathematics, Sulbasturas, have inspired all the mathematic sciences of the antique world—from Babylonia to Egypt to Greece. Western world traces all its culture, heritage, philosophy etc to Greek world whose religion was definitely pagan and deeply inspired by Hindu practices.
Interestingly, till the 19th century, Europe acknowledged the supremacy of Hinduism as the fountain of all wisdom which shaped humanity. But once colonization gained roots and Christian missionaries spread far and wide, they couldn’t have accepted India as the land of eternal wisdom for their propagated mission was to civilize the barbarians. How could they admit that their very culture was derived from these savages? How could missionaries accept that their own religion was influenced by these very heathens?
The author presents various evidences that the study of India’s culture, history and philosophy was the flavour of Europe’s schools and universities till the 19th century.
Anquetil-Duperron had translated the Upanishads in 1801; Eugene Burnouf published in 1844 an “introduction to Indian Buddhism”; in Paris was created the first chair of Sanskrit. Famous writers and philosophers such as Edgar Quinet, Ernest Renan, Hippolyte Taine or Charles Renouvier were teaching Indian philosophy in academic institutions. The remarkable historian Michelet wrote: “From India comes a torrent of light, a river of Right and Reason.”
Famous Indianist Jean Herbert reminds us that “many centuries before us, India had devised most of the philosophical systems which Europe experienced with later…Egypt and Greece owe India their wisdom.”
German philosopher Frederich Shlegel said that “ India is not only at the origin of everything, she is superior in everything, intellectually, religiously or politically—and even the Greek heritage seems to pale in comparison.”
Friedrich Nietzsche said: “Budhism and Brahminism are a hundred times deeper and more objective than Christianity.”
But late in the 19thth century, Europe became “Helleno-Centric” (Greece-centred). As per French philosopher and journalist Roger-Pol Droit, it was philosopher Friedrich Hegel who sowed its seeds: “Hegel didn’t discover the Greeks; he created them and made up for them a destiny and thoughts which they didn’t always have.”
India suffered greatly at the resultant manipulation of history. Aryan Invasion Theory was one such fall-out. It was depicted that migrants/invaders from Central Asia pushed the local populace of north-west India to south and gave India its’ language and culture, including Vedas. That they moved in around 1500 BC which is a blatant lie: If Vedas were as recent then how come Saraswati river, which disappeared in 2200 BC, is mentioned 50 times in Rig Veda?
Since Harappan Civilization is said to be flourishing in 3100-1900 BC, Rig Veda must be in existence by 4000 BC. The author doesn’t hold himself back: “Aryan Invasion Theory was imposed upon the subcontinent by its colonizers and is today kept alive by Nehruvian historians.”
For example in the “Dictionary of Philosophers” there is no mention of Buddhist philosopher Asanga whose work is as important as those of Aristotle. None of Asanga’s books are in Europe’s libraries even as Nietzsche’s letters to his mother when he was only six are treated as intellectual marvels!
A few historical facts which we are not told are worth mentioning. For instance, Chandragupta, who founded the Maurya dynasty came from a low caste (so much for India’s “reprehensible” caste system). His administrative set-up was so efficient that it was later retained by Muslims and even English. In true Indian traditions, Chandragupta renounced the world during his last years and lived as an anchorite at the feet of the Jain saint Bhadrabhau in Shravanabelagola, near Mysore.
Most wouldn’t know that the Bhakti movement was developed in South India during the Pallavas; India’s influence extended to Mecca where Shiva’s black lingam was worshipped by the Arabians.
A few things Hindu critics need to bear in mind: Brahmins may have been the biggest in the caste system but they were poor and didn’t seize political power; “democracy” was long in vogue –even the great Ashoka was defeated in his power tussle with his Council and had to practically abdicate; Indian sculpture was unique for its complete sense of ego-very few of India’s sculptural masterpieces are signed for instance; Hindus always worshipped at non-Hindu places, such as Melngani, the Christian place of pilgrimage of South India; or some Sufi shrine in Kashmir or Rajasthan.
ISLAM AND THE MUSLIM INVASION
The massacres of local populace by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the holocaust.
Babur killed hundreds of thousands of Hindus and razed thousands of temples. His ultimate goal was the destruction and the enslaving of the Hindus; Aurangzeb had the “satnamis of Alwar” massacred to the last one, leaving one entire region empty of human beings: Conquest of Afghanistan in 1000AD was followed by the wiping out of the entire Hindu population—or Hindu Kush (Slaughter of Hindus); Bahmani sultans in Central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 Hindus a year; In 1399, Teimur killed 100,000 Hindus in a single day (and an Indian Bollywood star still considers the name worthy of bestowing it on his son); the last Jihad against the Hindus was waged by the much glorified Tipu Sultan at the end of the 18th century.
As per renowned professor K.S. Lal, Hindu population declined by 80 million between 1000-1525AD.
And how Nehruvian and Marxists adherents view this barbarity?
This is Pt Jawaharlal Nehru: “Mahmud of Ghazni was in the first place a soldier and a brilliant soldier”. Amazing on a man who was proud of desecrating hundreds of temples and made it a duty to terrorize and humiliate pagans.
Historians Romila Thapar, Harbhans Mukhia and Bipin Chandra, once professors at the JNU, are also cited. Sample this from Thapar: “Aurganzeb’s supposed intolerance is little more than a hostile legend based on isolated acts…” Come on Thapar- How can one be so dishonest or so blind?
The author views the flight of Hindus from Kashmir; or of 26/11 in Mumbai as a reminder that the Mughal cry for the House of Islam in India is not over yet.
Along with misinformation—for example, that India had a wretched education system when in Madras alone there were 125,000 medical institutes before the Whites came—England’s colonization inflicted a terrible toll on lives, industry and culture in India.
Industrially, the British strangled the local industries. They finished products, such as textiles, which had made India famous and a power in the world. Instead, they turned them towards jute, cotton, tea, oil seeds, which Britain needed as raw materials for their home industries.
Britain employed cheap labour for their enterprises and didn’t care for the perishing traditional artisans. And let’s also not forget how English exported Indian labour all over the world in their colonies—whether to Sri Lanka, Fiji, South Africa or to the West Indies.
The author also points out the conversion aims of Christian missionaries. For example, International School of Kodaikanal, under the guise of religious studies, still tries to convert its students, most of whom are Indians.
Accordig to British records one million Indians died of famine between 1800-25; 4 million between 1825-50: 5 million in 1850-1875; and 15 million by 1875-1900.
The book hurtles along swiftly on the pre-independence era and make you chuckle under the breath. Till the 19th century, the Congress regarded British rule in India as “divine dispensation”; Quit India was not for India’s independence but because Gandhi refused to cooperate in the Second World War; For all his fight in South Africa, Gandhi achieved “second class citizenship” for the Indians; Islam’s political institutions were semi-barbaric; Sufism is a lift of Gnostics who lived in Persia and influenced by Vedanta; Nehru went for socialism when there was no class conflict in India.
The books asks some serious questions on Kashmir, and on a bigger scale on Islam.
Kashmir once was entirely made up of Hindus and Buddhists before they were converted by the invading Muslims six centuries ago. Even as recently as the advent of the 20th century, there were 25 per cent Hindus in the Kashmir valley. Today the last 350,000 Kashmiri Pandits are refugees in their own land. Author views it as a “much bigger ethnic cleansing than the one of Bosnian Muslims or the Albanians in Yugoslavia.”
There is reflection on so-called human rights violations in the Valley. “If India decides to keep Kashmir, it has to do so according to the rules set by the militants: violence, death and treachery are the order of the day. As for the possibility of referendum, the author foresees a situation where the likes of Farooq Abdullah and Ghulam Nabi Azad could come to power and then be “eliminated” by Jihads who would then hand over Kashmir to Pakistan. Not just Kashmir, but Punjab, Assam, Gorkhaland, Jharkhand and Tamil land all could go in the name of democracy and human rights.
As for Islam, why it’s mentioned as a Muslim-Hindu question when it’s plainly a Muslim obsession, their hatred of the Hindu pagans? The RSS and VHP have never killed anybody, never massacred anybody in the name of their God. It’s an irony that those Hindus whose ancestors were raped, slaved and killed are giving a cry on Islam’s behalf today after being converted to the religion. (Jinnah himself was a descendent of a Hindu, named Jinnahbhai).
There are some related questions too. Did Amnesty International, which question Indian state’s role in Kashmir, bother at all about the support given by the CIA to mujahiddins in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Do Pakistani or Bangladeshi bombers in Hyderabad or Mumbai could function with the help of India’s muslims?
Media is heavily censored. Hindus are killed in pogroms in Pakistan and Bangladesh (read Taslima Nasreen’s Lajja) but their deaths is not worth a tear; while Hindus are colonized, converted and killed, it’s they who are blamed and not those who did the heinous acts.
The final word must go Sri Aurobindo on Islam: “The Islamic culture hardly gave anything to the world which may be said to fundamental importance and typically its own Islamic culture was mainly borrowed from the others.”
If I was an Indian Muslim, I would have a whole lot of questions today and certainly no answers.
So far, I believed in the pictures of Rahul Gandhi, skull cap and all, in Iftar party breaking his fast, so to speak, at sunset during a day in the Ramadan month. His remarks that Congress is a party of Muslims. Now, I read he said Tuesday in Indore that his party is one of Hinduism.
It raised a whole lot of issues to my mind. Does Congress stand for Muslims, Dalits, Hindus or everyone. So far I have been told the only protectors Muslims have are Congress. They engineered a special protection for my Jammu and Kashmir brethrens and sisters in Indian Constitution. They stood up for Sharia during the Shah Bano case; are most determined for Rohingya refugees; paralyzed the country on Kathua tragedy; stalled the Triple Talaq bill, spotlight every single–half or full–lynching incident in the remotest hamlets of the country. Now they say they are one of Hinduism.
All this while, they dubbed Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as sectarian and communal even though Narendra Modi never once said he stood only for Hindus. Isn’t Rahul Gandhi now being communal by opening claiming his party is one of Hinduism? Isn’t it polarizing the communities? Widening the gulf of fear and insecurity between practitioners of two religions? Is this the vision of One India or daring of a burglar who wishes to rob the home of 1.3 billions of all its valuables?
Then I look at my newspapers. My day begins with Indian Express, the “journalism of courage.” For the last four years and half, they have reported every single incident against my Muslim community, and Dalits, with sincerity and not a little bit of imagination and creativity. They have marked anniversaries of Dadri, Pehlu or a Junaid by sacrificing the space for news of their front pages. They made sure my Muslim community didn’t forget for a single day the crimes which have been committed against them during the Modi regime (Nor did they Una or Bhima-Koregaon on behalf of Dalits). Indian Express seemed seriously concerned about the future of Indian Muslims.
And look at them, now that Rahul Gandhi has jumped the ship, to my eyes at least, Indian Express choose to completely blank out his Indore comment in today’s edition (31.10.2018). Why didn’t they report Rahul Gandhi for his communal and polarizing comment? Why did they desert me and million of Indian Muslims like me who dread a majoritarian narrative in this country? Could Indian Express be said to be standing up to the idea of secular, free and equal India? Just imagine if Modi had said BJP stands only for Hinduism? (They haven’t allowed him to live down the Kabristan-Shamsaan speech to this day).
If I could ask Indian Express why for a similar offence, BJP is communal and Congress is not. Why give ammunition to right-wingers who claim there is never a pro-Hindu story on your front pages? Why make even your die-hard fans like me and other Indian Muslims doubt your sincerity when you sweep Rahul Gandhi’s all-for-Hinduism comment under the carpet?
I’ve tried to give my faith in Indian Express a second chance. What if your reporter truly miss the Indore event? Extremely unlikely for Rahul didn’t offer his comment in private. It was a press conference. Even if your reporter missed the event, news agencies such as PTI must have brought the news on your teleprinters. On close inspection, I even find this Indore press conference of offensive-comment buried inside your newspaper (Page 8).
Then why did you throw a cloak on this Rahul remark from our views? Why have double standards on BJP and Congress? If you care about us Indian Muslims or the idea of India that you numb our minds daily with, why avoid the searchlight on Mr Rahul Gandhi? Is that an editorial policy or a direction you receive from “Above”? And who’s this “Above”? Does this “Above” have the welfare of us Indian Muslims or India as a whole in mind?
These are all very disturbing questions to my mind. I hope Indian Express takes my fears in the form of questions to Rahul Gandhi. Ask its editorial writers from JNU and Ashoka University; Kancha Ilaiahs or Apoorvanands, to prove they truly speak for us minorities. That their propagation of free and secular India is not fake. Scratch the surface of Kapil Sibal and Shashi Tharoor who are never out of your reach, or representation, in your newspaper on a daily basis. You could even evoke write-ups from retired professionals such as Justice Fali S. Nariman or Chelameswar, ex-cop Julio Ribeiro, ex-election commissioner S.Y. Quraishi etc who don’t even need an invitation to fill your editorial pages.
After all, you are “journalism of courage.” You profess to stand up for us minorities. You claim to care for a free and secular India. The proof of burden that you don’t write on behalf of Muslims and Dalits only when it suits you.
Take a deep breath and reflect who you are not allowed to criticize in India. I could think of no other than Sonia Gandhi, former Congress and UPA chairperson. Run the entire gamut, pore over the worksheet of honchos of Indian media, Shekhar Gupta, Barkha Dutt, Vir Sanghvi, Rajdeep Sardesai, Sagarika Ghose etc; google as you might; dive into the archives of Lutyens Media like Hindustan Times, Times of India, Indian Express, The Hindu; Sonia Gandhi, much like Caesar’s wife, has been above reproach.
That’s astounding. I mean nobody has been the president of 134-year-old Congress longer than her (19 years); she got her party two consecutive Lok Sabha victories; a whole lot of scams were unearthed; yet not a word against her. I mean yes, BJP and her bete noire Dr. Subramaniam Swamy keep pelting her windows but that’s par for course for any opposition. But what accounts for no “black sheep” within Congress bleating ever? No media house opening its edit pages for trenchant views; no historian/academician offering critiques? No scholarly paper in JNU? No diagnosis on a person out on bail?
I do recall two embarrassing Sonia interviews, that is for any self-respecting journalist, by Rajdeep Sardesai (he kept saying “fought like a tigress,” both in 2005 and 2016), as it was for Aroon Purie on another occasion, coy and adolescent. Yes Shekhar Gupta (“she keeps a formidable dynasty on her slender shoulders,”), Barkha Dutt (“she has made a public commitment to Women’s Reservation Bill”) have also interviewed her; Vir Sanghvi has been profound in “Nobody-in-Nehru-Gandhi-Family-Has-Given-Kind-of-Authority-she-has-to Manmohan-Singh,” echoed by a gushing Sagarika Ghose ( “She never undermined Manmohan Singh, always backed him up”). Both Sanghvi and Ghose don’t touch upon how another Prime Minister, PV Narasimha Rao, was humiliated, even in death. And these clowns happily go toting about “bhakts” to everyone else. Phew.
Two books on Sonia immediately come to my mind. One is a pathetic account by a sychophant; another is “Red Sari” which was unofficially banned in India for six years due to machinations by Abhishek Sanghvi, as alleged by its author.
There was though one voice of dissent which was muzzled without much ado by this “deep state” in India. Margaret Alva, a former Union minister of state and Governor, was quite scathing in her autobiography: “Courage and Commitment:” Excerpts:
“While Pilot, Prasada and Scindia got all the honours due to them as Congress leaders—with shamianas erected at the AICC to receive their remains before the last rites—PV Narasimha Rao, the tallest of them all, was denied a state funeral in Delhi. His body was not even let into the AICC compound; instead, the gun carriage carrying the former Prime Minister and Congress President was parked on the pavement outside the gates, with chairs lined for party leaders. I was shocked…ever since, I have regretted not protesting and walking away.” – On PV Narasimha Rao’s death in 2004
Alva details that she played a peacebroker between Sonia and Rao: the latter falling out probably for deciding to appeal against the Delhi High Court’s decision to quash a complaint against the Bofors case. Sonia Gandhi once retorted to Alva: “What does the Prime Minister want to do? Send me to jail?”
Alva’s outburst about the unfair ticket distribution in Karnataka led to her ouster. She was asked to resign from the post of All-India Congress Committee (AICC) general secretary in 2009. In her resignation, Alva wrote thus:
“Times have changed and for the first time I have come to feel like a misfit in an organization that I considered as precious as my own home. A look at our recent candidates lists show a distinct patter of patronages to the wealthy and rich lobbies like mining, education and real-estate…”
Just reflect on the above in line of recent Karnataka assembly elections and ponder why no newspaper or media celebrity ever brought this book out of the shelves to examine Congress’ candidates in 2018? Why Congress’ demise in the state is not looked through the prism which Alva afforded us?
As per one reviewer of the book: “Alva’s book offers an amazing insight into the maneuverings of 10 Janpath—the home of Congress president Sonia Gandhi. Without being too harsh, Alva clearly indicts Gandhi for lacking transparency in her manner of functioning, her penchant for surrounding herself with a handful of loyalists…”.
Alva was made to leave Delhi, appointed as she was governor of Uttarakhand. In her words: “Once I had made the mistake of saying: `The Alvas are the only political family to have a member in Parliament without a break for almost half a century.’ This statement sealed our fate.”
(As an aside, Alva was Governor of Rajasthan when Narendra Modi came to power in 2014. Alva describes her meeting with Modi thus: `I told him I had come to pay my respects, not plead for an extension, adding `I am not prepared to quit anytime.’ “There is no question,” He (Modi) replied. “You are doing a good job please continue where you are.” She was subsequently given additional charge of Goa and Gujarat!).
Before the Supreme Court begins the final hearings on the Ram Janmabhoomi case from December 5, India’s mainstream English media has begun pressing its foot on the propaganda gas pedal to portray the Hindu Right Wing in poor light.
Indian Express, as its front page lead story on Saturday, carried the comment of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat in Bengaluru that “Ram Mandir alone will be built, nothing else will be built.” The newspaper also published the outrage of Muslim law board’s hardliner Asaduddin Owaisi on the remark.
The Leftist media and academicians would look to spread lies and propaganda from now on against the idea of “Ram Mandir” as a violation of India’s secularist spirit and as a disregard to apex judiciary, Supreme Court.
So it’s time we firmly nail the lie of these presstitutes—both Lutyens Media and academicians of JNU kind—before they succeed in vitiating communal harmony and poisoning unsuspecting minds.
The litigation in Supreme Court was filed by parties in contention to the Allahabad High Court’s Ayodhya judgment on September 30, 2010 which ran into 8500 pages. (The entire judgment is available on the website of India’s National Integration Council: rjbm.nic.in).
The three-member High Court bench had then ruled that the “Babri Masjid had indeed been built on a religious Hindu site.“ The bench had further imposed respect for the verified Hindu convention of treating the site as Rama’s birthplace. (As an aside, even the 1989 Encyclopaedia Brittanica had mentioned Ayodhya Ramjanambhoomi as a Hindu temple destroyed in the name of first Mughal Emperor, Babur).
As can be imagined, the High Court bench had arrived at the judgment after years of diligence and painstaking research and cross-examination which validated the claims of Hindu Right Wing groups.
In 2002, High Court asked for Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) to be used to confirm if the long-held tradition of a temple beneath the disputed Babri Masjid site was true. The verdict was overwhelmingly affirmative. High Court then asked the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to verify the GPR claim with its own excavations.
The ASI report (ASI 2003) said: “Excavations at the disputed site of Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid was carried out by the ASI from March 12, 2003 to August 7, 2003. 82 trenches were excavated.” The ASI’s verdict was there are “remains which are distinctive features found associated with the temples of north India.”
It was a huge setback for “Ram Janmabhoomi” opponents. But more damning was the judicial word on the so-called academicians and experts for the fraud and wool they tried to pull over the eyes of the High Court bench.
The Allahabad High Court reprimanded the JNU “historians and academicians”, for their flawed research and vested opinions. One Professor Mandal, who had written a book against the Hindu claim, was found never to have even visited Ayodhya!!! These independent experts, historians and archaeologists had appeared on behalf of the Waqf Board.
One of the three judges, Justice Sudhir Agarwal, in particular, put these experts under judicial scrutiny. Most of these experts were made to depose twice.
These “historians”, before the ASI excavations, had said there was no temple beneath the mosque. Once the buried structure was under-earthed, they claimed it was a “mosque” or “stupa.”
They were then subjected to a grueling cross-examination by Justice Agarwal and his opinion runs over several pages in the final report. Damningly, these independent “historians and experts” were all shown to have connections. For example, one had done a PhD under the other, another had contributed an article to a book written by a witness.
These “historians” who had written signed articles and issued pamphlets, were found by the Honourable Judge to have an “ostrich-like attitude” to facts. The cookie crumbled quickly enough:
One Suvira Jaiswal deposed “whatever knowledge I gained with respect to disputed site is based on newspaper reports or what others (experts) told !!!”
Supriya Verma, another expert who challenged the ASI excavations, had not read the GPR survey report that led the court to order an excavation. Verma and Jaya Menon had alleged that the pillar bases at the excavation site had been planted but HC found their claim to be false. Verma had done her PhD under another expert Shereen Ratnagar who had written the “introduction” to the book of another expert Professor Mandal, who as said hadn’t even visited Ayodhya! Shereen Ratngar indeed admitted she had no field experience.
Justice Agarwal noted that opinions had been offered without proper investigation, research or study in the subject. The judge said he was “startled and puzzled” by contradictory statements. He referred to signed statements issued by experts and noted that “instead of helping in making a cordial atmosphere, it tends to create more complications, conflict and controversy.”
So mark out reports on Ayodhya issue in Lutyens Media from now on. Note down these reporters and authors who would flood you with reams of columns. Make a scrap of their lies, distortions and propaganda. For it sure is going to dominate your newspapers like Rohingya Muslims did not long ago.
Till a few years ago, it was quite a fun to “spot the difference” between two almost identical images. The challenge was irresistible with the taunt that the two images differed on at least 10 counts. You scratched your head, forgot the world, and strained your eyes and crowned yourself genius once the task was accomplished.
Reading Indian Express these days is an exercise of a similar order. You have to match the headlines, the text and the photo and then pour over inverted commas and quotes to understand where the mischief has been planted. It’s not an easy order for most such Fake News are spread over two pages and are 1000-plus words, relying on time-tested tactics that readers would give up after headline or a few first paragraphs. It costs me hours but I have worked out a way to get through this maze. My strike rate is 99 out of 100 which is good enough and satiates my “spot-the-difference” urge.
First, of course are the stories on Front Page. Indian Express these days have reserved it to Modi-Centre-BJP bashing. (Now Yogi Adityanath is inching up the charts). Even on Front Page, the bigger decks accorded to a headline, the more reasons to suspect a mischief hiding in the text-matter. Most importantly, I make it a point to read the final two paras. It’s almost guaranteed that the saner, and the essential truth of the story, is in these two paras. After you read it, you go through the story backwards and spot the Fake News It’s a science folks! You got to give the devil his due. (Oh, I am sorry. Leftists don’t believe in Gods or Devils).
There are a few other Fake News spotters in Indian Express. If there is any Front Page news on Dalits, you got to really flush your lens and go through it. Most likely, such stories appear in profusion before an Assembly elections. Many a times these stories are discredited—as you would find in this link of my aggregated stories in NewsBred. Either Indian Express doesn’t carry an apology—like the fake moustache story on Dalits in Gujarat recently—or the Fake-News-buster true account is buried in inside pages.
You could also be sure that the anniversaries of all unfortunate victims of Muslim community, Akhlaq and Pehlu etc, would deserve a Front-Page mega spread, most likely as anchor story. (Never mind, Hindu victims never get such a privilege, some would say not even our soldier martyrs). Now, you must watch out for June 23, 2018 when it would be a year to Junaid Khan’s unfortunate killing in Ballabhgarh. I am second-guessing, you would have an Indian Express anchor on Junaid Khan, come June 23 next year.
I am not even coming to JNU’s Kanhaiyas and Umar Khalids of our world. I am also not mentioning how the coverage of grieving parents and relatives of minority victims—mind you never a Hindu victim–sitting at Jantar Mantar or taking out a demonstration on Capital streets has half-a-page reserved for it. How BHU girls agitation is a news and not that of AMU protesting girl students. For these are subjective matters and is the prerogative of a newspaper. To push the agenda, our mainstream English media-the Lutyens’ Media—let’s its editorial spread of two pages to do the dirty job.
Our attention is Fake News and so we must return to the subject. The second lead of Indian Express today is: “Slowdown concern, need to push growth jobs: PM’s advisors”
Quite a few things in this headline and the positioning of the story got my antennas up. I could smell Fake News in the use of “concern” and “PM’s advisors” in the headline. Would PM’s advisors really go public with their “concern” on the state of the economy? And the use of “PM’s advisors” and not the Economic Advisory Council (EAC) was a giveaway on who is meant to be a fall guy. All the economic ills of the country, by inference, must be put at the door of the Prime Minister. His own advisors are expressing concern at their own authoritarian ruler, that’s the inference.
The fake use of “concern” was easy to spot. The Express quoted part-time member Ashima Goyal that EAC would “work as a sounding board of ideas.” But Express cleverly preceded this quote with an inserted view of their own of “concern.” Read this particular para and make up your own mind:
There is a lot of concern about the economy today and the Council will “work as a sounding board of ideas”, EAC member Ashima Goyal said.
(The Express cleverly held back the full designation of Ashima Goyal. She is a part-time and not full-time EAC member).
That being so, I poured over the rest of the lengthy story. Then I read the same story in Times of India and Hindustan Times. I was intrigued that the Times of India prominently put in a front-page lead box the view of another EAC part-time member Rathin Roy that “IMF’s growth projections are 80% wrong…World Bank’s growth projections are 65% wrong. The government’s estimates are right more than 90% of the time.” However, the front page 1000-plus wordathon of Indian Express has no mention of it at all!
It is such selective and distorted coverage which has made Indian Express lose all its respect in the eyes of the discerning readers. It is morally wrong, agenda-driven, and worse a case of cheating against its paying-consumers. When the readers are seeking true coverage and information, they are getting blighted and manipulated coverage. Indian Express must be having its own compulsion, their hands could be forced but the newspaper would do well to heed this opinion of one of its readers: “I haven’t seen any story which favours a Hindu viewpoint in Indian Express for ages, at least on front page).” The worst thing a newspaper could do to its reputation is to appear biased and agenda-driven.
Facebook has set out 10 tools to check Fake News. A few give-aways are headlines, source, evidence and photos. Indian Express on Thursday’s edition has been found out in peddling a Fake News).
Ashutosh, a spokesperson of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has appeared in the op-ed page of Indian Express today (April 27, 2017) which is one place to meet/read most of those who are plotting overtime to break India along communal lines and put the blame on RSS and Modi-government.
We, at the NewsBred, make it a point to confront such a narrative. Much of RSS’ and Hindutva’s idealogues mistake has been to concentrate on social reforms and leave the field of academic and media manipulation to Nehruvian-Left combine. It has had a disastrous effect. The Left-Liberals have worked overtime to divide the people on sectarian and communal lines. India First thus could never get off the ground.
Ashutosh, a JNU alumni, largely targets two of RSS’ main idealogues—M.S. Golwalkar and VD Savarkar. He quotes from their works to show they were anti-Muslims and anti-Christians and their concept of Hindu Rashtra didn’t have any scope for minorities. He says this philosophy is being brought to fruition under the present dispensation. Says Ashutosh: “This is a desire for civilizational conquest.”
Ashutosh quotes from Golwalkar’s Bunch of Thoughts: “There are three enemies of India–Muslims, Christians and Communists.” He further accuses Golwalkar as a fascist who was inspired by Hitler.
Dear Ashutosh, are you aware of these words of Golwalkar: “The Muslims must realize that we are all one people and it is the same blood that courses in all our veins.”
Or, “Let Muslims be more devout Muslims. We will help them to be more devout.” (He wrote in Spotlight (P 48).
Or, “Let the Muslims evolve their own laws.” (as a caution against the Uniform Civil Code).
Before we come to the Hitler part, let’s dwell on the Muslim/ minority bit a little longer. It’s a fact that Golwalkar was embittered by partition and the two-nation theory. He also feared the religious identity of Muslims could keep them emotionally in sync with Pakistan and work to India’s disadvantage.
While evaluating this sentiment of Golwalkar, as well as on Hitler, we must remember that men are product of their times. India was hurting under the yoke of British and an enemy’s enemy is one’s friend is perfectly logical. Hitler thus could have been seen as useful to fight British; as imperialist Japan was seen to be useful by Subhas Chandra Bose. It’s also pertinent to remember that Jewish people were the role model of Golwalkar. Its not a profile of a man who was anti-Semitic or proponent of Hitler’s fascism.
Ashutosh further claims that Veer Savarkar’s idea of India was not “common love” but “common blood.” Well, this is what Savarkar wrote in Essentials of Hindutva, and I quote:
“Afer all, there is throughout this world so far as man is concerned but a single race—the human race kept alive by one common blood, the human blood.”
This doesn’t look like words from a man who wanted Hindu supremacy. Indeed, when confined in Ratnagiri, Savarkar invited all untouchable families in his house and dined with them. The Pan-Hindu canteen and Patit Pavan Mandir are standing symbols of his efforts.
It’s been the ploy of mischief-makers to take a sentence or two out of context and paint an individual, organization or a movement in a poor light. Let’s make a few points in this regard:
One, RSS doesn’t follow a book. Indeed, Hinduism doesn’t follow ANY book. Golwalkar’s Bunch of Thoughts isn’t a recommended reading in RSS. Indeed, take a head count and you won’t find 10 persons in RSS who would’ve read the book
Two, RSS has no qualms in denouncing or apologizing their own actions. It was Golwalkar himself who repudiated and withdrew his book “We the Nationhood Defined” in 1948. RSS also officially disowned the book in 2006.
Three, not all BJP men are from the RSS. For example, the present chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath is not from RSS. (So Ashutosh stop suggesting that RSS, VHP, BJP are all the same).
Because of this brain-wash, Muslims in India consider RSS to be an existential threat. It’s time they consider the points below and repudiate this propaganda of India-breakers who are anybody’s friends but theirs.
- RSS doesn’t look to restrict Muslims from doing Namaaz;
- It doesn’t call for Burqa ban;
- It doesn’t ask to butcher Muslims or have them kicked out of India;
- Indeed; it asks government to promote Madrasas;
- It’s not against Muslims getting subsidy for Haj; or mosques not getting aids
- It doesn’t say that why “pakhandi” babas have alone been jailed and not certain Maulanas who are less than pious;
- Why government has control over Hindu temples and not over Masjids or Mosques;
- RSS has backed bans of animal sacrifice in a few Hindu temples, such as Dakhineswar Kali Temple in Kolkata. They haven’t made any such appeal against Bakri-Eid.
Attend any Hindu festival in RSS shakhas and you would see all caste participate equally. There is complete harmony among followers of all religions. Many of them are untouchables and yet they distribute “prasads.”
The harder men like Ashutosh try to create a communal divide, the stronger should be our resistance to it. India First should always supersede our religious identity.
Even if it bores you please pay attention to English newspapers closely for the agenda followed by them could be seen even by a blind. Their agenda is to break-up India into parts, to Balkanize it, We must not allow it to happen.
You could find these tell-tale signs by their front and edit pages. These are considered “heart” of a newspaper. For example, Indian Express who is more brazen than others today makes no mention of Indian home minister Rajnath Singh informing the Lok Sabha that key documents related to the preparation of the second affidavit in the Ishrat Jahan case were not traceable in his ministry and an internal probe was on. (Times of India and Hindustan Times did make it a front page story. Kudos).
Then comes the edit page. The Express op-Ed page has two pieces; one by Archana Prasad who feels that BJP is polarizing opinion but since she is a professor of JNU we could take it with a pinch of salt. The second is an issue I want your utmost attention—it’s a piece of Harsh Mander with the scary headline: “Can the Indian Spring be far behind?” (interestingly, there is no mention of Indian Spring in the article!!! But Express is a zealot these days, fit to be pulled up by regulating agencies).
This Indian Spring is a take on Arab Spring. To put the bare-facts of Arab Spring, it’s hailed in western and our media as spontaneous people’s uprisings against repression, from Libya and Egypt to Syria and Yemen, the so-called Middle East North Africa (MENA).
Christopher L. Brennan, in his book “Fall of the Arab Spring: From Revolution to Destruction” views this widespread Arab upheaval, not as authentic grass-root movements for democracy but as a US-engineered destabilization moves.
Similarly, Ahmed Bensaad’s 2011 book “L’Arabesque Americaine” concerns the US government’s role in instigating, funding and coordinating the Arab Spring “revolutions.
Wikileaks cables also support covert funding for such activities. We all know Libya, Syria, Yemen and Egypt are worse off for these Spring revolutions. Here you have Mr Mander/Indian Express praying for an “Indian Spring” of similar catastrophe to Balkanize our India.
Mr Mander keeps writing edit pieces in Hindustan Times and Indian Express. It’s time readers know about his background.
Mander, a former IAS officer, was a member of the National Advisory Council which was termed as Sonia Gandhi’s kitchen cabinet.
Mander “voluntarily took retirement” but media termed it as “quitting,” anguished as he was because of the 2002 Gujarat riots.
He wrote an op-ed in Times of India, post-Godhra riots, which the Press Council of India (PCI) called “LIES.”
The Press Council of India reprimanded Mander by stating, “guilty of spreading false rumours about alleged Hindu atrocities” in his column: “Hindustan Hamara” dated 20/3/2002. The decision by the PCI was pronounced on 30/6/2002 vide decision reference 14/06/02-03
His modus operandi has been described thus: to organize protests through NGOs against multi-nationals or nuclear projects entry into India. These companies then pay “consulting fees” …, later these protests by NGOs fizzle out or vanish without trace.
For his hard work, Mander was presented by Sonia Gandhi as the recipient of the Rajiv Gandhi National Sadbhavana award in a function attended by Jstice A.M. Ahmadi (the judge who let Union Carbide off the hook).
A book “NGOs: Activists and Foreign Funds Anti Nation Industry” by Krishen Kak and Smt Radha Rajan claims that Mander was the poster boy of NDTV and Star News (now ABP News).
Kak notes in the book: “Not a single major paper or TV channel reported the Press Council’s exposure of Mander. Not surprisingly, in addition to the Times of India, publications like the Hindustan Times, The Telegraph, Asian Age, Mainstream, Deccan Chronicle and Rashtriya Sahara were found by the Press Council of India to carry reports tending to inflame communal passions and, let it be noted, these were pro-Muslim and anti-Hindu passions (page 127).”
Mander was convenor of the drafting committee for the “Prevention of Communal and targeted violence” bill. Under the bill, Hindus were not to be considered victims of communal violence, even if they were killed, robbed, humiliated, burnt to death or even gang-raped.
Mander was part of ActionAid, the giant British multi-national with a “subsidiary” in India. It’s been said to be a global children exploitation industry. Mander’s association was worth at least 50 times the salary of its lowest paid employee.
Express these days is full of such agendas. You have a full-page devoted to Economist magazine almost daily which is a pathetic, blatant, naked propaganda for the imperial, colonial, Anglo-Zionist cause. If not Economist, then you have monstrous lies of New York Times and Washington Post filling up Express pages. In the edit pages, you have those “gurus” of think-tanks from Brookings, Observer and others trying hard to spread lies,anti-India agenda and serve Western interests.
Readers, please be alert and vigilant to this dangerous agenda.
Remember: THE PRICE OF FREEDOM IS ETERNAL VIGILANCE.
They mean to divide us.
Let’s not leave an India for our children, when in order to travel to Ludhiana, Patna, Kolkata or Bengalaru, they would need a visa.
(Actually this Kanhaiya episode is a good thing. As a journalist, I know the best way to preserve a lie is to repeat it again and again till the ”truth-holders” give up. Unfortunately for them, the majority India has taken up cudgels to fight this issue. Being hardened journalists, these “balkanizing forces” are not giving up on Kanhaiya issue. But by stretching this issue beyond a decent limit, all they have done is to lose their credibility. So folks keep up your opposition, and let them shed the last fig-leaf they are keeping in front of their naked reality.)
Today, Times of India (March 5, 2016) has three stories on its front page:
Government says no to visit by US Panel: US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has been denied Indian visas to “discuss and assess religious freedom.” (NewsBred had an insightful take on it at least four months backwhich you must read if India concerns you).
India takes US to WTO over visa: India has hauled US in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) over their controversial new visa rules.
India rules out joint naval patrol in South China Sea: India refuses to join US in joint patrolling in South China Sea (all you read on South China Sea is hogwash. Read this and you won’t need to read anything else on South China Sea ever).
INDIAN EXPRESS HAS NONE OF THESE STORIES. FROM ITS FRONT PAGE TO ITS LAST– FROM ITS MASTHEAD TO IMPRINT LINE.
May be Express, busy as it is with all its resources on Kanhaiya affair (just count on the stories in today’s editions—I gave up after 1-2 dozens), just couldn’t free its reporters on other India issues (but that’s ok, they didn’t have time and space to discuss Indian budget).
May be, Express thinks other India issues are not important. (Remember they didn’t have time for India’s win over Pakistan in cricket on its front page; instead writing a fictional “mahaul” story for which got an official rap).
May be, they genuinely missed the 3 stories since all international news agencies AP, AFP, Reuters blocked these stories too from reaching newspapers offices (I couldn’t find one in google search). Never mind if these same agencies cried themselves hoarse on India’s promised joint patrol with US in South China Sea.
The only Express story on US in today’s edition was on its business page, Pg 19: “Monsanto threatens to exit India.”
So the facts established: Issues that India take up with United States didn’t find space in Express. Issues that United States takes up with India (like Monsanto) is a screaming headline.
What is Monsanto? Well it’s been dubbed as the “most evil corporation on earth.” We won’t waste time here on Monsanto. Readers can take their own sweet time to find about it.
Is Express of today a one-off thing? Or has there been a pattern?
The pro-US role in Indian Express is increasingly getting established. It publishes US envoy Richard Verma, president Barack Obama, Moody’s, Ford Foundation (which had infiltrated Nehru government to the core) and Greenpeace etc on issues where these divine voices question India’s freedom of speech, tolerance etc. (Even though the world knows that US has quarter of world’s all prisoners; its horrific track record against blacks; it snooping and spying on its citizens; the Patriot Law etc probably qualifies it as a “deep state.” today).
I won’t get so far as to question how Express runs without advertisements on its pages. There must be godly-souls in this world who would do anything for “tolerance” and “freedom of speech” issues. Or for that matter the allegations of “foreign funds’ to Kejriwal’s AAP for which, it must be told to readers, got a clean chit from none other than the Modi government last year!!! (can’t help taking a potshot: Kejriwal talks of “freedom of speech” but let’s not forget what he did to Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan—it wasn’t the best case of “freedom of speech, was it?).
Just as the JNU issue was hotting up, Modi addressing farmers in Bargarh, Odisha had said that NGOs with foreign funds were “conspiring” to destabilize his government and defame him.
Let me connect all the dots: A resurgent India would never be “allowed” by the United States. They don’t allow sovereign nations to functions: they only allow vassal—such as Europe, Japan or Gulf kingdoms to exist. Look at what it does to China, Iran, Russia, North Korea and Venezuela. Or what they did to Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya and Syria and countless Latin American and African countries. You would be naïve to believe that imperialism and colonialism just disappeared after World War II. They only turned more sophisticated and scientific with modern technological tools.
Vajpayee broke the pattern with Nuclear explosion; Modi now is pursing a dollar-free BRICS agenda. The empire would strike back and strike back hard.
What are the tools of those seeking world hegemony? Corporate and bought media for one; NGOs and funded foundations for another; intellectuals such as Amartya Sen (who is married into the Rothschild family); film celebrities (you know whom); superbly controlled academic institutions etc.
These intellectuals, writers and elites conveniently forget that tens of millions of Asians were murdered in Tokyo and Osaka firebombing (I am not evening mentioning Hiroshima and Nagasaki), horrific liquidation of Korean civilians or killing of millions in Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, East Timor and Philippines. Or what’s happening in Middle East where wars have been waged on lies of WMD and Benghazi or Syrian chemical use. So Indian elites, this is the future you have in mind for you and your children?
So a word from a neutral Indian citizen like me to the rest of the countrymen, more importantly to media: “Don’t support BJP or Congress or vice versa if that’s what you are convinced about. You support Kanhaiya–do it. You don’t want to support JNU–don’t do it. But don’t play into such destabilizing forces.
Remember there are forces who don’t want a strong, resurgent India. Those who are blocking Muslims in their own country; who won’t allow a Muslim women to wear “hijaab” but can allow cartoons against the Prophet while taking a legal action against those having anti-Semitic views–these are not the ideal countries that you think they are. Don’t be a tool in their hands.
All they want is a polarized India. Want to test it? I can even predict a headline you would see in paid media next week/month (Ok, watch this space for my prediction in next 48 hours—my wife tells me they won’t leave you alive. Who cares).
If you have interest and safety of your children in your heart, please don’t allow such polarization forces to gather wind. A polarized society would be an ideal breeding ground for ISIS/Al-Qaeda to find its recruiters and wreak havoc on our buses, trains, monuments etc. India would become a living hell. I can foresee such a scenario if you are not alert to this agenda of foreign forces/Indian media/NGOs/academic institutions.
There are people who are after the life of me, you and our children—and they are not Hindu or Muslim
If you are an Indian Express reader you have just been told: you are the dumbest, stupidest, bumpkin, buffoon, idiot, thick-headed, retarded, imbecile reader on this earth.
It’s your choice to live with this tag, readers.
Or why would their lead story of today (February 28, 2016) “VIDEO IS OUT: Kanhaiya assaulted, breaks down, police duck for cover” has no relation at all with the real report, smug as they are with the pig that they believe you are, readers?
Now what this headline tells you: It is that there is video which shows Kanhaiya assaulted, breaks down, police duck for cover, isn’t it?
And what does the actual report tells you?: The report tells you that this video is a deposition of Kanhaiya before the Supreme Court panel.
Spotted the difference? (don’t tell me you are really what Express thinks you are).
The Headline tells you there is a video of “Kanhaiya assaulted.’
The report tells you the video is of “Kanhaiya’s disposition” and not of assault.
In other words, Express believes that you stupid readers wouldn’t go beyond their headline (they actually know their worth, folks). Even if it is the lead story!
Now the next question which crossed my mind was how did they get hold of the video? A smart piece of journalism? That made me look for the SC panelists. One was Kapil Sibal (a multiple minister in the previous Congress government); another lawyer Vrinda Grover who is a board member of GreenPeace whose license to collect foreign funds has been cancelled by the Modi government. Actually Sibal has also been in the programme board of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which has been hauled over to Supreme Court by a writ petition.
I might be suggesting a NGOs+Congress+Marxists+Media collusion here but so dumb are you readers that I am confident I could get away with it without you suspecting anything.
There are usual suspects littered in this edition of Indian Express: Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, Admiral Ramdass, Sharad Pawar, Chidambaram, Nitish Kumar, our revered academic institutions voices (this time it’s missionary college St. Stephen’s principal), going after government on JNU issue. (Actually you must admire Mulayam, Jayalalitha, Mamata, Lalu, Shiv Sena to hold their tongues so far). Central minister Uma Bharti is actually lucky to get two paras in support of Modi, buried many pages deep inside the newspaper.
It’s a rogues’ gallery with Express passing the board-room bulletin as news for us asinine readers.
And don’t you believe anyone loves cricket in this country. On a Sunday edition, there is no front page mention of India beating Pakistan on a cricket field. Never mind this was India’s only seventh T20 match against arch rivals this millennium and that Virat Kohli played a knock which Sachin Tendulkar would’ve been proud to own up. (May be, showing Pakistan in a losing, poor light would’nt suit the agenda).
Fortunately, inside there is a full page interview of about-to-retire Delhi police commissioner, BS Bassi. He has replied on relevant issues but newspaper won’t put a word of it on the front page.
Bassi puts it as it is: without any spin, full of logic and reason. All those reporters and editors who have been baying for his blood, beat a hasty retreat. All that posturing went out of the first window. So here’s what Bassi said on key issues (it’s an abridged version of his quotes):
On The Actual Sedition Case: It’s an open-and-shut case (wow). Under section 124A of the IPC it’s a grave offence. It’s been declared valid by the Constitution. (For police) It’s an extremely easy case.
The law says: “bringing in hatred or contempt or exciting disaffection towards state by words or signs or visible representations.”
I am going to crack this case because I know these are the guys who have done it.
Please read the Kedar Nath judgment of 1962.
Country has to deal with issues in Northeast, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand and J and K. We have to have a law to deal with anti-national activities.
Debate happens within constitutional norms. But if it’s an anti-national activity, then it doesn’t remain a debate. Society survives because we respect our Constitution. If all of us start disrespecting our Constitution, the country will be destroyed.
Nobody is letting police do the job. Society as a whole should’ve cooperated with us.
On Kanhaiya, Journalists Beaten Inside Court:
Patiala House is a confined place. Use of teargas, lathi etc would have turned Patiala House into another Jallianwalla Bagh. It’s a prudent practice which police followed. My prudent policing practices also tell me I should have some space to chase away trouble- creators…If I have no such place, it will turn into nothing but Jallianwalla Bagh.
No footage is available of Kanhaiya being beaten. Journalists were still able to cover the event.
I would call it a technical riot because a real riot means arson and people’s heads being broken.
On Journalists Being Questioned:
It’s our job to ask involved persons and seek their reactions (as part of investigations). The thing has been made bigger than the actual event.
There, you have it.
The thing has been made bigger than the actual event. A case under trial has been considered bigger than over two dozen lives lost in the Jat stir. The Jat Stir case that has an aide of ex-Haryana Congress Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda, in an audio, apparently egging on a Jat community leader to escalate the violence. But that apparently doesn’t deserve any space in our beloved newspaper.
Don’t you think the front page deserved this headline (or even in inside pages):
JNU: It’s an Open-and-Shut Case, says Bassi
So we now know the devil who has been quoting from the scriptures. Who thinks bark is bigger than the bite. Who doesn’t know that it’s truth which can set it free.
So Shakespeare wrote:
The devil can cite scripture for his purpose;
An evil soul producing holy witness
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek
A goodly apple rotten at the heart.
In today’s world of deception and lies, truth is a revolutionary act. It’s up to us readers to hold the flag of truth high. And don’t be the fools that our newspapers think we are.
(This piece can also be read in NewsBred)
Indian Express of February 25, 2016 is a collector’s item. It’s imaginative, creative and like all such things it takes great liberty in dispensing with facts.
It’s imaginative for it gives a screaming full-page bottom-spread headline: “Quoting wisdom from 40 BC, misquoting Kashmiri poet (see the image),” even though there was no misquote from the person in question, Mr Venkaiah Naidu, Union Urban Development Minister. (More on it later).
It’s creative for it picks an exhortation for nationalism from ex-serviceman into a misleading headline: “Latest Wisdom: Bring a tank on JNU campus to instil nationalism in students.” (More on it later).
It’s factually wrong for it it splashes a three-decker headline: “Prof. shares piece on Khalid, ABVP burns effigy, blocks class” even as there is no mention in the report how ABVP “blocked” any student or students from attending one or any class (More on it later).
There is also the lead headline: “Smriti shines the light of treason” which could make a professor of English opt for a new paper roll in his toilet. But when agenda is an issue, language is a minor indiscretion.
All these are front-page headlines. None of them is in single column. Indeed, if there is any story other than concerning JNU row on front page, it’s a single column four paragraphs on forthcoming budget. The newspaper didn’t have space for rail budget due next day; the water crisis which has left the Capital parched or even the jat agitation where casualty is 28 by now.
What chance then there is for you to read about the unfortunate plane crash in Nepal which killed all 23 passengers aboard? The newspaper in its wisdom apparently believes that a “babu” unable to sleep at night because of worrying “mahaul”: (“Minister watching, Minority panel official says: Can’t sleep at night, mahaul -climate- worrying”) is worthy of a four-column display. Or that a retired octogenarian Supreme Court judge’s opinion on “sedition” is worth a second lead story.
All this concerned the Page One or Front Page. Let’s now move on to other pages:
Page 2: All stories barring two again concern the issues surrounding the JNU affair.
Page 3: Just one neutral story manages to find space on again a JNU-dominated page.
Page 4: By far the most neutral page in that just about half the page is on JNU affair. Things possibly are looking up.
Page 5: Darkness again. The entire page is devoted to JNU
Page 6: Not a single JNU story. Possibly the agenda is exhausted after all.
Page 7: Not a chance. The Jat agitation is blamed on—you guessed it right—JNU. This story takes up more than half the page.
Page 8: Again a page where you find JNU, along with Rohith’s death, filling up all corners.
Page 9: It’s again JNU and students all over.
Page 10: The entire page is advertisements and it apparently has broken the spell.
You can’t be serious that there is no JNU representation in the hollowed edit-oped spread (Page 14-15).
In case, by now, you are wondering whether I am mistaking any JNU Express newspaper with our “Journalism of Courage,” I can only disappoint you. It is indeed your revered newspaper. I can assure you though that you would only find business, arts and sports in their designated pages. There is no Mahesh Bhatt vowing the make his next movie on JNU affair or Indian cricket refusing to play for they are upset with JNU affair. (Oh my god, I might just have given them an idea!).
There is a saying: If your head is in the sand, your butt is in the air.
But let’s return to the unfinished “more-on-it-later” theme which I have mentioned at the start of the column.
Quoting wisdom from 40 BC, misquoting Kashmiri poet: The story begin with scarcely concealed contempt for Smriti Irani for having invoked a quote from 40 BC (they call it BCE now, you silly, unless you feel all your readers are Christians) to justify something in 2016.
(Ms Irani: you said you didn’t want to quote any Hindu sage lest be mistaken for a communal leaning. But quote you might anyone, you would still be up for ridicule).
But our real thrust is “Misquoting Kashmiri poet.” For the life of me, I couldn’t see how Naidu has misquoted this poet. The news item itself says that Naidu mistook it for a criticism of Modi government.
So the newspaper doesn’t see any difference between “misquote” and “mistook.” Quote comes with quotation marks. Mistook is a matter of interpretation. To replace one with another is mischievous.
Ironically, the newspaper itself misquotes on just the story above this one. It quotes a disgruntled minority commission additional secretary for saying “situation in the country is not allowing him to sleep peacefully,” even though newspaper admits that the official “reportedly” said it. The reporter’s source must be more than impeccable for a description from a third party he has deemed fit to put in quotes.
Latest wisdom: Bring a tank on JNU campus to instill nationalism in students: The story says a delegation of ex-servicemen met the JNU vice-chancellor and suggested ways to have a memorial on martyred soldiers inside the campus. Among the ways to make it happen, “the university is considering a wall of fame, showcasing a military tank or artillery…”
The import of this statement is laudatory. Still the newspaper’s headline makes it sound as if live tanks would roll down inside the JNU campus (a la Tiananmen Square in China in 1989).
The newspaper also buries in the end a reaction to US envoy Richard Verma’s comment on the “freedom of speech”. “(We) Challenge Verma to allow celebration of Osama (bin Laden) in any university in the US,,.”
Prof shares piece on Khalid, ABVP burns effigy, blocks class: The piece begins with the sentence that ABVP disrupted classes at the Lucknow University.
The story doesn’t have any mention of which classes were disrupted. It just mentions that students protested outside the sociology department. So, how and which class was “blocked ?”
It’s such an in-your-face Indian Express edition that the readers must brace themselves for more of it in days, months and years to come. (God helps the rail budge tomorrow). If it is not Dadri killing or “intolerance debate” or Aamir Khan’s concern or JNU, it would be something else it would pick up to raise the hackles on communalism and intolerance under the Modi government.
We would be watching. We would urge the newspaper to be its own conscience and live up to its reputation of “journalism of courage.”