(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
If I am reading it right, defence minister Rajnath Singh’s claim on Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK) is a sign that India wants to fix Pakistan once for all.
India needs be bellicose if it has measured the headwind right that Kashmir would become as big an issue as Palestine is in coming days, weeks, months and years.
Once the relaxation in Kashmir Valley comes, attacks and violence would be a common occurrence—at least in our newspapers even if the ground reality is different.
Already BBC and Reuters are on their old tricks of faking news and videos on Kashmir and our shameless columnists are losing no chance of equating Kashmir of today with Palestine and even Hong Kong protests as people’s revolt against a reactionary, despotic government.
China of course treats the Hong Kong matter with a heavy hand and gives a damn to what international press and human rights group write about Xinjiang region and the million Muslims it has kept in detention camps.
India similarly need not be ruffled by the outrage in media, demonstrations on streets or protests in our University campuses for they would be motivated, paid and planted by the break-India forces.
Isn’t it some wonder that India’s J & K move which was passed by an overwhelming majority by its lawmakers and acquiesced by its Supreme Court hasn’t found a line of support in our paid Left-Liberal media even though if the billion-strong citizens were to be asked at this very moment, Modi virtually would be worth 400-seats plus in the Parliament.
Our newspapers are full of constitutional “invalidity” of the move and vile hacks like Karan Thapar and Rajmohan Gandhi – I am not even coming to the rogues gallery of Ramchandra Guha, Sagarika Ghose, Rajdeep Sardesai, Shekhar Gupta, Barkha Dutt etc—are full-throated on “human rights violations” which of course didn’t matter to them when Kashmiri Pandits were being driven out of the Valley.
There have been some remarkable interventions by the likes of Dr. Jitender Singh, Venkaiah Naidu and Ravi Shankar Prasad in print which is virtually a spanking of such journalists and their propaganda yet a deluge awaits India-First forces and they better be prepared.
Pakistan would create global nuisance everyday from now on. They won’t be alone too for Khalistani separatists won’t let go such a god-send opportunity to be in the limelight. Already we have reports of such gadflies in places as distant as Seoul is from London (And please follow the template of bravehearts Shazia Ilmi and Poonam Joshi how to confront them). Why, Pakistan prime minister Imran Khan has officially created a Kashmir desk in its global embassies to drum up the propaganda.
Pakistan would also lose no opportunity to show UN Security Council has taken up the Kashmir matter even though neither India nor Pakistan was invited to the closed door discussions. No resolution was passed, no official statement issued. France, Germany, Russia have balked. Donald Trump wants Pakistan to settle the matter bilaterally and even China has made a similar sound. But try telling this to Pakistan.
The road ahead is not easy for Modi government. If it laxes Valley, Pakistan would plant violence. If India keeps a close surveillance, pictures would flash across our newspapers and TV screens of how even an Under-6 cricket match is shadowed by heavy boots and rifled soldiers. International media is a consort to this Deep State. They would play the ball. Then Abdullahs and Muftis are already ready with the script they would chant once set free.
It needs a strategy from India-First forces.
- Modi government must ask its public faces to counter the propaganda in real time. Chances are it would be a cry in wilderness but at least its main audience—the citizens of this country–would know. It would keep India combative;
- Modi government must remain dismissive of global outcry. They must borrow the template from Israel, and even China;
- They shouldn’t be shy of pitching in with nuclear-first and PoK talks all too often;
- It could safely ignore UNSC where China, on its own, doesn’t have traction.
At ground level, every India-loving entity—be it individuals, social media, websites, news outlets etc – need to take up the burden. Smash the propaganda by whatever means you could as your duty towards the nation. As your obligation towards the future of your kids. Such voices do assume a mass below the surface even though on exterior, it’s the propaganda which would have a field day. Don’t be discouraged and learn from Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping—all are hated by the Left-Liberal media but they continue to hold sway. Swachh Kashmir should be a mission in which all of us have a duty towards the nation.
(Post Script: Again, do read these erudite explanations from Dr. Jitendra Singh, Venkaiah Naidu and Ravi Shankar Prasad to bust the propaganda which would confront you every living moment from now on).
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
Millions of Indians today would term West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee is arrogant. Or why she wouldn’t pick up the phone calls from Prime Minister Narendra Modi or returns call to state governor Keshari Nath Tripathi when crisis is as grave as Cyclone Fani or the state is sitting on a time-bomb on doctors’ agitation?
Tens and thousands of us would also call “Didi” a fascist. Or why she would jump out of her caravan and confront people who are merely chanting “Jai Shri Ram”, a matter of greeting among India’s masses? Or why she would tell the agitating doctors to return to work within four hours or face the consequences?
Lakhs of Indians won’t deny either that she is communal in her approach, favouring Muslims and running down Hindus. Or why she would change “ramdhenu” with “rangdhenu” in textbooks? Pass the stricture that idol immersion in Durga Puja must be postponed on Muharram day?
An overwhelming numbers of us would also term Mamata Banerjee as an autocrat. Or why she would deny prominent opposition leaders, from Amit Shah to Yogi Adityanath, from landing on her turf for election rallies? Tear up the posters of BJP’s rallies? Pull up custom officials who have the temerity to stop her relatives at the airport?
A still bigger number of us would’ve no doubt that the only news emerging from West Bengal for so many days is violence. Mamata Banerjee and her TMC must take the blame for violent politics. So rampant is the politics of blood that 34% of seats in Panchayat elections go uncontested. Or the lynchings which takes place regularly on Bengal’s streets.
None of us would also deny that Mamata Banerjee is undemocractic and unconstitutional. People (Priyanka Sharma) are jailed for posting memes on whatsapp; professors (Rakesh Sinha) is booked for inciting violence when all he has done is to visit a temple with his mother.
Millions would nod in affirmative that Mamata Banerjee resembles a dictator in Bengal. The bureaucracy is under her thumbs; police is an extension for her coercive politics and is shielded from investigations by Central agencies. She even resists interventions of Supreme Court.
Millions would’ve also heard about the ongoing Saradha, Narada and Rose Valley scams and the charges that Mamata Banerjee is corrupt. The corruption charges have engulfed her TMC party.
All too often we hear that terror network and jihadi forces are rampant in West Bengal. That terror-network Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen has taken roots in the state. The news that radicalization has taken place in madarsas in districts such as Bardhaman. That the dreaded Islamic State (IS) has named a new “emir” in West Bengal. How would Mamata Banerjee deny the allegation that she is a “secessionist” and one of India’s “tukde-tukde”gang?
Now please put all these adjectives together: arrogant, fascist, communal, autocrat, violent, undemocratic, unconstitutional, dictator, corrupt etc together. Name one person who has been called all this by India’s ecosystem in the last five years: Yes, you are right—Narendra Modi. And I challenge you to show one instance in our mainstream English media—Lutyens Media—who has ever accused Mamata Banerjee of such traits.
What is an ecosystem? Ecosystem isn’t the government in power. Ecoystem is a network of politicians, media, academicians, lawyers, bureaucrats, institutional heads, cultural czars etc who work in unison to push a particular agenda.
So think about the politicians (such as Rahul Gandhi, Mehbooba Mufti, Omar Abdullah, Akhilesh Yadav, Mayawati etc), journalists (Shekhar Gupta, Rajdeep Sardesai, Sagarika Ghose, Barkha Dutt etc), laywers (Prashant Bhushan etc), academicians (Prof. Ram Chandra Guha, Faizan Mustafa, Rajmohan Gandhi etc) institutional heads (former Election Commissioners, Police Commissioners, Ex Chief Justices of India who occupy the edit pages), cultural czars (Javed Akhtar, Kamal Haasan etc) etc. Look at their twitter timelines to show me if they’ve ever accused Mamata Banerjee of being communal, autocrat, corrupt or instigating lynchings etc. How is that when rest of India has almost a similar opinion on Mamata Banerjee, these biggies who occupy our ears, eyes and minds have a completely different opinion?
It is easy for India’s ecosystem to do whataboutery. So when violence happens in Bengal, it’s both TMC and BJP who are guilty. If provocation happens, both TMC and BJP are at fault. If communal issues are flaring up, both TMC and BJP must take the blame.
But now the eco-system is in a bind. The doctors’ agitation can’t be blamed on BJP. It’s people who are rising up against Mamata Banerjee’s TMC in the state of Bengal. You can resort to propaganda against RSS and BJP, weave themes on lynchings and communalism but how do you face up to the wrath of millions. It’s the people of India who stood up to the ecosystem and showed it the mirror in the 2019 General Polls. It’s the people who are again exposing this network in rapidly deteriorating West Bengal.
As they say, you can fool some of the people all the time. But you can’t fool all the people all the time.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred)
There are some discourses you hear. Then there are others which are kept out of your sight. Out of sight, out of mind is a time-tested strategy.
So, let’s begin with what you see and hear. Kamal Haasan and Rahul Gandhi. One is an actor turned politician; the other is a politician turning actor. Both fluff their lines but as we would see it has its own merit.
Kamal Haasan calls Nathuram Godse independent India’s “first Hindu terrorist” for killing Mohandas Gandhi. Pragya Sadhvi, BJP’s candidate from Bhopal, joins the fray by terming Godse as “deshbhakt (patriot).” Uproar is immense on either side. So who were real Godse and Gandhi?
Gandhi was great—even Godse said he folded his hands in front of Gandhi before firing from his country-made pistol. But Hindus, throughout Gandhi’s political life in India, felt shortchanged by him. Godse, a microcosm of such feelings, felt cheated when Gandhi appeased Muslims in Khilafat movement in 1920s (who in turn massacred thousands of Hindus in Malabar riots as a return gift); when Gandhi kept his silence on a matter as grave as Assembly seats being reserved only for Muslim candidates on communal lines; when Gandhi and Congress hardly muttered as thousands of Hindus were raped and murdered under the call of Direct Action Day given by Mohammad Ali Jinnah in Bengal. Godse like many other Hindus, was anguished at butchering and rape of tens of thousands of Hindus in West of India, in what is now Pakistan, in migrations just before the Partition. He was absolutely horrified at the Razakars’ violence against Hindus in Hyderabad which is little discussed in your history books.
One could say that Gandhi, the great soul, was looking for Hindu-Muslim unity. But his appeasement, ironically, turned out to be the most violent pacifism of human history. This is a fact. As is the fact that Justice Khosla, presiding over the Godse trial, said if the assembled courtroom was asked to pronounce their verdict on Godse, the overwhelming word would have been: NOT GUILTY. This is also a fact. As is the fact that Godse’ testimony in court—he was his own lawyer—was so powerful that the Congress kept it banned for 20 years. You of course can now buy this testimony in the form of a book, Why I assassinated Gandhi. As you absolutely must read Manohar Molgaonkar’s book “The men who killed Gandhi.” This classic would leave you spellbound and hugely educated.
Now I want you to guess who said this:
“My own view is…Mr Gandhi had become a positive danger to this country. He had choked all the thoughts…As the Bible says that sometimes good cometh out of evil, so also I think good will come out of the death of Mr Gandhi.”
Pragya Sadhvi? Nah. It’s Bhimrao Ambedkar. Now please go and ask Congis to dare and criticize Bhimrao Ambedkar. Neither his progeny Prakash nor Gandhi’s grandson Rajmohan Gandhi would ever mention it. So, nothing is sacred or gospel. Read and read and form your opinion. This is the first good which has come out of Godse storm around us.
Now let’s look at Rahul Gandhi who has mocked Veer Savarkar no end up for “begging” British to release him from the dreaded Cellular Jail in Port Blair, the “Kaala Paani.” Now guess who said this on the death of Veer Savarkar in 1966: “It removes from our midst a great figure of contemporary India. His name was a byword for daring and patriotism. Mr Savarkar was cast in the role of a classical revolutionary and countless people drew inspiration from him.” No, not any RSS sanghachalak. Indira Gandhi said so. So Mr Rahul Gandhi, would you say your grandma, even though she was a contemporary of Savarkar, knew nothing about the great man?
Incidentally, The Ashok Gehlot Congress government in Rajasthan has removed “Veer” from Savarkar’s name from its’ educational school textbooks. You would have found this news in none of your Lutyens Media. This is how you stop a generation from knowing and being inspired by one of India’s true legend. You can find a lot about Veer Savarkar in an old piece of mine. Vikram Sampath, who is writing a biography on Veer Savarkar, has a brilliant edit piece in today’s Hindustan Times (May 17, 2019). The newspaper though seems to have developed cold feet since the article is nowhere to be found online.
Now let’s look at what you neither see nor hear.
It’s important for readers to know that they are victims of selective curriculum and biased discourse. While our newspapers jump up and down on Godse, and lap up Rahul Gandhi on his poison against Veer Savarkar, they would never question the Congress scion: Sir, aren’t you past the date (May 16) by which you had to reply to Ministry of Human Affairs (MHA) about your alleged British citizenship? Whatever is happening in the contempt of court case pending against Rahul Gandhi? Or the lawyer who has presented evidence that there is a plot against Chief Justice of India? How many of you know that Rajeev Kumar, the controversial West Bengal cop against whom Supreme Court has found allegations to be “very, very serious,” could be arrested today? Could “very, very serious” concern be about national security, terrorists hideouts? Shouldn’t our media be training all their resources on this man rather than on US immigration on their front pages? Do you know that the “apology” of Pragya Sharma was never a “pre-conditon” for her release by Supreme Court as your newspapers have tried to project to you? And what’s happening on “Chidambaran and son” case?
Question, question and question. And then draw your own conclusion. Don’t be a sitting duck for your newspaper who would even come free as long as you are the chicken they can feed their agenda.
This is a reprint from NewsBred.
Guha, already a book old on Gandhi–“Gandhi before India”– will have his second one on the man next year. Apparently, the cottage industry on Gandhi is a useful tool for self advancement and setting up the political agenda in this country.
Guha’s peg is the recent reference of Amit Shah where the BJP president had called Gandhi the “Chatur Baniya.” This has Guha in an outrage even though he himself reminded readers of “residue of Bania upbringing” in Gandhi in his book.
Guha’s entire premise is built on the assertion that Gandhi didn’t differentiate between castes and he repeatedly asked Hindus to “disregard matters of caste in where they lived…”
Gandhi is larger than life to most Indians. That doesn’t mean he is above examination. A Hindu mind isn’t shy of evaluating his own Gods. There is no reason a Mahatma be exempt from such a scrutiny. Gandhi himself would’ve approved of such “experiments with truth.”
So let’s examine if Gandhi didn’t differentiate between castes. In his over two decades of stay in South Africa, Gandhi didn’t think Black Africans were worth his time. In 1893, he wrote to the Natal parliament saying that Indians were better “than savages of the Natives of Africa.” He supported more taxes on impoverished African people and turned a blind eye to the brutality of the Empire on Africans. He termed them “kaffirs” an extremely offensive racist slur.
No less than Gandhi’s grandson and his biographer, Rajmohan Gandhi, has acknowledged that Gandhi was “prejudiced about South African blacks.” Historian Patrick French wrote in 2013 that “Gandhi’s blanking of Africans is the black hole at the heart of his saintly mythology.” Today a large number of Africans view Gandhi as a racist vis-a-vis Black Africans. A revision in his stature is already underway. Last year his statue was banished from Ghana University in Accra after massive protests by professors over his racist stance.
Guha of course would hide such facts from our view. Closer home, one would be interested to find out Guha’s opinion on Gandhi’s role in the Khilafat Movement (1919-1924). Most of us don’t know about it as a sanitized history is propagated by Left-Liberal combine in whose company Guha clearly is comfortable.
At the end of the World War I in 1919, Ottoman Turkey lay beaten by the Allied forces. Their pretensions of being Caliphs of the Islamic world was in ruins. It got the hackles up of Muslim leaders in India. They formed a committee to force the British government to restore the Sultan. This in brief is known as the Khilafat Movement.
Gandhi and the Congress launched the non-cooperation movement in support of the Khilafat demand. It clearly was a quid pro quo move. Gandhi, in return, got the Muslim support. It helped him become the biggest political actor of the Indian stage. (Bal Gangadhar Tilak had died on August 1, 1920). Gandhi justified his move thus:
“I would gladly ask for the postponement of the Swaraj activity if we could advance the interest of the Khilafat.” So Swaraj, which meant self-rule, became a subordinate action compared to restoration of Caliphate in a faraway land!!! It never occurred to Mahatma how the natives would make sense of such a sympathy for the Muslim cause which had nothing to do with India’s reality.
Mohammad Ali, a prominent leader of the Khilafat movement, went further: “If the Afghans invaded India to wage holy war, the Indian Muhammadans are not only bound to join them but also to fight the Hindus if they refuse to cooperate with them.”
This clearly was not respect-all-castes approach. And what was Gandhi’s reaction to this all? He supported Mohammad Ali for being true to his religion! So much for caste-free politics and the spirit of nationalism. Over to Gandhi:
“I claim that with us both the Khilafat is the central fact, with the Maulana Mohammad Ali because it is his religion, with me because, in laying down my life for the Khilafat, I ensure the safety of the cow, that is my religion, from the knife of the Mussalman.”
Let’s leave cow for the moment as it is a more sensitive subject than Mahatma these days. It must be mentioned though that Gandhi diverted a substantial sum of money from the Tilak Swaraj Fund to the Khilafat movement.
Gandhi’s support for Khilafat led to Mopla Rebellion of 1921. (Moplas are a Muslim sect of Malabar in Kerala). Murder and rapine followed the failure of Khilafat. It soon became a full-scale rebellion. Civil authorities caved in and army had to be summoned. Khilafat flags were hoisted on police stations and government offices. It took seven months to put it down completely.
Guha’s subtle message is that all religions are the same. Hindus must not make any distinctions vis-à-vis Islam, Christianity and other religions. And by inference, Ahimsa, the cornerstone of Gandhi’s philosophy, must be internalized.
But religious distinctions are there for all to see. Hindus don’t follow one book like Koran or Bible. They don’t have one God like Islam and Christianity. There is no prophet or messenger who stands between the God and humanity. There is no central religious authority like Pope to them.
Every time you open a newspaper, you read a piece by Guha, Sagarika Ghose and their ilks who appeal to the pacifist image of Hindus. Their method to neutralize the majority is simple: beat them with the creeds of Mahatma and shame them on the untouchability ills of Hindu society. Hemmed in by such imagery, India hasn’t responded to million cuts which aggressive neighbours inflict on it regularly. Bleed India to death is this creed. The Break-India plot must be thwarted with rigour and alertness for the forces have shifted gears.