!! समर्थ हिन्दु, समर्थ हिन्दुस्थान !!;........................!! समर्थ हिन्दुस्थान, समर्थ विश्व !!............................
All the posts on this blog are re-postings and post headings point towards the actual posts.
नेपाल के राष्ट्रपति रामबरण यादव कुंभ में गंगा में पवित्र डुबकी लगाएंगे। भारत सरकार के विदेश मंत्रालय में डिप्टी चीफ आफ प्रोटोकाल आलोक ए डिमरी ने सूबे के मुख्य सचिव को भेजे पत्र में बताया है कि नेपाल के राष्ट्रपति रामबरण यादव १५ से १८ फरवरी तक भारत के दौरे पर आ रहे हैं। निर्धारित कार्यक्रम के अनुसार १७ फरवरी को नेपाली राष्ट्रपति हरिद्वार प्रवास पर आएंगे। उनका दूधाधारी बाबा आश्रम, पाइलट बाबा आश्रम और रामदेव आश्रम जाने का कार्यक्रम तय है। इसी दिन राष्ट्रपति गंगा में डुबकी भी लगाएंगे।
The RSS has discovered a new way to deal with the problem of the youth's lack of interest in its activities - woo them with employment opportunities.
The RSS will open more than one lakh schools, called the Vanvasi Kalyan Ashrams, in the hinterlands of the country where only young people will be employed as teachers.
"The RSS is running 70,000 single-teacher schools in the tribal areas of the country. Now there is a plan to open one lakh more schools for which we need energetic young teachers. These youth will also be given an opportunity to shape their careers elsewhere," he said.
For all these grand plans, the members of the Bharatiya Adhyapak Parishad (BAP), a bank of teachers affiliated to the RSS, are mostly overage.
The Sangh employs them in its Saraswati Shishu Mandir schools. But they have mostly remained ineffective in giving any political boost to the BJP. It is believed that the Sangh Parivar expects to 'catch' maximum politically vibrant youngsters in Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Orissa where the tribal population is fairly high.
And here is another flag. We hardly know about it. An ugly piece that has to be displayed on the bonnets of the Ambassador cars the governor, chief minister or even the Union Home Minister and Prime Minister uses to negotiate a Kashmir road. Suddenly there are two flags, wo people, two lands. And still one republic? Ask Justice Sagheer Ahmad and hear'give more autonomy to J&K' call.More, still more autonomy for what?
A seperate flag and wanting to be more seperate?
Oh my god. Whose flag is this any way? They say its Kashmir flag.The Red reminds you of some communist touch, so naturally interwoven. So why don’t our rulers hoist it too in the republic day parade in New Delhi?
A bit red faced,they say it’s just for Kashmir.
So why not Bihar and Uttarakhand and Punjab and please, Tamilnadu too have their seperate flags?
They say Kashmir is special and other states are NOT.
Why not every state in India is special?
Why not every Indian citizen is equally special?
There is a provision in the Indian constitution that gives it that special status.And bars the soldiers , who give their life to protect the region, to buy or to get settled down there.The special provision in our constitution, the constitution we are celebrating on 26th January,is called article 370.
It says we are not authorised to be a citizen of Kashmir. But we are Indian citizens.
May I reproduce some extracts from the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir? It has a separate identity from the Indian constitution and no law that Indian Parliament passes is applied in J&K unless the J&K assembly passes it too and it has the right to overrule Indian parliament and amend or change the contents of the laws passed by the parliament situated at New Delhi.
On April 7, 1958 the Plebiscite Front of Sheikh Abdullah adopted a resolution specifically citing Article 370, and stated that : “Jammu and Kashmir state has not yet acceded to any of the two dominions, India and Pakistan. Therefore, it will not be right to call Pakistani invasion on Jammu and Kashmir as an attack on India.” Using Article 370 Kashmiri Muslim leaders have opposed any family planning and welfare schemes formulated by the Government of India, and the programme was implemented only in the Hindu majority Jammu. The former Chief Minister, G.M. Shah, had said that the aim of the Government family planning programme was to convert the Muslim majority into a minority.
Though the term ‘secularism’ is all embracing and non-discriminatory, it has been debased by its false followers in India. Literally, the word ‘Secular’ means worldly as against religious; and historically and politically, ‘secularism’ implies separation of state and religion; and non-discrimination on grounds of religion. But for chorus singers of ‘secularism’ in India, anything which is anti-Hindu, pro-Muslim, divisive, sectarian, and even anti-national, is ‘secularism’.
Bharat Varsha comprising the present day India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Afghanistan and even Zabol in Iran was Hindu land with zero Muslim population till Muhammad bin Qasim’s Arab army attacked Sindh in 711. Despite fighting valiantly to defend themselves during repeated Muslim attacks for over a thousand years, Hindus lost areas now known as Afghanistan in 987, and Pakistan and Bangladesh to Muslims in 1947.
Logically in 1947, on India’s Partition on religious basis and creation of Pakistan for Muslims as demanded by Muslims, truncated Bharat should have been declared a Hindu republic to re-assert its Hindu identity. Instead, a perverse ‘secularism’ signifying anti-Hinduism was foisted on India.
Though secularism commands separation of state and religion, many State governments in India have taken over all prominent Hindu temples. And only Hindu temples have been brought under government control whereas no Christian church or Muslim mosque has been touched.
Since secular India did not help Hindu Nepal, combined power of Maoists, Christian missionaries and Pakistan’s ISI divested Nepal of its Hindu identity in 2006.
And to complete Hindu humiliation, allotment of a piece of forest land in 2008 to Shri Amarnath Shrine Board to provide temporary shelter for pilgrims visiting Amarnath shrine in Kashmir was cancelled by the State government due to violent protests from Kashmiri Muslims. This fact shows that in secular India, Hindu-majority areas belong to everyone but Muslim-majority areas belong to Muslims only.
Article 370: Country within a country And though Article 370 of Constitution negates the very concept of one unified India and though this Article has brought genocide and eviction of Hindus from Kashmir, ‘secular’ political parties do not want its abrogation though the Constitution framers had inserted this Article in 1950 only as a "temporary provision". Because of Article 370, Kashmiris can colonise the rest of India but the rest of Indians cannot settle in Kashmir.
Since the so-called ‘secular’ India has proved to be a disaster, it has to be transformed into Hindu Bharat before ‘secularism’ completely destroys the Hindus and Bharat.
Since Hinduism is all embracing, Hindu Bharat will give justice to all and appease none. In Hindu Bharat, there will be one law and one nation; no distinction of majority and minority; no discrimination against any community and equal rights for all citizens. Hindu Bharat will save Hindu identity of Bharat and remove laws which discriminate against Hindus. It will re-settle Kashmiri Hindus in Kashmir and restore their homes and lands to them.
Hindu Bharat will dismantle fake-secularism and liberate the nation from Pak-Bangla terrorists and infiltrators. It will prevent the creation of more Pakistans and Bangladeshs on Bharat’s soil.
No one can object to emergence of a Hindu Bharat when all the 57 Muslim majority countries (including Pakistan and Bangladesh which used to be Hindu lands) are declared Islamic countries.
Since those who shun politics are governed by their tormentors, all nationalist individuals and organisations must actively participate in politics to acquire state power; and to transform the present fake ‘secular’ India into a really ‘Secular Hindu Republic of Bharat’ by all peaceful, constitutional and lawful means.
Ralph Nader has put it very aptly, "If you are not turned on by politics, politics will turn on you."
(Author is former Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org)
In the not too-distant past, our former colonial rulers, both the British and the Muslims, had consistently followed the strategy enshrined in the Roman maxim, divide et impera, to tighten their political stranglehold over India. The Mughals successfully divided the Hindus and induced many warriors of the Rajput community and powerful landlords to break ranks with their brethren and join the alien conquerors for leading campaigns in several parts of the country against Hindu rulers who refused to surrender to the Mughals and stood up for protection of their dharma and their people.
Similarly the British were able to create a class of ‘toadies’ (whom they disparagingly called ‘natives’), for utilising their services as pillars of support for the British empire. Surprisingly the Congress Party, which at one time swore by the unity of the Indian people, has gone far beyond what the British and the Mughals did. It has strategised a far worse policy of ‘divide and destroy’ by recourse to the politics of minorityism.
Improving upon what V.P. Singh did in the year 1990 to create fissures in the Hindu society by implementing the recommendations of Mandal Commission, the Congress led UPA has embarked on a devious programme of minority appeasement in flagrant violation of the Constitution. The sole aim of the ruling political dispensation is to strengthen their Muslim and Christian votebank by dividing the Hindus and thereby destroy the unity of the majority community.
The NCAER survey further revealed that on an average a Muslim household, at the national level, spent more than its Hindu counterpart, the quantum of annual expenditure being Rs. 40,327 for the Muslims as against Rs. 40,009 for the Hindus.4 The survey revealed that both Sikhs and Christians were way ahead of Hindus. The average Sikh household spent a whopping Rs. 60,475 per annum, while the average Christian household expenditure per annum was Rs. 45,291.5 The NCAER survey confirmed that at the national level, Hindu and Muslim households virtually mirror each other on ownership of a host of products, e.g., cars, two-wheelers, refrigerators, etc.6 The only oddity was the ownership of television, with Hindu ownership at 62.8 percent and Muslim ownership at 54 percent. Could it be due to the diktats of anti-television Mullahs ? Your guess is as good as mine.
The foregoing facts, based on data-supported empirical findings of two surveys fly in the face of the falsehood peddled by Ranganath Misra Report. In any case, it is patently preposterous to claim that Muslims are the most disadvantaged community. In fact, the boot is on the other leg. It is the Hindu community which is in a more disadvantaged position.
Unfortunately in 2007, the Hindu leaders failed to rise to the occasion because none of them cared to read the voluminous report, cleverly written by Justice Sachar. It is a pity that the parliamentarians representing the Hindus could not even detect a highly questionable subtle fraud, foisted by the then Minister for Minority Affairs, A R Antulay, at the time of presenting the Action Taken Report on Sachar Report in the Lok Sabha on August 31, 2007.
(The writer is a retired DGP and has written a number of books on national security.)
"(On the other hand) There was also a terrible satisfaction amongst Muslims, who had not completely forgotten the Partition’s unpleasant aftermath. Hindus and Sikhs were alike paying for their ‘sins’. They were paying for the blood they had drawn in 1947."
(At Home In India: A restatement of Indian Muslims, P.115)
Can there be more barbaric and fascistic observation than the aforesaid statement on anti-Sikh riots (1984)? Moreover, the man who dared to say so is none other than Union Minister for Minority Affairs Salman Khursid. He seems to be blaming Hindus and Sikhs even for the Muslim Leaguers’ "Direct Action" in the late 40’s.
When the country was Partitioned on the basis of religion, the Congress realised that the country paid the price for the social philosophy it followed during the colonial period when secularism was treated as a slave of Shariat. Dissent against such policies and politics remained unheard and marginalised. For instance, when Nehru initiated Muslim Mass Contact programme Govind Ballabha Pant argued that "it was not necessary to lay emphasis on the Muslim Mass Contact" and advised Nehru that Congress should stick to its old policy and creed of representing the "masses of India regardless of caste or creed" after the Partition the Constituent Assembly deliberated the futuristic social philosophy of the Indian state. And it rejected old politics and policies based on reservation on the basis of religion as divisive, anti-secular and anti national. Not only Sardar Patel but members like Dr HC Mukherji (vice chairman and Christian by faith), Tajamul Husain (representative of the Muslim League) all of them categorically stated that in a secular democratic polity of India the concept of minority was anathema to its historical tradition and pluralistic social order.
(The author is associate professor in Political Science at DU and is honorary Director of India Policy Foundation.)
The national flag was not hoisted by security forces in Lal Chowk, the nerve centre of Srinagar, on the Republic Day today for the The usual hustle and bustle was not there in the heart of the city as people preferred to remain indoors in view of strike call given by separatists as well as tight security measures taken by the authorities. first time in 19 years.
Srinagar (Jammu and Kashmir):
The first time the flag was hoisted at the clock tower was in 1991 when then BJP President Murli Manohar Joshi did it amidst rocket attacks by militants.
No official reason was cited for not hoisting the national flag in Lal Chowk, which recently saw a 22-hour terrorist siege.
If the riots were racially inspired, as our journalists claim, how come only Lebanese Muslim thugs were targeted? Why were there no Indians, Chinese, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Ceylonese, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jews, etc., involved? Also ignored by our media guardians is the interesting fact that the Lebanese have been immigrating to Australia for more than 100 years without any kind of reaction from native Australians. Additionally, how do they explain Lebanese Catholic churches being targeted by Muslims?
Why did he refuse to use the ‘M’ word? Because this snivelling coward’s Lakemba electorate is dominated by –– you guessed it –– Lebanese Muslim thugs. It is therefore no accident that though the Lakemba mosque is notorious for its hate speech and the presence of the pro-terrorist Islamic Youth Movement the state has never interfered with its anti-Australian activities, even though its actions amount to sedition.
American churches also work closely with the US government intelligence community, which regards religious conversion as a useful lever to influence polities like India. US church businesses have entered Iraq, Afghanistan and every troubled country the US has invaded. It goes without saying that most of the ordinary Christians cynically used by the corporate owners of various churches for evangelical work are perfectly sincere and imagine they are undertaking the work of Christ, the saviour. They are capable for sacrifice and suffering in much the way individual soldiers can be motivated to sacrifice their lives in destructive imperialist wars waged by venal politicians. As a corollary, it needs to be remembered that most Indian Christian churches and India’s most influential Catholic devotee all opposed its acquisition of nuclear weapons.
(The author taught international political economy at London School of Economics.)