Hindu Samhati’s Facebook Friends Meet in Delhi ignites youths

September 22, 2013 happens to be different in the saga of Hindu struggle across India as on the same day the national capital of New Delhi witnessed the Facebook Friends Meet organized by Hindu Samhati in Hindu Mahasabha Bhawan at Mandir Marg. Hindu Samhati is no more a new name and within five years of its formal initiation in Kolkata, it has become a household name in several districts of rural Bengal owing its own perseverance, fervidness to save Hindus in the state from the surge of Islamic communalism vitiating the culture, basis of the state extremely. 

To make people in Delhi grasp the reality and how Hindu Samhati is fighting against all predicaments in Bengal the convention was organized. A good number of youths attended the meeting and interacted with the panel of speakers and among themselves. 

People who spoke on the occasion included Tapan Ghosh (president, Hindu Samhati), Sandhya Jain, ML Gupta, Priyadarshi Dutta.

Hindu aggression only hope to stop Slaughtering and Smuggling of Cows

Cow in Hindu Dharma earns a special status and is synonymous to divinity. It is not looked down on as an animal but as the truest incarnation of mother – a mother who is venerated for her infinite love and protective nature to her own offspring. According to Hindu mythology, Gavu means cow while shala denotes shed or home and all gods (Devata Devi) dwell in a cow.  Even the holy cow Kaamdhenu turned up following churning of cosmic ocean. If one has to realize the basis of this divinity, he must go through profundity of Vedas. In Book VI of Rig Veda, Hymn XXVIII attributed to  Rishi Bhardwaja, glorifies the virtue of the cow whereas in Atharva Veda (Book X, Hymn 10), cow is designated as Vishnu; she is also mentioned here as “all that the Sun surveys.” Kautilya in Arthshastra (Chapter XXIX) is also found to laud the divine character of cow.

But all these noble nature come to a halt in contemporary India where cow has become the greatest casualty.  Islamists do not miss a single opportunity to insult Hindus and in this context, slaughtering of cows is the first and best option to them. Gone are the days when Hindu perspective used to dominate the Indian political scene. Cashing in on pathetic nonchalance of Hindus, importance of minority votes, to be precise Muslim votes, has gained unimaginable significance. As a result, both slaughter and smuggling of cows have surged but the administration, under the aegis of “secular” political parties, remains silent altogether. And this surreptitious maneuver incites Islamists to open slaughter houses of cows far and wide vitiating the environment.       

Can this be stopped? This single question haunts a sane Hindu mind repeatedly when myriad instances of flouting court orders to prohibit open slaughtering of cows especially on the day of Bakri Id are readily available.   On November 2, 2011, by the decision bench headed by Chief Justice of Kolkata, Mr J. N. Patel and Mr. Ashim Kumar Roy (J), the Cow Slaughter on Bakri Id and trading of Cattle for sacrifice at Cattle markets was banned by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court. The historic judgment stated in clear terms “the all Officials of the State and local bodies have no power to facilitate holding of markets for trading of cattle for sacrifice and also the movement of cattle for the said purpose on the occasion of Id-uz-Zoha festival to be celebrated on 7th, November, 2011.” But by now the order has fallen through. Slaughtering and smuggling of cows is no more a covert but an overt affair and almost on a daily basis, such reports are found from different parts of Bengal. It is a steady affair leading to communal disturbances at different areas.

Violation of court judgments does not urge administration to take up apposite measures and venerate the Role of Judiciary in an independent country like India (ever ready to laud itself as the largest democracy in the globe). In this situation, are incidents like riots in Muzaffarnagar in Uttar Pradesh too unexpected? It resulted from the harassment of a Hindu girl and murders of Hindu boys for protesting.

Perhaps, Hindus have learnt at last that trust on Role of Democracy and Judiciary in India is nothing save for stupidity. As democracy defines the canon that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group, Hindus are also realizing the need of exerting force. If Hindus become both militant and dominant, it’s the failure of Indian democracy only.

Surely, there is the need of more combativeness to stop slaughtering and smuggling of cows. Indian legal system has failed miserably by now to check this escalating menace. 

United States’ overt antagonism to India in 1971

Without doubt, India’s relation with the United States ever from her independence in 1947 has been cryptic and India’s increasing tilt towards Soviet Union till its dissolution in 1991 aggravated the situation only. And the vengeance of it was displayed at different spheres of global political arena be it India-China conflict in 1962 or India-Pakistan war in 1965. But all these were outperformed by America’s overt antagonism to India during its violent face-off with Pakistan on the issue of Bangladesh in 1971. The conflict not only challenged the global political balance but put forward the rise of a third political force in it greatly. What United States had feared was the rise of a strong, virile India and its (then) growing linkup with Soviet Union would have energized the socialist block in particular. Keeping all these in mind United States initiated its most pernicious strategy to uproot India through beefing up Pakistan during the 1971 war in every capacity.

See below:       

When US supported Pak military bloodshed in Bangladesh

More than four decades ago, the Nixon Administration knowingly broke US law to help Pakistani army against Bangladesh and encouraged China to mass troops on Indian border to oppose the strong stand taken by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, according to a new book. 

In his latest book, Princeton historian Gary Bass 'The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger and a Forgotten Genocide' documents how the then US President Richard Nixon and his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger supported Pakistan military dictatorship as it brutally quashed the results of a historic free election. 

The Pakistani army launched a crackdown on East Pakistan, killing hundreds of thousands of people and sending ten million refugees fleeing to India - one of the worst humanitarian crisis of the 20th century. 

The author writes in the latest book, which is scheduled to hit the book market on September 24, how Nixon-Kissinger hated both India and Indira Gandhi and tried their level best to oppose the strong moral stand taken by the then Indian Prime Minister. 

Nixon and Kissinger thought in Cold War terms but also indulged in their personal disdain for India and its leader Indira Gandhi, Bass writes in the book, adding that they even secretly encourages China to mass troops on their India border, and illegally supplied weapons to the Pakistani military, all while censoring American officials who dared to speak up. 

Based on previously unheard White House tapes, the book gives a fresh insight into the Nixon-Kissinger hatred against Indira Gandhi, and how the then American leadership supported the butchering of innocent people, who dared to speak their voice and vote against Islamabad. 

As India under the strong leadership of Indira Gandhi decided to rescue the lives of people of then East Pakistan from the brutality of the Pakistani military, Bass writes in the book - running into nearly 500 pages - that Kissinger proposed three "dangerous" initiatives against India. 

"The United States would illegally allow Iran and Jordan to send squadrons of US aircraft to Pakistan, secretly asks China to mass its troops on the Indian border, and deploy a US aircraft carrier group to the Bay of Bengal to threaten India. He urged Nixon to stun India with all three moves simultaneously," Bass wrote.

Link: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/when-us-supported-pak-military-bloodshed-in-bangladesh-113091000246_1.html

(US 7th Fleet - 1971 War) 

Home ministry to push ahead the controversial Communal Violence Bill

The Home Ministry has decided to push ahead the controversial Communal Violence Bill which aims to check targeted violence against the minorities. The Ministry has submitted their draft of the bill to the Law Ministry for legal vetting.

A government source said there is an urgency now to bring the bill for Cabinet approval and introduce it in Parliament soon in an effort to get it passed in the tenure of UPA-2. This is especially because a draft of the proposed legislation was drawn up by the Sonia Gandhi-headed National Advisory Council (NAC) way back on July 25, 2011 and submitted for the Home Ministry's consideration. The Home Ministry has finally completed its deliberations on the proposed legislation and has submitted their draft bill to the Law Ministry. A source said the Ministry draft "largely sticks" to the provisions in the 'Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011' prepared by the NAC. The BJP is dead against the said draft as it aims to protect only the religious or linguistic minorities from violence by a majority group. BJP in the past has in fact called it a "dangerous bill", saying it will harm federal structure of the Constitution and questioned how the bill could presume that the majority community is always responsible for riots.

This bill also has a long history of being derailed due to political opposition. The Bill was first introduced in Rajya Sabha in 2005 and subsequently referred to the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs. The Committee submitted its report in 2006 to the Parliament and notices were given in March, 2007, December 2008, February 2009, December 2009 and again in February 2010 in the Rajya Sabha for consideration and passing of the Bill. However, the Bill could not be taken up for consideration on any of these occasions. Thereafter, several suggestions from civil society groups were received and examined. Finally, the NAC said in July 2010 that there was a need to revise the law to deal with communal violence, worked on a draft bill and submitted the same on July 25, 2011 to the Ministry.

The draft bill imposed duties on the Central Government and the State Governments and their officers to exercise their powers in an impartial and non-discriminatory manner to prevent and control targeted violence, including mass violence, against religious or linguistic minorities, SCs and STs. The NAC draft also proposed the Central Government to constitute a body known as the National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation to exercise the powers and perform the functions assigned to it under this Act and investigate incidents of communal violence in the country.

Source: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-04-05/news/38306559_1_communal-violence-bill-targeted-violence-draft-bill

Revealed: Nehru wanted to scuttle Sardar’s Hyderabad plan

by Kumar Chellappan

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the then Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister of India, whose 137th birth anniversary is on October 31, was insulted, humiliated and disgraced by the then Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, during a Cabinet meeting. “You are a complete communalist and I’ll never be a party to your suggestions and proposals,” Nehru shouted at Patel during a crucial Cabinet meeting to discuss the liberation of Hyderabad by the Army from the tyranny of the Razakkars, the then Nizam’s private army.

“A shocked Sardar Patel collected his papers from the table and slowly walked out of the Cabinet room. That was the last time Patel attended a Cabinet meeting. He also stopped speaking to Nehru since then,” writes MKK Nair, a 1947 batch IAS officer, in his memoirs “With No Ill Feeling to Anybody”. Nair had close ties with both Sardar and VP Menon, his Man Friday.

Though Nair has not written the exact date of the above mentioned Cabinet meeting, it could have happened during the weeks prior to the liberation of Hyderabad by the Indian Army. Operation Polo, the mission to liberate Hyderabad from the Nizam, began on September 13, 1948 and culminated on September 18. While Sardar Patel wanted direct military action to liberate Hyderabad from the rape and mayhem perpetrated by the 2,00,000 Razakars, Nehru preferred the United  Nations route.

Nair writes that Nehru’s personal hatred for Sardar Patel came out in the open on December 15, 1950, the day the Sardar breathed his last in Bombay (now Mumbai). “Immediately after he got the news about Sardar Patel’s death, Nehru sent two notes to the Ministry of States. The notes reached VP Menon, the then Secretary to the Ministry. In one of the notes, Nehru had asked Menon to send the official Cadillac car used by Sardar Patel to the former’s office. The second note was shocking. Nehru wanted government secretaries desirous of attending Sardar Patel’s last rites to do so at their own personal expenses.

“But Menon convened a meeting of all secretaries and asked them to furnish the names of those who want to attend the last rites of Patel. He did not mention anything about the note sent by Nehru. Menon paid the entire cost of the air tickets for those secretaries who expressed their wish to attend Sardar’s last journey. This further infuriated Nehru,” Nair has written about his memoirs in the corridors of power in New Delhi.

Nair’s friendship with Patel began during the former’s posting in Hyderabad as a civilian officer of the Army. “I was a bachelor and my guest house was a rendezvous of all those in the inner circle of the then Nizam of Hyderabad. Every night they arrived with bundles of currency notes. We gambled and played flash and the stakes were high. During the game I served them the finest Scotch. After a couple of drinks, the princes and the junior Nawabs would open their minds and reveal the secret action plans being drawn out in the Nizam’s palace. Once intoxicated, they would tell me about the plans to merge Hyderabad with Pakistan after independence. This was information that no one outside the Nawab’s close family members and the British secret service were privy to. But I ensured that this information reached directly to Sardar Patel and thus grew our relation,” writes Nair.

The relation between Nair and Sardar Patel was such that the former’s director general in the ministry told him once: “Sardar Patel keeps an open house for you.” Nair, who worked in various ministries during his three-decade long civil service career, writes that the formation of North East Frontier Service under the Ministry of External Affairs by Nehru and the removal of the affairs of the Jammu & Kashmir from the Ministry of Home Affairs are the major reasons behind the turmoil in both the regions. 

“This was done by Nehru to curtail the wings of Sardar Patel,” Nair has written. Though Sardar Patel was known as a no-nonsense man devoid of any sense of humour, Nair has written about lighter moments featuring him. The one centres around VP Menon with whom Patel had a special relation. Menon had to face the ire of Nesamani Nadar, a Congress MP from Kanyakumari, during his visit to Thiruvananthapuram in connection with the reorganisation of States. Nadar barged into Menon’s suit in the State Gust House and shouted at him for not obeying his diktats. Menon, who was enjoying his quota of sun-downer, asked Nadar to get out of his room. A furious Nadar sent a six-page letter to Sardar Patel trading all kinds of charges against Menon. “He was fully drunk when I went to meet him in the evening and he abused me using the filthiest of languages,” complained Nadar in his letter.

Sardar Patel, who read the letter in full asked his secretary V Shankar, an ICS officer: “Shankar, does VP take drinks?” Shankar, who was embarrassed by the question, had to spill the beans. “Sir, Menon takes a couple of drinks in the evening,” he said. Sardar was curious to know what was Menon’s favorite drink. Shankar replied that Menon preferred only Scotch. “Shankar, you instruct all government secretaries to take Scotch in the evening,” Sardar told Shankar. Nair writes that this anecdote was a rave in the Delhi evenings for a number of years!

Balraj Krishna (92), who authored Sardar’s biography, told The Pioneer that Nehru was opposed to Babu Rajendra Prasad, the then President, travelling to Bombay to pay his last respects to Patel. “But Prasad insisted and made it to Bombay,” said Krishna. MV Kamath, senior journalist, said though Nehru too attended the funeral of Patel, it was C Rajagopalachari, who delivered the funeral oration.

Prof MGS Narayanan, former chairman of Indian Council of Historical Research, said there was no reason to disbelieve what Nair has written. “But his memoirs did not get the due recognition it deserved. It is a historical chronicle of pre-and post independent India,” he said. 

 

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Bangladesh Begum’s India Visit: Real Or Ephimeral? – Analysis

Can ideology and political agenda change overnight? At least, that is the message Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Chairperson and former Prime Minister Begum Khaleda Zia carried when she arrived in India on October 28 for an eight-day visit.

Begum Zia came at the invitation of the Government of India. There have been some comments that this is a change in India’s Bangladesh strategy. This is not correct.

Certainly, following the assassination of Sk. Mujibur Rahaman in August 1975, New Delhi felt betrayed. The operation to kill Sk. Mujib was a cooperative venture between the USA (read mainly Secretary of State Henry Kissenger), Pakistan, and a group of Bangladeshis who pretended to be pro-liberation but were trying to reverse history. Hence, not only the government of India but the Indian people at large burst out with a series of emotions.

Relations began to improve when Gen. H.M. Ershad became president of Bangladesh. From the 1990s, the Indian government adopted the policy that India will be nice to Bangladesh and ‘hope Bangladesh’ would reciprocate. And this policy was irrespective of the political party in power at the centre.

With economic liberalization in the early 1990s under Prime Minister Narsimha Rao and architected by Finance Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, India began to grow. But the growth story would be a greater success if the neighbours also grew together.

But that did not happen. Pakistan expectedly remained the spoiler. But there was a great opportunity for Bangladesh to join India. The entire Bangladeshi policies went through a regressive storm, especially during the BNP’s rule from 2001 to 2006. The ruling four-party alliance comprising mainly of the BNP and JEI marked India as the main enemy. Those were tense years. The JEI spoke about winning the majority in Parliament by 2013 and bringing Bangladesh under Sharia law. Some BNP leaders also floated an idea of confederation type of relationship with Pakistan.

The BNP-JEI coalition gave enough opportunities to India to react strongly on the ground. It was not only of attacks on Hindus just after the elections which saw Hindu migration to India. An Indian Border Security Force (BSF) officer was abducted from Indian Territory by Bangladeshi villagers assisted by the Bangladeshi border force, the BDR, tortured and killed, and his body taken around tied to a bamboo pole, and photographs widely printed in the media. Had the BSF retaliated, the BDR would have been routed. But calmer political counsel prevailed in New Delhi. Then were many other incidents of provocation.

A major insurgency in North-East India was prevented when ten-truck loads of arms landed in the Chittagong port in April 2004 was accidentally detected. The BNP-JEI government tried to paper over the incident. These arms were meant for the Assam insurgents ULFA, the Naga insurgents and others.

This case is in the court now, and witness’ statements reveal that those involved include Begum Zia’s elder son Tareq Reheman, de facto leader of the BNP, the then Minister of State for Home, Lutffozaman Babar, JEI Chief Motiur Reheman Nizami, and a host of intelligence officers. Pakistan’s ISI funded the operation through a media front. The arms were brought from China.

During her meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid, Begum Zia assured they will support anti-terrorism policy and would not allow Bangladesh’s territory to be used against India. When asked by journalists on the BNP’s position on the Chittagong arms haul case, one of Khaleda Zia’s spokesmen said if they returned to power the case would be reinvestigated by an independent body. This gives lie to all the nice pronouncements.’

Khaleda Zia is on record to say that if her party came to power all agreements with Indian signed by the present Awami League government would be annulled. The BNP opposed the transport corridor for India to its North-East on several grounds. The most important reason proferred was if an India-China war broke out, India will be able transfer arms and troops quickly through Bangladesh to its border, and it would annoy China.

The BNP cannot do without the JEI and the other anti-India radical parties. The JEI has its fixed agenda and has close relations with the terrorist organizations some of which have begun to stir against. Connections of some of the BNP leaders including that of Tareq Reheman with terrorist organizations is well known and recorded. BNP-JEI terrorists form a triangular relationship which Khaleda Zia cannot discard. She knows that if she does so, she will be creating two new and dangerous enemies. She is caught in that vicious trap. Khaleda cannot afford to support the Liberation War Crimes trial because it would be counter-productive.

Begum Khaleda Zia’s sudden change is a riddle. Before coming to India she visited China on a party invitation and a high level Chinese led by Politburo Standing Committee member Li Changchun was in Dhaka and held discussions with her and her party leaders. At the moment the Chinese do not want instability in South Asia and would have advised Khaleda to mend relations with India. China had in the past months also advised Pakistan to improve relations with India. For Beijing, Indian influence is preferable to American influence.

After a whole history of anti-Indianism, a sudden showering of goodwill from the BNP is difficult to digest. For India it will be good if the BNP adopts a normal relationship with India. If not, the status quo will remain and Bangladesh’s economic development will be hurt. It will be for the voters of Bangladesh to judge that at the next elections just over a year ahead.

Source: http://www.eurasiareview.com/06112012-bangladesh-begums-india-visit-real-or-ephimeral-analysis/

   

Prohibitory orders along Indo-Bangladesh border in Assam

Prohibitory orders have been promulgated along Assam-Bangladesh international border in Cachar district in view of reports about extremist elements entering the district for creating law and order problem.

South Assam's Cachar district magistrate H K Dev Mahanta promulgated the orders following reports about extremist elements likely to cross the border and enter Cachar from Bangladesh, official sources said.

There is also apprehension of the possibility of illegal export of commodities and cattle from the district to Bangladesh, besides efforts by illegal immigrants to cross over from across the border to cause disturbance and social tension.

The prohibitory orders have been enforced as a preventive measure.

The district magistrate has directed that no person shall move within one km radius of the Indo-Bangladesh border between 8 pm and 5 am.

The order also prohibits movement of people on river Surma and on its high banks within the limit of the territory in actual control of India in the district of Cachar from dusk to dawn.

Plying of boats in the river Surma without license from the village panchayat duly countersigned by the chief executive officer of Zila Parishad was also prohibited.

The circle officer of Katigorah circle may allow the authorised local lessees permission for fishing with the copy of such an order endorsed by the district magistrate of Cachar and the commandant of 63 Bn BSF Dholcherra.

The order also prohibits carrying of sugar, rice, wheat, edible oil, kerosene oil and salt by any sort of vehicle, cart, rickshaw or any other means between dusk to dawn within 5 km belt inside the district boundary of Cachar along Bangladesh border unless permit is issued by the circle officer.

Source: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-11-03/guwahati/34892978_1_prohibitory-orders-indo-bangladesh-border-km-belt