Wednesday, 18 November 2015

Wage a war against ISIS, spare Islam


Wage a war against ISIS, spare Islam

No excuse is good enough for Muslim terrorists to engage in the kind of murderous activities which they have been doing.

 |  6-minute read |   17-11-2015
  • 1.53k
    Total Shares
Within a span of less than 12 months, Islamist terrorism has managed to strike the soul of Paris twice. Earlier this year, on January 7, two gunmen allied with the Yemeni branch of al Qaeda opened fire at the office of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo killing 12 people. On November 13, Paris witnessed yet another horrific terror attack in which Islamic State (ISIS) recruits launched coordinated assaults on innocent French people killing hundreds and injuring several others.
Whether the French government bans the custom of wearing face veils by Muslim women or Charlie Hebdo draws blasphemous cartoons of Prophet Muhammad, it doesn't serve as a good enough excuse for Muslim terrorists to engage in the kind of murderous activities which they have been doing. There can be no justification for it. Absolutely none! However, one must add that issues like anti-Islamic cartoons and banning of veils are as significant to radical Islamists as their conception of political Islam which is premised on world domination by way of establishment of a global Islamic state after the elimination of non-Muslims through violent attacks or terrorism.
There are no easy solutions to this problem. As a response to the Paris terror attacks, French security forces have started targeting ISIS settlements in Syria following President Francois Hollande's vow to be "unforgiving with barbarians". So far so good, but as experience has taught us, such strikes usually result in collateral damage. The family members and friends of those who die in collateral damage often go on to become part of terror outfits like ISIS and al-Qaeda.
How does one stop this? The answer obviously has two sides. First is the complete and utter annihilation of terror outfits like the ISIS, al-Qaeda and Boko Haram so that there is no one left to further terrorism, indoctrinate young minds and carry out recruitments. The second involves making such surgical strikes that collateral damage becomes a thing of the past. This, of course, is a utopian argument but there is hardly any other alternative.
Prejudice or backlash against Muslims should also be contained in the immediate aftermath of the attack. Any form of discrimination or unwarranted arrest and detention of French Muslims would lead to radicalisation and provide ammunition to the terror groups. Treatment of immigrants would require careful consideration and any law made which impinges upon their liberties without due rationale would attract ire. As a citizen, if you don't like something, ignore it or condemn it. If it is too serious an issue then protest vigorously against it or take the matter to court, but for heaven's sake do not start emptying bullets at a crowded market place or undertake suicide bombing.
Governments across the world have to realise that terrorism is a battle in which there is no space for errors. Collateral damage, arbitrary arrests, torture and discrimination have to be shunned. If we are unable to prevent this from happening then never mind how much we may condemn terror attacks, people will continue to join and support terrorism on some plank or the other.
The war against terrorism is a collective battle. It cannot be projected as a fight between white liberals in the West and radical Muslims mainly concentrated in West Asia. Every day terror outfits are splashing Muslim blood in places like Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The immediate victims of the beastly violence unleashed by the ISIS on a day-to-day basis are mostly Muslims stranded in Iraq. The brutality of the Taliban was faced chiefly by Muslims living under its rule in Afghanistan and not Europeans or Americans. It is true that Europeans and Americans have also suffered because of Islamist terror groups but so have Arabs, Asians and Africans.
If Muslims or Islam was the problem, as commentators easily remark in the wake of terror attacks, why is it that most of the victims of Islamist terrorism are Muslims? Most Muslims who take their religion seriously are only concerned with their faith and belief in the one and only god whom they call Allah, praying five times a day, giving charity or zakaat, fasting during Ramadan and undertaking the Hajj pilgrimage.
Not every Muslim possesses the tendency to commit genocide of non-Muslims and establish worldwide Islamic rule based on some divinely ordained law. It's only a tiny minority of Muslims running into a few thousands who comprise less than even one per cent of a community of over 1.5 billion. When speaking of the Quran, Muslims would cite verse 5:32 to state that their religion prohibits the killing of innocents. They would cite verses 2:256 and 109:6 to suggest that their religion stands for freedom of religion and religious pluralism.
True, Muslim terrorists use religion to justify their actions. They are most likely to quote verse 9:29 or 9:5 claiming that Islam advocates the killing of Jews, Christians and polytheists. That is a viewpoint shared by several radical clerics but as has been repeated innumerable times by innumerable scholars, such interpretation does not take into account the context of the Quranic verses. The Quran has a certain context and history which cannot be ignored.
Every word of that book is not to be read without understanding the circumstances under which it is believed to have been revealed to Prophet Muhammad. There is bound to be confusion and misunderstanding if context is altogether erased. Very importantly, there are verses which might be problematic in many ways. The correct way to address them would be by holding debates and discussions with common Muslims. Let the people think about it and decide whether they agree with it or not as the Quran itself says, "It is a blessed book which we have revealed for you so that you will reflect upon its verses and so the people of understanding will take heed."
The issue of scriptural fundamentalism has to have a humane approach. You cannot expect to win the war against terrorism by telling peace-loving, moderate Muslims that the only thing that their religion preaches is violence and nothing else because it is simply not true. To tell Muslims that the only version of their faith which is correct is the one preached by terror outfits like al-Qaeda and ISIS is to empower terror groups themselves. We must support modern, moderate interpretations of the Quran. It is the ideology of radical Islam which must be targeted, made to disappear and not Islam per se.
Islamist terrorism is killing Muslims as also non-Muslims. It's about time that it is tackled cohesively without finger-pointing. Terrorism or any form of violence has no place in the 21st century. Yet it continues to be one of the biggest obstacles towards peace and prosperity. Terrorism has to be exterminated along with the reasons which cause its growth, be it a particular form of ideology or a set of unjust actions dictated by state or non-state actors. Injustice has to be stopped against all groups and people whether at home or abroad which is possible only with the realisation that every human life is equal and deserving of human rights and legal protection.

Wednesday, 11 November 2015

బాలీవుడ్‌ బాద్షా షారుక్‌ ఖాన్‌కు కష్ట కాలం

బాలీవుడ్‌ బాద్షా షారుక్‌ ఖాన్‌కు కష్ట కాలం 
Updated :11-11-2015 14:35:30
ముంబై : బాలీవుడ్‌ బాద్‌షా షారుక్‌ ఖాన్‌ను ఈడీ ప్రశ్నించింది. ముంబైలో షారుక్‌ను అధికారులు మూడు గంటలపాటు ప్రశ్నించారు. ఫెమా నిబంధనలను ఆయన ఉల్లంఘించారని ఈడీ అడిట్‌ తేల్చింది. విదేశీమారకద్రవ్య విషయంలో రూ. వంద కోట్ల అక్రమాలకు పాల్పడ్డారని ఆరోపించింది. ఐపీఎల్‌ డీల్‌లో షారుక్‌ ఖాన్‌ నిబంధనలు ఉల్లంఘించారంటూ గతంలో ఈడీ నోటీసులు పంపించింది. అయితే ఆ నోటీసులపై షారుక్‌ స్పందించలేదు. నైట్‌ రైడర్స్‌ షేర్ల అమ్మకంలో అక్రమాలకు పాల్పడ్డారని రూ. 80ల షేర్‌ ధరను రూ. 10లుగా చూపారని ఈడీ ఆరోపించింది.

Tuesday, 10 November 2015

Narendra Modi: the divisive manipulator who charmed the world

Narendra Modi: the divisive manipulator who charmed the world
This week the Indian prime minister makes a triumphant visit to the UK after cosying up to everyone from Silicon Valley CEOs to Rupert Murdoch. What’s behind the uncritical embrace of a man who has presided over a rising tide of assassinations and religious zealotry, and driven the country’s writers and artists into revolt?
Modi’s speeches about his country’s cruelly postponed and now imminent glory have packed stadiums around the world with ecstatic Indians.
 Modi’s speeches about his country’s cruelly postponed and now imminent glory have packed stadiums around the world with ecstatic Indians. Photograph: Javed Dar/Xinhua Press/Corbis
Monday 9 November 2015 17.37 GMTLast modified on Tuesday 10 November 201509.49 GMT
In 2005, when Narendra Modi was the chief minister of the wealthy Indian state of Gujarat, local police murdered a criminal called Sheikh Sohrabuddin in cold blood. At an election rally in 2007 for the ruling Hindu nationalist BJP, Modi assured his citizens that Sohrabuddin “got what he deserved”. What should be done, he asked, to a man found possessing illegal arms? The pumped-up crowd shouted back: “Mari nakho-mari nakho!” (Kill him, kill him!)
The lynch mob’s cry was repeated in a village near Delhi last month as zealotsbeat to death a Muslim farmer they suspected – wrongly – of keeping beef in his house. While Modi makes a triumphant visit to the UK after more than a year as India’s prime minister, the Hindu supremacists are, as the novelist Mukul Kesavan wrote last month, in “full hunting mode, head up and howling”. In recent weeks, activists and scholars have been shot dead amid a nationwide campaign against “Hindu-baiters” that targets secular intellectuals and “westernised” women as well as public figures with Muslim and Christian names, and western NGOs such as Greenpeace. The assassinations follow months of violence and intimidating rhetoric by Hindu supremacists. A range of public figures, from Shah Rukh Khan, Bollywood’s biggest star, to India’s respected central banker, Raghuram Rajan, have spoken out against the rising tide of sectarian hatred. More than 40 of India’s most distinguished writers havereturned their awards to the Sahitya Academy, the national literature academy. Many others, including artists, scholars, filmmakers and scientists, have since joined the protests, which reached boiling point after Hindu fanatics lynched at least four people in connection with beef-eating.
Modi with David Cameron in Australia last year.

 Modi with David Cameron in Australia last year. Photograph: LUKAS COCH / POOL/EPA
Modi turned beef into an incendiary issue during his run for India’s highest political office; he and his party colleagues reinfused it with anti-minorities venom during recent local elections in the state of Bihar. The chief minister of one of India’s richest states declared last month that Muslims could only live in the country if they stopped eating beef. The house magazine of the RSS, the parent outfit of Hindu nationalists, cited ancient scriptures to justify the killing of “sinners” who slaughter cows. The culture minister Mahesh Sharma said of protesting authors: “If they say they are unable to write, let them first stop writing. We will then see.” On Saturday, Modi hinted at his own views on the subject by posing for pictures with organisers of a Delhi demonstration against protesting writers, where slogans such as: “Hit the fraudulent literati with boots” and, “Presstitutes suck up to Europeans” had echoed.
Why the 'Modi Toadies' are after Salman Rushdie

Read more
On the day of Modi’s election last May, I wrote in the Guardian that India was entering its most sinister phase since independence. Those who had monitored Modi’s words and deeds, noted their consistency, and feared that Hindu supremacism could deliver a mortal blow to India’s already enfeebled democratic institutions and pluralist traditions had come to much the same conclusion. Modi is a stalwart member of the RSS, a paramilitary organisation explicitly modelled on European fascist parties, whose members have been found routinely guilty of violence against Indian minorities. A pogrom in Modi-ruled Gujarat in 2002 killed more than 1,000 Muslims and displaced tens of thousands. (It was what prompted the US and UK governments to impose a visa ban on Modi). Whether or not Modi was personally complicit in the murder and gang rapes, they had clearly been “planned in advance”, as Human Rights Watch said in the first of countless reports on the violence, “and organised with the extensive participation of the police and state government officials”. Among the few people convicted was Maya Kodnani, Modi’s ministerial colleague, and a fanatic called Babu Bajrangi, who crowed to a journalist that he had slashed open with his sword the womb of a heavily pregnant woman, and claimed that Modi sheltered him after the riots and even changed three judges in order for him to be released on bail (Modi has not responded to these allegations).
Modi turned beef into an incendiary issue during his run for India’s highest political office
Though sentenced to dozens of years in prison, Kodnani and Bajrangi are frequently granted bail and allowed to roam free in Modi’s India. India’s foremost investigative body, the CBI, had accused Modi’s consigliere, Amit Shah, who is now president of the BJP, of ordering the execution of Sohrabuddin (among others), but withdrew its case against him last year, citing lack of evidence. Meanwhile, Teesta Setalvad, a human rights activist and one of Modi’s most persistent critics, is saved from arrest only by the interventions of the supreme court.
Modi conveyed early the audacity – and tawdriness – of power when in May 2014 he flew from Gujarat to the oath-taking ceremony on a private corporate jet emblazoned with the name of his closest corporate chum. In January this year he turned out in a $15,000 Savile Row suit with personalised pinstripes to hug Barack Obama. Launching Digital India (a programme to connect thousands of villages to the internet) in Silicon Valley last month, the eager new international player seemingly shoved Mark Zuckerburg aside to clear space for a photo-op for himself (the video has gone viral). One of his most fervent cheerleaders in India now complains that the prime minister is like a new bride remaking herself for her powerful and wealthy in-laws.
Narendra Modi calls for unity in wake of Muslim man’s murder for eating beef

Read more
Consequently, many in his own neglected family are turning against him. On Sunday, his party’s vicious and lavishly funded campaign in elections in Bihar, one of India’s largest and poorest states, ended in humiliating defeat. But Modi’s glossy makeover seems to have seduced many in the west; Rupert Murdoch tweeted after a recent meeting that Modi is India’s “best leader with best policies since independence”. Sheryl Sandberg declared she was changing her Facebook profile in honour of Modi’s visit to Silicon Valley in September. His libertarian hosts did not seem to know or care that, just as Modi was arriving in California to promote Digital India, his factotums were shutting down the internet in Kashmir, or that earlier this year his government advocated a draconian law that the Indian police used repeatedly to arrest people posting opinions on Facebook and Twitter. Nor did the Bay area’s single-minded data-monetisers fuss about the fact that Modi had launched Digital India in India itself with a private party for his most fanatical troll-troopers – people who are, as the magazine Caravan put it, “a byword in online terror, hate and misogyny”. In a dog-eat-dog world primarily organised around lucrative deal-making, the only value seems to be economic growth – albeit, for a small minority.
Advertisement
Modi’s speeches about his country’s cruelly postponed and now imminent glory have packed stadiums around the world with ecstatic Indians. At Wembley this weekend, some more grownup men and women chanting “Modi, Modi!” will embarrass themselves in history. The seemingly unembarrassable Tory government discovered new muscles while kowtowing to Xi Jinping, and will no doubt find them useful for some Indian style-prostration, sashtanga pranam, before Modi.
Modi was always an odd choice to lead India into the 21st century. Meeting him early in his career, the distinguished social psychologist Ashis Nandy assessed Modi as a “classic, clinical case” of the “authoritarian personality”, with its “mix of puritanical rigidity, narrowing of emotional life” and “fantasies of violence”. Such a figure could describe refugee camps with tens of thousands of Muslim survivors of the 2002 pogrom as “child-breeding centres”. Asked repeatedly about his culpability in the killings, Modi insisted that his only mistake was bad media management. Pressed repeatedly over a decade about such extraordinary lack of remorse, he finally said that he regretted the killings as he would a “puppy being run over by a car”.
With Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg.
 With Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg. Photograph: Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images
More importantly, Modi was a symptom, easily identified through his many European and Asian predecessors, of capitalism’s periodic and inevitable dysfunction: he was plainly the opportune manipulator of mass disaffection with uneven and unstable growth, who distracts a fearful and atomised citizenry with the demonisation of minorities, scapegoating of ostensibly liberal, cosmopolitan and “rootless” people, and promises of “development”, while facilitating crony capitalism. To aspiring but thwarted young Indians Modi presented himself as a social revolutionary, the son of a humble tea-seller challenging entrenched dynasties, as well as an economic moderniser. He promised to overturn an old social and political order that they saw, correctly, as dominated by a venal and unresponsive ruling class. His self-packaging as a pious and virtuous man of the people seemed especially persuasive as corruption scandals tainted the media as well as politicians and businessmen in the years leading up to 2014.
Modi’s earliest supporters in his bid for supreme power, however, were India’s richest people, lured by special favours of cheap land and tax concessions. Ratan Tata, the steel and car-making tycoon, was one of the first big industrialists to embrace him in the wake of the anti-Muslim pogrom. Mukesh Ambani, another business magnate and owner of a 27-storey home in the city of slums, Mumbai, soon hailed his “grand vision”. His brother declared Modi “king among kings”. Even the Economist, reporting on Modi-mania among “private-equity types, blue-chip executives and the chiefs of India’s big conglomerates” was startled by the “creepy sycophancy”. It shouldn’t have been: in Modi’s India the Ambanis are fast heading towards a Berlusconi-style domination of both news and entertainment content and delivery mechanisms.
Play Video
Play
Mute
Current Time0:00
/
Duration Time3:19
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
Fullscreen
Media management has ceased to be a problem for Modi; the television channels and press owned by loyal supporters hectically build him up as India’s saviour. Modi also attracted academics, writers and journalists who had failed to flourish in the old regime – the embittered pedantocrats and wannabes who traditionally serve in the intellectual rearguard of illiberal movements. Predictably, these victims of ressentiment – who languished, as Nietzsche wrote, in “a whole tremulous realm of subterranean revenge” – are now taking over Indian institutions, and filling the airwaves with their “rabid mendaciousness and rage”.
Many non-resident Indians, denied full dignity in the white man’s world, also hitched their low self-esteem to Modi’s hot-air balloons about the coming Indian Century. The Modi Toadies, as they are widely referred to on social media, have turned out to be an intriguingly diverse lot: they range from small-town zealots campaigning against romantic love between Muslim and Hindus to a publicist called Swapan Dasgupta, a former Trotskyite and self-proclaimed “anglophile”. But it should not be forgotten that a variety of global elite networks went to work strenuously on Modi’s behalf: the slick public-relations firm APCO that works with Central Asian despots and suave technocrats as much as the rented armies of cyberthugs rampaging through social media and the comment sections of online articles.
Protestors after the murder of a Muslim who was beaten to death for allegedly eating beef.

 Protestors after the murder of a Muslim who was beaten to death for allegedly eating beef. Photograph: Rupak de Chowdhuri/Reuters/Corbis
A former special adviser to Tony Blair authored a hagiography for English-speaking readers. The Labour peer Meghnad Desai helped alchemise Modi’s record of assisting big corporations into an electorally potent myth of “efficiency” and “rapid development”. Jagdish Bhagwati and Arvind Panagariya – two Ivy League Indian economists charged with “poverty-denialism” by the recent Nobel laureate Angus Deaton – said in a letter to the Economist that the anti-Muslim pogrom in Modi’s Gujarat was actually a “riot”. As Modi appeared likely to become prime minister, the intellectual grunts at American thinktanks churned out op-eds hailing Modi as the man to accelerate India’s neoliberalisation, and reorient its foreign policy towards America and Israel. Many foreign correspondents and “India hands” lost their intellectual confidence and judgement before such diligently manufactured consensus.
Thus, Modi rose frictionlessly and swiftly from disgrace to respectability in a world where money, power and status are the measure of everything, and where human beings, as Balzac bitterly wrote, are reduced to being either fools or knaves. He may be very far from fulfilling his electoral promise of creating adequate jobs for the one million Indians who enter the workforce every month. He still deals mostly in fantasy, gushing about “smart cities” and “bullet trains”, and a digital India in which fibre-optic cables will bring remote villages online. But among global elites who see India as a fast-growing economy and counterweight to China, poverty-denialism shades easily into pogrom-denialism. A tweet by a New-York-based venture capitalist responding to protests by Indian writers sums up the prevailing morality: “The icons of new India are the wealth creators. Nobody gives a rat’s ass anymore about the writers.”
He still deals mostly in fantasy, gushing about “smart cities” and “bullet trains”
Modi’s ascent through a variety of enablers, whitewashers and wealth-creators invites us to probe our own complicity as fools and knaves in increasingly everyday forms of violence and dispossession. For Modi’s ruthless economism is a commonplace phenomenon, marked everywhere by greed, sophistry and a contempt for human life and dignity – symptoms, as GN Devy, one of India’s most bracing thinkers, put it last month, of a worldwide transition into a “post-human” existence.
In India itself, the prostration before Mammon, bellicose nationalism, boorish anti-intellectualism, and fear and hatred of the weak predates Modi. It did not seem so brazen previously because the now supplanted Indian elite disguised their hegemony with what Edmund Burke called “pleasing illusions”: in this case, reverential invocations of Gandhi and Nehru, and of the noble “idea of India”. Thus, the Congress party, which first summoned the malign ghosts of Hindu supremacism in the 1980s and presided over the massacre of more than 3,000 Sikhs in 1984, could claim to represent secularism. And liberal intellectuals patronised by the regime could remain silent when Indian security forces in Kashmir filled up mass graves with dissenters to the idea of India, gang-raped with impunity, and stuck live wires into the penises of suspected militants. The rare protestor among Indian writers was scorned for straying from literature into political activism. TV anchors and columnists competed with each other in whipping up patriotic rage and hatred against various internal and external enemies of the idea of India. The “secular” nationalists of the ancient regime are now trying to disown their own legitimate children when they recoil fastidiously from the Hindu supremacists foaming at the mouth.
One can only hope that the barefaced viciousness of Hindu supremacists will jolt the old elites out of their shattered dogmas and pieties while politicising a cheated young generation. It is true that Modi and his Toadies embody without shame, ambivalence or euphemism the brutality of power; they don’t give a rat’s ass about pleasing illusions. Yet their assaults on the authorised idea of India are creating a fissure in the unfeeling monolith through which a humane politics and culture might flow. The alternative, as recent weeks show, is a post-human India, where lynch mobs roused by their great leader shout: “Kill him! Kill him!”


టిప్పుసుల్తాన్‌ జయంతి ఉత్సవాల్లో ఉద్రిక్తత...వీహెచ్‌పీ కార్యకర్త మృతి

టిప్పుసుల్తాన్‌ జయంతి ఉత్సవాల్లో ఉద్రిక్తత...వీహెచ్‌పీ కార్యకర్త మృతి 
Updated :10-11-2015 13:17:15
కర్నాటక : కర్నాటకలో టిప్పుసుల్తాన్‌ జయంతి ఉత్సవాలు ఉద్రిక్తంగా మారాయి. కొడగుజిల్లా కేంద్రం మడికెరిలో జయంతి ఉత్సవాల నిర్వహణను వ్యతిరేకిస్తూ విశ్వహిందూ పరిషత, భజరంగ్‌దళ్‌, హిందూజాగరణ వేదిక సంస్థలు ఆందోళన చేపట్టాయి. మంగళవారం జిల్లాలో బంద్‌కు పిలుపు ఇచ్చాయి. వారిని పోలీసులు అడ్డుకున్నారు. దాంతో రెచ్చిపోయిన ఆందోళకారులు పోలీసులపై రాళ్లు రువ్వారు. పరిస్థితిని అదుపులోకి తెచ్చేందుకు లాఠీచార్జీ జరిపారు. ఈ ఘటనలో వీహెచ్‌పీ కార్యకర్త ప్రాణాలు కోల్పోయాడు. పలువురు తీవ్రంగా గాయపడ్డారు.

కర్ణాటక సర్కారు నిర్వహించ తలపెట్టిన మైసూరు పులి టిప్పు సుల్తాన్‌ జన్మదిన వేడుకలను బహిష్కరిస్తున్నట్టు బీజేపీ ప్రకటించింది. ఈ వేడుకలను పూర్తిగా బాయ్‌కాట్‌ చేస్తున్నామని.. తమ పార్టీ తరఫున ప్రతినిధులుగా ఎవ్వరూ హాజరు కాబోరని ఆ పార్టీ కర్ణాటక అధ్యక్షుడు ప్రహ్లాద్‌ జోషి స్పష్టం చేశారు. టిప్పుసుల్తాన్‌ను మత దురభిమాని, కన్నడ వ్యతిరేకిగా ఆయన పేర్కొన్నారు. తమ పార్టీకి 44 మంది శాసనసభ్యులున్నారని.. సాధారణంగా ఇలాంటి వేడుకలకు స్థానిక శాసనసభ్యులను ఆహ్వానిస్తారని, కానీ తమ పార్టీ ఎమ్మెల్యేలెవరూ వాటికి వెళ్లవద్దని పార్టీ రాష్ట్ర అధ్యక్షుడిగా తాను ఆజ్ఞాపించానని చెప్పారు. బీజేపీనే కాదు.. మంగళూరు యునైటెడ్‌ క్రిస్టియన్‌ అసోసియేషన్‌ సహా కర్ణాటకలోని పలు సంస్థలు, పలువురు వ్యక్తులు కూడా.. ప్రభుత్వం తలపెట్టిన ఈ వేడుకలను వ్యతిరేకించడం గమనార్హం. అయితే, ఆ రాష్ట్ర ముఖ్యమంత్రి సిద్దరామయ్య మాత్రం టిప్పు జయంతి జరిపి తీరుతామని స్పష్టం చేశారు.

A Rebuke to India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi

A Rebuke to India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi
By THE EDITORIAL BOARDNOV. 9, 2015  117 COMMENTS
Photo

Nitish Kumar, chief minister of Bihar, greeted supporters after victory in state elections on Sunday. Credit Aftab Alam Siddiqui/Associated Press
Advertisement


During a national election in India last year, Narendra Modi promised “development for all.” As prime minister, he has yet to deliver big economic improvements, but in the meantime, members of his government and political party have shredded his promise of inclusion by inflaming sectarian tensions. Now, voters in the country’s third most populous state have sent Mr. Modi a message: Put an end to the hatemongering.

Poisoning politics with religious hatred is bound to squander the country’s economic potential at a time when India should be playing a bigger and more constructive role in South Asia and the world. India’s history is filled with examples of religious and caste-based violence that set the country back. Those conflicts subsided during India’s rapid economic growth, but many Indians now fear a resurgence.

On Sunday, Mr. Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party lost a legislative election in the northern state of Bihar, which has a population of more than 100 million. A “grand alliance” of secular parties united by their antipathy to the Hindu nationalist B.J.P. won 178 constituencies in the 243-member legislative assembly to the B.J.P.’s 53. Many political analysts see the loss as a repudiation of Mr. Modi because he and his top aides campaigned vigorously in the state and many ads carried his image, rather than photos of local politicians.

Continue reading the main story
Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter
Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, The Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.


In the months leading up to the Bihar election, hard-liners in the B.J.P. and organizations affiliated with the party stoked India’s long-simmering sectarian tensions. The party’s lawmakers pushed for beef bans around the country ostensibly to protect the cow, which many Hindus consider holy, but really as a ploy to divide Hindus and Muslims, some of whom eat beef.

Mobs riled by the anti-beef crusade have killed four Muslims suspected of slaughtering, stealing or smuggling cows in the last seven weeks. And in August, unidentified attackers shot and killed Malleshappa Madivalappa Kalburgi, a scholar and vocal critic of Hindu idolatry. Hundreds of writers, filmmakers and academics have protested the growing intolerance by returning awards they received from the government-supported bodies.

Mr. Modi has not forcefully condemned the beef-related killings, despite pleas by Muslims and other minorities. He has tolerated hateful and insensitive remarks by his ministers and by B.J.P. officials.

Continue reading the main story
RECENT COMMENTS

rameshraghuvanshi 13 minutes ago
Indian politics not so easy to judge in boardroom of NY times office.Ground reality is quite different.Modi was defeated and Nitish wined...
Al 30 minutes ago
This is classic "lazy journalism". The only reason the opposition won is because they were united. Nitish Kumar, Lalu Prasad and the...
iyer 30 minutes ago
A very apt and perceptive comment from a newspaper thousands of miles and cultures away from India's Bihar... humanity is the key to...
SEE ALL COMMENTS  WRITE A COMMENT
During a campaign stop in Bihar, Mr. Modi tried to exploit sectarian divisions by telling voters that the secular alliance would reduce affirmative action benefits for lower-caste Hindus and tribes in favor of “a particular community” — an apparent reference to Muslims. And the president of the B.J.P., Amit Shah, one of Mr. Modi’s closest advisers, told voters that a victory for the alliance would be celebrated in Pakistan, the Muslim-majority neighbor that has fought several wars with India since 1947.

CONTINUE READING THE MAIN STORY
117
COMMENTS
Voters in Bihar saw through the B.J.P.’s attempts to divide them. They, like most Indians, are looking for leaders who will improve their standard of living. Bihar is one of the poorest states in India but has grown fast in the last 10 years under the leadership of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, who is credited for cracking down on crime, building roads and increasing the enrollment of girls in schools.

Mr. Modi and the B.J.P. secured a majority in the lower house of Parliament last year with promises of economic reforms. Now, to push through those reforms, the party needs to win the control of the upper house, which is elected by state assemblies. It won’t win those elections unless Mr. Modi gets rid of the officials in his government and party who are fueling sectarian culture wars.

Meanwhile, there are things Mr. Modi could do administratively to improve the economy, like investing in education and health care and building infrastructure. Voters in Bihar have sent the B.J.P. a clear message. Mr. Modi should heed it.


New York Times editorial slams Modi, says 'end hatemongering' is Bihar's message to PM
Nov 10, 2015 13:18 IST
#BeefBan   #bIhar   #Bihar Assembly Election 2015   #BJP   #Grand Alliance   #Modi   #Narendra Modi   #New York Times   #NewsTracker  
8 Comments

197850
Washington, DC: Bihar's electorate has sent Prime Minister Narendra Modi a message: "Put an end to hatemongering", said The New York Times on Tuesday.
An editorial titled A rebuke to India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi in The New York Times said that during a national election in India last year, Modi promised “development for all”.
Narendra Modi in a file photo. Naresh Sharma/Firstpost Narendra Modi in a file photo. Naresh Sharma/Firstpost
As prime minister, he has yet to deliver big economic improvements, "but in the meantime, members of his government and political party have shredded his promise of inclusion by inflaming sectarian tensions".
"Now, voters in the country’s third most populous state have sent Modi a message: Put an end to the hatemongering," said the daily.
The editorial said that "poisoning politics with religious hatred is bound to squander the country’s economic potential at a time when India should be playing a bigger and more constructive role in South Asia and the world".
"India’s history is filled with examples of religious and caste-based violence that set the country back. Those conflicts subsided during India’s rapid economic growth, but many Indians now fear a resurgence."
On Sunday, Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lost a legislative election in Bihar. A grand alliance of secular parties "united by their antipathy to the Hindu nationalist BJP" won 178 constituencies in the 243-member legislative assembly to the BJP’s 53.
The daily said that many political analysts see the loss as a "repudiation of Modi" because he and his top aides campaigned vigorously in the state and many ads carried his image, rather than photos of local politicians.
In the months leading up to the Bihar election, hardliners in the BJP and organizations affiliated with the party stoked India’s long-simmering sectarian tensions.
"The party’s lawmakers pushed for beef bans around the country ostensibly to protect the cow, which many Hindus consider holy, but really as a ploy to divide Hindus and Muslims, some of whom eat beef."
Mobs riled by the anti-beef crusade have killed four Muslims suspected of slaughtering, stealing or smuggling cows in the last seven weeks. And in August, unidentified attackers shot and killed Malleshappa Madivalappa Kalburgi, a scholar and vocal critic of Hindu idolatry. Hundreds of writers, filmmakers and academics have protested the growing intolerance by returning awards they received from the government-supported bodies.
NYT went on to say that Modi has "not forcefully condemned the beef-related killings, despite pleas by Muslims and other minorities. He has tolerated hateful and insensitive remarks by his ministers and by BJP officials".
During a campaign stop in Bihar, Modi "tried to exploit sectarian divisions by telling voters that the secular alliance would reduce affirmative action benefits for lower-caste Hindus and tribes in favour of 'a particular community' - an apparent reference to Muslims".
And BJP president Amit Shah, one of Modi’s closest advisers, told voters that a victory for the alliance would be celebrated in Pakistan, the Muslim-majority neighbour that has fought several wars with India since 1947.
"Voters in Bihar saw through the BJP’s attempts to divide them. They, like most Indians, are looking for leaders who will improve their standard of living. Bihar is one of the poorest states in India but has grown fast in the last 10 years under the leadership of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, who is credited for cracking down on crime, building roads and increasing the enrollment of girls in schools."
The editorial said that Modi and the BJP secured a majority in the lower house of Parliament last year with promises of economic reforms.
"Now, to push through those reforms, the party needs to win the control of the upper house, which is elected by state assemblies. It won’t win those elections unless Modi gets rid of the officials in his government and party who are fueling sectarian culture wars," it added.
The daily noted that there are things Modi could do administratively to improve the economy, like investing in education and health care and building infrastructure. "Voters in Bihar have sent the BJP a clear message. Modi should heed it."
IANS

Friday, 6 November 2015

“Nobody has more right to live in this country than me, and I am not going to leave. So shut up”, says Shah Rukh Khan


“Nobody has more right to live in this country than me, and I am not going to leave. So shut up”, says Shah Rukh Khan


Shah-Rukh-Khan
Shahrukh Khan, during a Twitter townhall with a leading media outfit, said that he is open to the idea of  giving up his award as a symbolic means of protest against extreme intolerance in India.
“Yes, as a symbolic gesture I would give it up,” the actor said, referring to the spate of other film personalities, artists, writers, scientists and others who have returned awards as a measure of protest in recent months. “I do think there is intolerance. There is extreme intolerance,” the actor added in a hard hitting statement.
Shahrukh Khan, when asked about communalism in the country, reiterated the importance of India’s secular fabric. When asked about his identity as a Muslim in India, the actor said: “No one can question my patriotism. How dare anyone?” adding that the biggest mistake a patriot could make was to go against secularism.
SRK
Actor Shah Rukh Khan, celebrating his 50th birthday, spoke to some of the leading journalists of the country about his big day, religion and, of course, romance.
Here are the highlights of what SRK said in some of his interviews:
shahrukhkhan-jan30SRK
1. In the West, opinions are respected. In our country, I think opinion is taken with a little more aggression if it doesn’t agree with yours
2. I don’t speak my mind often enough because I worry my film get into trouble
3. Whoever takes a stand against creative people will face a huge backlash
4. Religion cannot be defined by our meat-eating habits
5. In my house, everyone is free to follow their religion. My kids were confused about whether they were Muslim or Hindu, I said ‘why not Christian?’
6. Religious intolerance, or intolerance of any kind, is the worst thing and will take us to the dark ages. Indians lose face over the questions that are asked
7. If you are a patriot, you must love your country as a whole, not parts of it as religions and regions
8. Anupam Kher should be able to give his opinion about another director and be able to have a discussion about it. That’s tolerance
9. I think it’s very brave of those returning their awards. I am on their side. If they tell me to join them on a march or a press conference, I would
10. Personally, it’s too much of symbolism to return my awards. Just returning something, I am not a believer in that
11. I think the FTII students are completely on the right side. Some words or actions may sound wrong, that’s natural when you are on a strike or a fast and passions run high. But I think the students are right
12. I have a weapon on my side. I think I am extremely lived by people. If someone takes a stand against me, I have enough people to love me back
13. I am not scared, just selfish sometimes. I don’t want a nuisance, I am scared of a nuisance. I work 18 hours a day and I need to be left alone to do my job
14. It is very degrading and humiliating to have to prove my patriotism
15. I am an Indian-born movie star. I am an Indian-born Indian. I am Indian – how does that get questioned?
16. Nobody has more right to live in this country than me, and I am not going to leave. So shut up
17. Somewhere the decision to send the children abroad to study is so they wouldn’t have to deal with the security and my stardom
18. The fact that we need to keep on talking about the three Khans to prove how secular India is means that India is not. We don’t need ‘Khans shining’ to prove that India is shining 24. If we start curbing creativity, we will be making more unsecular people
19. At 50, I can still do the dance and the hands and the cartwheel and I can still dignify a lady so much that she will fall in love with me. I think that is what romance is

Thursday, 5 November 2015

Indian Muslim, Accused of Stealing a Cow, Is Beaten to Death by a Hindu Mob

 Search

Asia Pacific

Indian Muslim, Accused of Stealing a Cow, Is Beaten to Death by a Hindu Mob


    NEW DELHI — Amid a politically charged national debate over religious intolerance, a Muslim man was beaten to death on Monday by a mob of Hindus who suspected him of stealing a cow, a revered symbol in the Hindu religion. It was the fourth time in six weeks that Hindus had killed Muslims they suspected of slaughtering, stealing or smuggling cows.
    The police found the bloodied and battered body of the man, Mohammad Hasmat Ali, early Monday morning in the remote village of Uchekon Moiba Thongkhong in Manipur, a state in northeast India. Mr. Ali, 55, married with three sons, was a leader in the neighboring village of Keirao Makting, where he was headmaster of a madrasa. Police officials said Mr. Ali had no criminal record and no known links to the cattle business.
    “What is happening here is completely wrong — people taking the law into their hands,” Naba Kanta, the senior police official leading the investigation into Mr. Ali’s death, said in an interview. “We face the problem of mob justice in this area, and we are trying to do our best to contain it.”
    The recent killings are occurring against a backdrop of intensifying political conflict over laws and policies aimed at protecting cows from slaughter and consumption. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P., has pushed aggressively to pass state beef bans. The Delhi police, controlled by Mr. Modi’s government, recently descended in force on a canteen after it posted beef on its menu. (It turned out to be buffalo meat.) On Wednesday, the B.J.P. ran campaign ads accusing its opponents of “insulting the holy cow.”
    Several recent cases of violence have involved Hindu nationalist vigilante groups dedicated to protecting cows. The groups, including some with ties to the B.J.P., mobilize members to confront those suspected of slaughtering, eating or stealing cows, sometimes with catastrophic results.
    On Sept. 28, a Muslim family was attacked in a village outside Delhi by a Hindu mob that suspected the family of eating beef, an accusation the family denied. The father, Mohammed Ikhlaq, was killed, and his son seriously wounded. Weeks later, another Hindu mob in the Kashmir Valley in north India threw a homemade bomb at a truck suspected of carrying beef; a young Muslim trucker, most of his body burned, died days later. Then, on Oct. 14, a Muslim man was killed in the north Indian state of Himachal Pradesh when he was attacked by a group of Hindu activists who suspected him of smuggling cattle for slaughter.
    These and other recent outbreaks of violence by Hindu nationalists have provoked a vigorous cultural and political backlash across India. Dozens of leading authors returned India’s highest literary award in protest. Hundreds of scientists, academics, actors and filmmakers have signed petitions or spoken out. On Tuesday, Sonia Gandhi, the president of the Congress Party and Mr. Modi’s longtime political opponent, led a march in Delhi to condemn “the atmosphere of fear, intolerance and intimidation in the country.”
    Mr. Modi’s party has struggled to formulate a response, at one point urging party leaders to temper their remarks, at another point ridiculing the spreading protests as a manufactured controversy. On Sunday, Mr. Modi’s finance minister, Arun Jaitley, went even further, asserting in a Facebook post that Mr. Modi was “the worst victim of ideological intolerance” enforced by “Congress, left thinkers and activists.”
    “Their strategy is twofold,” Mr. Jaitley wrote. “Firstly, obstruct Parliament and do not permit reforms which will bring credit to Modi government. Secondly, create, by structured and organized propaganda, an environment that there is a social strife in India.”
    The events leading to Mr. Ali’s death are still being pieced together by investigators. But according to Mr. Kanta, the police official, a Hindu man known by a single name, Brajendra, heard dogs barking outside his home early Monday morning.
    “Brajendra decided to go out and check,” Mr. Kanta said. “He found Mr. Ali huddled in one corner of his barn, shivering. Brajendra assumed he had come to steal his calf and raised an alarm. A crowd gathered and they started beating Mr. Ali. In the pushing and pulling, and being beaten up, Mr. Ali died.”
    Mr. Brajendra has been arrested, and police officials said he had acknowledged his involvement in Mr. Ali’s death and helped identify others in the mob.
    In the village of Keirao Makting, where Mr. Ali’s family lives, angry villagers this week staged protests at the local police station, blocked the main road to the city of Imphal and formed a citizens committee to conduct an independent investigation. “How can a man whose family consisted of engineers and doctors, and himself a respected headmaster, steal a calf?” asked Mohammad Raza-ud-din, leader of the citizens committee.
    “He never picked a fight with anyone in the village,” Mr. Raza-ud-din said. “The children in the madrasa love the gentle Ali.”