Speak out and say yes to unity.

Tarun Vijay | Times of India | 28 September 2008

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Columnists/Tarun_Vijay/The_Right_View/Speak_out_and_say_yes_to_unity/articleshow/msid-3537328,curpg-2.cms
 

Do we get bad leaders in spite of having good people?

If our people are great, why do we have leaders who fail?

Where are the people if the leaders are not doing what we think they should be doing?

A people so intensely under attack by the terrorists can't claim to be brave by sitting silently and petitioning state clerks. Those who fear get what they fear.

While China, having superbly completed the Olympics, sent a man for a space walk and Sarah Palin "delighted" our PM in the US with a handshake, India seems to be descending dangerously into communal polarisation, reinforced and powered by a secular lobby. In the process, the morale of the police and other security forces is being affected for they are facing the brunt from terrorists as well as the secularists in the government and the media who are running them down, doubting their intentions and integrity.

Suddenly yardsticks for our judgment have changed. Opinions, morphed as judgments, are passed not on merit or weighing its consequences for the society, but by the yardstick of the colour events wear. The Nanavati Commission's report is to be discarded even before its pages are browsed because the Narendra Modi government instituted it and it shows Hindus as victims. The Bannerjee report is to be trusted because the secular Lalu Yadav instituted it and shows Hindus as aggressors. Strange logic.

Who speaks for the Indian?

Inspector M.C.Sharma's funeral is not to be attended because he shot at Muslims. When the men in khaki arrested the Kanchi Shankaracharya, not a single secular channel or newspaper cast any doubt on the police reports and statements. But when the men in khaki arrested a few from Jamia Milia, doubts were raised immediately and investigative journalism flowered.

Anything written about patriotism, even a good word about Inspector Sharma, is sought to be embarrassed under a general head – Hindu media. I read this term being used first time in the aftermath of the Jamia controversy. Anything that Muslims show as a sign of solidarity with the rest of the India and condemnation of terrorism is either blacked out or shown apologetically.

Last week, 21st September to be exact, a few hundred young professional Muslim youth from Okhla and Jamia Nagar organized a silent procession at India Gate in New Delhi. They were condemning terrorism, asking for the harshest punishment for terrorists who use Islam for their crimes, and they wanted to be recognized as patriots. I didn't see the coverage it deserved. Why?

Who is speaking for the Indians who were killed in the Delhi blasts? Why did they have to be turned lifeless in a sudden stroke?

Suddenly a blast occurs and their life is changed. You are going to see a movie, and next moment found dead. Someone bringing his daughter home from school – suddenly both are dead in a blast. Gone to market for shopping – minutes later a phone call at home says 'Please come to claim the dead body'. Terrorism has changed our lives, our behaviour, our language and relations. Yet we feel hesitant to speak out.

What happens to those who were dependent on the terror-struck victim nobody knows. They are not news. Can't we speak about Simran – whose father and grandfather were killed in the previous blast – and about Santosh, the sweet little kid who got killed in Mehrauli blast on Saturday?

"Son, what's your religion?" – should that be our first query and decide what is said next?

Hard law is bad, because it was "used" against a particular community. Police is bad because it's arresting and targeting a particular community.

Terror is secular, khaki is suspect

While the nation and her security forces – that includes the police too, stand firm to combat terrorism, the state power and the seculars are providing focused support to terrorists and enhancing their morale through statements and casting doubt on the motives of the anti-terror action. India's secular cabinet ministers demanded lifting of a ban on a terrorist organization, proposed Indian citizenship to millions of illegal Bangladeshi infiltrators, refused to say a word of encouragement to the security forces fighting terrorists but publicly assured help to the accused whom police, a part of the government, arrested for blasting Delhi and killing citizens.



All these secular statements had just one consideration – religion of the groups they want to support or oppose. The seculars have become the worst kind of communal hate spreaders, with their extreme one-sided postures and acidic language. In a way these rabble-rousing seculars have become a security threat affecting the societal fabric and the morale of the policemen and soldiers.

They ordered a communal head count in the army, ignored and downgraded celebrations of Bharat Vijay Diwas, 16th December, and Kargil Vijay Diwas, stopped observing the Pokharan test anniversary in Delhi and failed to show due respect to Field Marshall Manekshaw. All this can't just be exceptions; they show a trend, an attitude.

These are the same elements who represent the governance and by virtue of being cabinet ministers, which ironically includes having taken an oath that obliges them to be loyal to the Constitution, succeed in facilitating comforts for the killers and create an atmosphere in which sympathies for the terrorists are generated and police become suspect with doubtful integrity. Words like – "they have a soft heart", "they are our children and hence it's our duty to provide them help", "nothing can be said till they are proven guilty", etc – are bandied about to warn the police and reassure those whom police caught at risk to their lives.

It's good and admirable to stick to a universal assumption that everyone is innocent till proven guilty. But during wartime words spoken publicly have to be weighed against their possible impact on the elements that shoulder the responsibility to safeguard the nation. If you start being celestially virtuous by sympathizing with the pains and difficulties of those who have waged a war on the state, it's bound to paralyze the enthusiasm of patriotic soldiers and civil resistance.

They know their side

In the secular dispensation, to be objective, liberal and broadminded and have sympathies on humanitarian grounds are reserved only for terror groups. Is it a secret that these seculars leave no stone unturned to create an atmosphere where procedural mechanism to punish the guilty is influenced and driven to believe that the arrested criminal is not the culprit, but the victim of an incompetent state apparatus.

Remember how a vigorous campaign to release a lecturer of the same Jamia Milia Islamia was launched in spite of Delhi police submitting a truckload of evidence about his involvement in the attack on Parliament? And the famous case of Abdul Mahdani, declared as the "main accused" in the Coimbatore bomb blast case, which left 58 dead? Karunanidhi went to see him in jail, provided all the facilities, including a regular masseur, and finally when on purely "technical" points he was released, Kerala's Left Front cabinet ministers came out and accorded him a public felicitation?

The charges against Mahdani were as follows:

"Accused No. 14 Mahdani is one of the key conspirators in the Coimbatore bomb blasts case."

"Accused of collecting and transferring explosives to the town, ripped by a series of bomb blasts on February 14, 1998."

"Charged under Sections 302 IPC (Murder); 307 IPC (Attempt to Murder); 153-A IPC (Creating hatred among communities); Section 5 of the Explosives Act and Section 25 of the Arms Act."

Public prosecutor Balasundarm, arguing against Mahdani, had expressed "surprise" over the judgment to release him and said he did a good job in assimilating the voluminous evidence of documents 1785 documents marked as evidence, 1300 witnesses and over 15,000 pages of investigation records. If indeed the case had been presented as thoroughly as claimed, why did it fail?

If such incidents do not open the eyes of the people leading our public life, then what's the course left for a law-abiding patriot?

In any other country facing such a serious serial terror assault, those who publicly empathize with the terrorists would have been tried along with the arrested accused of the blasts.

Speak out and say yes to unity.

It's the emergent duty of the media and political powers to help stop the dangerous polarization taking place in our social circles and polity post-bomb blasts and public shows of secular sympathies for the accused killers.

While care should be taken that no educational institution gets a bad name because of the actions of a few, it's also the duty of the faculty and the students to show solidarity with the terror-struck people. Muslim leaders have to come out openly re-enforcing a citizen's solidarity against terror. If students fail in duty and character, the teachers will have to share the responsibility for their bad behaviour. It's also wrong and false that a few wronged people have taken up guns. What wrongs and if it is indeed so, how many Kashmiri Hindus will have to take up guns?

Rather, the goodness of the religion needs to be publicized and there will be no dearth of other communities joining with such Muslims. So far it's only the Hindus who are coming out openly defending the goodness of the Indian Muslims and their religion. Nobody generalizes the community as terrorists, unlike in Europe and America. This difference remains unrecognized though. Maulanas are silent, teachers do not speak out and the common men suffer in silence. Is that the way we are going to deal with this war? If people don't forge solidarity and revolt and keep looking to politicians for all solutions, even god will think twice about helping them.

Godhra train carnage was a conspiracy: Nanavati panel

http://www.ibnlive.com/news/godhra-report-tabled-modi-gets-clean-chit/74309-3.html 

New Delhi: The Nanavati Commission report probing into the Godhra train carnage was tabled in the Gujarat Assembly on Thursday amid high drama.

The Nanavati report says the incident of burning S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express on February 27, 2002, was a pre-planned conspiracy and not an accident.

The first part of the report gave a clean chit to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi saying there was no evidence of the role of CM and any Gujarat minister in this case.

It also added that there was no evidence of them having not been able to provide protection, relief or rehabilitation to any riot victim

The report also said that 140 liters of petrol was purchased as the part of conspiracy to burn the bogey.

The report says Raza Kurkur and Salim Panwala had purchased petrol on the night of February 26 to be used in burning the bogey of Sabarmati Express.

The conspiracy was hatched at Aman guest house and meant to spread terror in the area, the report adds.

Doors of S-6 and S-7 bogey were forcibly opened and a person called Hassan Lalu threw objects which were burning inside the bogey, according to the report. It also said that Molvi Umarji planned the entire conspiracy.

Others named in the conspiracy are Shaukat Lalu, Imran Sheri, Rafique Batuck, Salim Zarda, Jabbir, Sheraj Bala.

As the report was being tabled, Congress legislators staged a walkout in the Assembly.

Meanwhile, spokesperson of Gujarat government and also the Health Minister of the state Jai Narayan Vyas said, "The report has clearly gone into details, analysed all the evidences and has come to the conclusion that there was no failure of machinery as far as maintenance of law and order is concerned."

"It had been conclusively established that Nanavati Commission was a commission, UC Banerjee Committee was just a committee not a commission," he added.

UC Banerjee, who had headed the Godhra probe, which was ordered by Railways Minister Lalu Prasad, reacted by saying, "I had examined witnesses and had found that there were no traces of petrol found. If there is any contradictory report nothing cannot be said about it, my analysis was based on the witnesses account."

What the UC Banerjee Commission had found:

Fire was accidental not deliberate.
Dismissed the theory that blaze was caused by outsiders.
Deaths caused by toxicity and suffocation.
There was no crowd at railway station; those present were just onlookers.
Claims that all entrances to coach were locked is a misconception.
No intelligence information on when kar sevaks were coming.

Wounded hearts

Tarun Vijay | Rediff | 25 September 2008

http://www.rediff.com///news/2008/sep/25tarun.htm 

I would have loved to see Hindus coming out in unison to protect the churches and say no, whatever our grievances may be, it is our Hindu-ness to see all prayer halls are secure and run unhindered. It's sacrilegious for any Hindu to assault the place of faith of any other brother citizen; the united colours of the tricolour that we so proudly fluttered in Jammu, makes us respect the bond that unites us all. If we don't do this, we are not Hindus. It's impossible as a Hindu, however aggrieved and anguished and unfairly treated I might be, to sit silent and watch approvingly the desecration of another's place of reverence.

I know professional hate-mongers would jump in and cite the example of Ayodhya, forgetting that the structure there was not a functional place of worship. Remember, no one would have been able to stop the Hindus from storming Kashi or Mathura's 'subjugated' temples, pre-independence or after 1947, if the Hindus were so reckless and intolerant. Just see the structures built on Hindu temples there. Yet, we didn't touch them.

It will be naïve say the same Hindus would feel great by pelting stones and breaking places of worship. Such acts never help a religious community. The crowd that did it is the crowd that expresses anger spontaneously and often in an uncontrolled manner, hitting at its own interests and image. Unacceptable, and sad indeed.

But when Hindus are unable to protect and secure respect for their religious scriptures, icons, gods and temples, how can they be exhorted to do so for others? Whatever is happening in Mangalore and Bengaluru needs introspection on both sides. Closing all options before the Hindus, making them look barbaric and demonising them as if they have surpassed Osama and Church-supported terror groups in the northeast would be to push them into a corner.

The Hindus who sheltered all the persecuted and brutalised religious communities of the world -- from Jews to Parsis to Tibetans and never created roadblocks for the aggressive harvesters of the West and rather mingled with the Muslims to pray at dargahs and light candles at churches, producing a cyclonic Hindu monk, Vivekananda, who officially started celebrating Christmas in all his great centres of Hindu faith the world over, which has continued unopposed. Such Hindus can't be assaulters of the kind they themselves have been condemning and complaining about.

Just see if it suits your palate and patience, what really happened at Mangalore. I have seen translations from a book -- Satya Darshini distributed by the missionaries of New Life in Mangalore and Bengaluru. It's in Kannada and the booklet denigrates Hindu gods and said Indians worship false gods and pleads for their 'liberation'.

Where are the leaders of the sacred word and social concerns?

All the incidents that took place were not attacks on churches.In fact, unauthorised prayer halls were attacked where the blasphemous pamphlets were distributed and aggressive proselytisation was taking place. These incidents were not localised but took place across three districts of Mangalore, Udupi and Chikmagalur.

The only place where attacks took place apart from New Life prayer halls was at a small prayer hall in the premises of Milagres church in Mangalore, where some miscreants had damaged an idol of Jesus Christ.The Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal have condemned this attack.Following this incident, a Christian mob gathered and the situation went out of control as it started pelting stones and disrupting traffic.The police was forced to intervene and this resulted in unsavoury violence.

It was not a Hindu-Christian clash. In fact, it is more appropriate to call it a 'Christian-police' clash. Since some Christians holed up in churches were pelting stones and disrupting traffic, the police was forced to enter the church to clear the mob.

Stabbing incidents were reported from four or five places across Mangalore district.In fact, an activist belonging to the Shri Ram Sena was stabbed, which led to a bandh call by the orgnanisation -- an outfit that is not connected with the Sangh Parivar.

The VHP and Bajrang Dal have condemned the desecration of Jesus Christ's idol in the prayer halladjacent to Milagres church in Mangalore.They have also clarified that they are not against the Catholic faith and the churches.



The archbishop was arrogant and rude to Chief Minister Yeddyurappa who had gone to see him. He could have used this opportunity to express his dismay but also to start a dialogue to know and eliminate the reasons for the unrest and an untowardly reaction.

Fine. Can Hindus express the same to the archbishop: your grace, we are deeply hurt and wounded by your silence on the brutal violence of words against Hindus by your people? And more so, since you have chosen to ignore the pains and angst of the Hindus. What do you have to say about the books of New Life mission?

The best and truly Christian voice I heard amidst the cacophony of blame game and wounded hearts was of a reputed Christian scholar P N Benjamin, in Bengaluru. He wrote, 'The real source of danger to the Indian Christian community is not the handful of Hindu extremists. Most of the violent incidents have been due to aggressive evangelising. Other than this, there have been few attacks on Christians. Finally, the sensitive and sensible Christians must realise that acts of certain groups of Christian evangelists are the root-cause of tension between Christians and Hindus. Christian leaders should come out in the open to disown such acts of intolerance. The best and perhaps the only way Christians can bear witness to their faith, is by extending their unconditional love to their neighbours and expecting nothing in return.'

And he advised, 'Will the Christians listen to the words of sanity of Dr Ken Gnanakan, well-known Christian scholar who told this writer the other day: 'Preach Christ, but do not condemn others'. Even Jesus said in John 3.17: 'God did not send his Son to condemn the world'

Hindus are like that. The aggressive conversions and the justification of it by the 'harvesters' are hurting Hindus as much as any other violence. Still there are saner ways to explain that hurt if there are saner platforms to receive those voices.

Have you seen in any magazine or periodical a story about the swami who was brutally murdered on the night of Krishna's birthday in Orissa? Why was he killed? They keep blaming the Maoists, and have immediately denied their hand through a well-publicised statement. And the aged lady monk, Ma Bhaktimoyee? Should her murder while performing puja be ignored just because she was not a nun and the Vatican won't speak about her plight and Italy's blind-curtained state would not call the Indian ambassador to protest over her death? How long do we have to run our public life directed by signals from firang-lands?

Nowhere on this earth have a people so brutalised and passed through many a holocaust been living so peacefully introverted that some elements of society call it cowardice. Yet, we never allowed the hate for the faithful of those communities whose ancestors were in the forefront of attacks on us.

But should it always be a one-sided story?

The muffling of Hindu voices of reason and dialogue will ultimately lead to more pitfalls and long nights of distrust. Those who advertise their beef-eating rendezvous with unashamed aplomb are trying to teach what makes for a good Hindu. It is bound to invite a payback.

How many of the church people came to heal our wounds when temples were desecrated and razed to the ground in Kashmir? How many maulanas came to help us forget the painful past and have a fresh and harmonious beginning after Godhra and Mumbai and Raghunath temple and Akshardham and Sankatmochan Mandir and Doda and……..

India needed an Indian prescription to heal the wounds and face the unhealthy attackers. Instead we received communalised medicines from secular panacea providers, practitioners of hate certified by state registry.

How can hate for one side provide succour to the other?

Everything this polity does or allows to be a victor in the elections is coated with hate for the other side -- a poison prescription to win a battle can't be transformed to yield admirable results.

Victims can't be aggressors and any amount of wordplay won't heal the hurt Hindus have been subjected to bear in isolation.

The Christian aggressiveness and offence is as much if not more violent than jihadis. They carnivalised the shameful mockery of Hindu gods through public passages in a show of strength that takes power from an Italian statement, the Vatican's powered protest, and finally a White House warning.

End aggressive faith-marketing

P N Benjamin | DeccanHerad | 23 September 2008

http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Sep232008/panorama2008092291535.asp 

The real source of danger to the Indian Christian community is not the handful of Hindu extremists. Most of the violent incidents have been due to aggressive evangelising.

A senior RSS leader once told me: "The incidents of violence against Christians are a reaction to the aggressive propaganda and mindless evangelism, abusing Hindu Gods and indulging in similar activities. The incidents are blown out of proportion. We have decided not to tolerate intolerance of other faiths. Let the Church declare that there can be salvation outside the Church also. The whole atmosphere will undergo a radical change…"

The real source of danger to the Indian Christian community is not the handful of Hindu extremists. Most of the violent incidents have been due to aggressive evangelising. Other than this, there have been few attacks on Christians. Finally, the sensitive and sensible Christians must realise that acts of certain groups of Christian evangelists are the root-cause of tension between Christians and Hindus. Christian leaders should come out in the open to disown such acts of intolerance.

The best and perhaps the only way Christians can bear witness to their faith, is by extending their unconditional love to their neighbours and expecting nothing in return. As such, most of the Christians are against aggressive faith marketing by any religious group because such efforts discredit India's tradition of respecting all religious thought and also runs counter to the true spirit in which the Constitution grants people the right to profess, practice and propagate their faith.


Many of the Indian Christians were born into Christianity and some others freely chose to embrace it. They also believe that the Great Commission in the Gospel, according to Matthew, unequivocally calls us to witness Christ in a pluralistic setting without violating the right of others to preach, practice and profess his/her faith. Witnessing Jesus cannot in any case be done by questionable means, whether by exploiting people's socio-psychological vulnerabilities or by running down other religions.

The Christian injunction to make disciples of all nations in today's context is best honoured by the bearers of the Good News living exemplary Christian lives and showing respect for the nation's commitment to pluralism, for the larger public good in a civil society. Conversion of faith, given its life-changing nature, stems from a considered personal experience and is less likely in this day and age to be the stuff of dramatic immediacy.

India will continue to remain hospitable to all religions only if the Muslim fanatics and the Christian fundamentalists accept the pluralistic tradition of Hindus which is to consider all religions as equal. Pluralistic Christians and liberated Muslims of India have done that. The overwhelming majority of Hindus practice it.

Fundamentalist Christians assert that they alone are the holders of valid visas to heaven and paradise! Many preachers of the Gospel lay enticing traps for people whom they think must be 'saved' at all costs. It is worse still that their attitudes, though they (Christians) are a tiny minority in India, often create counter-reaction from among militant Hindus who sometimes incite violence against Christians. The Hindu fundamentalism is a reaction to the provocation of Christian proselytisers. The fanatics among the Christian faith will soon realise that theirs is a losing battle even if they derive their financial and other means of support from the wealthy nations overseas.

Will the Christians listen to the words of sanity of Dr Ken Gnanakan, well-known Christian scholar who told this writer the other day: "Preach Christ, but do not condemn others." Even Jesus said in John 3.17: "God did not send his Son to condemn the world..."

Conversions: Faith in the closet

Shreerang Godbole | Vijayvaani | 22 September 2008
Dr. Shreerang Godbole is a Pune-based endocrinologist, social activist and author. He has contributed in making http://www.savarkar.org

Post-Kandhamal, post-Mangalore, the issue of conversions has taken centre-stage. "Christians are a persecuted, hapless minority"; "How can a minority that accounts for less than 2.5% of the population pose a threat to the 84% Hindus of the country?" is the general refrain. "If Christian missionaries had been indulging in large-scale conversions, how has the Christian percentage remained virtually static in the last two censuses" is the seemingly compelling argument.

The Christian percentage that stood at 2.32 in the 1991 census was virtually static at 2.35 in Census 2001. In fact, a state like Andhra Pradesh presents a strange phenomenon in religious demography. Since 1971, there has been a steady decline in the share of Christian population in the state. The Christian population in Andhra had increased steadily for more than a century from the time of "mass movements" in 1860s till 1970. The Christian population increased by 2.5 percentage points from 1.7% in 1911 to 4.2% in 1971. However, there has been a steady decline in the share of Christians since then, as recorded in every decadal census. As per Census 2001, the share of Christians came down to 1.6%. In fact, the Christian population even declined in absolute numbers, from about 180,000 in 1971 to about 120,000 in 2001. The decline in the share of Christians during 1971-2001 is seen in all regions of Andhra Pradesh, though it is most marked in the middle and southern coastal districts – the largest decline being observed in Guntur district (14.6% in 1971 to 3.0% in 2001).   Yet Hindu organizations routinely allege that Andhra Pradesh has emerged as a hotbed of Christian activities. The annual report of the Ministry of Home Affairs, March 2007, lends credence to Hindu apprehensions. According to the report, for the year 2005-2006, three metropolitan cities namely Chennai (Rs. 7530.83 million), Bangalore (Rs. 4640.97 million) and Mumbai (Rs. 4400.47 million) reported the highest district-wise receipt of foreign contribution in the country. Next in line are two districts in Andhra Pradesh - Ananthapur (Rs. 2880.11 million) and Hyderabad-Secunderabad (Rs. 2360.84 million). In the last four decades, Andhra Pradesh has consistently been one of the top three states to receive such mind-boggling foreign aid. A couple of years ago, Christian organizations had become bold enough to swarm the seven hills of Lord Venkateshwara to hawk their creed, but had to beat a retreat when Hindu society launched a staunch protest. Outside of the north-east, Andhra Pradesh is the only state in India to have a Christian Chief Minister. How does one explain the curious paradox of an apparent spurt in conversion activities and a static, sometimes even declining Christian share in the population?  The answer becomes obvious when one takes the trouble of studying Christian strategy and statistics – statistics provided by authoritative mission documents. Every year Christian churches spend billions of dollars to maintain a head-count of their flock. This aids the massive evangelistic enterprise of global Christianity. The Center for the Study of Global Christianity, at the Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, South Hamilton, Massachusetts, brings out the World Christian Encyclopedia (Oxford University Press, 1982; 2d ed., 2001) and World Christian Trends (William Carey Library, 2001). In addition, an annual update of many of the statistics in this report is produced every January in the International Bulletin of Missionary Research. The 2001 report states that of the estimated 1.88 billion professing Christians worldwide, an estimated 124 million or 6.2% are crypto-Christians or those who conceal their faith. We need not swallow everything churned out by this seminary. As the report itself notes, "Christian triumphalism – not as pride in huge numbers, but as publicized self-congratulation – is rampant in most churches, agencies, and ministries… some 250 of the 300 largest international Christian organizations regularly mislead the Christian public by publishing demonstrably incorrect or falsified progress statistics." Nevertheless, there is no doubt that a significant number of Christians worldwide keep their faith in the closet. Concealing one's faith – and double-crossing one's pre-Christian faith – has a hoary Biblical tradition. In the Gospel of John, we come across a character called Nicodemus who was a 'closet disciple' of Jesus Christ. Nicodemus was a Pharisee (a group of Jews whom the New Testament typically depicts as being self-righteous and arrogant because of their disbelief) and a member of the Sanhedrin or the Supreme Court of the ancient Jews which tried and found Jesus guilty. Without renouncing his Judaism explicitly, Nicodemus had met Jesus at night and subsequently took care of his corpse.     In later centuries, Christians have taken recourse to subterfuge to practice their faith. When Francis Xavier brought Roman Catholicism to Japan in 1549, most of the inhabitants of Ikitsuki Island left Buddhism and became Christians. Recognizing the threat that Christianity posed to Japan and her traditions, Hideyoshi and the other shogun all but stamped out Christianity. Adopting a complex sham, the Christians of Ikitsuki worshipped publicly at Buddhist temples, and then slipped away at night to hold secret Christian prayer meetings. At home, they prayed overtly before Buddhist and Shinto altars, but their real altar became the nan do garni (closet god), innocuous-looking bundles of cloth in which Christian statues and medallions were hidden. For two and a half centuries, the Christian faith was transmitted secretly to illiterate peasants.  These Janus-faced people came to be known as Kakure Kirishitan (crypto-Christians). In 1865, when Japan permitted a Catholic church to open in Nagasaki to serve Western visitors, the Kakure, then numbering around 30,000 in the region, suddenly came out of hiding. To this day, at public ceremonies such as Kakure funerals, a Buddhist priest is always asked to officiate, but the Kakure make sure to make a secret prayer to erase the effect of the Buddhist priest! Crypto-Christians are numerous in places where Christianity gets a taste of the maltreatment it usually metes out to others. Thus, Chinese law requires all churches to be registered with government-run Christian associations. Members of so-called underground churches are imprisoned, 're-educated,' and sometimes executed. China's official census enumerates 10 million Protestants and 4 million Roman Catholics. But reliable estimates place the actual number of Protestants in China at 39 million and that of Roman Catholics at 14 million. In Saudi Arabia, foreign Christians generally only worship in secret within private homes. They are careful to keep Bibles, crucifixes and religious statues away from public gaze.  While the Church-inspired United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, a creature of the US State Department, makes routine noises against the Saudis, it is not known to have recommended denial of US visas to visiting Saudi dignitaries! The existence, indeed proliferation, of crypto-Christians in India is a fact acknowledged by the Church. The World Christian Trends (2001) has placed the number of persons affiliated to the Church in India at 62243546 or 6.1%. In short, the number of Christians in India is nearly thrice the official census figure! The document places the share of crypto-Christians in the total Christian population at a staggering 62%!  In 2002, the American mission agency Global Mapping International asked Patrick Johnstone, author of Operation World, a prayer handbook which documents demographics and mission activity in many countries, to list the seven most encouraging trends of the 1990's. "The astonishing and mostly undocumented growth of the church in India - the official numbers (2.34% Christians in 1991) are far lower than the truth, deliberately hiding the true extent of Christianity in the nation. The true figures are certainly far more than double, and look like only the beginning. The 'untouchable' Dalits have started leaving Hinduism, which could lead to an immense growth of Indian churches" was Johnstone's gleeful reply.  So why do so many Christians in India conceal their faith, given that the rulers are Christian-friendly? The present Constitutional provision that limits the benefits available to Scheduled Castes only to Hindus (including Sikhs and Buddhists) is a major hurdle. This has created a peculiar breed of Christians with dual identity. They attend the Church but are identified by their Hindu names and castes in the Government records. No wonder Christian leaders are vigorously demanding continuation of benefits to Scheduled Castes even after conversion. Not so long ago, Church leaders heaped abuse on the institution of caste, calling it a strictly Hindu phenomenon and claimed that conversion to Christianity would ensure social equality. That argument is passé. "Scheduled Caste converts face the same social disabilities as their Hindu counterparts" is the new mantra. Another reason to hide conversions is the fear that awareness of the grim reality would jolt Hindus into action.  If events in Kandhamal and Mangalore are any indication, the grandiose ambitions of the Church to 'claim India for Christ' already seem doomed.

"Sachar Committee — Conspiracy to Divide the Nation?

L. K. Advani | 21 September 2008

Speech during release of the book "Sachar Committee — Conspiracy to Divide the Nation?"

I am very pleased to be with you at this function. I appreciate the initiative taken by the Bharatiya Vichar Manch to publish this timely and thought-provoking book Sachar Committee — Conspiracy to Divide the Nation? I also thank the Manch for inviting me to release the book. At the outset, I congratulate all the scholars who have contributed well-researched articles to this book. These articles collectively present a critique of the Sachar Committee which simply cannot be ignored in any debate on the subject. The critique is on four important aspects — the purpose of constituting the committee, the manner of its functioning, the arguments and recommendations in its report and, finally, the use of the report for advancing the politics of minorityism by the Congress party and its allies. Friends, we have assembled here at a time when the UPA Government is spending the last few months of its thoroughly discredited stay in office. Its nearly four-and-a-half years in saddle have been characterized by every conceivable attribute of misgovernance — unprecedented price rise, betrayal of the promises made to the aam aadmi, criminalization, corruption, devaluation of the office of Prime Minister, misuse of democratic institutions, desecration of Parliament through the 'Cash-for-Votes' scandal and, above all, endangering the security of the nation and the common man with its unwillingness to fight the scourge of terrorism. The point that I have mentioned last — the UPA Government's unwillingness to fight the menace of terrorism firmly — is one that I would like to touch upon first. I was in Ahmedabad in July after the city had been rocked by serial bomb blasts that left nearly 50 innocent persons dead. The previous day, Bangalore had been hit by serial bomb blasts. Yesterday in Delhi I participated in the funeral of a brave police officer who became a martyr while trying to nab terrorists in their hideout. The Delhi Police have affirmed that these terrorists were actively involved in several terrorist acts, including the one in the national capital on 13th September that killed nearly two dozen innocent people. Bangalore. Ahmedabad. Delhi. Earlier Jaipur. Earlier still — Malegaon, Hyderabad, Mumbai, Varanasi, Ayodhya, Samjhauta Express, Jammu, Srinagar ….The list of places where terrorists have struck is revoltingly long. And getting longer. What is revolting is not just that the list is long, but the cavalier attitude which the UPA Government has displayed while dealing with this open war on India. One of the first acts of this Government after it came into being in May 2004 was to repeal POTA, which had been enacted by the Vajpayee Government. Indeed, the leadership of the Congress party and the Government took pride in having disarmed and disabled India in its fight against terrorism. Last week, however, it behaved in an even more bizarre manner. A committee on administrative reforms, chaired by the chief spokesman of the Congress party, underscored the need for a POTA-like law to strengthen India's fight against terror. This sent the Government and the Congress party in a tizzy. After several flip-flops, the Government said 'No' to any new anti-terror law. Why did the Government conduct itself so shockingly? Because it chose once again to be guided by the politics of minorityism. By the fear of losing a vote-bank. The same fear is at the root of the UPA Government's willingness to implement the Supreme Court's verdict of death sentence on Afzal Guru, the prime convict in the terrorist attack on Indian Parliament. The same mindset of minorityism is also at the root of some Cabinet ministers in the UPA Government openly coming to the defense of SIMI, which has been banned as a terrorist organization. Minorityism does not mean any real concern and love on the part of the Congress and its allies for the minorities. Rather, it means a propensity to use the minority communities purely as vote banks and, for this purpose, adopt any policy, however unreasonable and harmful to national interests. Increasingly, in almost every policy formulation, the Government began to see 'minority' and 'majority' as two separate communities. This divisive mindset became manifest when the UPA Government set up the Sachar Committee in March 2005. Many of us wondered: "Why a separate committee to study the developmental issues of a particular religious community?" However, soon it became clear that the committee was not only studying developmental issues. It was up to something sinister. As the book that I have just released highlights, the Sachar Committee wanted the Armed Forces to conduct a communal census in their ranks. There was nationwide outcry. The three chiefs of the Armed Forces also refused to oblige. The ill-conceived move was dropped. The inspiration for the Sachar Committee to seek a religion-based census in the Armed Forces had come from a book titled Khaki and Ethnic Violence in India by that Omar Khalidi, an Indian now based in America. The book castigates the security forces in India as having an anti-Muslim bias and alleges that they perpetrate violence against the Muslim minority. This formed the guiding principle of the Sachar Committee — to show that Muslims in India are victims of discrimination and injustice. A systematic propaganda campaign was unleashed against the security forces in particular, and against the Indian State in general. Never before in independent India had a Government-appointed committee encouraged such anti-India propaganda. The same propaganda has been further intensified by SIMI and the Indian Mujahideen in their propaganda literature. Inequalities and backwardness in socio-economic development are not specific to any particular community in India. To a greater or lesser extent, they are true about all communities. Indeed, as the Sachar Committee's own field-level findings reveal, in some parameters of development — such as basic literacy, infant mortality, self-employment, etc — Muslims are ahead of non-Muslims in several states. One may mention here that the per capita income of Muslims in Gujarat is much higher than that of their counterparts in communist-ruled West Bengal. It can also be shown by empirical evidence that the per-capita income of Muslims in BJP-ruled Gujarat and Rajasthan has increased in the last five years. In other words, there is no basis for the allegation or insinuation of systemic discrimination and injustice against any particular religious community. And yet, the Congress party has tried to use the Sachar Report as a political tool to woo the Muslim community. Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh even went to the shocking extent of stating that Muslims should have the first claim on the Government's resources. Friends, while criticizing this perverse attitude of the leadership of the Congress party and its Government, the BJP would like to make it clear that we keenly want to see the development, well-being, safety and security of every person belonging to every community, minority or majority. We believe that the poor and the deprived must get the priority attention of the Government, irrespective of whether they belong to the minority or majority community. This is in keeping with the BJP's social philosophy: "Justice for All, Appeasement of None." I would like to see the day when the categories of "majority" and "minority" will have disappeared from the political lexicon in India. Of course, every community and every citizen must have untrammeled freedom to practice their own faith. This freedom is enshrined in our secular Constitution and is also ensured by the age-old secular ethos of our society. But in the eyes of political parties and the Government, all communities and all citizens should be equal, with no distinction between "majority" and "minority". This approach, I believe, is the best guarantor of India's national unity and integrity. It is also the surest path leading to the welfare and development of all Indians. I would like to appeal to my Muslim brethren to see through the inadequacies of the Sachar Committee. Indeed, even the genuine instances of the Muslim community's socio-economic backwardness, as highlighted by the Sachar report, beget the question: "Who is responsible for this backwardness, if not the Congress party which has ruled at the Centre and in states for the longest period since Independence? And if this is how the Congress party has treated its most loyal supporters, one can only imagine how it treats others!" I also appeal to my Muslim brethren: "Join the mainstream of India's national development, with equal involvement, equal contribution and equal benefits. By strengthening the common bond of Indianness, let us together create a bright future, shared equally by all Indians." With these words, I conclude my remarks. My thanks once again to the Bharatiya Vichar Manch for inviting me to this function. Thank you.

When cowards run the State, the nation bleeds

Tarun Vijay | September 17, 2008 | 15:30 IST

Again the same old stories, the same threats and same resolve of politicos, like wet, squeezed paper. We told you so, at that date and time, but you didn't listen. We asked for a stringent law. Our intelligence department was warned, yet no one acted.

It's a plot to derail the peace process with Pakistan, we shall never get trapped but continue our mohabbat. They are not Islamists. Bad guys have no religion, so don't say it's Islamic terrorism. They come from nowhere. May be from Mars, but certainly not from Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. They are not our people, not Kashmiris or Delhi-ites.

Don't embarrass Pakistan by pointing fingers at it or at SIMI or Hurriyat -- we are continuing with our Confidence Building Measures and such blasts aim to disrupt it. Why should we allow that?

Another feature, another magazine: SIMI is an association like the YMCA, these communal hate-mongers have connived with the Congress government to implicate them wrongly while they were conducting adult education classes. Please see the truth from secular eyes and defeat the anti-Afzal Guru crowd. Maybe the next time we will include Afzal as a minister for internal security after having experimented with the Muslim League as a partner in governance.

The Deoband's concerned maulvis will again issue a statement to be welcomed by all peace-loving people. Look, they have again said that their scriptures don't recommend this kind of violent jihad and killing innocent people. But no one would ask them how many killers of the jihadi variety have turned peaceniks and left their bomb factories after such dictates.

'Hindu intolerant groups behind such bomb blasts!' -- another secular television channel would scream -- because they create an atmosphere to malign Muslims and get votes, it's election time folks. These bomb blasts, like the Godhra train fire, have been planned by Hindu chauvinists.

A job well done. We can all go to sleep.

When cowards run the State, the nation bleeds.

A will to eliminate the weeds and face the wrath of malevolent elements with the confidence of a victor is the prerequisite to be a ruler and, yes, to be a citizen. If it's there, you build a nation. If not, civilisations vanish.

If citizens encourage and harbour the wicked, forget dates like December 13 that should be remembered, forget to take revenge on anti-nationals, continue with their late-night parties when dead bodies of their fellow citizens lie splattered in busy fashion markets, no one can save that deadwood society.

Where writers and columnists advocate yielding to the gun-wielding secessionists because 'they want it', no one can save that country from disintegrating as every day new secessionists will emerge.

It's useless to blame this party or that organisation. See what we have done and to what level the state of affairs have been brought to. Everything boils down to personal wars and wins, and homemade potboilers rule the top echelons of organisations.

The nation as a matter of serious planning and vision has simply vanished off the agendas of those who are the known faces of our leadership and decision-making mechanism of the State.

Personal jealousies, vendettas and mandi-isation of the high and mighty turn peoples' security into a joke of the ghostland where signal-jammers and black cat commandos iconise the Neros and the Republic is left to fend for itself.

This is our state of affairs today.

Any day, any time, anyone.

Free Afzal committees. Visits to the Azamgarh home of a terrorist. Demand citizenship for Bangladeshi infiltrators. Demand ban on patriotic organisations. Win the election. That's the final aim of governance and our living. Only the people are to be blamed. It's a democracy. Choose those who bring you safety and succour. If you choose the marauders you get back marauders.

The Indian people, as Indians alone, have done it marvellously before too whenever the occasion demanded solidarity and cohesion. Kargil saw it, 1965 saw it, 1962 had a great solidarity of the patriots. Always, it's the leaders and politicians who have failed the country and backstabbed the trust people had reposed in them.

Peoples' power saw that the culprits behind the Uphaar cinema fire tragedy case were brought to book, however influential they may be. It was because of their pressure and media build-up that the Nandas were punished in the BMW case. The Right to Information Act is a great instrument given to the people not because politicians wanted it but there was public pressure to have it and finally it was done.

And look how Jammu rose to see the tricolour win against the Pakistani flag-wallahs. No one had ever imagined a people can create an upsurge unknown in regional history and win too. Great things happen nimble-footed. The British never had ay inkling of the 1857 uprising till Mangal Pandey shot the British officer in Barrackpore. Jayaprakash Narayn's too was a movement whose expanse and impact no one had anticipated, and so was the Ram Janambhoomi movement that changed the contours of the Indian polity.

If people will, they can.

Indians will have to decide how many more will have to die before they feel compelled to rise in revolt. India needs a rebellion of Indian people who would merge all their other identities under one banner -- the tricolour. Forget temples, churches and mosques. The first to protect the church should be a Hindu like the first to protect a swami should be a Christian. That's where the nation gets life.

When the nation is in peril, gods must be discovered in national unity and not within concrete structures. These ugly, nincompoop politicos need to be thrown into the dustbin lock, stock and barrel. The truth is we, as Indians, never paid a price for our independence and honour. When I had interviewed Morarji Desai, which turned out to be one of his last, in his Mumbai apartment, he said not more than five percent Indians had participated in the independence struggle. The rest were either too lazy to come out or had lined up before the British for bakshish and be their officers.

Read what Abraham Lincoln did to save America from disintegration and his famous Gettysburg address and also his inaugural one as president. He accepted a civil war but refused the demand to divide America. Nearly seven lakh Americans died in that war, but a new sun rose on its horizon that inspired millions across the globe with its egalitarian and democratic values.

What sacrifices have we offered to save national integrity and the civil life of our nation?

Isn't it time to ask this question and rise in rebellion to say 'no' to this bloodbath unitedly?

SIMI's 'success' is a result of our secular polity

M R Venkatesh | Rediff | September 17, 2008

http://www.rediff. com/news/ 2008/sep/ 17guest.htm

 

'In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace. The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence under no circumstances can it be neglected.' -- Tsun Tzu, ancient Chinese philosopher

The Students Islamic Movement of India, Wikipedia informs us, was formed in Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh, in April 1977. The stated mission of SIMI -- the 'liberation of India' from Western materialistic cultural influence and to convert it into an Islamic society -- makes it an enemy of the State of India.

Wikipedia further points out that 'fears exist in government circles that SIMI has been penetrated by al Qaeda. It goes on to add that it is suspected that SIMI after being banned by the Government of India is now also operating under a different name of Indian Majahideen, an outfit that has taken responsibility for the successive blasts in India over the past several months.' Yet SIMI remains virtually un-debated by the polity and the intelligentsia of the country.

Contrary to the popular belief that SIMI is run by uneducated, misdirected and poor Muslim youth, readers may be surprised at the fact that SIMI's founding president, Mohammad Ahmadullah Siddiqi, is a professor of journalism and public relations at the Western Illinois University. And with the spate of terror mails sent by hacking Wi-Fi connections, it seems that SIMI is even to this day run by the educated, privileged and the moneyed.

Despite such repeated terror attempts, SIMI is largely an unknown commodity in India, especially to the common man. What are its objectives? What are its guiding philosophies? How does it operate and what makes it the centrifugal force of terrorism in India? Crucially, what makes it devastating despite a ban by the central government?

The answers to all these questions are not difficult and need not be a subject matter of speculation as these are in the public domain. Yet, some preliminary understanding of SIMI provides the text to the polity that intellectually facilitates its existence, sustains its growth and shields it from the reach of law, all of which collectively make SIMI a potent force in the Indian context.

SIMI -- a fact file

Basic research about SIMI reveals something stunning as well as chilling. SIMI believes in leading human life on the basis of the Quran as well as propagation of Islam in India. While there is nothing wrong about these two objectives, as these are guaranteed by the Constitution, the third -- jihad for the cause of Islam -- makes it a potent terrorist organisation.

SIMI does not believe in a nation-state. To amplify further, SIMI's ultimate aim is to have an Islamic caliphate with an Islamic India an integral part of such an arrangement. And to achieve this, SIMI sees secular, democratic modern India as a hurdle. Yet it is the secular cabal that acts as a cheerleader for SIMI!

Consequently, it does not believe in the concept of Indian nation, culture and values. And to achieve its self-professed goal, SIMI seeks to wage a low-intensity war against the Government of India so as to liquidate the very concept of India. In this attempt, SIMI seeks to utilise the youth in the propagation of Islam and also to mobilise support for jihad and establish a Shariat-based Islamic rule in India through Islami Inqilab.

In effect, whatever it may be christened or defined by the secular polity in India, SIMI is basically a fundamentalist organisation that not only rejects other beliefs, ideals, as well as other 'anti-Islamic cultures', it in fact seeks to systematically eliminate them. Ideologically, SIMI maintains that the concepts of secularism, democracy and nationalism, keystones of the Indian Constitution, are antithetical to Islam.

Parallel to its rejection of secularism, democracy and nationalism is its oft-repeated objective of restoration of the 'caliphate', emphasis on ummah and the need for jihad to establish the supremacy of Islam. Further, it reveres Osama bin Laden while it does not believe that Jammu and Kashmir to be an integral part of India.

SIMI is also reported to get generous financial assistance from the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, Riyadh, the International Islamic Federation of Students' Organisations in Kuwait, and of course the dreaded ISI of Pakistan. Further, SIMI gets operational and training assistance from the Jamaat-e-Islam units in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal, Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, and the Harkat-ul-Jehad- al Islami Bangladesh.

And in the process, SIMI is at war with India. And in this war SIMI gets all the funding, training as well as strategic help from various countries. If Osama provides it ideological inspiration, Pakistan and others provide it strategic, financial and military support, overtly or covertly.

But what about support within India?

While it may be easier to blame others, especially in the neighbourhood, the fact of the matter is that the success of SIMI lies exclusively within India. It is patently unjust to blame an entire community. Quite the contrary, the rise and success of SIMI is a direct product of our secular polity and the manner in which successive governments have handled this convoluted yet crucial issue.

It may be recalled that SIMI was first banned -- the first and preliminary steps at containing it -- by the then National Democratic Alliance government on September 27, 2001, immediately following the terror attacks in the US on September 11, 2001. This ban remained till September 27, 2003. In this interregnum, several prosecutions were launched against its members under the provisions of the now repealed Prevention Of Terrorism Act.

The second ban, in effect the extension of the first, was between September 27, 2003 and September 27, 2005. The government of India had effected a third ban on SIMI from February 8, 2006. Therefore SIMI was in effect legally in existence between September 28, 2005, and February 7, 2006.

The third ban on SIMI was lifted by Delhi high court tribunal on August 5, 2008, which has since been stayed by the Supreme Court. 'Material given by the home ministry is insufficient, so ban cannot be continued,' Justice Geeta Mittal, a sitting Delhi high court judge, had said while lifting the ban. Obviously, the hydraulic power of the secular polity, with a proven soft corner to SIMI, had its desired effect on our bureaucracy.

But how did secular India react to all these acts of SIMI? Consider this:

Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lalu Prasad Yadav said the ban on SIMI was wrong in the first place.

Congress spokesperson Shakeel Ahmed said the order was "no setback" to the government and added, "Wherever terrorist attacks have taken place in the recent past -- Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Gujarat -- it is the state governments that are investigating the matter. It is their responsibility to submit the evidence against SIMI to the central government," implying that it was the state government that needs to act against SIMI, not the central government.

Salman Khurshid, president of the Uttar Pradesh Congress committee, was the counsel defending SIMI in the high court and in the Supreme Court against the ban.

Others, including the Communists, have ensured that their responses are either muted or guarded, lest they be branded as communalists by others in the polity.

With such wonderful local support, why them blame others including the ISI? The issue is not of the terrorists and their activity. Rather it is something quite serious that points out to the serious drift in our national polity and our skewed concept of secularism.

It may be noted that while our secular polity was explicitly exonerating SIMI, a study by the Institute of Conflict Management headed by K P S Gill, had clearly listed over 100 terror incidents from 2000 to 2008 which involves SIMI. Yet, such blatant and patent support to SIMI by our polity is inexplicable.

Substantiating the finding of this institute, even a spokesperson of the Indian government told the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Tribunal held in New Delhi that contrary to notions that SIMI's activities declined following its ban, the organisation "had stepped up its subversive activities and was involved in almost all major explosions, communal violence and circulation of inflammatory material across the country." And it is this group that the secular polity virtually exonerates without any remorse!

Let us not make any mistake -- we are amidst a war, a war with a faceless enemy. But it is not the only advantage that our enemy has. As explained above, the approach of our polity rationalises, legalises and sanctifies terrorism in India. It is this attitude of the secular polity makes the faceless enemy that much potent. It is time that we the ordinary people realised this simple fact. 

As the Chinese philosopher said centuries ago, war is for peace. Unfortunately a country that has Ashoka (who renounced war and became a pacifist) as its model and hence does not even cognise the fact that it is amidst a war runs the risk of being a failure as a State and faces the prospect of disintegration.

It is time that we need to wage a war, both against such terrorists and those who are apologists for such terrorists. In the interregnum, of course, politicians from the safe haven of Z-plus category security can continue to pontificate. Whether we will be alive to hear them is a different matter.

Islamic Fundamentals for Hindu Dummies

Subramanian Swamy [The writer is a former Union Law Minister]
Recently, thanks to Shri Vedantamji of the VHP, I had visited Thondi and Rasathipuram Municipalities of Ramanathapuram and Vellore districts respectively, and was truly shocked by what I saw. Both these municipalities are in Muslim majority areas, and the Local Bodies election had empowered the Muslims with their capture of the municipalities. The Muslim--ruled municipalities have thereafter converted these areas into mini 'Darul Islams', in a Hindustan of 83% Hindus! The minority Hindu areas of the municipality were thus denied civic amenities, funds for schools, garbage clearing etc., and sent notices in Urdu. Hindus were bluntly told convert to Islam if they wanted civic facilities. I could not believe that in South India this was possible where Hindus are actually above national average at 90 percent of the population. I know that in Kashmir valley, Muslims who are in majority have actively or passively connived in driving out half a million Hindus out of their homes and made them refugees in their own country. Temples have been demolished in the valley on a daily basis. The world could not care less. An American had once told me: "Why should we care? Indian democracy is led by the majority who are Hindus and you want us to talk about the human rights of the community of rulers?" Such atrocities are happening not only in Kashmir, but in other parts of India as well in pockets wherever Muslims are in majority, e.g., Mau and Meerut. In pocket boroughs of India thus, Darul Islam has today returned to India after two centuries. Considering that a demographic re-structuring is slowly but surely taking place, with Hindu majority shrinking everywhere, Darul Islam in pockets might indeed, like amoeba, proliferate, coalesce, and jell into a frightening national reality---unless we Hindus wake up and take corrective action now, actions for which we shall of course not get a Nobel Peace Prize. Darul Islam is a Muslim religious concept of a land where Muslims rule, and the non-believers in Islam are termed as 'Dhimmis". The term 'Dhimmi' was coined after the Jews were crushed in Medina[Khaybar to be exact], and the defeated Jews accepted that if they did not convert to Islam, then they would accept second class status politically, culturally, and religiously. This included zero civil rights including the right to modesty of women, and the special tax jizya. There is thus no scope for Muslims and non-Muslims uniting as equals in the political, cultural, or social system in a Darul Islam where Muslims rule. Secular order in India thus is possible only when Muslims are not in power. Thondi, Rasathipuram, and other places prove that the Muslim mind suffers from a dangerous duality---of seeking secularism when out of power and imposing a brutal demeaning theocracy for non-Muslims when in power. It is this duality that patriotic Hindus must re-shape by modern education and other means, as also retain its demographicoverwhelming majority in India. We do not have much time, in fact about 45 years, as the X-graph of statistical regressions estimated by J.S. Bajaj and colleagues shows. 'X' represents the two trends—Hindu percentage declining and Muslim percentage rising, and intersecting in the year 2061. The 'dhimmitude' of Jews in Medina and later in Mecca represents the beginning of religious apartheid inherent and basic to Islamic mores, and practiced long before what we saw in South Africa on the basis of colour and race, and that which became prevalent during the Islamic imperialist rule in parts of India. Hindus were dhimmis for six hundred years in those parts of India despite being a bigger majority in the country than even today. Hence, a majority is not enough. Hindus need also a Hindu mindset to be free. In his Presidential address to the Muslim League in Lahore in 1940, Mohammed Ali Jinnah had articulated this concept of apartheid in his own inimitable way: "To visualize Hindus and Muslims in India uniting to create a common nation is a mythical concept. It is only a fancy dream of some unawakened Hindu leaders….The truth is that Hindus and Muslims are two different civilisations…. since their thought process grow on different beliefs." Large sections of Muslims in India then had rejected Jinnah and his concept of non-compatibility of Muslims with Hindus. But after Independence and Partition, instead of building on this rejection by many Muslims, the Nehru era saw increasing pandering precisely to the religious element that believed in this apartheid. Indira Gandhi vigorously continued this appeasement thereby nurturing the apartheid mentality of Muslim orthodoxy. But the final undermining of the enlightened Muslim came when the government capitulated in the Shah Bano case. Thousands of Muslims had demonstrated on the streets demanding that the government not bring legislation that would nullify the Supreme Court's judgment in the Shah Bano case but in vain. Rajiv Gandhi, I learnt later, on counsel from his Italian Catholic family, had surrendered to the hard line clerics who protested that the Supreme Court had no right to interfere and to defacto amend theShariat, the Islamic law code. These relatives on a directive from the Vatican thought that if secular law would be applied to Muslims, it can be to the Christians too. This was a nonsense argument of the Muslim clerics, since the Shariat had already been amended, without protest, in the criminal law of India. The Indian Penal Code represents the uniform criminal code that equally applies to all religious communities. I therefore ask the clerics: if a Muslim is caught stealing, can any court in India direct that his hand at the wrist be cut off as the Shariat prescribes ? If Muslims can accept a uniform criminal code what is the logic in rejecting the uniform civil code? In India, Dhimmi status for Hindus during Islamic imperialist rule has had other social implications. Defiant Brahmins and Kshatriyas who had refused to convert and chose to remain Hindus, were forced to carry night soil and suffer great indignities for their women folk. Or it meant gross mental torture. Guru Tegh Bahadur, for example, had to see his sons sawed in half, before the pious Guru's own head was severed and displayed in public. The debasement of Hindu society then was such that those targeted valiant Brahmins and Kshatriyas who had refused to convert and thus made to carry night soil, were disowned by other Hindus and declared to be asprashya or "untouchable". The ranks of the Scheduled Caste community which was not more than 1% of the population before the advent of Islam in India, swelled to 14 percent by the time Mughal rule collapsed. Thus, today's SC community especially those who are still Hindus, consists mostly of those valiant Brahmins and Kshatriyas who had refused to become Muslims but preferred ostracization and ignominy in order to remain Hindus. Hindu society today should offer koti koti pranams to them for keeping the Bhagwa Dhwaj of Hindu religion flying even at great personal cost and misery. I have already written enough in these columns about Hindus being under siege from Islamic fanatics and Christian proselytizers. I have suggested that we can lift this siege only if we develop a Hindu mindset, which is a four dimensional concept. But that mind must be informed, and understand why others do what they do to Hindus before we can defeat their nefarious designs. Here I suggest therefore that we Hindus must understand the true nature of Islam before we can formulate a strategy to defeat those who threaten us. In a later column I will write about the true nature of Christianity and how to combat the menace of religious conversions of Hindus. At this juncture let me add even though I oppose conversion as violence, as Swami Dayanand Sarasvati bold wrote to the Vatican Pope, nevertheless if an Indian Muslim or Christian changes his religion to Hinduism today, I will not regard it as conversion because it is a return to the Hindu fold of those whose ancestors had been forcibly converted. Islam is not only and merely what is stated in the Koran. Islam is a trilogy of Koran, Sira and Hadith. This trilogy defines a "true" Muslim or believer. Therefore those who sing praises of the Koran to prove that Islam is intrinsically humane, have not read the Sira and Hadith. While Koran is a compilation of revelations of Allah to Mohammed through angel Gabriel, Sira is essentially a biography of Mohammed, while Hadiths are a collection of proverbs, poems, and practices of Mohammed. Thus Islamic theology is Koran plus what the Prophet said or did. This is borne by content analysis of the trilogy. Koran has 153,000 words, while Sira has 408,000 words, and Hadith compiled by Bukhari has 338,000 words. Hence, Koran is just 17 % of Islam, while Sira and Hadith are 83% and about Prophet Mohammed. For 13 years in Mecca, Mohammed preached the Koran and managed to convert just 150 persons. But in Medina, Mohammed did and said what is contained in Sira and Hadith. Within 10 years he became the King of Arabia, and converted 100 percent of the people who survived the sword of Islam. To enforce his revelations, Mohammed resorted to Jihad,which meant sacred violence as a process of spreading Islam. Holy war is just one phase of Jihad, because Jihad is a process. It is in Sira that one finds a detailed manual of the complete strategy of jihad and political dimension of Islam. Sira is about how Mohammed dealt with those who disagreed with him. In Mecca, Mohammed was conciliatory because he was in a hopeless minority. But he became completely different in Medina, While Koran is personal to every Muslim or believer, Sira and Hadith affect non-believers. Islam as a trilogy is obsessed with what to do with unbelievers and non-believers. Unlike Hinduism, which says not a word against non-believers, in fact says that other religions also lead to God, Islam is harsh on them, and justifies violence against them as sacred. The choice to non-believers in Islam is: convert or accept dhimmitude. Hence, the explanation for Thondi, Rasathipuram, Mau etc., and the duality in ethics practiced by Muslims everywhere. A true Muslim is Dr.Jekyll when in minority, and Mr. Hyde when in majority. So what should we Hindus do ? First, recognize that being a pious Hindu is not enough. Hindus must unite and work to install a Hindu-minded government. If 35% of the 83% Hindus unite to vote for a party, absolute majority is attainable. If Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha, RSS, and VHP decide to mobilize the voter to support a party that espouses an approved Hindu Agenda, then the union government is within reach through the ballot box. Second, search for those Muslims who are ready to openly and with pride declare that their ancestors were Hindus. My guess is that about 75% of Muslims will be ready to do so. These are the Muslims who can be co-opted by Hindus to fight Islamic fundamentalism. If we do not do so, then the Muslim clerics will have a free run of their fanaticism. For this a required reading is Sri Sri Ravishankar's Hinduism & Islam: Dedicated to the People of Pakistan Who have Forgotten Their Own Roots [www.artofliving.org]. In this Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has shown how "Muslims have completely forgotten that their forefathers were Hindus, so they have every right to vedic culture". He in fact traces the pre-Islam origins of the K'aaba and many key words in Koran as of Hindu origin. Third, invest heavily in primary education to make it world class, ban the madrassas for any student below 21 years, and make Sanskrit a compulsory language for all students.