On Subramanian Swamy's Hindutva

After Subramanian Swamy wrote his DNA article on "How to wipe Islamic Terror", there have been many repercussions. On one hand some people in Harvard - a student group - have demanded that Harvard must discontinue academic association with Swamy while some others - the civil liberties group - have advocated that he be allowed to express his opinions.

There have been two rebuttals by Muslim authors in India. One is by Faizur Rehman titled: "Subramanian Swamy‘s Two Faces: Disinformation Campaigns to Divide Indians will Fail" (here) while the other is by Ayub Khan titled: "Subramanian Swamy’s transformation into a merchant of hate" (here). Both of these quote mr. Swamy's earlier article in Frontline (here).

In the Frontline article Mr. Swamy accuses the RSS of being fascist:

"...
Today the creeping fascism of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is coming upon us not as gradually as imperialism did, nor as suddenly as did the Emergency. Its spread is being calibrated adroitly by seven faceless men of the RSS, the RSS "high command".
..."

He criticizes RSS for being anti-Muslim, targeting Christians, while not being pro-Hindu, and so on, and he ends his article with the following hope:

"...
Of course, the good news is that the game plan can fail. I live on the hope that in India, no well-laid plan ever works. India, after all, is a functioning anarchy. That has been the undoing of every attempt to straitjacket its society. That is why we ar e still the longest continuing unbroken civilisation of over 10,000 years. The RSS is, luckily, our counter-culture. The vibrations of Mother India will, I hope, be its undoing.
..."

On his party website, Mr. Swamy has claimed that for the past many years he has been espousing the cause of Hindutva, while his party profile speaks of basic secularism! It also appears that Mr. Swamy has broken ice with the Sangh and wrote an article for them, see an example, the article titled Search for Hindu Agenda. Mr. Swamy also wrote a book "Hindus under Siege".

So the question is, what is the reality of this man, Mr. Subramanian Swamy? We would advocate exercising caution. Hindus must be extremely careful while choosing their leaders. We have been back-stabbed so many times that it will be prudent to wear the armor of caution all the time.

We find that RSS is not at all anti-Muslim. Rather we lament that RSS is not sufficiently clear about Islam and therefore Muslims as well. This is a folly that Mr. Swamy commits in greater measure compared to RSS when he daydreams that by "acknowledging with pride that his ancestors were Hindus", the Muslims can be included in the Brihad Hindu Samaj. We reiterate that there may be moderate Muslims but there is no Moderate Islam, and often the best Muslims are the least Muslims.

Despite being confused about Hinduism, the RSS has worked for donkey's years for the Hindus. As we have mentioned earlier, the heart of the RSS is better placed than their head. While Mr. Swamy's brain seems addled on the Islam-Muslim issue, his heart has been unpredictable, to say the least. He has come a long way from terming RSS a fascist organization to writing in their newsletter on Hindutva.

However, as Hindus (followers of Sanatana Dharma), we should focus on clear understanding for ourselves lest our leaders delude us. At the same time, we should always choose a leader who supports Hindus and Hinduism more. So if Swamy supports us more, we may prefer him over RSS and vice versa. At the same time, at the intellectual or thought level, we must have very clear concepts and priorities.

Mr. Swamy, however intelligent he may be, has been a maverick. A look at the articles given at the party site makes it clear that Mr. Swamy has been bed-fellows with strange people, though he may claim that he has had a clear conscience and a consistent philosophy. We need not hold it against him. But the burden of proof must be on him to show that he is for the Hindus. On his party's website he has posted many articles, some of which are on Hindutva . We recommend you read them and form your own judgment. But beware, his party believes in egalitarian and Gandhian ideals! So we would be extremely suspicious of him.

Yeddy and Reddy, not Ready?

The drama surrounding the Lokayukta report closed by Mr. Hegde filing his report. Santosh Hegde, who may possibly be right in his indictment of Yeddy, has played as a pawn in the hands of Congress. Justice Hegde is a media savvy and media seeking person. There are multiple aspects of this story, we will concentrate on a few of them:

1. Santosh Hegde, Congress and Anna Hazare:

Even after being indicted by a Lokpal, if a chief minister can hold his turf, it shows that the Lokpal which Hegde - who is a sympathiser of Anna's team - is seeking at the center, will be as ineffective as Hegde has been. For example, if the Lokpal at the center indicts Manmohan, he will wait even after Sonia orders him to resign!

Lokpal himself can become indulgent in activism. Who checks the Lokpal? We have mentioned this point earlier. In this particular case, we do not feel empathatic to Hegde. Hegde wanted to make at least one CM resign before he retired. His motivation seems similar to the retiring DGP DV Guruprasad who wanted to be IGP, even if for a month, before retiring. Do we think such ambitions are wrong? We will dodge this question. We say that personal ambitions should be irrelevant, however, in any mechanism design, the fact that individuals have their own personal ambitions must be taken into consideration. Anna thinks that his Lokpal will be above suspicion, and that is rubbish. For all we know, Anna, like Hegde, wants a Prime Minister to be forced to resign by a Lokpal at the center.

As a person Santosh Hegde has been a sissy. This whole idea of Lokpal, the team Anna and the Congress itself are part of the broader Congress-culture of rampant hypocrisy and double standards which all other parties have inherited or imbibed. This is part of the Mohandasian culture of low-thinking and high-preaching.

2. B S Yeddyurappa:

BSY has been just another chief minister. He is no angel, at the same time he is no worse than his predecessors or other past or present CMs in other states. Sheila Dikshit is worse than BSY, but has not been forced to resign yet. On a personal front, BSY has come a long way from his past when he was inclined to tears. And now he is clinging as much as he can, though there is news that he has consented to resign.

BSY is also being criticized for his demands that he wants his loyal to succeed him and his wanting a say in the allotment of ministerial berths. This quality too, though worthy of criticism, is not something that BSY alone is guilty of! Laloo relinquished his post only for Rabdidevi. This whole dynastic family culture, both in and out of Congress, is owing to that. Since the times of just pre-Islamic-invasion days, we have suffered from leadership embroiled in nepotism, despotism and back-stabbing. Be that kings or be it modern politicians.


3. The BJP, Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley, Rajnath Singh:

The BJP has been clownish on this front. They should have had their own internal evaluation of BSY and should have encouraged BSY to resign on his own much earlier. And if they have been unequal to this, they should have been shameless, like Congress, and allowed BSY to continue till the courts ordered such a thing. As we have mentioned BJP always comes across as second-rate Congress. When they need conviction they exhibit tact, and when they must exercise tact they betray sissy convictions. This is the reason they are not an alternative to Congress, nor are they a party with a difference. They are a party with diffidence.

Rajnath Singh who caused the decline and downfall of Kalyan Singh is a frustrated man. He is akin to ex-PM Chandrashekhar of yesteryears who was waiting to be a PM for donkey's years. Then there are politicians who lack leadership qualities. Also, there are many people in public life who practice the policy of "Can't do, won't let do".

Thayee, Sushma Swaraj, is conspicuous by her absence. Now if Yeddy goes, can she or will she save Reddys? And if she can't safeguard Reddys now, why did she mastermind the fall of BSY that took place earlier? There are people in public life who follow the policy: "Either you are subservient to me, or an enemy of mine".

Jaitley has been trying to maintain a brave face, but it does not rescue the matter at hand.


4. The High Command Culture:

If Lokpal report is important enough, then BSY should have resigned as soon as the report was out. And if he refused the quit then only a judicial mechanism should have the powers to throw him. In this way, either moral force or legal force exerts pressure. However, in India, we have the "high command culture". A defiant CM suddenly bows to party discipline. It looks as if there are no rhymes and no reasons. Pure stupid sentimentality! We mention that we are not averse to sentiments, but we do criticize stupid sentimentality.

This also shows that India does not have the federal structure that it boasts it has. It has the Congress culture, that of high-command.

These dramas will not change unless there are electoral reforms. We, however, favor a new Constitution. (See here and here)

Swamy on Islamic Terror

Mr. Subramanian Swamy's article has been criticized for the usual reasons which are cited by Secularists and Socialists, namely Islamophobia and so on.

We want to critically analyze the article from a somewhat Hindu perspective.

His lessons that 1. We must develop Hindu Mindset, 2. We must Not Concede anything however small, 3. We must practice Massive Retaliation, and 4. We must reject Non-Islam theories of Islamic Terror. are very important. However, he concedes critical ground by advocating:

"...
The Muslims of India can join us if they genuinely feel for the Hindu. That they do I will not believe unless they acknowledge with pride that though they may be Muslims, their ancestors were Hindus. If any Muslim acknowledges his or her Hindu legacy, then we Hindus can accept him or her as a part of the Brihad Hindu Samaj (greater Hindu society) which is Hindustan.
..."

He fails to recognize that a Muslim is infected with the Koranic virus and simple "acknowledging with pride that his ancestors were Hindus" will not cleanse his system.


Similarly, Swamy makes critical mistake in giving a clean chit to Manmohan:

"...
For example, Manmohan Singh has high personal character, but by being a rubber stamp of a semi-literate Sonia Gandhi and waffling on all national issues, he has proved that he has no rashtriya charitra.
..."

Swamy has exhibited an incredible ignorance by opining this. He fails to recognize that if Manmohan is a man of high personal character then he would have resigned long time ago, as soon as he realized that he had to choose between being honest and being a rubber stamp. Please note that if Manmohan in his dog-like loyalty and honesty has acceeded to be Sonia's pet then he must be criticized for his canine intelligence!


He has given a commendable set of goals, and an important aspect in the recommendation is tackling India's social problems:

"...
that caste is not based on birth but on code or discipline. Welcome non-Hindus to re-convert to the caste of their choice provided they adhere to the code of discipline.
..."

But he fails to recognize that such a step cannot come about by political means, unless he is dreaming of government coerced societal change which is Socialism in disguise. Even though Mr. Swamy has mentioned an important thing, his approach is flawed.

Such a change can come about only if we as Hindu society learn (swadhyaya) and practice spirituality and have seers and sages amongst us again who can rightly educate us on the varnashrama both intellectually and practically.

By suggesting "declaring that caste is not based on birth", Mr. Swamy advocates statism.

And as mentioned earlier, the most crucial and critical aspect that is missing in Swamy's approach is the need to Discredit Koran and Islam.


Unless there is an understanding that there is no peaceful Islam which is being hijacked by fundamentalists and that even though there may be moderate Muslims, there is no moderate Islam; and often the best Muslims are the Least Muslims; we will be perpetually deluding ourselves into believing that we can integrate Muslims into what Mr. Swamy calls the Brihad Hindu Samaj.

However, Mr. Swamy has taken a baby step in the right direction. He needs to complete his journey further.

And we remind Hindus, as we do here:

O Hindus, realize that no politician is representing you! So you need to choose and send politicians from among yourselves. Make new politicians, make new political parties. Encourage people with spine to become your representatives. Otherwise you will be led by a bunch of Mohandas and Jawahar clones. And surely they will lead you to your doom!

Killing in Norway

One may not form a coherent and cogent understanding from what one reads and what one perceives. One may not be intellectually capable of deciding what actions to perform out of whatever understanding he may have developed. After all, oftentimes real life situations are very very complex and difficult to deal with.

However, on learning about an act, drawing premature conclusions about the understanding and about the material that was read including those who wrote what was read, is quite simplemindedness. More over, it is hypocritical when a completely orthogonal approach is taken in thousands of other cases which are quite similar.

Consider an example in which a person A (or persons A,B,C), who claim to have read X, Y, Z, kill tens (hundreds) of people. What should be our position? Well, let us tell you what the current practice is:

If A (A,B,C) are Muslims who are inspired (or have read) Koran and kill infidels then the model is:

A, B, C have committed crime, but they are gullible people who were victims (of discrimination, and so on) and were indoctrinated by those who misrepresent an otherwise peaceful writing of Koran. And thus, though A,B,C must be tried for the crimes, utmost care must be taken not to tarnish the beautiful religion of peace called Islam, and not alienate Muslims.

If A is a Norwegian white, who read some stuff including Hindutva and killed those who he thought were collaborators with Muslims then the model is:

In the West:

A is a Christian Fundamentalist who is friendly to Hindutva and thus we must discredit Christianity, Whiteness and Hindutva.

In India, the model will soon reduce to:

Hindu organizations are fundamentalist and they are planning pogroms as they did in Gujarat.

Both the western and Indian people have to learn to call the bluff on this deception.

We are not sitting in judgment over the Norwegian man, nor are we saying that what he did was right. What we are emphasizing is that even before we understand the total picture, we must have the honesty and integrity to follow a consistent approach.

Another point that we must not overlook is that events may be correlated. Hitler ordered killing of Jews. American president ordered nuking of Japan that resulted in killing of millions of Japanese. How are these two events judged? It will be horrible to sympathize with killing of Japanese, right? And yet, the idea to nuke Japan was mooted as that appeared to be an effective way to defeat the Axis forces. Again, we are not rejudging history here, we only want to mention that if the act in Norway has happened as a reaction to somethings that have happened previously, the previous happenings must also be given due credence.

To judge may be easy, but to be wise in judgment is arduous.

Our view is that there is such widespread and gross unfairness and evil that is going on in the name of multiculturalism, affirmative action, secularism, social justice, feminism, socialism, minority rights, and so on; that unless drastic measures are taken quickly enough, the consequences are going to be far far worse. These are ominous signs and it will be insane to ignore these and parroting multi-culti and liberal platitudes.

Socialism, Judiciary, and Activism

In a recent judgment the Supreme Court has spoken profusely on the activism shown by the judiciary. The judgement came on a PIL filed by an NGO, National Campaign for Dignity and Rights of Sewerage and Allied Workers, highlighting the frequent deaths of sewage workers trapped in manholes.

The court pooh-poohed the allegation of judicial activism.

The court said it is praised when it gives judgments in favour of the rich but condemned with a “theoretical debate raising the bogey of judicial activism” when it gives relief to the poor on a PIL.

A Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly, in a 45-page judgment, said

the highest court will be failing in its constitutional duty if it does not accept genuine PILs and “those who are decrying public interest litigation do not seem to realise that courts are not meant only for the rich and the well-to-do, for the landlord and the gentry, for the business magnate and the industrial tycoon but they exist also for the poor and the down-trodden, the have-nots and the handicapped and the half-hungry millions of our countrymen”.

However the court did not specify what it thought to be its constitutional duty. Prior to the 42nd amendment India was not a Socialist country. So, do we assume that the obligations of the court changed after this amendment?

The court ensuring that everyone is equal before the law can be a constitutional and legal obligation. It is correct in saying that the law exists for all, both the rich and the poor.

However,

In a startling observation, the bench said that “so far the courts have been used only for the purpose of vindicating the rights of the wealthy and the affluent.”

This is an observation which smacks of socialist activism. We need to notice the obvious and realize that Affirmative Action and Social Justice, especially when coerced by the state are unfair actions primarily aimed at redistribution of wealth, where the state robs the haves for the sake of havenots while constantly increasing its own (the state's own) power over the people.

We, as the peoples, are facing a dual crisis. One of inaction by the legislative and the executive, and the other of socialistic activism by the judiciary.

We need to make it clear that we are not opposing the protection offered by this judgment to the workers. We are appreciating the fact that the rights of the people are upheld. What we are criticizing is that the court is failing in its duty while it refuses to chastise the government for not leaving domains where private enterprise can offer services on a competitive basis and under consumer protection laws. Also the judiciary exceeds it boundaries when it identifies itself with statist socialistic activism.

Why has the Supreme Court not given a similar ultimatum to the government for increasing the number of courts and judges?

Further, notice the court statements:

1. “It is only these privileged classes which have been able to approach the courts for protecting their vested interests. It is only the moneyed who have so far had the golden key to unlock the doors of justice,”

If it is only the privileged classes who had the access to justice, whose fault is it? What is the corrective action being recommended by the Supreme Court?

2. “There is a misconception in the minds of some lawyers, journalists and men in public life that public interest litigation is unnecessarily cluttering up the files of the court and adding to the already staggering arrears of cases which are pending for long years and it should not therefore be encouraged by the court. This is, to our mind, a totally perverse view smacking of elitist and status quoist approach,”

Isn't the SC itself being elitist? Isn't it even being status quoist if it has not given a similar ultimatum to the government for increasing the number of courts and judges?

3. “If the sugar barons and the alcohol kings have the fundamental right to carry on their business and to fatten their purses by exploiting the consuming public, have the Chamars belonging to the lowest strata of society no fundamental right to earn an honest living through their sweat and toil?”

Terming voluntary exchange between the manufacturers of a commodity and consumers of the commodity as exploitation the SC has betrayed its Social Engineering proclivities. It assumes that the rich exploit and the poor toil. It refuses to see the glaring facts that affirmative action is exploitation as well. The courts exist not only for protecting citizens from other citizens, but also for protecting the citizens from the state, especially a state which is a commission agent of wealth redistribution.

4. The most unfortunate part, the court said, is that when the judiciary issues directions for ensuring the right to equality, life and liberty of those who suffer from the handicaps of poverty, illiteracy and ignorance, “a theoretical debate is started by raising the bogey of judicial activism or judicial overreach”.

Is equality the equality of opportunity or equality of result? These two hugely differ in their meanings. The former is fairness while the latter unfair.

Conclusion:

1. While there is large scale apathy and inaction in the Legislative and the Executive, it is encouraging to see action on part of the judiciary.

2. However, the action is not well guided, however well intentioned it may appear to be. Further, the misguided action can be counter-productive and worse than status quo!

3. Let there be change for the better, for we must remember that not all change is necessarily good!

4. If the SC reveres the constitution then it must forsake activism but if it wants to be active for the upholding of justice and fairness in a larger perspective then it must open itself to questioning of unfairness in the constitution itself. Otherwise this selective activism betrays prejudice which is the worst form of injustice and unfairness.

Culture, Language, Region and Linguo-Culture political parties

Shiv Sena, Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, and all such parties, including those in Tamil Nadu, fall into the category of Linguo-Cultural identity parties. And yet, if you take a closer look, their confusion comes out.

Firstly, we need to point out that this article is not against Marathi or Tamil or any such language. Rather we want to call the bluff on the confusion in their understanding of themselves.

As examples, we take the parties from Maharashtra. Both the Shiv Sena and MNS claim to follow Chhatrapati Shivaji. Was Shivaji for Hindu pride or Marathi pride? To make the distinction further clearer, let us sub-divide and use the terms culture, language and region independently. Please note that the same confusion can be generated in relation to Sanatana Dharma, Sanskrit and Indian-subcontinent.

Let us consider a few examples, all of these are hypothetical and we hope no situation mentioned in these examples ever happens, and yet our answers to the questions posed in these examples will help us clarify our understandings about these terms.

For example, if we were Marathi, we would identify ourselves with the culture propagated by the philosophical writings of Sant Dnyaneshwar (Gyaneshwar), Sant tukaram, Samarth Ramdas, and their ancestor sages. The vehicle of the communication has been Marathi language, and the peoples upholding this culture have for long resided in a region now known as Maharashtra.

Now, let us try and answer a few hypothetical questions:

1. There are two groups of people, one group reads and practices Dnyaneshwar, Ramdas and others through English, and another group which reads and practices Karl Marx in Marathi. Who will you identify with?

Our answer is, we identify with Dnyaneshwar in English rather than Marx in Marathi.

2. There are two groups of people, one group from Maharashtra naturalized citizens of UK, working in London, and another group from America, naturalized in India working for Maharashtra. Who will you identify with?

Our answer again is obvious.

3. God forbid, tomorrow if China annexes the region of Maharashtra and hordes of Chinese thrive in Mumbai while crores of Marathi speaking people are languishing in Africa, who will we support? The region or the people?

Our answer is again obvious.

There can be many such questions. And similarly a Tamilian has to find from himself if he prefers people following Periya Puranams in English or those following the Koran in Tamil.

We have nothing against language or sub-region and so on. However, these leaders and their followers must understand that if they are not clear, they will do disservice to their own cause. We also do not claim that this article makes all aspect clear and provides a final understanding. However, what we emphasize is that such questions must be asked and answered in sufficient details so as to attain clarity of understanding without which the leaders and their followers remain eternally confused and thus move about meaninglessly in circuits.

Media Syndicate on Mumbai Blasts and Terror

In a recent article Media Syndicate has presented an analysis for the July 13 blasts in Mumbai. Then in a subsequent article Media Syndicate proposes a way to prevent future terrorist attacks. The analysis and recommendations are a mixed bag. The generality of the analysis has obscured some very fine and important points that have been made. Occasionally confusing phrases like "war on terror" and "fighting terrorism" have been used. We have drawn from the above articles while preparing this summary:

Multiple leaders have spoken irritatingly stupidly after Mumbai Blast (See here, here, here, here and here). Any adequate response can come only after a clear understanding of the situation. Unfortunately, as a nation we are clueless on this front.

1. The most important point to remember about terrorism in general is that it is a tactic. It’s not a cause, not a movement, not an enemy. It’s a tactic, which terrorists use to make things so ugly, to scare people so much that they hope to win their point. In short terrorism is a tactic to terrorize people. Advancing an ideology, whether that belief is political, philosophical or religious in nature, is the ultimate goal of a terrorist, whether that individual is acting in a group or alone and carries out those acts domestically or in foreign lands.


Thus war on terror and fight against terrorism are misleading terms. It is as if we could wage a war on suicide bombings, or war on trench warfare! It's not about being politicall­y correct. It is about being accurate, and using the proper words to describe what is going on.


2. The enemy are those who have an ideology and are using the tactic. What is the ideology behind the tactic and who are the perpetrators? The ideology is Islam. Remember it is not Islamofascism, not radical Islam, not fanatical Islam, not fundamentalist Islam. It is Islam, plain and simple. There is no moderate Islam. Many Muslims may be moderate, but there is no moderate Islam.


There may be Kashmiri separatists or Pakistan sponsored insurgents or whatever. The culprit is Islam. Recall that Pakistan was demanded in the name of Islam! That there are some militant organizations hostile to India does not put the finger on the nub. Incidentally, the Media Syndicate article correctly points out that the long term goals are extending Sharia, the Islamic law across India, eventually across the whole world. And here we need to understand that thus the attacks are not on India, as it ias falsely understood, it is on non-Muslims, and in the case of India, it is on Hindus.

Thus Hindus need to understand that Islam is at war with them, as it has been for past 1400 years. We may want peace, co-existence out of our own stupidity masquerading as generosity. We may not be at war with them, but they are at war with us. It does not need a genius to notice this simple fact. In fact it needs a cunning and evil design to obscure this obvious fact. And this has been done by Mohandasian suicidal principles, Jawaharian inverted policies and Romila Thaparian distorted history education. The Secularists as well as the Pseudo-secularists, the Communists as well as the Socialists, the Congress-persons, the Third (rate) Front persons, all have been spreading lies to obscure simple facts.


But now, things must change quickly and radically. We, Hindus must wake up. Islam is using, as always and as many others, terror against us. Hindus need to rise and save themselves and their civilization.

Raj Thackeray's Dhim-wit

Raj Thackeray split from Shiv Sens founded by his uncle Bal Thackeray and founded Maharashtra N Sena. Raj fell prey to Congress strategy. Of course the old man, Bala, was favoring his own son over his own nephew. But what was the cause and what was the effect has never been clear. Whether it was Raj's fissiparous tendencies that cause the older Thackeray favor his son or the other way round remains a matter of surmise.

Both Shiv Sena and MNS are parties with some sense and much non-sense. Demanding Mumbai/Maharashtra for Maharashtrians is like the SP-BJP talk of Indian Nationalism, calling India for Hindus. Both the groups are confused about their subject matter. Ask SP-BJP leaders who a Hindu is and they will tie themselves into knots. And ask Shiv Sena and MNS who a Maharashtrian is and they will tie themselves into more convoluted knots.

When Lalu Prasad was Railway minister, he ran special trains to examination centers from Bihar to facilitate the recruitment of Biharis in the Railways. And if Shiv Sena or MNS oppose that, it sounds sensible. But going beyond this is foolishness. Fairness must prevail.

One abominable fact is that Indian polity is so abysmally stupid. And an electorate with dim-wit (low intelligence) almost always have an extractive view of democracy. They do not ask their elected leaders to do what is right, rather they merely demand more as their rights! Vote bank politics of the past sixty years is a standing example. The large have-not vote-banks are voting for themselves the earnings of the haves, all this in the name of pro-poor and socialist affirmative action policies.

Shiv Sena, MNS, and such parties want linguistic vote-banks for themselves. This is not new. The old rat from Chennai, M Karunanidhi (dbuh) has been doing it for much longer. And they do the people of their states much disservice. Will Raj offer all Maharashtrians in the USA lucrative jobs if the Americans indiscriminately threw the Marathi-Manus out of USA?

This time the occasion is Mumbai Blasts. Raj made imbecile comments today blaming "immigration" for the blasts! This is not to say that Raj's criticisms of the Congress and the BJP are wrong. On the contrary, they are spot on. However, Raj besides being a dim-wit proved himself a dhim-wit by blaming the illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. Does it mean that legal immigrants from that place would be better? Was Mohammad Atta, who flew one of the planes into the twin towers on 9/11 an illegal immigrant to USA?

No Mr. Raj, and also Mr. Bal, for you will open your mouth shortly, you need to know better. Immigration may be a problem. But in this case, the diagnosis is simple. It is Islam stupid! No covering up of the facts will do. Pakistan is a problem, because of Islam, Bangladesh is a problem because of Islam, Muslims are a problem because of Islam. Speak that out! If you don't, and in stead of that if you talk of unrelated non-sense regarding immigration (which may be valid in some other context, we grant that to you), you are not only being a dim-wit, rather you are being a dhim-wit (dhimmi dim-wit).

P.S. dbuh = death be upon him.

Does Rahul consider assassinations of Indira and Rajiv within One Percent? Advocates Terror-Quota!

The blasts have happened and the dumb-fucks are at it again. DogVijay feels that India is better than Pakistan. This is false Mr. Singh. Pakistan is much much better, for they have no DogVijay Sing yapping all the time. They only have bearded men barking five times a day from minaret tops.

DS's disciple bettered his preceptor with his piece of wisdom. After applying his brilliant mind to the problem for a couple of millions of nanoseconds, the Bos (This is no spelling error, Bos = Bucket of Sh*t) opined: About 99% terror attacks have been stopped, and it is not possible to stop about 1% of them.

We guess, assassinations of Indira and Rajiv must be well within the available 1% quota. We are wondering whether he is contemplating allocating 1% quota for terrorists. If he ever had his say, he might amend the constitution to accommodate 1% of the terrorists!

However, what surprises us is that if Indira and Rajiv assassinations fall under that 1% quota, why did the Congress orchestrate riots against peaceful Sikhs in Delhi in 1984, and villified the LTTE in 1991? Is it that Indira and Rajiv are more valuable that the rest. Well Rajiv certainly opined so by comparing Indira to a huge tree! (See here)

"once a mighty tree falls, it is only natural that the earth around it shakes."

This summarizes the attitide of those who are entrusted with governing the country. Firstly they think of themselves as rulers. And they consider the ruled to be worms, which can be sacrificed for any whim and fancy of the rulers.

Jawahar sacrificed India for his policy of Panchasheela (leading to the debacle in China war in 1962). Then he screwed India's economy by his socialism. Indira institutionalized corruption, and Rajiv took off from where his mom had left. And yes, Rahul is proving himself to be a worthy element in this lineage.

Being Rahul's mentor, DogVijay Singh is equally worthy in the sequence, starting from Mohandas Gandhi. Everytime we imagine that it might be impossible to worse Mohandas and Jawahar, there come people like Rahul and DogVijay who remind us, that they can come quite close.

Advani's Half-Truths on Mumbai Blasts

As if to complement the stupidity of P Chidambaram, L K Advani spilled his pearls of wisdom. Addressing a press conference after visiting the injured he said:

It is a policy failure not intelligence failure. There have been repeated attacks on Mumbai, this is a failure of policy ...

What Advani fails to see is this inability to formulate an appropriate policy springs from the inability to understand the elementary truth that Islam is the problem. And this inability is inherent in the BJP as well.

Inability to understand is intelligence failure!

Of course, there is another graver possibility, and that is that there is willful negligence.

We wonder how these leaders want to be seen as: Unintelligent or Willfully Negligent!

Whatever be the case, Advani must stop parading his half-truths as pearls of wisdom.

It is high time that Hindus realized and acted upon the fact that Islam is the problem.

As the famous Dutch politician Geert Wilders has said repeatedly:

There may be moderate Muslims, but there is NO moderate Islam.

And Like Serge Trifkovic mentioned:

The best Moslems are generally the least Moslems (a pattern which does not seem to be the case with other religions)

Thus anyone, especially a leader, who does not see this simple fact is either a case of Intelligence Failure or Willful Negligence.

Advani must know better.

Chidambaram Blabbers On Mumbai Blasts

The ever suave venomous snake P Chidambaram has delivered pearls of wisdom again. In his remarks on the recent Mumbai Blasts, he said:

He accepted that this was "unfortunate" but said the new terror attack was "not an attack on India's commercial capital" and that it cannot be described as an intelligence failure because for 31 months, since 26/11 was unleashed upon Mumbai, the police and the government had managed to keep the city safe till last evening.

What wisdom! A cabinet minister from Congress which has ruled the country for over sixty years claims that securing a city for thirty one months is good enough! And it is not intelligence failure!

You empty skull, this is intelligence failure. You are refusing to see the writing which has been there for all to see, a writing not merely on the wall, rather the writing on the SKY!

Secularism is the problem. Islam is the problem. Appeasement is the problem.

A nation based on Hindu Way of Life (Sanatana Dharma) is the only solution.

If you can't figure this out, this is intelligence failure! Don't fool the nation with false concepts.

Islam's Latest Gift to Hindus: Blasts in Mumbai

Yesterday, on July 13, 2011, Islam was at it again, and its followers, ardent Muslims, sent their message for the n-th time, unmistakable signals that we seem to have decided to ignore, despite 1400 years of repeated messaging; and the message is:

1. The problem is not some misguided Muslims.

2. The problem is not those who have hijacked peaceful Islam.

3. The problems are not ambiguous concepts like Islmo-fascism, and so on.

4. Most importantly the problems are not, what our secular socialist politicians and media keep shouting from the roof-tops: the psychology, the national origin, the immigration status, the socioeconomic status, the marital status of a Muslim, whether he is born of cousin marriage or not, whether he is culturally alienated in the West or not, whether he is sexually frustrated or not, whether he is angry at Islam being "left behind" by the modern West or not, if he's a Muslim, then he is a candidate for Muslim extremist.

5. Because The Problem is Islam itself.

Take for instance another example:

The Muslims aren't happy!

They're not happy in Gaza. They're not happy in Egypt. They're not happy in Libya. They're not happy in Morocco. They're not happy in Iran. They're not happy in Iraq. They're not happy in Yemen. They're not happy in Afghanistan. They're not happy in Pakistan. They're not happy in Syria. They're not happy in Lebanon.

And where are they happy?

They're happy in England. They're happy in France. They're happy in Italy. They're happy in Germany. They're happy in Sweden. They're happy in the USA. They're happy in India.They're happy in Norway. They're happy in every country that is not Muslim. And who do they blame? Not Islam. Not their leadership. Not themselves.

THEY BLAME THE COUNTRIES THEY ARE HAPPY IN!

So, no matter what, anything and everything becomes a cause for Muslim violence against non-Muslims. Because Islam itself is the problem.

What should we do?

1. First and Foremost: Speak, Think and Discuss openly about Islam. No kid-glove treatment in the name of minorities.

2. Discredit and Expose Islam for what it is.

3. Ban Islam, its teaching, and its practice.

IFIH's Working Paper on Indian Nationalism

The International Forum For India's Heritage (IFIH) has a nice working paper on inspiring the young in India and instilling nationalistic values in them. We present some of their noteworthy recommendations below:

(a). The lives of the great early exponents of Indian nationalism, for instance Swami Vivekananda, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Sri Aurobindo, Sister Nivedita, Subramania Bharati and others, must be taught in an inspiring manner. Also a collection of brief extracts from inspirational writings by a wide selection of Indian Nationalists and freedom fighters, from all regions of India, should be made available to students as supplementary reading material.


(b). A certain number of misconceptions still plague the way in which the freedom movement is taught; for instance, the notion that the Indian nation came into existence only thanks to the colonial masters; the failure to highlight the distinctive features of Indian nationalism as compared to Western types of nationalism; the eclipse of a number of important early pioneers of the freedom movement, their values, thoughts, action and role; the depiction of some freedom fighters as “terrorists”; party considerations in highlighting one group of leaders resulting in sacrificing the importance of the contributions of other leaders. A fair and objective account of the freedom movement, devoid of any ideological bias, is yet to be written.


(c). Keeping in mind the cultural roots of Indian nationalism, which are far more ancient than the colonial era, Sanskrit should be taught at primary, middle and secondary levels. In particular, the two great Indian Epics, which have long played a considerable role in culturally unifying the nation, must be studied, preferably through innovative methods such as those outlined above. Here again, reference may be made to the recent Supreme Court judgement, which explicitly “emphasized the importance of Sanskrit study and declared the omission of Sanskrit from CBSE syllabus as unjustified.”


(d). The above recommendations are, in fact, part of a process of decolonization of the Indian mind, an indispensable process if students are to become truly Indian, conscious of what India has stood for throughout history and can still offer to humanity today and tomorrow.


Emphasizing teachings and lives of nationalist thinkers, sanskrit, the truth regarding the freedom movement, and decolonizing the Indian mind are really very important and the effort of IFIH must be commended.


Here, we want to mention a few points which get lost in the confusion created by the constraint of political correctness owing to our secular socialist system.


Some of these are:


1. While decolonizing Indian mind, we must also emphatically de-Islamize (de-moghulize) India.


2. Thus, in language, we must de-urduize, de-arabicize and de-persianize Hindi used by the population. Instead the Sanskrit roots of Hindi must be strengthened. Modern day Hindi news channels, movies are imposing Arabic and Persian on Indian people while calling it Hindi.


3. Similarly, we must also de-moghulize the names of our cities. Cities like Aurangabad, must be renamed. Recall that Aurangzeb was a tyrannical Muslim ruler and who terrorized Hindus, and we must surely not be celebrating his name! Names like Ahmedabad, Allahabad, and so on must GO!

...


And there are many more to be added. We welcome readers' suggestions.

Save the Army from Civilians

A few years ago a boy was killed for trespassing into a Defense Compound in Bangalore (see here). In a recent incident, another boy has been killed in Chennai (see here).

There was a lot of hue and cry over the incident in Bangalore, and now there is a similar lot in Chennai. All and sundry are crying foul while asserting that the boys were innocent. Jayalalitha has gone onto accuse the army for the killing. Similar emotional accusations were made even after the Bangalore incident.

There are many points in these stories and we must avoid conflating issues. First let us merely observe the facts. Two boys (on separate occasions) sneaked into defense areas, and were killed. Let us also grant that untimely deaths have been tragic. But then who is to be blamed?

It has been well known that defense establishments work with their own rules and frameworks. These rules and frameworks may seem unsavory, but they are the result of wisdom coming from long experience, in many cases, of centuries. After all, armies have existed for much much longer than civilian governments have existed.

It is also true and understandable that civilians live by civilian rules and they might be at variance, especially in terms of strictness, with those of the army. By and large, defense establishments work under the management code 'You can't ask the question why. It is for you to do or die'. A high premium on discipline and obedience. This seemingly brutal rule is necessary since often at critical situations time is very short and a lightening response is needed. Not merely the army, but even the police and the fire-fighters operate on similar principles. As can easily be understood, the need for quick reaction is paramount in these institutions.

On the other hand, civilians may want the culture of debate or negotiation rather than obedience. Often times the paucity of time, excepting in emergency situations, is never an issue. And a comprehensive and careful analysis including multiple re-examinations, cross-examinations, debates even across the hierarchy are not merely acceptable, they are even encouraged, as they must be.

Neither is wrong, both are right, then where is the mistake? The error lies in mixing of these two. And why do we mix the two? Because we are dumb-fucks. Since ages ago, serious and sincere administrators have known that it is unwise to keep defense and civilian populations in overlapping or close locations. The demarcation between the city and the cantonment has been understood for ages and ages. Often they were even separated by large gaps acting as buffer zones.

However, India's urban planners and politicians have allowed the civilian settlements to mushroom almost as an undergrowth of defense colonies. When two completely different systems live close by, such accidents are the obvious outcomes.

However, in our urgency to gain popular civilian support, we must not blame the army or the defense establishment, nor should we demand any change in the behavior from the defense personnel. India's defense establishment has already been badly abused, and if we do not want them to degenerate into what our police has become, we would rather avoid meddling in their affairs.

Nor need we demand any change in civilian life-styles. What we must demand is that these entities must be sufficiently isolated from each other. The present hue and cry over army firing seems to focus on the emotional issues. The death of young boys is tragic, but it is not the army jawan who is responsible for such deaths. It is the politicians like Jayalalita and our dumb-fuck town planners who fail to implement an adequate and effective isolation between the two, for they are usually in collusion with the real-estate mafia.

This is not to state that army must be free to do to civilians what they like. Once a proper isolation is effected, neither party can coerce its mode on the other. But more importantly, these chest thumping fools who want to save the civilians from the army are morons. In India, it is the army which needs to be saved from civilians! And remember, we need to save the army so that the army can save us.

An Update:

An ex-army officer has allegedly confessed to shooting the boy. According to the report the officer ... told police that he shot at Dilshan after getting annoyed over the boys from a nearby locality frequenting the campus to pluck almond.

There will always be a debate whether such an explanation by the officer is acceptable or not. However this update surely reemphasizes what we said in the above post, and that is, we need to isolate cantonments from civil settlements. We need to save our army so that the army can save us.

Don't Sympathize with DMK-chief Karunanidhi

When we wrote about another blighter Arjun Singh, a sensitive friend of ours was somewhat taken aback. This time again we risk ruffling a few feathers.

India, especially Hindus have been suffering at the hands of many a evil politicians and their families, often encompassing their multiple illegitimate progeny both biological as well as intellectual.

The first and foremost of such families has been the Jawahar-Mohandas (Nehru-Gandhi) family. The Karunanidhi-Maran family belongs to a similar genre. Once upon a time there was a rogue named E. Ramaswamy Naikar, called Periyar (the great one) by his imbecile followers. He spearheaded a movement called DK (Dravida Kazhagam). His movement was based upon the utterly bogus colonial theory: The Aryan Invasion Theory. This theory stands thoroughly exposed and debunked (see here, here and here). On such a flimsy ground, this moron Periyar, founded his Dravida Kazhagam.

This Dravida Kazhagam, in the name of Tamizh Pride, had only one main agenda. Discrediting Hinduism. The followers of Periyar called themselves atheists, propagated worship of Ravana, desecrated Rama, but had no qualms about hobnobbing with the vilest of dogmatic religions like Islam, Christianity and the worst of them all Communism.

M. Karunanidhi, is a poisonous fruit from the same tree. His most recent intellectual accomplishment was asking the profound question:

Some say there was a person over 17 lakh years ago. His name was Rama. Do not touch the bridge (Ramar Sethu) constructed by him. Who is this Rama? From which engineering college did he graduate? Is there any proof for this?

And later this same valiant politicians broke down when one of his progeny was arrested. It is quite common among Indian politicians to ask questions of everyone, while breaking down when questions are asked of them.

In more recent development, another of this family, Dayanidhi Maran, had to resign from the central cabinet. Recall that Karunanidhi's daughter Kanimozhi is relaxing in jail along with her valiant paramour A. Raja. And the kalaigner - as Karunanidhi is called by his followers, no less stupid than the followers of Periyar - is thus enjoying is life.

We emphasize that let there be no sympathies for this old rat. Let him reap what he has sown. And, when he passes away, which we believe he will much sooner rather than later, we will talk about it in exactly the same manner as we did earlier for another moron.

Government Takeover of Padmanabhaswamy Temple Funds must be Opposed

A news item in the Indian Express reports:

Retired Judge C S Rajan, a member of the panel appointed by the Supreme Court to prepare the inventory of assets in the chambers of Sree Padmamabhaswamy temple here, on Tuesday hinted that the recovered wealth could be taken over by the government by invoking the treasure trove Act. ...

This is a horrendous decision. The donations from the kings may (must) have been for the temple deity, Bhagwan Padmanabhaswamy; may be they also thought that the funds could be used for the devotees of the temple during distressful times. Even in its most general interpretation, the temple funds, at the very least, must be used for Hindus and/or Hinduism (sanAtana dharma).

The moment a secular government takes over the treasure, it will use it to fulfill its own secular policies, for example, subsidizing Haj travel and/or Vatican travel. This is a blatant and evil abuse of funds of the Hindus against the Hindus.

Already, there is intolerable evil in the governmental control of Hindu Temples, where out of lakhs of crores of donations given by the devotees to Hindu Temples, the government provides paltry salaries (like Rs. 500 a month) for the up-keepers of the temples. The aid provided to minority run institutions from tax payers' money, and money siphoned from Hindu Temple Funds is used to support much higher salaries for employees in non-Hindu institutions.

Until now, the Hindus have been keeping quiet. However, in recent times, the evil doings of the secular government has crossed all limits. The wealth of Tirupati was attempted to be siphoned off for minority purposes, the huge sum found in the Satya Sai Trust too may fall into anti-Hindu secular (read Muslims, Christians and Communists) hands. It is nearly as if money collected from Indian Tax payers are siphoned to the Taliban and the Lashkar-e-Taiba.

The charge that, without government control or take over, the money will be grabbed by the sharks is another evil maneuver, for the secular government is the biggest and the evil-most shark.

Hindus do not need secular governments to control their money. If there are to be elected representatives for such a control, they must be elected by only Hindu voters. A secular government has no business meddling with Hindu religious funds.

We urge the Hindus to realize that these secular (neither pseudo-secular nor true-secular) politicians or representatives should have no say in matters related to money donated by Hindus for Hindu-Temples or Hindu religious causes! Hindus must choose their own representatives from among themselves who must then manage the wealth of the Hindus. We urge the Hindus to become their own representatives and forsake any trust in secular representatives. Encourage people with spine to become your representatives. Otherwise you will be fooled by a bunch of YSRs and Sonias and their clones. And surely they will squander your money by using it for subsidizing Islam and Christianity.

What Can We Do?

A Dark Reality:

We are facing enormous problems as a nation. While dangers are lurking all around us, our system is falling apart. As the nation faces crisis, people belonging to the Governing circles are busy doing everything other than governance. Crises after crises are happening and there is no sensible decision making. Effective crucial decisions are neither being debated nor are they being taken.

In addition, responsibility for failure can not be fixed/identified! For there is no accountability. Thus, despite repeated and frequent failures, a corrective action does not happen.

While this is bad enough, it gets worse, because in the minds of common people, there is a general impression (especially about the rich and the powerful) that they can do and get away with anything. And the rich and the powerful are committing evil acts with impunity. The starkest example is the midnight eviction from Ramlila grounds on the night of 4th June 2011. And the major section of the media, instead of waking the nation up, is lulling the people to sleep.

A Ray of Hope:

Amongst all this turmoil, the good point is that we, as peoples, still have some resilience left, and there is some hope. Against all odds, the people at large are still peaceful towards each other. But, their patience must not be tested. We believe that this patience is because of two reasons. One, that it is a lull before the storm and the peril of a civil war looms large over us. But second, and more importantly, that our Hindu civilisation has such deep rooted strengths that people can be peaceful against all huge odds. And this is something that we need to understand, appreciate, take pride in, and most importantly nurture. We need to realise that despite of so called modern obsessions with Secularism, Socialism, etc. have failed, while our traditional principles are saving us.

Problem Identification:

1. Failure as a Society:

We recall a quote:

We must learn to live with reality. Otherwise for sure reality will come and live with us.

Further, it is not difficult to observe that if we misunderstand the reality, we will mistakenly pursue wrong solutions to our problems. Moreover a deliberate misunderstanding will surely lead to hypocrisy as the solution. Thus, ignorance of the true results in the empowerment of the false.


We are wrongly taught that wealth and righteousness are incompatible. However, as the same time, people do want material prosperity as well as wealth. So there is wide spread hypocrisy. People claim that they are NOT seeking wealth, while that is what they seek, and what is worse is that they seek it by hook or by crook. Those who foolishly believe that wealth and righteousness are incompatible seek poverty and then are marginalized.

The religious wisdom does not tell you to shun wealth. It merely tells you that wealth alone can not give you lasting happiness. So when one pursues wealth, besides knowing what wealth CAN get, one must also be aware of what wealth CANNOT get! In contrast, materialism tells us that wealth is the only happiness that we can get.

Similarly, religious wisdom does not tell you that you can not acquire wealth by righteous means. In fact sanatana dharma tells us that righteousness is the only way to acquire lasting wealth. For example, the great sage Vyasa says in mahAbharata:

By dharma alone one can obtain artha and kama, that is righteous fulfilment of desires.

However, our present social wisdom tells us, that if one is honest, one can not be rich.

Thus, there is this false and its perpetration at two levels.

By ignoring to look at facts we do not change them, rather we become their victims.

2. Failure as a System:

The foremost requirement from a System is that it must learn, and learn quickly. We have a system based on the false, and the feed-back mechanisms are not in place. Thus the false gets perpetrated. So we need a system where erros and mistakes can be quickly identified, responsibilities fixed, and corrective action taken.

Consider the example of riots. A furious mob kills a man. Who gets hanged? No one because the law could say that if a mob (whatever be the definition) kills someone, we can not identify the killer and hence no one (even if we catch all members of the mob) should be hanged.

So here we have our parliamentary system. The mob (parliamentary government) indulges in the acts of corruption. All know that there is corruption, and no one is punish because responsibility can not be fixed!

If we consider the peoblem of redistribution, democracy causes a similar problem. Once the recepients of Affirmative Action are in majority, they always vote for more and more affirmative action, while they oppose entry into the recepient of AA club.

Solution:

There are many remedies that are popularized as solutions. Before we explore possible solution(s), let us reject the non-solutions.

1. Fake or Non-Solutions:

Often people tend to believe that a change in government will bring about a solution. There are two problems with that.

1. The people in the government come from the same society that they govern. So there are two associated problems now.

(1.a) What is the nature and content of people in the society.

(1.b) What kind of people get chosen to the role of governance.

2. The people in the government are supposed to work within the framework of the same system. Again there are two associated problems.

(2.a) Are the errors caught.

(2.b) are they corrected?

In view of the above, it is evident that we need to explore inherent short-comings of the system as well, and try and have remedies for that. This means that we need to address both the social and systemic aspects.

2. Possible Solution:

Thus, on the intellectual action front, we need to address the following:

1. Education:

Society changes through education. We term this notion Human change, and this will come through Education (both formal and informal) in the broad sense.

But then what is right education? If we claim that the current education is wrong, how do we know what we propose is right? The answer is, therefore that education must be based on ...

Thus we need a New Education System.

The moment we realize the importance of knowing and living by Truth, we are reorienting ourselves towards a Truth Based Civilization. That is sanAtana dharma or Hindu way of Life.

Thus the thrust must be on: How to stop the deterioration in the Hindu ethos; and how to reinforce Hindu Understanding. For it is only the wisdom of our Rishis both ancient and modern that can truly sustain us.


2. Constitution:

How to reform our system, so that it WORKS! How to put in place a Mechanism so that in the case of failure, Responsibilities are fixed and Corrective action taken! We term this Systemic Change, and this will come through reforms in the system.

However, in order to achieve this, we must be prepared for even radical changes. For example, we could think of a NEW CONSTITUTION.

Do we need to continue with parliamentary system with "collective responsibility", or should we change to something else? Is five years too long a term for one government, or should the term be reduced to four years? We need to ask ourselves and answer these questions.

In the paradigm of "collective responsibility", the task of "fixing the responsibility" becomes ambiguous and difficult.

We also need to wonder whether we believe in democracy as an ideal or democracy as a mechanism. And we need to explore the pros and cons.

Whichever way we look, we need to transform both society and system. And we need to do it through radical reforms in education and constitution.

Anna's Stupidities Surface Again!

In a recent news item it was reported that Anna has put some conditions on Baba Ramdev to allow him to join his (Anna's) fast.

Isn't it De javu? Mohandasian Anna is at it again. It always is that Anna knows the best. Mr. Anna, then why are you calling it a "people's national movement"? Why don't you call it "Anna's movement"?

Apparently Baba's call to raise an army of 11,000 has troubled Anna. This Anna has no qualms about writing a servile letter to Sonia! Anna has, in the past, also given a clean chit to Manmohan while pointing fingers at Sonia.

Anna, in our opinion, has gone senile. He needs to make up his mind before he speaks.

Pranab Mukherji establishes again that he is Murkhaji

Pranab Murkhaji is at it again. In a rally at Kolkata he said regarding Anna's rally:

" ...But it is an attack on the parliamentary system and the democratic process ..."

This stupid person must specify what exactly is an attack on parliamentary system and democracy. Is the fight against corruption the attack? Is questioning whether parliamentary system has failed the attack?

Other than conducting, more often than not, farce elections what has been so "democratic" about India? What is "democratic" in Congress?

About CPM he said:

Recalling that a Communist minister of Kerala had said in 1957 “we will wreck the Constitution from within”, he said, “They could not do it. So now, they have joined Hazare.”

What is so sacrosanct about the current Constitution? And if this Congress thinks that the Constitution is so sacrosanct why did they take the support of CPM to survive in the government? Including the crucial vote by the old bandicoot Somnath Chatterji? This old bandicoot is so anti-national that he sided with Congress, against the diktats of his own party, lest the BJP gain any mileage.

The first and the foremost thing to be realized is that Congress is the strongest retrograde and counter-revolution in India. They impeded and slowed the Freedom Struggle, especially after the advent and rise of Mohandas. Post 1947, Jawahar was the biggest counter-revolutionary in terms of economic development and military might that India needed so badly at that time. Indira was the biggest subverter of democracy during emergency and the present congress is equally big if not bigger going by the blatant way in which they crushed Baba movement, and are bad-mouthing Anna movement.

This Congress does not deserve a mere defeat in the elections. They deserve to be decimated and destroyed. And mind you, their own "luminary" Mohandas had expressed the wish in 1947 that Congress be disbanded.

To top it all this murkhaji said:

... All Bills are put on the website. If people want to give their opinion, they can do so. There is no need for fasts or threats for this ...

Wow, this is "brilliant"! Only a Murkhaji could have said this. And now to make his vision come true the Congress will gift all the citizens of India Laptops and free internet connection and sufficient computer skills!

By making such statements Pranab has exposed his wickedness. Despite having been in the politics and governance for decades, despite (hopefully) having reached the fag end of his life, this fool has not learnt even the most elementary lessons.

Have any parties in India ever bothered to educate people about decision making through reasoned debate in a democracy? Do we have any democracy in India? Without an efficient information flow to all the voters can there even be a semblance of an informed decision making or voting?