இந்தியாவிலும், கிறிஸ்துவ பள்ளிக்கூடங்களில், பால்பவுடருக்காகவும், காசுக்காகவும் கிறிஸ்துவமதம் மாறிய இந்துக்கள், இந்துமதத்தை கேவலமாக பேச ஊக்குவிக்கப்படுகிறார்கள்.
இது தென்னாப்பிரிக்காவிலும் நடக்கிறது.
New ‘hell-bound Hindus’ row at nose-ring school
Suthentira Govender Published:Oct 28, 2007
SA Dharma Sabha head complains to Human Rights Commission after teacher allegedly insulted pupils
A Durban school that was recently at the centre of a nose-ring saga is embroiled in another religious row after Hindus were allegedly told by a teacher that they were bound for hell.
Durban Girls’ High School in Glenwood has been in the public eye for the past three years since a former pupil, Sunali Pillay, and her mother, Navi, legally challenged the institution for refusing to allow her to wear a nose ring.
This month, the Constitutional Court found that the school’s governing body had discriminated unfairly against her and ordered that its code of conduct be reviewed to accommodate religious and cultural practices.
Now a new controversy has erupted after concerned parents complained that a teacher had allegedly ridiculed Hinduism.
The parents approached Kamal Maharaj, editor of the Hindu Vishwa Shakti newspaper, and Ram Maharaj, head of the SA Dharma Sabha, who is a member of the parliamentary education portfolio committee.
A parent who asked not to be identified said she was outraged when she learnt that a teacher who was discussing religion with a group of girls told them that “those who did not believe in Jesus will go to hell and those who prayed to Jesus would go to heaven”.
“When a child said she was Hindu, she was told because she’s Hindu, she will go to hell. The teacher told her she would pray for her,” said the parent.
She also claimed the teacher said Hindus, in particular, were destined for hell because of their “idol worship”.
“After the discussion, a pupil told Hindu pupils that they were the people who came back as cows.
“I am shocked by these remarks. They are propagating Christianity and attacking other religions, which is unacceptable.”
Anne Martin, the school’s principal, said her initial investigation into the complaints revealed that “discussions took place between the teachers and the learners informally”.
“The educators clarified to the Hindu learners the Christian point of view when the learners had queried this with the teachers,” said Martin.
She said the comment about “reincarnation as cows is regretted and is the opinion of a single learner, seemingly speaking insensitively from a basis of a lack of knowledge and ignorance”.
“At no time would this school support any derogatory statement about any learner’s religion or beliefs. We endeavour to correct misconceptions when they are brought to our attention and teach tolerance and respect for another’s views.
“Our parents are encouraged to raise these issues with the governing body and school as a first approach to finding common ground,” said Martin.
Kamal Maharaj said schools were places of learning, not centres of indoctrination or propaganda.
“Schools should not be used to promote sectarian thinking, party politics or religious propaganda,” he said.
“Teachers are regarded as role models, and children tend to emulate them. It’s unacceptable that religion has been used to discriminate against others.
“The children were traumatised by the remarks. We are going to take this issue to the highest authorities.”
Ram Maharaj, who submitted a complaint to the Human Rights Commission this week, said: “These allegations are a flagrant violation of our Constitution, as well as the current national education policy, which promotes inter-faith understanding, harmony and nation-building.”
He called for a full-scale investigation into the allegations.
“After due process is followed, effective measures must be implemented so that never again will a child be persecuted or insulted for his or her religious and cultural beliefs and traditions.
“Hindus are in a state of renaissance. No more are we servile and docile, but strong, proud and assertive. While we Hindus respect all religions, we expect respect in return. We will not tolerate intolerance.
“The alleged remarks are unwarranted and venomous. It is particularly insensitive, offensive and traumatising during this period of Diwali.
“Schools can’t be reduced to happy hunting grounds to wean converts.”
Jody Kollapen, head of the Human Rights Commission, said: “School is a place where we should advance the values of tolerance and understanding.
“Any attempt to create a hierarchy of religion that suggests one God is more powerful than the other, to undermine people’s faith and belief, certainly would run contrary to the spirit of our Constitution.
“The commission would view such conduct in a strong light. But we will have to investigate this complaint thoroughly before drawing any conclusions.”
Showing posts with label கிறிஸ்துவ பித்துக்குளித்தனம். Show all posts
Showing posts with label கிறிஸ்துவ பித்துக்குளித்தனம். Show all posts
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Monday, October 15, 2007
பயமுறுத்தி கிறிஸ்துவ மதமாற்றம்
கிறிஸ்துவ மிஷனரிகள் அப்பாவி இந்துக்களை பயமுறுத்தி கிறிஸ்துவ பிரச்சாரம் செய்கிறார்கள்.
காலஹஸ்தி கோவிலுக்குள் கிறிஸ்துவ் மதமாற்ற பிரச்சாரங்களை வினியோகித்துக்கொண்டிருந்தவரை கைது செய்ததில் அவர் தன்னிடம் திருப்பதியில் ஒரு கிறிஸ்துவர் சந்தித்து இந்த பிரசுரங்களை கொடுக்கவில்லை என்றால், அவருக்கு பெரும் துயரம் நேரும் என்ற் பயமுறுத்தியதாக கூறுகிறார்.
Deceptive Christian missionary propaganda in Sri Kalahasti
PDF | Print | E-mail
Wednesday, 10 October 2007
source: Andhra Jyothy (Telugu), October 8, 2007
A new way of deceiving innocent Hindus to become virtual missionaries discovered.
Srikalahasti Oct8: Police arrested a 60 year old man for distributing Christian missionary propaganda material inside Sri Kalahasthiswara temple. Police are investigating this man who claims to be a Hindu. On Monday morning temple security personnel identified a man distributing Christian conversion propaganda material near Nandi idol inside the temple. Enraged devotees and locals pounced on the man before security personel could get hold of him.
The man claims that he did not distribute the Christian literature intentionally. The man claimed that he is a Hindu and his name is Ankayya and resides in Muthyalamma street. During his recent visit to Tirupati he met a Christian missionary who claimed that if he doesn't distribute those flyers to 50 other people, bad luck would fall upon him. Mr. Ankayya got scared of these words and started distributing Christian conversion literature.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
ராமர் பாலம் என்பது கற்பனையே -கிறிஸ்துவர் தா.பாண்டியன் பேட்டி
ராமர் பாலம் என்பது கற்பனை என்று கிறிஸ்துவரான தா பாண்டியன் கூறியுள்ளார்.
--
மதுரை: ராமர் பாலம் என்பது கற்பனையே என இந்திய கம்யூ., மாநில செயலாளர் தா. பாண்டியன் கூறினார்.
மதுரையில் நேற்று அவர் கூறியதாவது: சேது சமுத்திர திட்டத்தை முழுமையாக நிறைவேற்ற வேண்டும். வகுப்புவாத சக்திகள் ஒரு காப்பியத்தில் வந்த கதாபாத்திரத்தை வைத்து விஞ்ஞான ரீதியில் நிறைவேற்றப்படும் திட்டத்தை செயல்படுத்தாதே என கூறுதல் ஏற்புடையதல்ல. ராமர் பாலம் என்பது கற்பனையே. இயற்கையாக உருவான ஒரு மணல் திட்டுக்கு வைக்கப்பட்ட பெயர் தான் ராமர் பாலம். இது தொடர்பான வழக்கில் மத்திய அரசு ஆதாரமாக கொடுத்த வாக்குமூலத்தை மதவாதிகளின் எதிர்ப்பை காரணம் காட்டி வாபஸ் பெற்றது கண்டிக்கத்தக்கது. இதில் மத்திய அரசின் தெளிவற்ற கொள்கையையே காட்டுகிறது. ராமர் பாலத்தை காப்போம் என்ற பெயரால் தமிழகத்தில் மதக்கலவரத்தை துõண்ட மதவாத சக்திகள் திட்டமிட்டுள்ளன. இதன் ஒரு அடையாளம் தான் பெங்களூருவில் தமிழக முதல்வரின் மகள் வீட்டில் கை வெடிகுண்டு வீசப்பட்டுள்ளது. மத உணர்வுகளை மதிக்கிறோம் என்ற பெயரில் அரசுகள் உண்மையை மறைக்கக்கூடாது. இப்பிரச்னைகளை கண்டித்து இடதுசாரிகள் சார்பில் தமிழகம் முழுவதும் எதிர்ப்பு இயக்கங்களை நடத்துவோம். சேலம் ரயில்வே கோட்டம், சேது சமுத்திர திட்ட பிரச்னை பற்றி விவாதிக்க சென்னையில் செப். 24 ல் நடைபெறும் அனைத்துக் கட்சி கூட்டத்தில் பங்கேற்போம். இவ்வாறு அவர் கூறினார். தேசியக்குழு உறுப்பினர் நல்லகண்ணு, மாநில விவசாயிகள் சங்க செயலாளர் துரைமாணிக்கம், மதுரை மாவட்ட செயலாளர் சேதுராமன் உடனிருந்தனர்.
சி.பி.சி.ஐ.டி.,க்கு மாற்றம்: திருநெல்வேலியில் இளைஞர் பெருமன்ற செயலாளர் சுடலைமுத்து மணல் கொள்ளையர்களால் படுகொலை செய்யப்பட்ட வழக்கை சி.பி.சி.ஐ.டி.,க்கு மாற்றி விசாரணைக்கு உத்தரவிடப்பட்டுள்ளதாக முதல்வர் கருணாநிதி எங்களிடம் தெரிவித்துள்ளார். சுடலைமுத்துவின் மனைவிக்கு கருணை அடிப்படையில் அரசு வேலை வழங்கவும் முதல்வர் உறுதியளித்துள்ளதாக பேட்டியின் போது தா. பாண்டியன் தெரிவித்தார்.
நன்றி தினமலர்
--
மதுரை: ராமர் பாலம் என்பது கற்பனையே என இந்திய கம்யூ., மாநில செயலாளர் தா. பாண்டியன் கூறினார்.
மதுரையில் நேற்று அவர் கூறியதாவது: சேது சமுத்திர திட்டத்தை முழுமையாக நிறைவேற்ற வேண்டும். வகுப்புவாத சக்திகள் ஒரு காப்பியத்தில் வந்த கதாபாத்திரத்தை வைத்து விஞ்ஞான ரீதியில் நிறைவேற்றப்படும் திட்டத்தை செயல்படுத்தாதே என கூறுதல் ஏற்புடையதல்ல. ராமர் பாலம் என்பது கற்பனையே. இயற்கையாக உருவான ஒரு மணல் திட்டுக்கு வைக்கப்பட்ட பெயர் தான் ராமர் பாலம். இது தொடர்பான வழக்கில் மத்திய அரசு ஆதாரமாக கொடுத்த வாக்குமூலத்தை மதவாதிகளின் எதிர்ப்பை காரணம் காட்டி வாபஸ் பெற்றது கண்டிக்கத்தக்கது. இதில் மத்திய அரசின் தெளிவற்ற கொள்கையையே காட்டுகிறது. ராமர் பாலத்தை காப்போம் என்ற பெயரால் தமிழகத்தில் மதக்கலவரத்தை துõண்ட மதவாத சக்திகள் திட்டமிட்டுள்ளன. இதன் ஒரு அடையாளம் தான் பெங்களூருவில் தமிழக முதல்வரின் மகள் வீட்டில் கை வெடிகுண்டு வீசப்பட்டுள்ளது. மத உணர்வுகளை மதிக்கிறோம் என்ற பெயரில் அரசுகள் உண்மையை மறைக்கக்கூடாது. இப்பிரச்னைகளை கண்டித்து இடதுசாரிகள் சார்பில் தமிழகம் முழுவதும் எதிர்ப்பு இயக்கங்களை நடத்துவோம். சேலம் ரயில்வே கோட்டம், சேது சமுத்திர திட்ட பிரச்னை பற்றி விவாதிக்க சென்னையில் செப். 24 ல் நடைபெறும் அனைத்துக் கட்சி கூட்டத்தில் பங்கேற்போம். இவ்வாறு அவர் கூறினார். தேசியக்குழு உறுப்பினர் நல்லகண்ணு, மாநில விவசாயிகள் சங்க செயலாளர் துரைமாணிக்கம், மதுரை மாவட்ட செயலாளர் சேதுராமன் உடனிருந்தனர்.
சி.பி.சி.ஐ.டி.,க்கு மாற்றம்: திருநெல்வேலியில் இளைஞர் பெருமன்ற செயலாளர் சுடலைமுத்து மணல் கொள்ளையர்களால் படுகொலை செய்யப்பட்ட வழக்கை சி.பி.சி.ஐ.டி.,க்கு மாற்றி விசாரணைக்கு உத்தரவிடப்பட்டுள்ளதாக முதல்வர் கருணாநிதி எங்களிடம் தெரிவித்துள்ளார். சுடலைமுத்துவின் மனைவிக்கு கருணை அடிப்படையில் அரசு வேலை வழங்கவும் முதல்வர் உறுதியளித்துள்ளதாக பேட்டியின் போது தா. பாண்டியன் தெரிவித்தார்.
நன்றி தினமலர்
Monday, September 17, 2007
ராமர் சேது அபிடவிட் சோனியா மேற்பார்வை பார்த்ததே - அம்பிகா சோனி ஒப்புதல்
எதற்கு இந்திய அரசாங்கம் சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட்டில் சமர்பிக்கும் அபிடவிட்டை அரசாங்கத்தில் இல்லாத காங்கிரஸ் தலைவர் மேற்பார்வை பார்க்கவேண்டும்?
சட்ட அமைச்சர் பார்ப்பதும், கலாச்சார அமைச்சர் பார்ப்பதும் வேறு. அரசாங்கத்தில் இல்லாத கட்சித்தலைவர் பார்ப்பது வேறு.
எல்லாம் பார்த்துதான் குறி வைத்து சுட்டிருக்கிறார்கள். இப்போது சோனியாவுக்கு வழக்கம்போல கிரீடம் வைக்கிறார்கள்..
இந்துக்கள் ஏமாளிகள் அல்ல. அது கொஞ்சம் காலம் கழித்து தெரியும்.
Sonia lashes out at Ambika Soni over the phone
Published on Sunday , September 16, 2007 at 15:11 in Nation section
New Delhi: Union Tourism Minister Ambika Soni has confirmed that while she was on an official visit to Tokyo, Congress President Sonia Gandhi telephoned her and gave her a tongue lashing over her ministry's affidavit filed in connection with the ongoing Sethusamudram project.
In Ambika's own words: "The CP called me in Tokyo. She was agitated as to how such an erroneous affidavit could go. I tried to explain to her and promised her to submit all the concerned papers about the controversy."
Ambika arrived here last evening from Tokyo amid the raging controversy over the "Ram-affidavit".
"Today, when I met her (Sonia Gandhi) at 10 Janpath, I handed over all the papers concerning the affidavit. I showed her the draft affidavit in which I and my officials had made three corrections. While two corrections were incorporated in the draft affidavit, one which we had expressly deleted, went uncorrected," Soni said.
She, however, said that she had carried out the corrections in the affidavit on September 7.
Replying to a question as to how such a mistake went through even after being corrected, she said, "I just can't say at what level such a mistake was committed."
Ambika met Sonia in afternoon and is understood to have briefed her about the inquiry into the matter. She had a brief ten-minute meeting with the Congress President and did not talk to the waiting mediapersons at 10 Janpath.
Meanwhile, after having ordered suspension of two senior officials of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) on Friday, the Culture Ministry has sought a personal explanation from the Director General of ASI, Anshu Vaish, to explain her role in the filing of the affidavit, official sources said.
Vaish has been asked to give her reply to Culture Secretary Badal K Das by Tuesday.
The two senior ASI officials - Chandrashekhar, Director (Administration) and V Bakshi, Assistant Director (Monuments) - were found to be responsible for not carrying out the corrections in the affidavit as directed by the Culture Ministry.
சட்ட அமைச்சர் பார்ப்பதும், கலாச்சார அமைச்சர் பார்ப்பதும் வேறு. அரசாங்கத்தில் இல்லாத கட்சித்தலைவர் பார்ப்பது வேறு.
எல்லாம் பார்த்துதான் குறி வைத்து சுட்டிருக்கிறார்கள். இப்போது சோனியாவுக்கு வழக்கம்போல கிரீடம் வைக்கிறார்கள்..
இந்துக்கள் ஏமாளிகள் அல்ல. அது கொஞ்சம் காலம் கழித்து தெரியும்.
Sonia lashes out at Ambika Soni over the phone
Published on Sunday , September 16, 2007 at 15:11 in Nation section
New Delhi: Union Tourism Minister Ambika Soni has confirmed that while she was on an official visit to Tokyo, Congress President Sonia Gandhi telephoned her and gave her a tongue lashing over her ministry's affidavit filed in connection with the ongoing Sethusamudram project.
In Ambika's own words: "The CP called me in Tokyo. She was agitated as to how such an erroneous affidavit could go. I tried to explain to her and promised her to submit all the concerned papers about the controversy."
Ambika arrived here last evening from Tokyo amid the raging controversy over the "Ram-affidavit".
"Today, when I met her (Sonia Gandhi) at 10 Janpath, I handed over all the papers concerning the affidavit. I showed her the draft affidavit in which I and my officials had made three corrections. While two corrections were incorporated in the draft affidavit, one which we had expressly deleted, went uncorrected," Soni said.
She, however, said that she had carried out the corrections in the affidavit on September 7.
Replying to a question as to how such a mistake went through even after being corrected, she said, "I just can't say at what level such a mistake was committed."
Ambika met Sonia in afternoon and is understood to have briefed her about the inquiry into the matter. She had a brief ten-minute meeting with the Congress President and did not talk to the waiting mediapersons at 10 Janpath.
Meanwhile, after having ordered suspension of two senior officials of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) on Friday, the Culture Ministry has sought a personal explanation from the Director General of ASI, Anshu Vaish, to explain her role in the filing of the affidavit, official sources said.
Vaish has been asked to give her reply to Culture Secretary Badal K Das by Tuesday.
The two senior ASI officials - Chandrashekhar, Director (Administration) and V Bakshi, Assistant Director (Monuments) - were found to be responsible for not carrying out the corrections in the affidavit as directed by the Culture Ministry.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
காங்கிரஸின் வளர்ச்சி- முன்பு ஹே ராம்... இப்போது நோ ராம்
ராம் என்று யாரும் இல்லை என்றவாறு சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட்டில் சமர்பித்த மத்திய அரசாங்கத்தின் மனுவை தயாரித்தது சட்டத்துறை இல்லை. சட்டத்துறை அமைச்சர் பரத்வாஜ் என் துறைக்கு இந்த மனுவுக்கும் சம்பந்தமில்லை என்று கூறியுள்ளார்.
இந்த மனுவை சமர்பித்தது கலாச்சார அமைச்சகம். கலாச்சார அமைச்சகம் இருப்பது திருமதி அம்பிகா சோனியின் கீழ்.
அம்பிகா சோனி ஒரு கிறிஸ்துவர். அதனாலேயே திருமதி சோனியா காந்தியின் பிரிய நண்பராகவும், கிச்சன் கேபினட்டின் உறுப்பினராகவும் இருப்பவர்.
சாய் சுரேஷ் சிவசாமி இந்த மனு, பிறகு சோனியா பெரிய மனது வைத்து இந்த மனுவை மீட்டு எடுத்துக்கொண்டதெல்லாம் நாடகம் என்று கூறுகிறார்.
From He Ram to No Ram: Who benefits?
September 14, 2007
Can an explosive affidavit like what the Archaelogical Survey of India filed on Wednesday in the Supreme Court denying Lord Ram's existence, and which affidavit was backed by the government of India, have been cleared by a mere babu?
Or, will it have gone for higher, ministerial sanction?
Law Minister H R Bhardwaj has been quick to wash his hands of the affidavit, saying that since the ASI comes under the culture ministry, probably that minister approved the affidavit.
And who is the culture minister? Ambika Soni, once considered to be part of Congress president Sonia Gandhi's [Images] inner circle and who is now reported to have fallen out of favour with 10 Janpath.
So was it a ploy by a piqued loyalist to 'show the boss' by embarrassing the government?
That is one possibility, though personally I don't think any Congressman, or woman, has the guts to throw the gauntlet so openly to the most powerful entity in the country unless s/he has decided to exit the Congress party.
Soni is not leaving the party anytime, that's for sure. So the assumption of her challenging Gandhi falls flat. Even if one were to theorise that she wasn't aware of the depth of sentiment over Ram, it doesn't wash given the time she has spent in public life and which must have exposed to India's truths.
So was the affidavit the product of a pliant bureaucracy which, it is being said openly, saw the ascendancy of Christians in the power structure post-Sonia Gandhi and which felt driving a nail into Hinduism's icon would show itself in a positive light with the political masters?
Possible, given the way our bureaucracy thrives on the crumbs the political class throws its way.
Even assuming that a supine bureaucracy prepared the affidavit, it was finally a political decision to go with it, and a decision that could only have been taken at the highest levels.
Just who took the decision to debunk Ram in a court affidavit, and when and how this decision was taken, will forever remain hidden from the public gaze. L K Advani has hinted at resorting to the Right to Information Act to find out the truth; more power to him and the RTI effort.
So who benefits from this unholy mess?
It is very easy to surmise that the BJP has been given a windfall by the politically naive Congress party, as happened in 1989 when Rajiv Gandhi virtually gifted the former the Ram Janambhoomi issue.
But in this instance, it won't be a correct reading of the situation.
The BJP was expected to revolt at the denigration of Ram; and it did. The affidavit amounted to blasphemy, it fumed, and L K Advani appealed to the prime minister -- who probably was not in the know of the affidavit -- to rescind it.
A 120-year-old party that claims credit for leading the national movement, whose patriarch's last words on being shot were He Ram -- it didn't calculate the extent of uproar such an affidavit would generate? There was no one in the party who foresaw the public outrage it would provoke?
Pardon me while I yawn, but I find that hard to believe.
My reading of the situation is that the party high command -- leave the apolitical PM out of it please -� had done a cost:benefit analysis and decided that the benefit far outweighed the cost to the party.
Here's how.
What was the cost?
A BJP frothing at the mouth.
But what is unusual about an apoplectic BJP? It has been in this condition ever since it lost power in a surprise verdict in May 2004. Appearing utterly clueless and rudderless, it has frothed at the mouth over anything and everything -- including, for Ram's sake, the nuclear deal with the United States which it would have gone ahead with had it been re-elected.
What was the additional cost?
Fear of public outrage over the offensive affidavit. But aggrieved Hindus, experience shows, are not the kind who will brave bullets and set fire to public transport at the first opportunity.
Even assuming that the government did not foresee the gathering storm over Ram, its alarm bells would have gone off once the media pounced on the issue, disseminating evidence of the government's insensitivity in matters religious.
A clueless government would have acted right away to nip the trouble in the bud.
This government did not. It let the issue fester for a full 24 hours; Bhardwaj in the meantime made conciliatory noises, but a formal announcement of the government's decision to retract the affidavit came a day later.
Sign of a panicking government, or of a well-thought-out process?
Forgive me while I yawn, but I am a born sceptic.
To return to my favourite theory, who benefits. Cui bono.
But a small digression before that. Will the UPA government complete its full term? Even its hardened supporter will not put his money on a general election being held on schedule, in April-May 2009.
The government cannot go back on the nuclear deal, and the Left cannot go back on its opposition to the US. Houston, this government has a problem!
So does Sonia Gandhi, actually.
She is the Congress party's biggest asset, and is equally its biggest liability.
I can't think of another political leader who evokes such extreme passion among Indians. For every one who votes for her, it seems there is one who hates her.
Now, if only this number can be reduced, the Congress will have a winning formula on its hand.
Everytime the Congress thinks it has a winning formula, alas she opens her mouth and out flies the chance.
But who best to help the party tide over this problem but Ram!
So 24 hours after the UPA government disses Ram in the Supreme Court, the government rediscovers his greatness and reinstates him in the Indian pantheon.
This, we are told, was done at the instance of Sonia Gandhi who has been reviled by Hindutva forces for her Christian origin and which shrill campaign nixed her chance of becoming prime minister in 2004.
Sonia Gandhi herself does not directly take credit for this act of grace; all those around her attribute the decision to her, taken out of respect for Hindu sentiment.
Heck, the person the Sangh Parivar painted as anti-Hindu is the one who has come to the Hindu's rescue, establishing her faith in one of the most revered gods of the land. Who benefits, you ask? Sonia Gandhi, obviously!
Who said only the BJP can lay claim to Ram's legacy! The Congress has shown it is not far behind in claiming the maryada purshottam for its own ends.
Do you agree with my theory? Yes or no, drop a line to me at sai@rediff.co.in. And catch more of me at http://saisureshsivaswamy.rediffblogs.com
இந்த மனுவை சமர்பித்தது கலாச்சார அமைச்சகம். கலாச்சார அமைச்சகம் இருப்பது திருமதி அம்பிகா சோனியின் கீழ்.
அம்பிகா சோனி ஒரு கிறிஸ்துவர். அதனாலேயே திருமதி சோனியா காந்தியின் பிரிய நண்பராகவும், கிச்சன் கேபினட்டின் உறுப்பினராகவும் இருப்பவர்.
சாய் சுரேஷ் சிவசாமி இந்த மனு, பிறகு சோனியா பெரிய மனது வைத்து இந்த மனுவை மீட்டு எடுத்துக்கொண்டதெல்லாம் நாடகம் என்று கூறுகிறார்.
From He Ram to No Ram: Who benefits?
September 14, 2007
Can an explosive affidavit like what the Archaelogical Survey of India filed on Wednesday in the Supreme Court denying Lord Ram's existence, and which affidavit was backed by the government of India, have been cleared by a mere babu?
Or, will it have gone for higher, ministerial sanction?
Law Minister H R Bhardwaj has been quick to wash his hands of the affidavit, saying that since the ASI comes under the culture ministry, probably that minister approved the affidavit.
And who is the culture minister? Ambika Soni, once considered to be part of Congress president Sonia Gandhi's [Images] inner circle and who is now reported to have fallen out of favour with 10 Janpath.
So was it a ploy by a piqued loyalist to 'show the boss' by embarrassing the government?
That is one possibility, though personally I don't think any Congressman, or woman, has the guts to throw the gauntlet so openly to the most powerful entity in the country unless s/he has decided to exit the Congress party.
Soni is not leaving the party anytime, that's for sure. So the assumption of her challenging Gandhi falls flat. Even if one were to theorise that she wasn't aware of the depth of sentiment over Ram, it doesn't wash given the time she has spent in public life and which must have exposed to India's truths.
So was the affidavit the product of a pliant bureaucracy which, it is being said openly, saw the ascendancy of Christians in the power structure post-Sonia Gandhi and which felt driving a nail into Hinduism's icon would show itself in a positive light with the political masters?
Possible, given the way our bureaucracy thrives on the crumbs the political class throws its way.
Even assuming that a supine bureaucracy prepared the affidavit, it was finally a political decision to go with it, and a decision that could only have been taken at the highest levels.
Just who took the decision to debunk Ram in a court affidavit, and when and how this decision was taken, will forever remain hidden from the public gaze. L K Advani has hinted at resorting to the Right to Information Act to find out the truth; more power to him and the RTI effort.
So who benefits from this unholy mess?
It is very easy to surmise that the BJP has been given a windfall by the politically naive Congress party, as happened in 1989 when Rajiv Gandhi virtually gifted the former the Ram Janambhoomi issue.
But in this instance, it won't be a correct reading of the situation.
The BJP was expected to revolt at the denigration of Ram; and it did. The affidavit amounted to blasphemy, it fumed, and L K Advani appealed to the prime minister -- who probably was not in the know of the affidavit -- to rescind it.
A 120-year-old party that claims credit for leading the national movement, whose patriarch's last words on being shot were He Ram -- it didn't calculate the extent of uproar such an affidavit would generate? There was no one in the party who foresaw the public outrage it would provoke?
Pardon me while I yawn, but I find that hard to believe.
My reading of the situation is that the party high command -- leave the apolitical PM out of it please -� had done a cost:benefit analysis and decided that the benefit far outweighed the cost to the party.
Here's how.
What was the cost?
A BJP frothing at the mouth.
But what is unusual about an apoplectic BJP? It has been in this condition ever since it lost power in a surprise verdict in May 2004. Appearing utterly clueless and rudderless, it has frothed at the mouth over anything and everything -- including, for Ram's sake, the nuclear deal with the United States which it would have gone ahead with had it been re-elected.
What was the additional cost?
Fear of public outrage over the offensive affidavit. But aggrieved Hindus, experience shows, are not the kind who will brave bullets and set fire to public transport at the first opportunity.
Even assuming that the government did not foresee the gathering storm over Ram, its alarm bells would have gone off once the media pounced on the issue, disseminating evidence of the government's insensitivity in matters religious.
A clueless government would have acted right away to nip the trouble in the bud.
This government did not. It let the issue fester for a full 24 hours; Bhardwaj in the meantime made conciliatory noises, but a formal announcement of the government's decision to retract the affidavit came a day later.
Sign of a panicking government, or of a well-thought-out process?
Forgive me while I yawn, but I am a born sceptic.
To return to my favourite theory, who benefits. Cui bono.
But a small digression before that. Will the UPA government complete its full term? Even its hardened supporter will not put his money on a general election being held on schedule, in April-May 2009.
The government cannot go back on the nuclear deal, and the Left cannot go back on its opposition to the US. Houston, this government has a problem!
So does Sonia Gandhi, actually.
She is the Congress party's biggest asset, and is equally its biggest liability.
I can't think of another political leader who evokes such extreme passion among Indians. For every one who votes for her, it seems there is one who hates her.
Now, if only this number can be reduced, the Congress will have a winning formula on its hand.
Everytime the Congress thinks it has a winning formula, alas she opens her mouth and out flies the chance.
But who best to help the party tide over this problem but Ram!
So 24 hours after the UPA government disses Ram in the Supreme Court, the government rediscovers his greatness and reinstates him in the Indian pantheon.
This, we are told, was done at the instance of Sonia Gandhi who has been reviled by Hindutva forces for her Christian origin and which shrill campaign nixed her chance of becoming prime minister in 2004.
Sonia Gandhi herself does not directly take credit for this act of grace; all those around her attribute the decision to her, taken out of respect for Hindu sentiment.
Heck, the person the Sangh Parivar painted as anti-Hindu is the one who has come to the Hindu's rescue, establishing her faith in one of the most revered gods of the land. Who benefits, you ask? Sonia Gandhi, obviously!
Who said only the BJP can lay claim to Ram's legacy! The Congress has shown it is not far behind in claiming the maryada purshottam for its own ends.
Do you agree with my theory? Yes or no, drop a line to me at sai@rediff.co.in. And catch more of me at http://saisureshsivaswamy.rediffblogs.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)