<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Togadia, Modi get death threat</b>
PTI | February 01, 2006
International general secretary of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad Pravin Togadia and Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi received a combined death threat Tuesday, VHP sources said in Ahmedabad.
The death threat claiming to be from the "Christian community" was sent in a closed envelope that was sent by post to the VHP office, the sources said.
<b>"The letter has warned both Togadiyaji and Modiji of dire consequences if they do not stop their anti-Christian activities. We have intimated the police and the state Home Department regarding this threat letter,"</b> a VHP local office bearer Abhay Singh told PTI.
The letter, handwritten in Gujarati, also threatens that the members of the "Christian community" would self immolate if Togadia and Modi did not change their stand against the minority community in Gujarat.
The threat letter also mentions that it was a "last warning" being given to the two leaders.
Incidentally Togadia just received a death threat via post three days ago and it had claimed to be sent from Osama bin Laden.
<b>Modi also received a "threat" and "abusive" email in December and police did arrest a Delhi-based man Omar Siddiqui in this connection but he was pardoned by the chief minister on Monday on compassionate grounds</b>.
www.rediff.com///news/2006/feb/01feb.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Calling youth to launch Second Freedom struggle! (By Rajinder Puri )</b>
www.samachar.com
Before the full Supreme Court judgment on the unconstitutional dissolution of the Bihar Assembly was delivered a view had been expressed in these columns to the effect that all three, the Governor, the Prime Minister and the President, were responsible and therefore deserved to go.
Contrary to the media attention that focused only on Governor Buta Singh, a reading of the full judgment has reinforced this view.
The Supreme Courtâs stringent criticism of the Governorâs malafide recommendation which subverted the Constitution needs no reiteration. The media gave it ample coverage. It is the Supreme Courtâs view of how the Council of Ministers and the President acquitted themselves that deserves close scrutiny.
It must be borne in mind that the Supreme Court was not affixing responsibility for the dissolution of the Bihar Assembly. Under Presidentâs Rule it is beyond dispute the Central government which is responsible for the dissolution of a state assembly.
The Supreme Court was assessing in detail the circumstances in which the Bihar Assembly was in fact dissolved. Inevitably the Governor as the frontline operative hogged most attention. But it may be inaccurate to infer, as the distinguished jurist Fali Nariman seems to have done elsewhere, that the judgmentâs brevity of allusion to the Central Council of Ministers in any way mitigates the latterâsresponsibility or involvement.
The brief allusion is specific and unambiguous. It should dispel any doubt about the cabinetâs culpability. On page 159 the judgment says: âIn the facts and circumstances of this case the Governor may be the main player, but the Council of Ministers should have verified facts stated in the report of the Governor before hurriedly (emphasis added) accepting it as a gospel truth. Clearly the Governor has misled the Council of Ministers which led to aid and advice being given by the Council of Ministers to the President leading to the issue of the impugned Proclamation.â
The Supreme Court did not elaborate on the midnight emergency cabinet meeting which decided to send the papers for signing to the President in Moscow. But the word `hurriedlyâinjected in its observation is indicative enough of the Central governmentâs complicity in the Governorâs role.
A little further the judgment says: âThe Court cannot remain a silent spectator watching the subversion of the Constitution.âSo, should the Central government have remained a silent spectator as the Constitution was being subverted?
The judgment does not spare even the President. The restraint in language of judicial pronouncements, particularly on a grave constitutional issue such as this, should not obscure understanding about what the Supreme Court has conveyed.
On page 125 the judgment approvingly quotes observations from Justice Sawantâs ruling against the Proclamation dissolving Karnataka and Nagaland assemblies.
Justice Sawant had ruled: âThe Presidentâs satisfaction has to be based on objective material. The objective material must vindicate that the government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. That is a condition precedent before the issue of the Proclamation.â
There was no objective material placed before President Kalam in Moscow that justified his signing of the Proclamation. The implied censure of the President becomes clearer on page 195 of the judgment: Referring to Article 361 (1) which grants protection to the President and the Governor, the judgment says: âThe personal immunity from answerability provided in Article 361(1) does not bar the challenge that may be made to their actions. Article 361(1) does not take away the power of the Court to examine the validity of the action including on the ground of malafide.â
The reaction of Congress party spokespersons to the Supreme Court judgment offers little hope that any sense of rectitude will prevail. Governor Buta Singhâs removal is all that ruling party circles are prepared to yield. The only slight hope one might cling to rests with the President.
Given the traditional view of the Presidentâs role, which is to act as an obedient robot of the Central cabinet, President Kalam deserves sympathy for being deliberately misled by the cabinet. Alas, that cannot obfuscate the harsh truth that in the light of Justice Sawantâs observations quoted approvingly in the Supreme Court judgment, he displayed dereliction of duty.
The President is under oath to protect and preserve the Constitution. He failed to do so. If he cannot persuade the Prime Minister and the Central cabinet to resign, the President himself should resign. Let the political process take care of the rest. This case lays bare the malaise in Indiaâs polity. It is a polity that has destroyed democratic governance and the rule of law. It has encouraged criminality and corruption to reach unimagined heights.
<b>The Supreme Court judgment in the Bihar Assembly dissolution case can act as a catalyst to jolt society out of its torpor. But will it? Make no mistake. The rot has gone so deep that only systemic reform can now save India. All talk of Indiaâs emergence as a global power will evaporate like hot air when bad governance, corruption and crime bring the economy to a grinding halt. </b>
The law of nature dictates that the instinct for survival and enlightened self-interest should impel society to introduce the much needed revolutionary reform. But who will bring it?
Little hope might be placed on the current crop of politicians occupying both the government and the opposition. India needs a political instrument capable of providing good governance and the rule of law.
It is difficult to see any prospect of any party becoming the instrument capable of doing this. Whether an existing party will reform itself, or a new party will emerge, effective leadership of the new political instrument obviously may be expected only from a new generation. How might that come about?
In 1997 India celebrated a half century of independence. To commemorate the event a special joint session of Parliament was convened. The parties and leaders adorning the political stage then were about the same that adorn it today. In his keynote address the Speaker of Lok Sabha, PN Sanghma, gave a call to the nation to launch Indiaâs Second Freedom struggle. The MPs of both Houses applauded.
The Prime Minster of the day, Mr IK Gujral, endorsing Sanghmaâs call, urged the people of India to court arrest and fill jails to win Indiaâs Second Freedom. The House unanimously adopted an agenda for India to end corruption, criminalization, casteism and communalism. There was not one dissenting voice.
Isnât it time that the young people of India accepted Parliamentâs invitation to launch Indiaâs Second Freedom struggle? From whom freedom must be wrested, and identity of enemies from whom the nation must liberate itself, will doubtless become clear as the struggle commences. Young people should recall the East India Company.
Second or third sons of English lords and aristocrats, at age thirteen or fourteen years, came to India as apprentices of the Company. By the time they were in their twenties they were conquerors. To serve their nation and the Company they learnt and studied languages, dialects and habits of the subjects they ruled.
They compiled their findings in the Gazetteers of India that remain even today the most insightful study of different sects and classes in India. They were members of the English elite who de-classed themselves to conquer India. Why cannot young members of the Indian elite de-class themselves and conquer India?
<b>They wonât need guns. They have freedom of expression and freedom of association. They can conquer India democratically. </b>
Send in your comments on this article to samachar_editor@sify.com
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ramana,
NCERT post is moved to Link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savitri_Devi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Warning_to_the_Hindus
The Cyclic View of History / Savitri Devi (Maximiani Portas)
The idea of progress - indefinite betterment - is anything but modern. It is probably as oldest as man's oldest successful attempt to improve his material surroundings and to increase, through technical skill, his capacity of attack and defence. Technical skill, for many centuries at least, has been too precious to be despised. Nay, when displayed to an extra ordinary degree, it has, more than once, been hailed as something almost divine.
Wondrous legends have always been woven, for instance, round such men as was said to have, by some means, been able to raise themselves, physically, above the earth, be it Etana of Erech who soared to heaven "borne upon eagle's wings", or the famous Icarus, unfortunate forerunner of our modern airmen, or Manco Capac's brother, Auca, said to have been gifted with "natural" wings which finally fared hardly better than Icarus' artificial ones.
But apart from such incredible feats by a handful of individuals, the Ancients as a whole distinguished themselves in many material achievements. They could boast of the irrigation system in Sumeria; of the construction of pyramids revealing, both in Egypt and, centuries later, in Central America, an amazing knowledge of astronomical data; of the bath-rooms and drains in the palace of Knossos; of the invention of the war-chariot after that of the bow and arrow, and of the sand-clock after that of the sun-dial - enough to make them dizzy with conceit and over-confident in the destiny of their respective civilisations.
Yet, although they fully recognised the value of their own work in the practical field, and surely very soon conceived the possibility - and perhaps acquired the certitude - of indefinite technical progress, they never believed in progress as a whole, in progress on all lines, as most of our contemporaries seem to do. From all evidence, they faithfully clung to the traditional idea of cyclic evolution and had, in addition to that, the good sense to admit that they lived (in spite of all their achievements) in anything but the beginning of the long-drawn, downward process constituting their own particular "cycle" - and ours. Whether Hindu or Greeks, Egyptians or Japanese, Chinese, Sumerians, or ancient Americans - or even Romans, the most "modern" amongst people of Antiquity - they all placed the "Golden Age", the "Age of Truth", the rule of Kronos or of Ra, or of any other Gods on earth - the glorious Beginning of the slow, downward unfurling of history, whatever name it be! given - far behind them in the past.
And they believed that the return of a similar Age, foretold in their respective sacred texts and oral traditions, depends, not upon man's conscious effort, but upon iron laws, inherent to the very nature of visible and tangible manifestation, and all-pervading; upon cosmic laws. They believed man's conscious effort is but an expression of those laws at work, leading the world, willing or unwilling, wherever its destiny lies; in one word, that the history of man, as the history of the rest of the living, is but a detail in cosmic history without beginning nor end; a periodical outcome of the inner Necessity that binds all phenomena in Time.
And just as the Ancients could accept that vision of the world's evolution while taking full advantage of all technical progress within their reach, so can - and so do - to this day, thousands of men brought up within the pale of age-old cultures centred round the self-same traditional views, and, also, in the very midst of the over-proud industrial cultures, a few stray individuals able to think for themselves. They contemplate the history of mankind in a similar perspective.
While living, apparently, as "modern" men and women - using electric fans and electric irons, telephones and trains, and aeroplanes, when they can afford it - they nourish in their hearts a deep contempt for the childish conceit and bloated hopes of our age, and for the various recipes for "saving mankind", which zealous philosophers and politicians thrust into circulation. They know that nothing can "save mankind", for mankind is reaching the end of its present cycle. The wave that carried it, for so many millenniums, is about to break, with all the fury of acquired speed, and to merge once more into the depth of the unchanging Ocean of undifferentiated existence. It will rise again, some day, with abrupt majesty, for such is the law of waves. But in the meantime nothing can be done to stop it. The unfortunate - the fools - are those men who, for some reason best known to themselves - probably on account of their exaggerated estimation of what is to be lost in the process ! - would like to stop it. The privileged ones - the wise - are those few who, being fully aware of the increasing worthlessness of present-day mankind and of its much-applauded "progress", know how little there is to be lost in the coming crash and look forward to it with joyous expectation as to the necessary condition of a new beginning - a new "Golden Age", sunlit crest of the next long drawn downward wave upon the surface of the endless Ocean of Life.
To those privileged ones - amongst whom we count ourselves - the whole succession of "current events" appears in an entirely different perspective from that either of the desperate believers in "progress" or of those people who, though accepting the cyclic view of history and therefore considering the coming crash as unavoidable, feel sorry to see the civilisation in which they live rush towards its doom.
To us, the high-resounding "isms" to which our contemporaries ask us to give our allegiance, now, in 1948, are all equally futile: bound to be betrayed, defeated, and finally rejected by men at large, if containing anything really noble: bound to enjoy, for the time being, some sort of noisy success, if sufficiently vulgar, pretentious and soul-killing to appeal to the growing number of mechanically conditioned slaves that crawl about our planet, posing as free men; all destined to prove, ultimately, of no avail. The time-honoured religions, rapidly growing out of fashion as present-day "isms" become more and more popular, are no less futile - if not more: frameworks of organised superstition void of all true feeling of the Divine, or - among more sophisticated people - mere conventional aspects of social life, or systems of ethics (and of very elementary ethics at that) seasoned with a sprinkling of out-dated rites and symbols of which hardly anybody bothers to seek the or! iginal meaning: devices in the hands of clever men in power to lull the simpletons into permanent obedience; convenient names, round which it might be easy to rally converging national aspirations or political tendencies; or just the last resort of weaklings and cranks: that is, practically, all they are - all they have been reduced to in the course of a few centuries - the lot of them. They are dead, in fact - as dead as the old cults that flourished before them, with the difference that those cults have long ceased exhaling the stench of death, whil e they (the so-called "living" ones) are still at the stage at which death is inseparable from corruption. None - neither Christianity nor Islam nor even Buddhism - can be expected now to "save" anything of that world they once partly conquered; none have any normal place in "modern" life, which is essentially devoid of all awareness of the eternal.
There are no activities in "modern" life which are not futile, save perhaps those that aim at satisfying one's body hunger: growing rice; growing wheat; gathering chestnuts from the woods or potatoes from one's garden. And the one and only sensible policy can but be to let things take their course and to await the coming Destroyer, destined to clear the ground for the building of a new "Age of Truth": the One Whom the Hindus name Kalki and hail as the tenth and last Incarnation of Vishnu; the Destroyer Whose advent is the condition of the preservation of life, according to Life's everlasting laws.
We know all this will sound utter folly to those, more and more numerous, who, despite the untold horrors of our age, remain convinced that humanity is "progressing". It will appear as cynicism even to many of those who accept our belief in cyclic evolution, which is the universal, traditional belief expressed in poetic form in all the sacred texts of the world, including the Bible. We have nothing to reply to this latter possible criticism, for it is entirely based upon an emotional attitude which is not ours. But we can try to point out the vanity of the popular belief in "progress", be it only in order to stress the rationality and strength of the theory of cycles.
Arguments
The exponents of the belief in "progress" put forth many arguments to prove - to themselves and to others - that our times, with all their undeniable drawbacks, are on the whole, better than any epoch of the past, and even that they show definite signs of improvement. It is not possible to analyse all their arguments in detail. But one can easily detect the fallacies hidden in the most widespread and, apparently, the most "convincing" of them.
All the advocates of "prog-ress" lay enormous stress upon such things as literacy, individual "freedom", equal opportunities for all men, religious toleration and "humaneness," progress in this last line covering all such tendencies as find their expression in the modern preoccupation of child-welfare, prison-reforms, better conditions of labour, State aid to the sick and destitute and, if not greater kindness, at least less cruelty to animals. The dazzling results obtained, of recent years, in the application of scientific discoveries to industrial and other practical pursuits, are, of course, the most popular of all instances expected to show how marvellous our times are. But that point we shall not discuss, as we have already made it clear that we by no means deny or minimise the importance of technical progress. What we do deny is the existence of any progress at all in the value of man as such, whether individually or collectively, and our reflections on universal l! iterac y and other highly praised "signs" of improvement in which our contemporaries take pride, all spring from that one point of view.
We believe that man's value - as every creature's value, ultimately - lies not in the mere intellect but in the spirit; in the capacity to reflect that which, for lack of a more precise word, we choose to call "the divine," i.e. that which is true and beautiful beyond all manifestation; that which remains timeless (and therefore unchangeable) within all changes...
Progress? - It is true that, today, at least in all highly organised (typically "modern") countries, nearly everybody can read and write. But what of that? To be able to read and write is an advantage - and a considerable one. But it is not a virtue. It is a tool and a weapon; a means to an end; a very useful thing, no doubt; but not an end in itself. The ultimate value of literacy depends on the end to which it is used. And to what end is it generally used today? It is used for convenience or entertainment, by those who read; for some advertisement, or some objectionable propaganda - for money-making or power-grabbing - by those who write; sometimes, of course, by both, for acquiring and spreading disinterested knowledge of the few things worth knowing: for finding expression of or giving expression to the few deep feelings that can lift a man to the awareness of things eternal, but not more often so than in the days in which one man out of ten thousand could understand th! e symb olism of the written word. Generally, today, the man or woman whom compulsory education has made "literate" uses writing to communicate personal matters to absent friends and relatives, to fill forms - one of the international occupations of modern civilised humanity - or to commit to memory little useful, but otherwise trifling things such as someone's address or telephone number, or the date of some appointment with the hairdresser or the dentist, or the list of clean clothes due from the laundry. He or she reads "to pass time" because, outside the hours of dreary work, mere thinking is no longer intense and interesting enough to serve that purpose.
We know that there are also people whose whole lives have been directed to some beautiful destiny by a book, a poem - a mere sentence - read in distant childhood, like Schliemann, who lavishly spent on archeological excavations and wealth patiently and purposefully gathered in forty years of dreary toil, all for the sake of the impression left upon him, as a boy, by the immortal story of Troy. But such people always lived, even before compulsory education came into fashion. And the stories heard and remembered were no less inspiring than stories now read. The real advantage of general literacy, if any, is to be sought elsewhere. It lies not in the better quality either of the exceptional men and women or of the literate millions, but rather in the fact that the latter are rapidly becoming intellectually more lazy and therefore more credulous than ever - and not less so - more easily deceived, more liable to be led like sheep without even the shadow of a protest, provided th! e nons ense one wishes them to swallow be presented to them in printed form and made to appear "scientific". The higher the general level of literacy, the easier it is, for a government in control of the daily press, of the wireless and of the publishing business - these almost irresistible modern means of action upon the mind - to keep the masses and the "intelligentsia" under its thumb, without them even suspecting it.
Among widely illiterate but more actively thinking people, openly governed in the more autocratic manner, a prophet, direct mouthpiece of the Gods, or of genuine collective aspirations, could always hope to rise between secular authority and the people. The priests themselves could never be quite sure of keeping the people in obedience for ever. The people could choose to listen to the prophet, if they liked. And they did, sometimes. Today, wherever universal literacy is prevalent, inspired exponents of timeless truth - prophets - or even selfless advocates if timely practical changes, have less and less chances to appear. Sincere thought, real free thought, ready, in the name of superhuman authority or of humble common sense, to question the basis of what is officially taught and generally accepted, is less and less likely to thrive. It is, we repeat, by far easier to enslave a literate people than an illiterate one, strange as this may seem at first sight. And the enslave! ment is likely to be more lasting. The real advantage of universal literacy is to tighten the grip of the governing power upon the foolish and conceited millions. That is probably why it is drummed into our heads, from babyhood onwards, that "literacy" is such a boon. Capacity to think for one's self is, however, the real boon. And that always was and always will be the privilege of a minority, once recognised as a natural elite and respected. Today, compulsory mass-education and an increasingly standardised literature for the consumption of "conditioned" brains - outstanding signs of "progress" - tend to reduce that minority to the smallest possible proportions; ultimately, to suppress it altogether. Is that what mankind wants? If so, mankind is losing its raison d'etre, and the sooner the end of this so-called "civilisation" the better.
What we have said of literacy can roughly be repeated about those two other main glories of modern Democracy: "individual freedom" and equality of opportunities for every person. The first is a lie - and a more and more sinister one as the shackles of compulsory education are being more and more hopelessly fastened round people's whole being. The second is an absurdity.
One of the funniest inconsistencies of the average citizen of the modern industrialised world is the way in which he criticises all institutions of older and better civilisations, such as the caste-system of the Hindus or the all-absorbing family cult of the Far East, on the ground that these tend to check the "liberty of the individual." He does not realise how exacting - nay, how annihilating - is the command of the collective authority which he obeys (half the time, unknowingly) compared to that of traditional collective authority, in apparently less "free" societies. The caste-ridden or family-ridden people of India or of the Far East might not be allowed to do all that they like, in many relatively trifling and in a few really all-important matters of daily life. But they are left to believe what they like, or rather what they can; to feel according to their own nature and to express themselves freely about a great number of essential matters; they are allowed to condu! ct their higher life in the manner they judge the wisest for them, after their duties to family, caste and king have been fulfilled. The individual living under the iron and steel rule of modern "progress" can eat whatever he fancies (to a great extent) and marry whom he pleases - unfortunately! - and go wherever he likes (in theory at least). But he is made to accept, in all extra-individual matters - matters which, to us, really count - the beliefs, the attitude to life, the scale of values and, to a great extent, the political views, that tend to strengthen the mighty socio-economic system of exploitation to which he belongs (to which he is forced to belong, in order to be able to live) and in which he is a mere cog. And what is more, he is made to believe that it is a privilege of his to be a cog in such an organism; that the unimportant matters in which he feels he is his own master are, in fact, the most important ones - the only really important ones. He is taught not to value that freedom of judgment about ultimate truth, aesthetical, ethical or metaphysical, of which he is subtly deprived. More still: he is told - in the democratic countries at any rate - that he is free in all respects; that he is "an individual, answerable to none but his own conscience"... after years of clever conditioning have moulded his "conscience"! and h is whole being so thoroughly according to pattern, that he is no longer capable of reacting differently. Well can such a man speak of "pressure upon the individual" in any society, ancient or modern!
One can realise to what an extent men's minds have been curved, both by deliberate and unconscious conditioning, in the world in which we live today, when one encounters people who have never come under the influence of industrial civilisation, or when one happens, oneself, to be lucky enough to have defied, from childhood onwards, the pernicious pressure of standardised education and to have remained free amongst the crowd of those who react as they were taught to, in all fundamental matters. The cleavage between the thinking and the unthinking, the free and the slaves, is appalling.
As for "equality of opportunities," there can be no such thing anyhow, really speaking. By producing men and women different both in degree and quality of intelligence, sensitiveness and will power, different in character and temperament, Nature herself gives them the most unequal opportunities of fulfilling their aspirations, whatever these might be. An over-emotional and rather weak person can, for instance, neither conceive the same ideal of happiness nor have equal chances of reaching it in life, as one who is born with a more balanced nature and a stronger will. That is obvious...
What our contemporaries mean when they speak of "equality of opportunities" is the fact that, in modern society - so they say - any man or woman stands, more and more, as many chances as his or her neighbour of holding the position and doing the job for which he or she is naturally fitted. But that too is only partly true. For, more and more, the world of today - the world dominated by grand-scale industry and mass production - can offer only jobs in which the best of the worker's self plays little or no part if he or she be anything more than a merely clever and materially efficient person. The hereditary craftsman, who could find the best expression for what is conveniently called his "soul" in his daily weaving, carpet-making, enamel work, etc ..., even the tiller of the soil, in personal contact with Mother Earth and the Sun and the seasons, is becoming more and more a figure of the past. There are less and less opportunities, also, for the sincere seeker of truth - spe! aker or writer - who refuses to become the expounder of broadly accepted ideas, products of mass-conditioning, for which he or she does not stand; for the seeker of beauty who refuses to bend his or her art to the demands of popular taste which he or she knows to be bad taste. Such people have to waste much of their time doing inefficiently - and grudgingly - some job for which they are not fitted, in order to live, before they can devote the rest of it to what the Hindus would call their sadhana - the work for which their deeper nature has appointed them; their life's dedication.
The idea of modern division of labour, condensed in the oft-quoted sentence "the right man in the right place," boils down, in practice, to the fact that any man - any one of the dull, indiscriminate millions - can be "conditioned" to occupy any place, while the best of human beings, the only ones who still justify the existence of the more and more degenerate species, are allowed no place at all. Progress....
Tolerance?
Remain the "religious toleration" of our times and their "humaneness" compared with the "barbarity" of the past. Two jokes, to say the least!
Recalling some of the most spectacular horrors of history - the burning of "heretics" and "witches" at the stake; the wholesale massacre of "heathens," and other no less repulsive manifestations of Christian civilisation in Europe, conquered America, Goa, and elsewhere - modern man is filled with pride in the "progress" accomplished, in one line at least, since the end of the dark ages of religious fanaticism. However bad they may be, our contemporaries have, at any rate, grown out of the habit of torturing people for such "trifles" as their conception of the Holy Trinity or their ideas about predestination and purgatory. Such is modern man's feeling - because theological questions have lost all importance in his life. But in the days when Christian churches persecuted one another and encouraged the conversion of heathen nations by means of blood and fire, both the persecutors and the persecuted, both the Christians and those who wished to remain faithful to non-Christian c! reeds, looked upon such questions as vital in one way or another. And the real reason for which nobody is put to torture, today, for the sake of his or her religious beliefs, is not that torture as such has become distasteful to everybody, in "advanced" twentieth-century civilisation, not that individuals and States have become "tolerant," but just that, among those who have the power of inflicting pain, hardly anybody takes any vivid, vital interest in religion, let alone in theology.
The so-called "religious toleration" practised by modern States and individuals springs from anything but an intelligent understanding and love of all religions as manifold, symbolical expressions of the same few essential, eternal truths... It is, rather, the outcome of a grossly ignorant contempt for all religions; of indifference to those very truths which their various founders endeavoured to re-assert, again and again. It is no toleration at all.
To judge how far our contemporaries have or not the right to boast of their "spirit of toleration," the best is to watch their behaviour towards those whom they decidedly look upon as enemies of their gods: the men who happen to be holding views contrary to theirs concerning not some theological quibble, in which they are not interested, but some political or socio-political Ideology which they regard as "a threat to civilisation" or as "the only creed through which civilisation can be saved." Nobody can deny that in all such circumstances, and specially in war time, they all perform - to the extent they have the power - or condone - to the extent they have not, themselves, the opportunity of performing - actions in every respect as ugly as those ordered, performed or tolerated in the past, in the name of different religions (if indeed the latter ugly be). The only difference is, perhaps, that modern cold-blooded atrocities only become known when the hidden powers in contro! l of the means of herd-conditioning - of the press, the wireless and the cinema - decide, for ends anything but "humanitarian," that they should be, i.e. when they happen to be the enemies atrocities, not one's own - nor those of one's "gallant allies" - and when their story is, therefore, considered to be "good propaganda," on account of the current of indignation it is expected to create and of the new incentive it is expected to give the war-effort. Moreover, after a war, fought or supposed to have been fought for an Ideology - the modern equivalent of the bitter religious conflicts of old - the horrors rightly or wrongly said to have been perpetrated by the vanquished are the only ones to be broadcasted all over the world, while the victors try as hard as they can to make believe that their High Command at least never shut its eyes to any similar horrors. But in sixteenth century Europe, and before; and among the warriors of Islam conducting "jihad" against men of other faiths, each side was well aware of the atrocious means used, not only by its opponents for their "foul ends," but by its own people and its own leaders in order to "uproot heresy" or to "fight popery." Modern man is more of a moral coward. He wants the advantages of violent intolerance - which is only natural - but he shuns the responsibility of it. Progress, that also.
Humaneness?
The so-called "humaneness" of our contemporaries (compared with their forefathers) is just lack of nerve or lack of strong feelings - increasing cowardice, or increasing apathy.
Modern man is squeamish about atrocities - even about ordinary, unimaginative brutality - only when it happens that the aims for which atrocious or merely brutal actions are performed are either hateful or indifferent to him. In all other circumstances.... he shuts his eyes to any horrors - especially when he knows that the victims can never retaliate (as it is the case with all atrocities committed by man upon animals, for whatever purpose it be) and he demands, at the most, not to be reminded of them too often and too noisily. He reacts as though he classified atrocities under two headlines: the "unavoidable" and the avoidable. The "unavoidable" are those that served or are supposed to serve modern man's purpose - generally: "the good of humanity" or the "triumph of Democracy." They are tolerated, nay, justified. The "avoidable" are those which are occasionally committed, or said to be committed, by people whose purpose is alien to his. They alone are condemned, and their! real or supposed authors - or inspirers - branded by public opinion as "criminals against humanity."
Which are, anyhow, the alleged signs of that wonderful "humaneness" of modern man, according to those who believe in progress? We no longer have today - they say - the horrid executions of former times; traitors are no longer "hung, drawn and quartered," as was the custom in glorious sixteenth century England; anything approaching in ghastliness the torture and execution of Francois Damien, upon the central square of Paris, before thousands of people purposefully come to see it, on the 28th of May, 1757, would be unthinkable in modern France. Modern man also no longer upholds slavery, nor does he (in theory, at least) justify the exploitation of the masses under any form. And his wars - even his wars! monstrous as they may seem, with their elaborate apparatus of costly demoniacal machinery - are beginning to admit, within their code, (so one says) some amount of humanity and justice. Modern man is horrified at the mere thought of the war time, habits of ancient peoples - at! the s acrifice of twelve young Trojans to the shade of the Greek hero Patrocles, not to speak of the far less ancient but far more atrocious sacrifices of prisoners of war to the Aztec war-god Huitzilopochtli. (But the Aztecs, though relatively modern, were not Christians, nor, as far as we know, believers in all round progress). Finally - one says - modern man is kinder, or less cruel, to animals than his forefathers were.
Alone an enormous amount of prejudice in favour of our times can enable one to be taken in by such fallacies.
Surely modern man does not "uphold" slavery; he denounces it vehemently. But he practices it nevertheless - and on a wider scale than ever, and far more thoroughly than the Ancients ever could - whether in the Capitalistic West or in the Tropics, or (from what one hears from outside its impenetrable walls) even in the one State supposed to be, today, the "workers' paradise." There are differences, of course. In Antiquity, even the slave had hours of leisure and merriment that were all his own; he had his games of dice in the shade of the columns of his master's portico, his coarse jokes, his free chatter, his free life outside his daily routine. The modern slave has not the privilege of loitering, completely carefree, for half an hour. His so-called leisure itself is either filled with almost compulsory entertainment, as exacting and often as dreary as his work, or - in "lands of freedom" - poisoned by economic worries. But he is not openly bought and sold. He is just taken! . And taken, not by a man in some way at least superior to himself, but by a huge impersonal system without either a body to kick or a soul to damn or a head to answer for its mischief.
And similarly, old horrors have no doubt disappeared from the records of so-called civilised mankind, regarding both justice and war. But new and worse ones, unknown to "barbaric" ages, have crept up in their place...
And, curiously enough - although (they say) they "hate such things" - a considerable number of men and women of today, while lacking the guts to commit horrible actions personally, seem to be just as keen as ever on watching them being performed or, at least, on thinking of them and gloating over them, and enjoying them vicariously, if denied the morbid pleasure of watching...
Such are also the millions of folk, hitherto "civilised" and apparently kind, who reveal themselves in their proper light no sooner a war breaks out, i.e. no sooner they feel encouraged to display the most repulsive type of imagination in competitive descriptions of what tortures everyone of them "would" inflict upon the enemy's leaders, if he - or more often she - had a free hand. Such are, at heart, all those who gloat over the sufferings of the fallen enemy after a victorious war. And they are also millions: millions of vicarious savages, mean at the same time as cruel - unmanly - whom the warriors of the so-called "barbaric" ages would have thoroughly despised...
'Dark Age'
Such a world may well boast of its tender care for prize dogs and cats and for pet animals in general, while trying to forget (and to make better civilisations forget) the hideous fact of a million creatures vivisected yearly, in Great Britain alone. It cannot make us overlook its hidden horrors and convince us of its "progress" in kindness to animals, anymore than of its increasing kindness to people "irrespective of their creed." We refuse to see in it anything else but the darkest living evidence of that which the Hindus have characterised from time immemorial as "Kali Yuga" - the "Dark Age"; the Era of Gloom; the last (and, fortunately, the shortest) subdivision of the present Cycle of history. There is no hope of "putting things right", in such an age. It is, essentially, the age so forcefully though laconically described in the Book of books - the Bhagavad Gita - as that in which "out of the corruption of women proceeds the confusion of castes; out of the confusion of! caste s, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory the lack of understanding; and out of all this, all evils;" the age in which falsehood is termed "truth" and truth persecuted as falsehood or mocked as insanity; in which the exponents of truth, the divinely inspired leaders, the real friends of all the living - the god-like men - are defeated, and their followers humbled and their memory slandered, while the masters of lies are hailed as "saviours"; the age in which every man and woman is in the wrong place, and the world dominated by inferior individuals and vicious doctrines, all part and parcel of an order of inherent ugliness far worse than complete anarchy.
This is the age in which our triumphant Democrats and our hopeful Communists boast of "slow but steady progress through science and education." Thanks very much for such "progress"! The very sight of it is enough to confirm us in our belief in the immemorial cyclic theory of history, illustrated in the myths of all ancient, natural religions... It impresses upon us the fact that human history, far from being a steady ascension towards the better, is an increasingly hopeless process of bastardisation, emasculation and demoralisation of mankind; an inexorable "fall". It rouses in us the yearning to see the end - the final crash that will push into oblivion both those worthless "isms" that are the product of the decay of thought and of character, and the no less worthless religions of equality which have slowly prepared and ground for them; the coming of Kalki, the divine Destroyer of evil; the dawn of a new Cycle opening, as all time-cycles ever did, with a "Golden Age".
Never mind how bloody the final crash may be! Never mind what old treasures may perish for ever in the redeeming conflagration! The sooner it comes, the better. We are waiting for it - and for the following glory - confident in the divinely established cyclic Law that governs all manifestations of existence in Time: the law of Eternal Return. We are waiting for it, and for the subsequent triumph of the Truth persecuted today; for the triumph under whatever name, of the only faith in harmony with the everlasting laws of being; of the only modern "ism" which is anything but "modern", being just the latest expression of principles as old as the Sun; the triumph of all those men who, throughout the centuries and today, have never lost the vision of the everlasting Order, decreed by the Sun, and who have fought in a selfless spirit to impress that vision upon others. We are waiting for the glorious restoration, this time, on a worldwide scale, of the "Golden Age", of the everlasting Order of the Cosmos.
It is the only thing worth living for - and dying for, if given that privilege - now, in 1948.
thats the sort of nut job savitri devi was and thats the sort of writting the neo nazis dig.
to us the 2nd world war was the one single event in history that freed 30 countries and 3 billion people. for them it was the biggest mistake of whiteman. they idolise hitler, savitri devi, ISD, david duke, don black and hate israel, non whites, ZOG, multiculturism, outsourcing, etc etc.
the problem is that such nut jobs are gaining ground. they target school kids, people who have los their jobs, eastern european scum, russians etc.
as long as russia has its hurt pride and teams up with china to upset usa we can breath easy. the problem starts when usa-eu-russia-oz form an axis and start thinking as one. i am not writting off a civil war of sorts in western europe (to which holigans/skinheads from eastern europe will add fuel and muscle) in the next 10 years.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->SC rejects petition on ending "My Lord" address of judges
Monday February 6 2006 13:58 IST
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a petition seeking an end to the century-old practice of addressing judges of the Supreme Court and high courts as "My Lord" and "Lordship", which is continuing in the country since the British Times.
A division bench of Chief Justice Y K Sabharwal and Justice C K Thakker asked the petitioner -- Progressive and Vigilant Lawyers Forum -- to take up the issue with the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils.
The bench said if anything had to be done in this regard, it has to be by the Bar Association.
As the court made it clear that it was not inclined to entertain the petition, Forum's counsel Sanjeev Bhatnagar withdrew it and the same was "dismissed as withdrawn" terming the practice of addressing the judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts as "My Lord" and "Lordship" a legacy of the British Raj, the forum requested the court to "transform the manner of addressing the learned judges of the superior courts".
http://tinyurl.com/9csca
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->
Undivided India
Percent of Total Population in Each Religion 1881-1941
         Hindu   Muslim
1881 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 78.09 Â Â 19.97
1891 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 74.24 Â Â 20.41
1901 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 72.87 Â Â 21.88
1911 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 71.68 Â Â 22.39
1921 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 70.73 Â Â 23.23
1931 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 70.67 Â Â 23.49
1941 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 69.46 Â Â 24.28 Â [1]
***
***
[2]
     Millions (1988 est.)   Hindu  Muslim (1982)
India     796.60          78.8%   11.6%
Bangladesh  104.53          12.7   85.9
Pakistan   105.41          1.3   96.8
adding another line to the first table:
India + Bangladesh + Pakistan
        Hindu   Muslim
1980s       63.8    28.2
***
[1] : Davis Kingsley, The Population of India and Pakistan, ~1951.
[2] : Economist Book of Vital World Statistics, 1990
<!--c2--><!--ec2-->
SWAMI RAMDEV AND HINDU DISUNITY
http://www.francoisgautier.com/Written%2...ramdev.doc
When CPI leader Brinda Karad attacks Swami Ramdev, she is not attacking Ramdev in particular, she is attacking Hinduism in general. This guru or that guru, makes no difference to her, she is against all gurus. Other gurus might think that they are safe, that Ramdev committed some sin, for which he is paying. But one of them will be next in the line of fire! Hindu gurus are all vulnerable in todayâs India: the Shankacharya has already been hit, so has Satya Sai Baba, with accusations of paedophilia, Amrita Anandamayi has to live under the constant shadow of an hostile Kerala communist-dominated government, Dhirendra Brahmachari has been obliterated and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar is periodically targeted as the âGuru of the richâ, the âglib Godmanâ etcâ¦
May I be forgiven my arrogance, but what Indian gurus have to understand is that for Indian communists, Hinduism is the N°1 enemy. Mao called religion âthe opium of the peopleâ. But for Indian communists, as for Britishers and Muslim invaders before them, what stands between their ambition for absolute power in India (and eventually a triumphant return of communism in the world â as Indian communists believe) is the hold that Hinduism has in the hearts of the rural people of India, who constitute 80% of this country. And still today, the humble farmer, from Uttar Pradesh to Tamil Nadu, has a natural understanding of the universality of God, who takes many names throughout the ages and can be Buddha, Jesus Christ, Ram or Mohamed and this humble farmer possesses the knowledge that there is something deeper than the skin and the mind, and a life beyond death. This knowledge is inbred, it is not in his head, not even in his heart, but in his or her genes transmitted from generation to generation.
Of course, the English speaking media is too happy to oblige Brinda Karat and come down hard on gurus with all kind of accusations, ranging from superstition to conman ship. There is of course a strong communist streak in most Indian newspapers, whether it is Frontlineâs and the Hinduâs open allegiance to Communist China, or Brinda Karat being the sister of Prannoy Royâs wife (not many people know that). Before Ramdev, they condemned the Shankacharya, before him Osho, before him Dhirendra Brahmachari. You can even go back to Sri Aurobindo, who was accused in the early 1900âs by the moderate Congress-controlled press to be a âfanaticâ, when he was only demanding total independence from the British, long before Gandhi took it up. Accusation against Hinduism of superstition, brainwashing, ritualistic ignorance, date back from British missionaries and have been taken up today by communists. Yet, Hinduism, at least the Hinduism which goes beyond the rituals and becomes universal spirituality, has nothing to do with superstition and conman ship: it is all about science, knowledge and light. Look at pranayama, a science that has known for thousands of years how to harness breath and use it for controlling the mind, for a better, more healthy, more spititualized life. If you read Oshoâs books today, you find a lot of solid common sense and wisdom. Sai Baba cannot have millions of disciples from the most humble to the presidents of India, without âsomethingâ which is beyond superstition. So it goes for Amrita Anandmai, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Ramdev, or Guruma of Ganeshpuri.
And why should Brinda Karat target Ayurveda, the most ancient medical system in the world still in practice, the first medecine to realize 3000 years ago that plants and minerals offer the best cure, that many illnesses have a psychosomatic origin, the first to practice plastic surgery on patients? In India today, every third shop is an allopathic medical shop, whose profits go to western multinationals (hello Mrs Karad!) at a time when ayurvedic medicine is becoming increasingly popular in western countries, disillusioned by antibiotics and other heavy-handed medicines.
We are witnessing an interesting phenomenon in India today. Communists, Christians, Muslims and some of the Congress leadership (notice that Brinda Karat has written to Uttaranchal Chief Minister Narayan Dutt Tiwari to close down Swami Ramdevâs pharmacy), all of whom have nothing in common and often hate each other, are all united against Hinduism and Hindu leaders. Each one of course, have their own reasons for doing so. The Christians, under the leadership of people like John Dayal, want to convert the maximum of âheathensâ Hindus, as Jesus Christ is the only âtrueâ God that can save India; some of the Muslim leadership, here, in Pakistan, or even in todayâs Bangladesh, still dream of 'Dar-ul-Islam', the House of Islam in South Asia; and Sonia Gandhi, maybe in a true spirit of secularism, maybe out of personal conviction, has chosen to ally her party with anti-Hindu forces. <span style='color:red'>Whatever it is, their unity makes them a powerful enemy.</span>
In contrast, look at Hindus: Swami Ramdev himself criticized Sri Sri Ravi Shankar live on TV, advising his followers not to practise the Art of Living breathing techniques. During the Tsunami relief operations in Nagapatinam, disciples of Amrita Anand Mayi and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar nearly came to blows over who would give relief to whom, instead of networking and uniting their efforts. And who came to the rescue Osho when he was maligned to death, or Brahmachari, when the entire press came down on him, of Sai Baba, when he was slandered, of the Shankacharya when he was thrown into jail, or of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, when Javed Akhtar accused him of coming âfrom a cave to live in a palaceâ (and not from a palace to a cave, like the Buddha) ? None of the previously mentioned. Yet, Indian politicians can commit any crime, have any number of court cases against them, and they still end up as Union ministers and get positive press coverage .
The greatest curse of Hinduism throughout the ages has been its disunity - and more than that â its betraying each other. The British did not conquer India, it was given to them by its warring Hindu princes, jealous of each other. The same is true of Islam: the last great Hindu empire, that of Vijaynagar, was betrayed to the Muslims by the Lingayats. Today, if the combined forces of communists, Muslims, Christian fundamentalists and the Congress win, it will not be because of their strength and valour, but rather because of the disunity of Hindu leaders.
I know that there is something mysterious and unfathomable in the manifestation of the Divine upon earth, that each guru has a defined task to fulfil and that the combined task of all the gurus may solve the great puzzle that is this ignorant and suffering earth. Thus it may not be necessary for each guru to communicate with each other. But nevertheless, it is of the greatest urgency today that Hindu leaders unite to save Hinduism, rather than the âeach one for his ownâ that we see today. The Catholics have their Pope - and his word is binding to most catholics, whatever the resistance of some progressive leaders. Muslims have Mohamedâs words written 1400 years ago â and that binds all of Islam together, whatever the relevance of these words in the 21st century; India Communists have Marx and Lenin words, their opium, even if it has become irrelevant in Russia, Germany, and even in China; but the poor Hindus have nobody to refer to, so as to defend themselves.
Yet, if you take the combined people power of Satya Sai Baba, Amrita Ananda Mayi, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Swami Ramdev, Gurumayi of Ganeshpuri, the Shankacharya of Kancheepuram, and so many others I cannot mention here, it runs in hundreds of millions.
Again, in all humility and conscious of the limitation of my small mind, compared to some of these great gurus whom I have met, I propose that a Supreme Spiritual Council, composed of at least seven of the most popular Hindu leaders of India, be constituted, maybe under the leadership of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar (with a yearly rotation of leadership), the most travelled of all these, the one who has disciples and teachers of all religions, both from India and the West. It would be a non-political body, and each group would keep its independence but nevertheless, it could meet two or three times a year and issue edicts, which would be binding to 850 millions Hindus in India and one billion over the world.
Then and then only, can this wonderful spirituality which is Hinduism, this eternal knowledge behind the outer forms, the wisdom to understand this mad earth and its sufferings, be preserved for the future of India, and for the future of humanity. I bow down to each of these gurus above-mentioned and to all those not mentioned, to Swami Vivekananda, the initiator of modern Hinduism, to Sri Aurobindo, the great avatar of the supramental and to all the great gurus who have graced over the ages, this wonderful and sacred land which is India and beseech them to hear my prayer: Hindus leaders, unite against the common enemy if you want the eternal Dharma to survive.
François Gautier
Swamy Dayananda Saraswati of the Arsha Vidya Gurukulam has already moved in this direction.
There is an Acharya Sabha which has Gurus from all Hindu denominations and has alreeady met many times.
Just before his arrest the Kanchi Acharya had attended one such meeting where he spoke up for the Hindu downtrodden.
To be effective better publicity for such an organisation is a must. Most Hindus are unaware such an organisation exists.
Hope Sri Gautier knows about this Acharya Sabha.
this should go in 'cool website' thread. but i am puting this here as the admins here are too stiff about me starting any new threads <!--emo&:furious--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/furious.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='furious.gif' /><!--endemo-->
any who, cool web site for lots of brif Biographies
http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/biolist.htm
Jaya Bachchan loses Rajya Sabha seat <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Bringing to a close proceedings on a petition filed by Madan Mohan, a losing candidate against her in the election from Uttar Pradesh, the Commission has recommended disqualification of Bachchan on the ground that she was holding an office of profit -- Chairperson of UP Film Development Board.
Under the Constitution, the President decides whether a sitting member has incurred disqualification in consultation with the EC.
Article 102 (1)(a) bars an MP from holding any office of profit under the Government of India or in any state other than an office declared by Parliament by law not to disqualify its holder.
Legal experts say that the President is bound by the EC recommendation which is notified in the official gazette.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Baba Ramdev's medicines get clean chit </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->NDTV Correspondent
Tuesday, March 7, 2006 (Dehradun):
The Uttaranchal government has given a clean chit to yoga guru Baba Ramdev after samples from his pharmacy did not test positive for animal or human remains.
This was announced by the state health minister on Tuesday.
<b>Samples of four medicines were collected and sent to the Sriram Institute for Industrial Research in Delhi.
The medicines had no human or animal residue</b>.
CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat had accused Ramdev's pharmacy of misleading people by using these remains in medicines sold at his Divya Yog pharmacy<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
03-07-2006, 10:44 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2006, 10:45 PM by Sunder.)
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Mar 7 2006, 10:26 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Mar 7 2006, 10:26 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The medicines had no human or animal residue</b>.
CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat had accused Ramdev's pharmacy of misleading people by using these remains in medicines sold at his Divya Yog pharmacy<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good. Now there can be a libel and defamation lawsuit against Brinda. Also a lawsuit for causing unwarranted emotional stress to Baba Ramdev and his followers."
I hope the amount is pretty high enough to prevent further unsubstantiated accusation.
Maximum hit: <b>Brinda Karat morphed</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The photograph, that showed Karat dressed in skimpy clothes and boxing gloves, had created a storm and the magazine offices were reportedly raided by the Delhi police</b>.
"I strongly condemn this. We are quite aware of the matter and watching it closely", Dasmunsi said. Reports said the Delhi Police have registered a case against the magazine and was conduting enquiries
Maxim editors had defended their stand by saying that the controversial issue was not released on news stands and was a dummy copy meant only for advertisers
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>UPA govt sowing seeds of another partition: Rajnath</b>
PTI
Thursday, March 09, 2006 20:01 IST
PATNA: Attacking the UPA government for "pursuing politics of minoritism and appeasement", BJP president Rajnath Singh has accused the Congress-led UPA government of 'sowing seeds of yet another partition'.
In an indication of the BJP going back to its 'Hindutva' moorings after the Jinnah episode which saw his predecessor L K Advani locked in a confrontation with the Sangh Parivar, Singh reaffirmed the party's faith in 'Hindutva' and 'cultural nationalism' which, he said, alone could save India from disintegration.
"The Congress is sowing seeds of another partition by pursuing politics of minoritism and appeasement.....The congress had sown the seeds of partition when in 1916 it adopted a resolution at its Lucknow plenary advocating status of separate electorate for the Muslims which culminated in the Partition in 1947," he said addressing a well-attended BJP workers' conference.
To buttress his charge, Singh said, "The UPA government proposed to bring a legislation to restore the minority institution status to Aligarh Muslim University after it was struck down by the Supreme Court. Congress government in Andhra Pradesh declared to implement reservation policy for Muslims in violation of the Constitution and then the UPA government appointed a committee for the headcount of Muslims in the armed forces."
The BJP president said that it was because of the Congress' 'votebank politics' that POTA was scrapped for being 'too harsh'.
Rajnath Singh alleged that it was because of the UPA government's 'soft' approach to terrorism that incidents like Varanasi blasts happened. "The terrorists today feel emboldened to strike at a marketplace in Delhi, our scientific hub in Bangalore and the centre of our faith in Varanasi," he said.
The BJP president slammed the Congress and its Left allies for dubbing his party as communal.
"Our commitment to Hindutva does not mean we want to create hatred among people. If those who condemn us as communal and have any faith in the judiciary, they should tender an apology after the Supreme Court ruling that Hindutva is not a religion but a way of life," he said.
"It is because of Hindutva that India has a President who is a Muslim, a Prime Minister who is a Sikh and a president of the ruling party who is a Christian," he said and reaffirmed his party's 'total commitment to cultural nationalism'.
"It was due to cultural nationalism that Israel was born and it was on account of lack of it that the mighty Soviet Union splintered," the BJP president said.
Recalling the sacrifice made by Jan Sangh founder Shyama Prasad Mukherjee in keeping India united, Rajnath Singh said had he not defied the law which required people from outside Jammu and Kashmir to seek a permit to enter the state, India would not have remained one and he paid for it with his life.
"When nobody dared, former BJP chief Murli Manohar Joshi hoisted the Tricolour at Lal Chowk in Srinagar after a gap of 12 years braving threats from terrorists," he said.
Attacking the UPA government's foreign policy which he dubbed as 'very weak', the BJP chief said," despite so much hype over the nuclear deal with the US, it could not secure the status of a nuclear weapons state for India. It is a big failure."
Describing India's present foreign policy as 'too timid', he said that the erstwhile Atal Bihari Vajpayee government went ahead with the Pokhran nuclear test without fear of international sanctions and emerged stronger.
"I don't know why the successive Congress regimes right from the days of Nehru have tried to model India on the Soviet Union. Followers of Nehru blindly adopted the policy of controlled economy as prevalent in the erstwhile USSR and the present day Congressmen are votaries of globalisation and open door policy espoused by America without caring for its consequences," he said.
Claiming that the UPA government's popularity was on the decline, Singh said BJP had gained in strength in the last couple of years with the party forming governments in Bihar, Jharkhand and now for the first time in the southern state of Karnataka.
Asserting that the BJP today had a 'stronger support base than even the Congress', he said that the 'BJP is destined to gain in strength as we are the only truly nationalist party in origin, ideology and inspiration. The Congress was founded by an Englishman and the source of inspiration for the Left is China or the now extinct Soviet Union.'
Slamming the Centre for its failure to check price rise, he said that prices of essential commodities like sugar, kerosene and LPG had doubled since the exit of the Vajpayee government.
The BJP president appreciated the steps taken by the NDA government in Bihar for the state's development, but warned against complacency.
Addressing the gathering, the newly appointed state BJP president Radhamohan Singh affirmed his 'total allegiance' to the RSS. He asked the workers to mobilise public opinion against terrorism, which, he said, was the biggest threat faced by the country.
Bihar Deputy Chief Minister Sushil Kumar Modi listed the steps taken by the new NDA government to bring the state back on the path of progress and prosperity and claimed state's image outside had undergone a positive and remarkable' change in little over three months that NDA has been in power.
Former Union Ministers Ravishanker Prasad, Syed Shahnawaz Hussain, Rajiv Pratap Rudy, C P Thakur and former state BJP presidents Nandkishore Yadav, Gopal Narain Singh and Tarakant Jha also spoke on the occasion.
<!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo--> Global woman
Office hazard: outsourcing love
Neelam Raaj
[ Saturday, March 11, 2006 10:01:23 pmTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]
RSS Feeds| SMS NEWS to 8888 for latest updates
"Itâs difficult to keep these things under wraps. Sooner or later, the couple is found out, especially as they use the intranet or the office phone to make their assignations. But since the HR department isnât the morality police, all they have to do is maintain office decorum," says an HR manager, clarifying that the management seldom makes character judgements based on such clandestine relationships.
As for anything akin to the âlove contractsâ that have become common in the US, he says no policies have been formalised to deal with such eventualities. "Itâs done on a case-to-case basis since a warning or department transfer if they are in direct-reporting positions is usually enough."
So while a dalliance and sacking may not go hand in hand, office gossip, tension and the possibility of having to continue working with a paramour after the relationship's soured do make many think twice about l'affaire office.
Inputs from Sharmishta Koushik in Bangalore
< Previous|1|2|3|4|
check this tamil news article
http://www.dinamalar.com/2006apr01seithikatturai/p7.asp
it says that a place called Marayoor near Udumalaipettai in Tamil nadu had human existence from 5000 years before. They had earlier found a statue of rama with his bow in the same place.
very interesting to note that, these earlest human settlers in plains like this had knowledge of getting honey from bee hives. Archeologists have discovered paintings depicting the process of collecting honey, with a man standing with fire near the honey bee hives.
bengurion
|
