01-13-2007, 01:31 AM (This post was last modified: 01-13-2007, 01:31 AM by Bharatvarsh.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->can u imagine an India with both pakistan and bangladesh? Would india have seen even this relative "peace" of the last 50 years? We only fought 4 big wars and about 20 years of militancy in about quarter of india's territories.
If gandhi was father of india's independence from the british, jinnah is father of india's prosperity. had it not been for jinnah's long term thinking, we would still be pulled down by larger population of muslims (although gandhi offered Prime minister post to jinnah, jinnah wondered what would happen after he and gandhi died. he knew he was dying soon of cancer anyway) <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wouldn't it be preferable to have had an full scale civil war and winner takes all instead of the slow secular death we are dying today, in my study of history I have not seen another nation which acted as dumb as we did, why did we have partition in the first place if the population exchange was only going to be a one way street?
Today we are told that we don't accept the 2 nation theory then why did we concede partition (built on this premise) in the first place, if we were really serious about not accepting it then we would have fought to keep India united, but we agreed to partition but still make absurd claims of brotherhood.
Tomorrow we will have another partition and then these secularists will come settle down in the remaining chunk we have left and begin fighting against the dreaded Hindu communalists all over again.
All Communists should have been deported to Pakistan since they supported partition but now claim that they didn't.
<!--QuoteBegin-Viren+Jan 12 2007, 01:30 PM-->QUOTE(Viren @ Jan 12 2007, 01:30 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->LSrini: See your point - it's a different debate. My remarks were in reference to that red ant's comments about benevolent Brits. No doubt they collaborated with Brits back in 42 to sabotage Quit India movement.
[right][snapback]63040[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see what u r saying. Brits did what they had to be in power. They split up the hindu-muslim united animosity (not unity!) towards the brits in 1857 by appeasing muslims. When commies realised that quit india movement was getting too strong, they co-operated with brits to break it up. brits had the WW2 to fight where they were cooperating with commie soviets anyway, so they had no quesyness accepting help in india.
But my point is that partition has been good for india. and we have jinnah to thank for that. and not the british, who did not care what happened to hindus and muslims in india.
<!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Jan 12 2007, 04:01 PM-->QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Jan 12 2007, 04:01 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
Wouldn't it be preferable to have had an full scale civil war and winner takes all instead of the slow secular death we are dying today, in my study of history I have not seen another nation which acted as dumb as we did, why did we have partition in the first place if the population exchange was only going to be a one way street?
Today we are told that we don't accept the 2 nation theory then why did we concede partition (built on this premise) in the first place, if we were really serious about not accepting it then we would have fought to keep India united, but we agreed to partition but still make absurd claims of brotherhood.
Tomorrow we will have another partition and then these secularists will come settle down in the remaining chunk we have left and begin fighting against the dreaded Hindu communalists all over again.
All Communists should have been deported to Pakistan since they supported partition but now claim that they didn't.
[right][snapback]63046[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A full scale fight would be preferable. Look at gujarat, where the hindus realised what muslims did in godhra and have thrashed the muslims there. But for hindus to win in such a full scale fight, we need that awareness, which the commie media is trying its best to prevent. And the gandhian peace mentality (hindus cowards, muslims bully, please the bully for peace) among hindus have not helped.
The commie method of fake secularism is interesting. Now commies realise that the alternate belief structure has to be destroyed before communism spreads. so anything to destroy hinduism is good enough. they probably believe hindus will automatically accept communism once their religion is destroyed. As for not accepting 2 nation theory, many indian muslims identify or atleast sympathise with paki and bong muslims. by supporting pak and bong and by saying that partition was a mistake, commies want to win over indian muslims. They think making hindus soft can achieve that. commies probably believe that muslims either can be persuaded to communism or can be used without any bad consequences. I dont think muslims can be persuaded to communism and commies are dumb if they believe that. the first party to get banned in pakistan after partition was communist. it would be interesting to see how communist parties were removed from pak. was there any mullah order or that most of the commies were hindus who migrated/converted after partition.
so i think commies believe muslims can be used for votes without much consequences. example.. courting madani in kerala and bong muslims in WB. This might backfire on commies later, but by the time it backfires, it could be too late for india.
Whatever the commie intention, hindus should be made to understand islam and how feeding the bully will only make it stronger.
01-13-2007, 06:15 AM (This post was last modified: 01-13-2007, 06:16 AM by Husky.)
Post 271:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->hindu-muslim united animosity (not unity!) towards the brits <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Great phrasing <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Post 272:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->commies realise that the alternate belief structure has to be destroyed before communism spreads.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Communists always do that. In China it's all about destroying the local religions of Buddhism and Taoism.
In Greece, and Russia as well as other East European countries it's about destroying christianity. Not that I particularly care about this, but orthodox christianity is better than the other kinds from what I know IMO. (Killing orthodox christianity is something the Roman Church prays for everyday - and they do and have done more than just praying toward this end. Imagine if Russia and Greece became Catholic instead. Eewww.)
And in India it's Hinduism. If India were Buddhist or Jain, it would be Buddhism or Jainism that the insipid communists would be trying to put out.
In Turkey, it used to be Islam. But some Turkish communists find Islam works well with communism, just like some high up in the Catholic hierarchy find catholicism and communism work well together, as does liberation theology. And why not: christoislamism does work well with its offspring communism anyway.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->they (communists) probably believe hindus will automatically accept communism once their religion is destroyed.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->That's where they are wrong. We're not desperate. We have many choices.
If I can't be Hindu in India, then personally, I'd follow - in order of choice (many Gods, natural religion, closest to Hinduism, know enough about it to be happy in it):
(1) Shinto
(2) North-American native American beliefs
(3) Taoism
(4) Hellenismos - Greek religion
(5) Jainism, then Buddhism - sorry, I need Gods. Mahayana then Theravada Buddhism
(6) African beliefs (don't know as much about this as about the others, so that's why it comes to 6)
(7) Any other natural religion I can find
(8) Death first
(9) Reconsidering and rejecting, once more, communism or christoislamism
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->it would be interesting to see how communist parties were removed from pak. was there any mullah order or that most of the commies were hindus who migrated/converted after partition. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now this makes for an interesting research investigation, my theory is that most of the commies were all upper castes (FC) Hindus, in West Pakistan they weren't as strong as in Bengal, now if you look at the Bengal commies, you will find that many of their ancestors or in some cases the presently alive commies got kicked out of the Muslim paradise they helped create, once the riots started the Muslims made no difference between commies and Hindus, I am glad they slaughtered as many commies as they could because that is what traitors deserve, I just wish they lined up all the commies and executed them instead of unleashing these parasites into India.
01-13-2007, 11:10 AM (This post was last modified: 01-13-2007, 12:08 PM by Bodhi.)
I had read that Kabul was the primary center of Indian communists in the past. In 1920s, Communism (or socialism) was an in-thing for the common educated youth of India. Obviousely an attractive alternative concept to fight the imperialism with. Recent success of USSR was obviousely a motivator and Afghanistan become the gateway of communism into India. (CPI was formed in 1920 by MN Roy, who was under constant control of International comradery of Lenin and Stalin)
Even the revolutionaries like Sri Chandrashekhar Azad etc tried using communist network to flee to USSR via Kabul (before he was betrayed and martyred in Allahabad). Netaji also used this route (and communist network?) to flee abroad a couple of decades after.
During WW2, CPI initially opposed and then suddenly started supporting the British. Their stand was completely dependant upon on which side their Lord Master Stalin stood. As long as Stalin was neutral/supporting Nazis, CPI opposed British, and as soon as he signed deal with allies, CPI became british supporter. (So these folks have gaddari for their motherland in their blood).
In 1947, CPI whole heartedly supported partition, and encouraged its muslim cadres to join Pakistan. These CPI fractions of Pakistan merged with Muslim League (ironic because ML was largely a party of muslim landlords!) But mullas soon got rid of all communists from their midst.
Later even with growing Chinese influence, commies in Pak got no lease of life. Chinese are interested in collaborating with Pakis only for their strategic interest, and are in no way promoting or supporting communism in holy land.
Anyways, will Indian communists learn something from the past? They will do well to always remember how Taliban had treated communists of Afghanistan very recently.
The best way to approach the history of Islamic conversions in the Indian subcontinent is probably to understand the complex politics of secular academic research and history writing. Most historians of mediaeval and early modern India have typically avoided the theme.
Mohammad Habib's thesis â oppressed castes embracing an egalitarian Islam â turned out to be no more than a politically correct speculation. In the meantime, communalist historians seized the opportunity to make the best of the non-academic and entirely modern anxieties about explaining the large number of Muslims in the subcontinent.
Their ans-wer was simple, unsubstantiated and predictable: Islam is inherently proselytising and violent. The thesis of forced conversions, combined with politics of Hindutva, put present-day Muslims in the rather curious position of being both victims as well as perpetrators of the said 'crime'.
What do you do with such obviously ridiculous propositions? Secular mediaevalists vehemently and rightly rebutted them and presumably went back to writing biographies of states, and great Sufi and Bhakti saints. Worse still, some like historian Harbans Mukhia ('Muslim Puzzle', Nov 29, 2006) set out to look for answers to a question that was historically questionable. The Muslim puzzle remained just that: a puzzle to all those who seek and fail to explain the presence of Muslims in such large numbers, as if the latter were some disease defying diagnosis.
The point is this: The construct of conversion for understanding the religious processes in pre-modern India obfuscates our vision and condemns us to view Islamic expansion in the subcontinent in pre-determined ways. As a result, historians end up looking for evidence of individuals and communities choosing (one fine morning, as it were!) to embrace Islam for this reason or that.
They also look for motives or incentives behind such conversion. No wonder they end up complaining about inadequate evidence. If they tried to similarly explain the presence of staggeringly larger number of those professing Brahmanism/Hinduism in India today, they would fare no better.
However, they never try to ask that question. At least not with the intention of explaining any Hindu puzzle, and certainly never invoking conversion. Why?
One may argue that this was because Brahmanic-Sanskritic textual traditions, unlike Islamic-Persianate literary conventions, never invoked conversion as a tool of expansion. Worse, chronicles written during the Sultanate period often castigated polytheists and idol-worshippers. This, however, is a gross distortion of truth.
For, it seems to imply that Brahmanism did not evolve its own apparatus for self-conservation and expansion. Or that scurrilous doctrinal attacks on other religions was a wholly Islamic novelty in India. This is simply not true.
First, looking down upon believers of rival religious systems was not unique to Islam. Reviling other religions in highly charged offensive language, as for example in the 11th century Sanskrit play Prabodhachandrodaya, was a popular (and pre-Islamic) narrative technique, widely deployed in most religious and non-religious compositions in the high languages (especially Sanskrit and Persian) across confessional boundaries.
This linguistic excess was probably appreciated for what it was by contemporaries and not taken literally. Second, at least from later Vedic times onwards, mythic sages were routinely glorified for sanctifying and bringing this land or that under dharma. Puranic literature from the early centuries of Christian era onwards emphatically attests to the process of Brahmanisation within the subcontinent.
A large number of tribes, mostly on the frontiers of state systems and agrarian economies, appear to have increasingly come into contact with established kingdoms and religions. Over the next millennium or so, they were apparently integrated into Brahmanism with most being consigned to lowly Shudra status.
Why, then, is it that most secular historians avoid looking into the question of Islamisation, as some of them have done in the context of Brahmanisation. And how is it that those who do cannot extricate themselves from the self-defeating construct of conversion? It was almost as if they were doing a marketing survey of why people prefer AirTel over Hutch.
Why, on earth, did people convert to Islam, they seem to be asking? It is important to explode rather than answer such questions. For they emanate from the communalist article of faith that India is a natural habitat for Hindus. Everyone else needs an explanation certificate from historians, or else they may be declared to have descended on this Hindu land in objectionable ways.
Secular history cannot be written by posing communalist questions. What we need are works of history that look at patterns of accretion and change in belief systems over a long duration and in relation with other changes. Such works cannot be based on positivistic readings of Persian or Sanskrit texts. It must acknowledge and analyse politics of representation and patterns of narrative techniques. It must also harness vernacular literature and oral compositions.
Such a history must consider the fact that it is only the modern state with its vast coercive apparatus and insatiable appetite for classifiable information that demands exclusive religious affiliation from its subjects. The pre-modern state in an age not marked by mass politics had neither the will and wherewithal nor the need to even try to do that.
Recognising this may help us consider the possibility that many in that age could actually occupy that liminal space between boundaries of more than one orthodoxy which modernity finds so difficult to imagine.
(The writer teaches history at Lady Shri Ram College.)
=============================
Is this is the best that Red comrades can come up with, a daydreaming fairytale? Comparing a Sanskrit play to mau-mau 'looking down upon believers of rival religious systems' embedded in Quran. <!--emo&:omg--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/omg.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='omg.gif' /><!--endemo--> how dare you, kufr?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>CPI-M to launch campaign for industrialisation </b>
Pioneer.com
PTI | Kolkata
With several industrial projects lined up in West Bengal, the CPI-M today decided to launch a campaign to explain its stand on industrialisation despite recent protests at Singur and Nandigram over land acquisition.
CPI-M would launch a one-and-half-month-long campaign from January 15 to February 28 for industrialisation of the state and counter the opposition propaganda, party state secretary Biman Bose told reporters after a marathon meeting with party leaders from East Midnapore and South 24 Parganas districts.
He said the party would also publish booklets explaining the Left Front government's stand on industrialsation.
.........
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are they going to start strike or Red March or burn buses?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Revolution devours its own</b>
Pioneer.com
Swapan Dasgupta
The agitations in Singur and Nandigram have revived interest in what Communist theoreticians for over a century have pompously called the "agrarian question". Conceived as a movement of the working classes for emancipation, <b>Communist parties have traditionally never been at ease with a peasantry that combines a deep attachment to the land with a pre-capitalist mindset. Karl Marx, for example, had contempt both for the "idiocy of rural life" and the peasantry - which he equated with "sacks of potatoes". </b>The forcible collectivisation of agriculture brought about by Stalin in the Soviet Union and Mao Zedong in China proved disastrous because they violated human nature.Â
Indian Communists were pragmatic enough to realise that rural support in a democracy would prove elusive unless the party pandered to the land hunger of the rural poor. In trying to out-radicalise the Congress, <b>the Communists launched militant movements against "landlordism" and their State Governments in Kerala and West Bengal granted proprietary and quasi-proprietary rights to tenants, share-croppers and the local busybody</b>.
In electoral terms, this was smart and has contributed to West Bengal at least becoming a near-invincible red fortress. However, the quest for rural equity has had baneful side-effects. First, the unending agitations for rights, both real and imaginary, destroyed the traditional - you may call it feudal - harmony of rural communities based on both rights and obligations. <b>The paternalism of landlords was no doubt destroyed but replaced by the dictatorship of local party units. </b>A culture of deference, bordering on exaggerated fatalism, was replaced by cussed aggression.
<b>Second, land re-distribution led to a mushrooming of unviable holdings which contributed to the larger crisis of agriculture facing the country. The opportunity costs of land fragmentation were deeply damaging for West Bengal.</b>
<b>Finally, the sanctity of property, already compromised by decades of wanton nationalisation and social engineering, was further eroded by the Left's populist high-handedness. When "surplus" land proved difficult to redistribute through legal means, Left cadre merely appropriated what was convenient - Government property, temple land and holdings of political opponents</b>. It is, for example, striking that though much of the land proposed for acquisition in Nandigram belongs to the Government, the CPI(M) cannot make an issue of encroachments since Left control is dependant on the wanton violation of property laws.
The mounting problems in rural Bengal would not have escalated had the growth of manufacturing and services provided income alternatives for both the rural poor and those who struggled to maintain the pretensions of bhadralok existence. Unfortunately, three decades of Left Front rule did little to stem an industrial decline that began with the labour militancy of the late-1960s and was exacerbated by the infrastructure collapse in the 1980s. Worst of all, unending Marxist rule created a new ugly Bengali who combined nihilism with insolence. Amartya Sen's "argumentative Indian" is actually a label best suited to fellow Bengalis who are insufferable in Bengal but remarkably dynamic when taken out of the Left environment.
In the early-1960s, West Bengal was India's second-most industrialised State after Maharashtra. Today, it is merely the elector of Left MPs. By pandering to the basest of human instincts, <b>the Left created an environment of bloody-mindedness and reduced West Bengal to a near wasteland and a nursery of counter-enlightenment</b>. So deep was the impact of Marxist perversity on the popular imagination that opposition parties replicated that self-destructive mentality. The difference between the CPI(M) and the Congress (and its splinter wings) is that while one is a semi-disciplined mob, the other is a rabble.
It is brave of Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee to try to arrest the decline and decay. He wants a West Bengal that is economically vibrant - a convenient euphemism for energetic capitalism. To make up for lost time he has cut a few corners and offered sops and incentives to those willing to invest. His real opposition is neither Mamata Bannerjee nor the Muslim clergy which organised the Nandigram resistance. The stumbling block is a mindset.
Revolution, they say, devours its own parents.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->JNU goes to Nepal House
- Holiday after making history
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
Kathmandu, Jan. 16: âJawaharlal Nehru University is going to run Nepal now,â remarked a Nepalese politician. That may not be entirely true but what prompted the remark was the induction of three new MPs â all from JNU â last night in the new interim parliament of Nepal.
Two of them â Amresh Singh and Hari Roka â are still completing their PhD in JNU. Singh expects to finish his thesis within a year at the School of International Studies. Roka hopes to submit his thesis in the economics department by this July. The third, Bamdev Chetri, was assistant librarian in JNU before he was arrested by India for his Maoist links and closeness to another former JNU student, Baburam Bhattarai. He was deported to face the torture of King Gyanendraâs police.
Former foreign minister Chakara Prasad Bastola, himself a product of Banaras Hindu University (BHU), remarked: âThe BHU-centred leadership of Nepal reflected the pre- and post-1947 reality. Calcutta, Patna and Allahabad universities also played a role in influencing the Nepalese leadership once. Today, that role is being played to some extent by JNU.â
Hari Roka, who was jailed at the age of 13 for seven years for participating in a demonstration, and Amresh are both familiar faces to those in Delhi who took any interest in Nepal.
âJNU expanded my horizons. It gave me the space to talk about democracy and freedom. It is that experience which made some of us argue for negotiations between the political parties and the Maoists,â said Singh, who has been nominated by the Nepali Congress to parliament.
Not only did JNU change them but the Nepalese students also changed opinion about Nepal in India. Hari Roka, nominated by the Maoists as a civil society representative free from their party whip in parliament, can justifiably claim credit in this regard.
The author of several seminal analytical articles in the Indian press on the Nepalese democracy movement, Roka said: âEarlier the relationship with India was mediated through retired Indian bureaucrats who organised seminars on Nepal and pontificated in the media. Our political leaders and the Kathmandu elite forged close ties with them.
âWe started writing in the Indian newspapers and forged a new kind of relationship with Indian intellectuals, political parties, journalists and editors. The Indian people realised what was really happening in Nepal.â
JNU also became the hub of Nepalese political activities after the kingâs retrograde action in October 2002 of dissolving parliament and then his complete takeover on February 1, 2005.
âNot only Nepalese students but even the Indian students lent support to our democracy movement. Leaders like Baburam Bhattarai, Krishna Bahadur Mahara, Mahant Thakur, Krishna Sitaula, Shekhar Koirala, Hridayesh Tripathi and Rajendra Mahato came to JNU,â Singh pointed out.
âAll their meetings were held either in my room in Brahmaputra Hostel or in Hari Rokaâs room in Sutlej Hostel,â he recalled.
Roka, who organised news conferences of leaders of Nepalese democracy in JNU, recalls how JNUâs professors helped open political doors for them. âHow can we ever forget the support given to us by professors S.D. Muni, Anand Kumar, Kamal Mitra Chinoy, Anuradha Chinoy or the president of the JNU Teachersâ Association Roopamanjari Ghosh?â Singh said.
âNepal needs good social scientists and experts on regional development. Indian universities like JNU must train Nepalese students on a preferential basis.â Roka said.
There are long-term benefits of helping Nepalese students study in Indian universities. âIndia does not recognise this. Today, our students are going to the US, China, Bangladesh and Pakistan as admission in Indian universities is very difficult. This cannot be good for India,â Bastola said.
âThose educated in India have goodwill towards it with no expectation of rewards. That relationship is very strong, very positive and very objective. Today, bureaucrats think that the Indian embassy here can generate goodwill. The chemistry of such âgoodwillâ is very different from that which comes from being educated in India,â Bastola said. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070117/asp/...ory_7272291.asp<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is very serious, these pests have latched onto Nepal and will not let go until they suck out the last drop of blood from the Nepalese.
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"<b>Revolutionary warfare</b> is never confined within the bounds of military action. Because <b>its purpose is to destroy an existing society and its institutions and to replace them with a completely new structure</b>, any revolutionary war is a unity of which the constituent parts, in varying importance, are military, political, economic, social and psychological."
Mao Tse-Tung on âGuerilla Warfare'<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
After a great deal of dissembling and vacillation, Indiaâs security establishment, both at the Centre and in the âaffectedâ States, appears to have conceded, finally, that the Maoist threat is, in Prime Minister Manmohan Singhâs words, the countryâs "single biggest internal security challenge." But the threat is still restrictively envisaged as afflicting only parts of those States where Naxalite violence is visible, and is assumed to follow the erratic trajectory of incidents and fatalities from year to year. However, as the Chhattisgarh Director General of Police, O.P. Rathor, recently observed at a Conference in Raipur,<b> "Statistics of incidents never give a real picture of the ground. Whatever is visible is only the mere tip of the iceberg. Unless caution is exercised, volcanoes can erupt." </b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Sonia and MMS caught with their pants down. Communist violence being there for all to see, even communist-supporting-party Congress has to now admit to it. When SIMI has done enough damage, Congress will turn around and decide it's time to admit they're a supreme threat too. Until then, they're all buddies.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It is necessary to recognize, crucially, that the phase of violence, which is ordinarily the point at which the state takes cognizance of the problem, comes at the tail end of the process of mass mobilization, and at a stage where neutralizing the threat requires considerable, if not massive, use of force. Within this context it is, consequently, useful to notice not merely the current expanse of visible Maoist mobilisation and militancy, but the extent of their current intentions, ambitions and agenda.
<b>Significantly, the CPI-Maoist has established Regional Bureaus across a mass of nearly two-thirds of the countryâs territory (Map 1), and these regions are further sub-divided into state, special zonal and special area committee jurisdictions (Map 2), where the processes of mobilisation have been defined and allocated to local leaders.</b> As these maps indicate, there are at least five regional bureaus, thirteen State committees, two Special Area Committees and three Special Zonal Committees in the country. This structure of organisation substantially reflects current Maoist organisational consolidation, but does not exhaust their perspectives or ambitions.
There is further evidence of preliminary activity for the extension of operations to new areas including Gujarat, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Meghalaya, beyond what is reflected in the scope of the regional, zonal and state committees. A âLeading teamâ recently visited Jammu & Kashmir to assess the potential of creating a permanent Party structure in the form of a State Committee to take the Maoist agenda forward in the State.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Communists consider islamic ideology as heresy (Kashmir) and christo ideology too (Meghalaya). Just like christianity and islam consider each other heresy and communism too.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Taslima appeals for Indian citizenship
Express News ServiceÂ
Kolkata, January 28: Doubting whether she would be able to visit her motherland irrespective of what the outcome of the elections there is, Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen has appealed to the Indian government to grant her citizenship or permanent resident status.
âTo live like a writer I cannot shift elsewhere. Here (in India) I can meet my own people, converse with them in my own language, the language in which I express my thoughts. The government can help me live like a writer,â Taslima said.
The writer, who was earlier given a six-month residential permit valid till February 17, said she hoped that the appeal made to the Foreignersâ Registration Office in December for a six-month extension from February would be granted.
âI can then concentrate on my writing. Let us see,â Taslima, who has also lived in Sweden, Germany and France, said. âI am also loved by people in Europe but Kolkata holds a special place for me,â she added.
Asked if she wished to return to her home in Bangladesh, which she was forced to leave in 1994 after fundamentalists issued a death threat or fatwa against her following the publication of her book Lajja, she said: âThat does not seem possible as there is not likely to be much change in the socio-political situation in Bangladesh. All major parties â both ruling and Oppositionâ- will not risk antagonising the fundamentalists who are calling the shots in Bangladesh politics at present. Both the BNP and the Awami League want to keep such groups in good humour,â she said.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Taslima appeals for Indian citizenship
Sudhi Ranjan Sen
Watch story
Thursday, February 15, 2007 (New Delhi):
Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen wants a long-term visa or an Indian citizenship.
"My work is suffering because of this. I want to stay here to pursue my work here," she says.
But the Buddadev Bhattacharya government in West Bengal is being careful about reacting to her demands.
The Bangladeshi writer has now been given six more months in India. Perhaps it is worried about how the large Muslim population would feel about an extension.
Hurt sentiments
But the Left denies that the minimal visa extension is because it is scared of hurting Muslim sentiments. .
The Front was one of the first to support artist M F Hussain when his prosecution was cleared by the Home Ministry for hurting communal sentiments.
However, now it clearly says Hussian and Tasleema cannot be equated.
"Taslima's work is not as great. I do not think it has got anything do with the Muslims in the state," says Nilotpal Basu, CPM leader. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Key factor
The Union Home Ministry that issues visas is using the state's recommendations as an excuse, so it says it cant consider a longer visa because the Buddadev government has not asked for it.
It claims that the state government's recommendation is key in such cases. The state should make an exception, categorising her as a person of eminence and recommending a long term visa
Indian citizenship cannot be granted because Tasleema has to stay for a minimum period of seven years in India to be eligible for it.
Sources in the MHA say this could possibly be the last visa extension for the writer. While the Home Ministry uses the rule book, the Congress party has surprisingly come out in Tasleema's favour.
"No one denies that she is a person of eminence has stood firm against all odds. Lets hope the issue is settled amicably," said Tom Vadakan, Spokesperson, Congress.
Politics is art of possibility and doublespeak. In Taslima's case it is unfortunately all double speak.
From Asian Age
Bullets seized from CPM Kerala unit secretary
By OUR CORRESPONDENT
Chennai, Feb. 16: Security officials at Chennai airport on Friday seized five bullets from the baggage of CPI(M) Kerala unit secretary Pinarayi Vijayan when he was on his way to New Delhi to attend the party politburo meeting.
Mr Pinarayi was supposed to board the Jet Airways flight leaving Chennai at 5.30 pm.
The bullets, which were meant for use in a .38-calibre revolver, were found in the bag containing his laptop. It was a routine security check that led to the seizure of the bullets. Though Mr Pinarayi furnished the licence of the revolver, the security officials seized the bullets.
Gujarat 2002 witnessed an estimated killing of 2000
people, rape of approximately 400 women, property
damage worth Rs 3800 crores, around 1100 restaurants
destroyed, 563 religious places (302 dargahs, 209
mosques, 30 madrassas, 18 temples and 3 churches)
destroyed or damaged. About 2.5 lakh people were
directly displaced.
Recent surveys reveal that 5,000-10,000 families are
still living in around 80 relief camps, not recognized
by the state govt. and without any basic civic
amenities! Out of a total 4252 FIRs lodged (minuscule,
compared to unofficial figures), 2208 cases were
summarily closed and most of the accused were released
within one year of the carnage. 214 people are still
languishing in jails under POTA, all Muslims barring
five!
The legacy continues! The politicians are still
reaping benefits; academics are still trying to make
sense of it for the long-term future of Indian
democracy; media persons are still divided over it;
activists are still trying to wrest for the victims
whatever minuscule doles they can from an otherwise
hostile state and the victims are still struggling to
make two ends meet or to come to terms with the
nightmare they had to undergo.
Meanwhile the memory of it all is being overwritten!
It is being touted instead that all is well with the
proverbial Gujarati world and the state continues to
march on its way to glory. Those raising doubts are
portrayed as conspiring to divide the five crore
Gujaratis. The pathetic condition of the minorities
does not raise any concern rather becomes a solid
example to showcase the state as ruthless and hence
very focused. And what is the stateâs track record on
other fronts? Gujarat âs status remains as number five
in debt. According to NSSO May 2005, each of the 48
lakh farmers in the state is reeling under a debt of
Rs. 15526. Officially, in the three years till 30 June
2006, 100 dalits have been murdered. Gujarat is also
number five in the worst sex ratio record. At the same
time, small-time thugs are not allowing Fanaa and
Parzania to be screened inside Gujarat ; are forcibly
breaking inter-religious marriages apart and working
for intense polarization among the tribals against the
minorities.
The happenings of 2002 form the larger backdrop
against which the events continue to unfold. How do we
then pursue, an honest admission of truth and moral
responsibility through a collective and public
exercise as well as stateâs responsibility for the
acts of its organs or agents and for its own failure
to prevent or adequately respond to the commission of
gross human rights violations, remains the challenge.
One continues to demand for the right to fair and
adequate compensation; the right to restoration of the
situation existing prior to the violation; the
restoration of dignity and the right to a guarantee,
by means of appropriate legislative and/or
institutional intervention and reform, that the
violation will not be repeated. A crucial aspect in
all this is the symbolic reparation, especially in the
backdrop of the gravest threat of âerasure from memory
and historyâ, encompassing a process of remembering
and commemorating the pain. It aims to restore the
dignity of victims and serve as a continuing reminder.
As we know, post-holocaust Germany is an example of
that.
It is in this spirit that this six-day event is being
organised. To serve as a platform where all of us
stand together for preserving the âmemoryâ against
âforgettingâ.
We, a Collective of more than twenty-five
organizations, invite you to join us in our
determination for Truth, Justice and Peace in Gujarat
.
The events will be inaugurated
On : 26th February 2007
At : 1.00 pm.
At : The Gujarat Vidyapith (Heerak Mahotsav Hall),
Ahmedabad with a Seminar entitled :
REVISITING 150 YEARS OF 1857,100 YEARS OF SATYAGRAHA
AND 5 YEARS OF GUJARAT CARNAGE.
The Speakers are : Urvashi Butalia, Mallika Sarabhai,
Teesta Setalvad and Ghanshyam Shah
That same evening, at 5.00 pm. two painting
exhibitions will begin :
à The Gujarat Series in Mithila tradition by
Santosh Kumar Das at Amdavad-ni Gufa
à Paintings by six Girls affected by the Gujarat
Carnage 2002 at Visual Arts Centre
Later, at 8.00 pm. UNSUNI (UNHEARD VOICES), a physical
musical theatre piece at Natrani, Darpana Academy .
For further details, contact :
DARSHAN (079 â 26815484 / 9426181334)
ORGANIZING GROUPS : ACTION AID,AMAN SAMUDAY,AMDAVAD
MUSLIM WOMENâ S ASSOCIATION, ANALA,AWAG,BEHAVIOR AL SCIENCE CENTRE (BSC),CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT, CITIZENS FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE,
COMMUNALISM COMBAT,DARPANA, DARSHAN,DRISHTI, HIMMAT,INSAF, LOKNAAD,MANAV KALYAN TRUST,NAWO,OXFAM GB,PRASHANT, RANGKARMI, SAFAR,SAHRWARU, SAMERTH,SAMVEDAN, CULTURAL PROGRAMME,SANCHETNA ,ST. XAVIERâS SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY, WOMENâS INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM,URJAGHAR - KARAWADA
Post 144 of First war of independence: 1857, How it started?People involved in it thread:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ashok Mitra in Telegraph, Kolkota, 16 March 2007<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Choking Miter still can't stay away from the christo theology of his schooling, I see:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In Anno Domini 2007<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->'Anno Domini' supposedly means (has for long been interpreted as) Year of lord jeebus.
(In reality, the Latin word means Lord and had always referred to various Roman Gods - but based on previous experience with Choking Miter, I'd say he doesn't know that.
Meanwhile christos flatter themselves that all of Latin is at the service of jeebus. Hahahahahaha. A hoot.)
Communists like choking miter like rewriting history to ensure that their ideology and its followers come out looking like the heroes. When in reality, as Bharatvarsha and others have shown, India's plague/the communists were best of friends with the islamoterrorists during partition and were also Britain's best buddies.
Now that they're no longer proud of the latter part of this track record, they have to rewrite the records. How by the book of them. It's so Nineteen Eighty-Four. Guess 'Choke Mi' (someone oblige him) is working for the Records Department of West Bengal's Ministry of Truth. Too dense to notice that today's paper states "Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia", when only yesterday the papers said "Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia".
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->(Choke The rise of the Bengalis â specially of their Hindu species â actually coincided with Cliveâs conquest of eastern India.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Hindus a species now? Well, why not. By the same logic, communists and christoterrorists are viral strains. Am finally starting to see the (accidental) sense in Choke's analogy.
Keeping its commitment of killing at least one Sangh Parivar activist every week, CPM goons butchered advocate P.P. Valsaraj Kurup (37) on March 4 at Panur near Thalassery in Kannur district.
Valsaraj, a leading, bright and energetic advocate of the Thalassery Bar, was also a Mandal Karyakarta of the BJP and former Bauddhik Pramukh of the RSS. He was a darling of the local populace as he took up several cases of the poor and the oppressed, free of cost. Despite threats, he relentlessly fought CPM criminal gangs who were involved in bomb manufacturing, money laundering, hawala transactions and financing at enormous interest rates called âblade mafiaâ. Moreover due to his activities, general public and CPM cadres started coming to BJP programmes and Sangh shakhas. This irritated the local CPM leadership and they wanted to kill him at any cost.
.............
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->