DID CONVERSION START WITH AGRA?

By S R Ramanujan

Is conversion new to India? Or, for that matter re-conversion? If we listen to the discourses of our fake liberals, it appears so. As if, it all started at Agra! If there is one subject on which there is pretentious ignorance, palpable prejudice and bias in the media narratives, it is the hyporcritic blabber on conversions.

A senior citizen journalist (I don’t have a word to describe a journalist of the colonial era), may be, we can call “vintage journalist” talks about conversions away from Islam/Christianity to Hinduism as “”BPL conversions”” because the reverse was branded as “”rice conversions””. In a way he admits, though not directly, there is “”inducement”” in both the formulae. Does our Constitution guarantee such a right to convert with inducements when it guarantees the right to propagate one’s religion? And that is what was and has been happening all these decades when our (il)liberals looked the other way. If a society fails to act on such a naked aggression on the indigenous faith of its people, pro-active resistance is sure to follow and that is what we are witnessing today.

Let’s admit. India is a nation of conversions. And all these centuries, it was just one way track. May be, the faultlines of the indigenous religion were exploited for “”harvesting of souls””. May be, the followers of indigenous faith were so passive and powerless that the invaders could convert them with tremendous  ease. There was resistance at different stages in history. But such a resistance was quite feeble. The state power was in alien hands, first with Moghuls and later with the Missionaries, followed by the Communists who enjoyed state patronage under Jawaharlal Nehru and whatever the Left historians might write “force” was the only instrument used for conversion. There was no conversion which was out of one’s own sheer will. Either there was allurement and fraud or threat to life. 

Well, one may argue that it’s all history and what we should be concerned about is what is happening post- Independence. Quite right. But, let’s ask this basic question.  Why did six states of the Indian Union pass an anti-conversion law? All of them were not ruled by right wing parties at the time of such a legislation. For example, Odisha had to enact an anti-conversion law because the tribals in the state were exploited for conversion away from Hinduism to Christianity. So is the case with Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Arunachal Pradesh. What is more, these legislations were endorsed by the highest court in the land. When this verdict doesn’t suit the agenda of the fake seculars, there is clamour for revisiting this judgment.

Now, that is, in the background of Agra programme, liberals argue “that (such) programmes no doubt carry enormous potential to incite violence and hatred between communities; they are immoral, wicked and capable of producing dire consequences…Such legislation (anti-conversion law) can produce even greater damage; it would render nugatory our rights to freedom of conscience and religion, and in the process, it would scuttle any genuine attempts at achieving a peaceful, democratic society””.

Yes, the liberals are right. But the problem is selective amnesia. What they apprehend for Ghar Vapasi programme equally applies to conversion from Hinduism to other non-Hindu religions. No! That is not acceptable. Only “Ghar Vapasi”” is criminal or unconstitutional. Conversion of Hindus is perfectly Constitutional and it reinforced the fundamental right to freedom of conscience.

What happened in Kandhamal (Odisha), despite an anti-conversion law, is a classic example as to what could happen when conversions from the indigenous culture or religion to other alien faiths take place. When an Australian missionary and a Hindu saint were brutally killed in Odisha, none of these liberals raised their finger against conversions through inducement or ridicule of indigenous beliefs which were responsible for communal violence and hatred; but directed their wrath against “”fascist forces””. It was a clash of civilizations. Followers of indigenous faith whose tradition was to rever cows was not merely challenged by the alien faith, but ridiculed. What was the outcome of this clash is now part of history. 

When the Hindu saint was murdered as he was performing a religious ritual, the blame was put on naxals. For the post-murder violence, saffron forces were hauled up. First of all, why was he murdered? He could successfully arrest the pace of conversions among the tribals with foreign funds. The same liberals who now say that such conversions (mind you, they only refer to reconversions) were immoral, wicked and capable of producing dire consequences did not recognise the dangers involved in the business of conversion by missionaries imported from abroad. None of these liberals took time for honest introspection. Only when Agra happens, their conscience is aroused. Freedom of conscience comes into play.

Those who cry hoarse over Agra should ponder over the reality that conversion is the antithesis of secularism or secular spirit. Our founding fathers of the Constitution would not have imagined that billions of dollars would flow into the country for conversion by all foul and fraudulent means. Otherwise, they would have made a specific provision against conversions by inducement or allurement. Why does one convert a person belonging to another faith? Because he thinks that his faith is superior to the other and only when he/she follows his religion he/she can attain salvation. How does it gel with the spirit of secularism which warrants that all religions should be treated with equal respect? Do the converters endorse the indigenous faith “”Sarva Dharma Samo bhav””.

In today’s political jargon, “”secularism has an anti-Hindu animus””. Christian missionaries believe that India was a land of darkness, of heathenism, of paganism, of unbelievers and they want the entire country had to be converted into a land of Christ. India is poor, according to them, and backward because the land is full of unbelievers, and Joshua Project targets these heathens for the “”harvesting of souls””. When it comes to Islam, any religion that does not owe allegiance to the Prophet is “false religion” worshipping false gods. Does this square up with the spirit of secularism? If someone raises such questions, he will be immediately branded “”communal”” by our secular warriors.

When will our seculars see the reality?

FEDERALISM IS NO ONE WAY ALLEY

By S R Ramanujan

Federalism is the latest buzz word in political discourses these days, of course, next only to “secularism”. Is federalism a one-way street?  Is it the responsibility of the Centre alone to respect and maintain the federal spirit of the Constitution with no role for the States to reciprocate? After the booing incidents at the functions organized by the state where there was an attempt to silence the state chief ministers by a small section of the audience in contrast to the cheering of the Prime Minister, the debate for true federalism has become more shrill.

Undoubtedly, what happened at Kaithal, Solapur and Jharkand are not in good taste and a little prod from the Prime Minister could have averted an ugly spectacle. But, this, in no way, can be stretched to conclude that the Centre has violated the federal spirit of the Constitution. Federal spirit has nothing to do with the unpredictable behavior of the “aam admi”. What the chief ministers did in retaliation saying that they would never share the dais with the PM and would never follow the protocol was also indeed a violation of the federal spirit. Petty incidents, that too, in poll-bound states, cannot and should not be blown out of proportion. Maharashtra chief minister did violate the protocol when he refused to receive the Prime Minister at the Mumbai airport, and instead sent one of his junior ministers. He went a step further and said that he wanted a guarantee for boo-free audience if he were to participate in the functions of the Prime Minister.

Well, what Prithviraj Chavan chose to ignore was the fact that in his own state his partymen breached PM’s security to show him black flags. This protest was perfectly legitimate in a democracy, as legitimate for a section of the audience to boo a chief minister. The argument was that such a protest was orchestrated by the BJP to humiliate the state chief ministers. Can the BJP or the PM put a counter-condition that the PM would visit a state only if the state chief ministers could guarantee that there would be no black flags against the PM. That would have been silly, as silly as Chavan’s demand for a similar guarantee. But the national English media went to town that there was “a rape of federal structure of the country”. The very same media thought it was no news when Modi invited Haryana chief minister Hooda for a chat over tea to mollify his hurt sentiments. When the slogan shouting clip was repeated ad nauseum, there was no clip of Modi-Hooda meet.

Anyway, let us come to the basics. If there could be one party which cared a damn for the federal spirit of the Constitution, it is the Indian National Congress of the Nehru era, Indira Congress of the Nehru dynasty and now the Sonia Congress. In between we had many more Congress parties with different “suffixes” like Congress (O), Congress (U), Congress (R) and the splinter groups led by Arjun Singh,ND Tiwari and others. The extant splinter group is NCP. Why did we have so many Congress groups? The reason is quite simple. Those at the helm at the Centre, whether it was Nehru, Indira, or Sonia did not respect the federal spirit of the Constitution and treated the States like the vassals? That arrogant attitude caring a damn for the federal spirit splintered the party and laid the foundation for political immorality. 

We may hail Nehru as the greatest democrat. But, he was the first Prime Minister to strike a blow to the federal spirit of our Constitution when he dismissed EMS Namboodiripad government in Kerala on 31st July 1959. The undivided communist party of India won the polls with a thin majority of two seats. The Congress could not digest this defeat and the party under the leadership of his daughter, Indira Gandhi, unsuccessfully tried its best for defection. Under the guise of “Vimochana Samaram” (liberation movement), a situation was created to dismiss the duly elected government using Art. 356 of the Constitution.

The tips that Indira leant under her father to (mis)use Art 356 came very handy for her when she took over the reins. She imposed President’s Rule misusing Art 356 on 39 occasions between 1966 and 1977. Janata Party government, formed after the Emergency, was no angel. It also resorted to this authoritarian trend by imposing President’s rule on nine occasions in the states ruled by the Congress.  If Art 356 remains in cold storage for some time now, it is not because of the mercy shown by the Centre to the states or respect for federalism or the wisdom of the political class, but the credit goes to the SC judgement on SR Bommai case that restored a semblance of sanity in dealing with the states.

 Sonia Gandhi, a loyal “bahu” of the dynasty proved that she was no different in trashing the federal spirit of the Constitution and treating the states like vassals when she wanted to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh. The resolution of the State assembly was thrown into the dustbin. A legal pundit made a succinct remark over this episode. Let me quote: “To treat the State’s views as carrying merely formal value, as has been widely suggested, would render the Constitutional process of consultation entirely nugatory in a matter of national importance”. Well, it is like quoting scriptures to a devil. It cannot also be forgotten as to how Lalu Prasad Yadav, when he was the Union Railway Minister, destroyed the federal spirit,  when ordered a parallel enquiry, without the state’s consent, into the 2002 Godhra violence, as a political tool to beat Modi with.

Law and order is another state subject and the Centre cannot intervene unless in an advisory role. But what is the record of the states in equipping themselves with competent manpower and arms and ammunition, besides intelligence network, in order to maintain the federal spirit?  States have not implemented police reforms and the police force has been completely politicized. Every time there is a terror attack or Maoist violence, states were caught napping. It is the Centre that has to intervene with its men and material. Even the failure to control Maoist insurgency is because of the dual authority. Centre cannot directly intervene and it can only supply men and material but the operation has to be under state control. Most often, lack of coordination, as we have seen in Chattisgarh, led to enormous violence and loss of lives.

It is, therefore, funny that states that cannot handle the subject of law and order that was given to them under the federal structure and failed to protect its people is raising a silly incident like booing to talk of “rape of democracy”.  Let the surviving Sonia Congress and for that matter the people who are around and who were partners in Janata experiment introspect as to who trampled the federal spirit of the Constitution for decades instead of blaming the present dispensation!

     

DECLINING MEDIA POWER

By S R Ramanujan

The media was smarting under a great delusion till recently that it was setting the national agenda and that the government of the day whether at the state level or at the Centre was scared of its enormous clout and its ability to shape public opinion or to create public perceptions. But, unfortunately for the media, this has taken a serious beating after the results of the 2014 general elections were out and its bluff was called. Media or no media, people have a mind of their own. There was a time, as the experience in the then AP would show, the media arraigned to itself the role of king maker. But the times have changed.  People’s sentiments and emotions cannot be trifled with. They are more intelligent than what the anchors or editors think they are. Throughout the poll campaign Modi was called all sorts of names like Hitler, Mussolini, polarizer, divisive politician. The results showed that this did not have any impact on the electorate and that was the first shocker for the media, especially the unbearably noisy national media.

On his part, Modi, too, kept the so-called mainstream media at a respectable distance. The media had to be content with the press handouts, sources and this made them hungry for news. When a person is hungry, what does he do? He eats anything that is available. Therefore, Tendulkar’s absence from Parliament made news, as if his absence is going to bring down the edifice of parliamentary democracy. If Rahul Gandhi dozed off in the Lok Sabha, it made headlines; if he makes some inane noise outside Parliament, it led to endless debates; an innocuous advertisement of Airtel became the topic for panel discussion on gender sensitivity at prime time; an albino child not allowed into a play zone in a mall became breaking news. An MP was pilloried for making an appeal to women to dress in a dignified manner and it was called “sexist remark” with liberated women descending on the television studios with their sermons. Whom were they defending? Not the working women nor the home makers of any class – lower, lower middle, middle, upper – who dress decently, but those miscroscopic section of  those who care a damn for any societal norms with the slogan “My body, my right”.

Narendra Modi made a precise diagnosis of this media malaise and showed its place. Social media filled this vacuum. Be that as it may, what is happening at the state level is a bit disturbing. The media which was roaring like a lion started behaving like sheep. Otherwise, how do you expect a channel to apologize to Telangana state Federation of MSOs? The channel’s letter to MSOs  stated “We hereby convey our apologies unconditionally to your association also and request you to resume our network signals to the subscribers”. This may be the first time in the history of India media that a media house fell at the feet of not even the government, but an entity which has nothing to do with the editorial content. The MSOs donned the role of censors and blocked this particular channel’s signals in all the districts of Telangana, except Hyderabad city. What was the sin committed by this channel? On the day, TRS government was sworn in, there was an allegedly derogatory reference to some of the TS MLAs in their bullet news. The channel already apologized to the party and the government and there the matter should end. How come the MSOs usurped punitive powers by blocking the signals to censor the channel for months together? As if this is not enough, the channel’s CEO was arrested and released on bail.

Astonishingly, when the press freedom is threatened in the state with the active connivance of the state, there is no whimper of protest. The journalists associations which normally lose their shirt in protest against silly incidents, is conspicuously silent. Though the matter was raised in Parliament, the Information and Broadcasting Minister made the familiar noise with no honest intention to intervene in the issue. What is worse, the arrest of the CEO of the channel was effected after the matter was raised in Parliament. The assault on press freedom in Telangana State is no news for the national media which is otherwise busy picking holes in Modi’s torn turban, or his speech, or what Mohan Bhagavat’s imagined Hindu agenda.

Is mimicking MLAs such a heinous crime committed by the media? Are MLAs above criticism? Can they not be subjected to harmless banter? NTR was made fun of, Anajaih was Cartoonists’ delight; KCR called Modi a fascist – a serious charge against an elected Prime Minister and the entire media carried it; can we punish the media for that? MPs were painted as the ones who ask questions for cash, who manipulate their travel bills, etc. No offence was meant against the media for carrying those reports. No one raised a privilege motion against the media for maligning the MPs. Perhaps, only perhaps, the fun at the cost of MLAs in TS, gave a clue to Jaya Bachchan  when she was so upset with the radio jockeys for their jokes and raised the issue in Parliament. But, she was only ridiculed for lack of humour though the MPs might have supported her. What is inexplicable is this. How can the MSOs in TS be concerned about an issue which involves the media and the government. Tomorrow, if the same media makes some funny remarks against the Cong/BJP legislators, will their action be the same? If this trend goes unchallenged, MSOs will emerge as the censors of the media and controller of media content possibly with a wink from the government of the day. Are we going to allow this?

Yet another Telugu channel was also clubbed with this particular channel whose CEO was arrested and a case was foisted against him under section 504 and 505 of the IPC. The owners of these two channels belong to a particular community which does not find favour with the present rulers of TS as they do not hail from TS. Could this be the reason for the command performance of the MSOs? Or is this an attempt to warn the rest of the media to behave? Whatever the reason, troubled times are ahead for the media which do not toe the line of the rulers. What happened with the” bullet news” is only the precursor for the bullets that are likely to follow against the uncooperative media!

One take away from TS MSOs episode that stares on your face is this. While Modi simply ignored the mainstream media, TS government is set to punish it over the shoulders of the MSOs.

  

DECLINING MEDIA POWER

By S R Ramanujan

The media was smarting under a great delusion till recently that it was setting the national agenda and that the government of the day whether at the state level or at the Centre was scared of its enormous clout and its ability to shape public opinion or to create public perceptions. But, unfortunately for the media, this has taken a serious beating after the results of the 2014 general elections were out and its bluff was called. Media or no media, people have a mind of their own. There was a time, as the experience in the then AP would show, the media arraigned to itself the role of king maker. But the times have changed.  People’s sentiments and emotions cannot be trifled with. They are more intelligent than what the anchors or editors think they are. Throughout the poll campaign Modi was called all sorts of names like Hitler, Mussolini, polarizer, divisive politician. The results showed that this did not have any impact on the electorate and that was the first shocker for the media, especially the unbearably noisy national media.

On his part, Modi, too, kept the so-called mainstream media at a respectable distance. The media had to be content with the press handouts, sources and this made them hungry for news. When a person is hungry, what does he do? He eats anything that is available. Therefore, Tendulkar’s absence from Parliament made news, as if his absence is going to bring down the edifice of parliamentary democracy. If Rahul Gandhi dozed off in the Lok Sabha, it made headlines; if he makes some inane noise outside Parliament, it led to endless debates; an innocuous advertisement of Airtel became the topic for panel discussion on gender sensitivity at prime time; an albino child not allowed into a play zone in a mall became breaking news. An MP was pilloried for making an appeal to women to dress in a dignified manner and it was called “sexist remark” with liberated women descending on the television studios with their sermons. Whom were they defending? Not the working women nor the home makers of any class – lower, lower middle, middle, upper – who dress decently, but those miscroscopic section of  those who care a damn for any societal norms with the slogan “My body, my right”.

Narendra Modi made a precise diagnosis of this media malaise and showed its place. Social media filled this vacuum. Be that as it may, what is happening at the state level is a bit disturbing. The media which was roaring like a lion started behaving like sheep. Otherwise, how do you expect a channel to apologize to Telangana state Federation of MSOs? The channel’s letter to MSOs  stated “We hereby convey our apologies unconditionally to your association also and request you to resume our network signals to the subscribers”. This may be the first time in the history of India media that a media house fell at the feet of not even the government, but an entity which has nothing to do with the editorial content. The MSOs donned the role of censors and blocked this particular channel’s signals in all the districts of Telangana, except Hyderabad city. What was the sin committed by this channel? On the day, TRS government was sworn in, there was an allegedly derogatory reference to some of the TS MLAs in their bullet news. The channel already apologized to the party and the government and there the matter should end. How come the MSOs usurped punitive powers by blocking the signals to censor the channel for months together? As if this is not enough, the channel’s CEO was arrested and released on bail.

Astonishingly, when the press freedom is threatened in the state with the active connivance of the state, there is no whimper of protest. The journalists associations which normally lose their shirt in protest against silly incidents, is conspicuously silent. Though the matter was raised in Parliament, the Information and Broadcasting Minister made the familiar noise with no honest intention to intervene in the issue. What is worse, the arrest of the CEO of the channel was effected after the matter was raised in Parliament. The assault on press freedom in Telangana State is no news for the national media which is otherwise busy picking holes in Modi’s torn turban, or his speech, or what Mohan Bhagavat’s imagined Hindu agenda.

Is mimicking MLAs such a heinous crime committed by the media? Are MLAs above criticism? Can they not be subjected to harmless banter? NTR was made fun of, Anajaih was Cartoonists’ delight; KCR called Modi a fascist – a serious charge against an elected Prime Minister and the entire media carried it; can we punish the media for that? MPs were painted as the ones who ask questions for cash, who manipulate their travel bills, etc. No offence was meant against the media for carrying those reports. No one raised a privilege motion against the media for maligning the MPs. Perhaps, only perhaps, the fun at the cost of MLAs in TS, gave a clue to Jaya Bachchan  when she was so upset with the radio jockeys for their jokes and raised the issue in Parliament. But, she was only ridiculed for lack of humour though the MPs might have supported her. What is inexplicable is this. How can the MSOs in TS be concerned about an issue which involves the media and the government. Tomorrow, if the same media makes some funny remarks against the Cong/BJP legislators, will their action be the same? If this trend goes unchallenged, MSOs will emerge as the censors of the media and controller of media content possibly with a wink from the government of the day. Are we going to allow this?

Yet another Telugu channel was also clubbed with this particular channel whose CEO was arrested and a case was foisted against him under section 504 and 505 of the IPC. The owners of these two channels belong to a particular community which does not find favour with the present rulers of TS as they do not hail from TS. Could this be the reason for the command performance of the MSOs? Or is this an attempt to warn the rest of the media to behave? Whatever the reason, troubled times are ahead for the media which do not toe the line of the rulers. What happened with the” bullet news” is only the precursor for the bullets that are likely to follow against the uncooperative media!

One take away from TS MSOs episode that stares on your face is this. While Modi simply ignored the mainstream media, TS government is set to punish it over the shoulders of the MSOs.

  

LINGUISTIC TERRORISTS OF TAMIL NADU

For Dravidian politicians Tamil interest is above national interest

By S R Ramanujan

You can’t find more obsessive feudal politicians in any part of democratic world or society than in Tamil Nadu. Dravidian parties may swear by rationalism, but their leaders are anything but rational. They are narcissistic to the core, megalomaniac to a fault and excessively intolerant. While Amma wants every MP or MLA to prostrate before her in public, in the case of Ayya (people in Tamil Nadu know Muthuvel Karunanidhi only by this honorific pronoun) no one can dare address him by his name. Either it should be “Kalaignar” or “Ayya” or “Thalivar”.

It is difficult to keep a count on how many times, Amma sacks her ministers for trivial reasons or without any reasons at all. “In” and “Exit” gates to her council of ministers are always on the standby either to open or shut depending on the whims of Amma. Karunanidhi may preach atheism to his partymen, but when it comes to his close family, his sermons stop at a respectable distance. The name of the game is hypocrisy, sheer hypocrisy. Reason and logic have no place in Dravidian politics and that is what the country is witnessing these days.  Sycophancy at its best!

Look at the reaction in Tamil Nadu against Sri Lankan defence ministry website’s article and caricature of Amma and Narendra Modi. Perhaps they were offensive enough to incur the wrath of politicians in Tamil Nadu. The External Affairs Ministry in Delhi took prompt action, knowing Amma’s theatrics, and the objectionable post was deleted and an apology was tendered by the Sri Lankan government. Karunanidhi, too, shed crocodile tears, with an anticipation that this episode might lead to some uncomfortable equations between Modi and Jaya. But, Tamil politicians were not satisfied at the apology and our national channels also were also in the same league in that even after Sri Lankan apology they have had the usual high decibel panel discussions. With 37-member strength in LS, there was an uproar in Parliament and Sri Lankan envoy was summoned just to placate regal Amma. True to the style of Amma’s politics and her feudal culture, her partymen perhaps expected Sri Lankan President Mahindra Rajapakshe to rush to Poes Garden in Chennai and prostrate before Amma.

Since it did not happen, Amma’s supporters began a poster campaign showing Rajapakshe kneeling before Amma and seeking her apology with a prayer “Oh Mother! I committed a great blunder; Forgive me; Give me life!” What they imagined or rather expected that should happen was in the posters. You may call it fantasy!  Is it the way to portray the leader of a neighbouring country with whom India shares social, cultural and civilizational values even from the time of Asoka the Great?  And mind you, this is even as you are protesting against an offensive article at the website of the Sri Lankan government which was promptly deleted.

Why this extremely acrimonious mindset when it comes to Tamil Nadu with its neighbouring country where a sizeable section of Tamils live who are bona fide citizens of that country. People of West Bengal and Bangladesh share the same language. It is not as if Bangladeshi Hindus are hunky dory about their living conditions though there was no civil war as in Sri Lanaka. But there is no whimper of protest from West Bengal even when Hindus were driven out and their temples were destroyed. The same thing can be said about Punjab or North-East sharing the border with Pakistan and Burma.

One plausible reason could be that with the emergence of Dravidian politics around the middle of the last century, the entire political architecture was revolving around Tamil language, its history, literature and uniqueness. There was no other agenda, economic or political. The entire political agenda was about language and we all know what happened in 1967. It was just the language that unseated Congress and even after four decades, the party is unable to recover the lost ground. Dravidian parties found an emotive issue in Tamil language, and as part of its cultural cleansing, they ridiculed all our epics and appropriated Ravana as Dravidian king and wanted to erase all traces of Hinduism from the state under the guise of rationalism and under the stewardship of EV Ramaswamy Naickar, followed by C N Annadurai and the likes of Karunanidhi.

After capturing power, the baby (i.e. language) cannot be allowed to be thrown away with the bath water. They had to sustain the language bogey. That was the time the Tamils in Sri Lanka raised a banner of revolt against the Sri Lankan government for treating them as second class citizens vis-à-vis the majority Sinhalese. Dravidian parties extended full support to them, allowed them to have their training camps in Tamil Nadu and mobilized the sentiments of Tamils for the cause of Sri Lankan Tamils who migrated to island nation as labour force in Tea estates centuries ago.  The geography of the area is also such that it enabled people to embark or disembark through the sea in an ordinary boat in an hour’s time. No passport, no visa and in a way it has become a free zone.

Further, seeds of secession are deeply laid in the psyche of Dravidian politics though they might not have sprouted. That is the reason their utterances have that tinge of separate identity and treat Sri Lanka as enemy nation of Tamil Nadu without identifying themselves with the national interest of the country and expecting the nation’s foreign policy to be seen through the prism of Sri Lankan Tamil interests. They don’t even take note of the fact that both China and Pakistan had acquired a strategic foothold in Sri Lanka in their ulterior objective for encircling India. Pakistan already took back a diplomat from Colombo because of his links with terrorist groups. ISI is using Sri Lankan base to infiltrate into Tamil Nadu and the proof, if you need proof at all, lies in some Tamil youth wearing T shirts with IS logo and assassination of many Hindu leaders in the recent past.

This is not to argue that no injustice was done to innocent Sri Lankan Tamils. They did suffer the worst effects of civil war.  But what led to the civil war? Was it not the result of terror unleashed by LTTE over the island nation including the multiple assassinations of not only Sri Lankan leaders but our own former Prime Minister? Can we expect the Sri Lankan  government to deal with such terror outfits with kid gloves. Won’t we love to have the head of Hafeez Syed? We banned SIMI and are hunting naxalites. But we expect different standards from Sri Lanka. Our national security interest demands that India should improve its diplomatic relations with Sri Lanka instead of pandering to the very narrow interests of chauvinistic  Dravdian politicians who can be easily defined as “Linguistic Terrorists” who are blinded enough not to see what is happening around.

NATIONAL MEDIA STANDS EXPOSED

It Only Panders to the Agenda of the Fake Secular Forces

By S R Ramanujan

The NDA government is quite right in denying the Sonia Congress the status of LoP. Let’s not get into any Constitutional quagmire.  It has nothing to with the requisite number of MPs the party has in the 16^th  Lok Sabha,  which, anyway, is lower than the Delhi temperature during the summer as pointed by a comedian-turned MP. But the reason, which is justifiable enough, for NDA’s decision is that the ruling alliance has its own opposition within and why should it recognize an opposition outside its circuit. Moreover, the national English media is doing or rather overdoing its role as watchdog, sometimes creating an identity crisis between a watchdog and a mad dog. So the Sonia Congress need not exert itself much to take on the ruling coalition on this issue or any other issue. The Vice President of the Party can happily go round the globe and when he gets some spare time come to Parliament to relax or to relieve himself from jetlag.

The MSM (Mainstream media) is already on the job of disruptive opposition and is trying to create a perception that communal forces are out in the open with Narendra Modi at the helm. It is ready to twist any incident so as to give it a communal colour. Stray comments from loony elements, which should normally be ignored, are blown out of proportion with never-ending debates on them.Hard news is an old-fashioned jargon. What is trending is opinion at the drop of a hat, high decibel debates, trial and judgment. The media  has to prove a point. It has to be seen as prophetic as Nostradamus. During the run up to the 2014 campaign, an apprehension was created in the minds of the people that if Modi were to pip the post, the country will turn into a communal cauldron and minorities will be terrorised. Can the national media, powered by armchair political pundits ever go wrong? It, therefore, started looking around with high-powered telescopic cameras to watch every nook and corner of the country to see whether such a trend is emerging. As luck would favour the MSM, there are instances provided by nondescript leaders belonging to the BJP or its allies. Official spokespersons of the BJP are so moronic that they do more damage to the cause than bringing any clarity or sanity to the debates on the channels. Simply they tie themselves up in knots.

Let’s come to the issues recently seized by the MSM to indicate, again to put in their own pet phrases, “emergence of majoritarianism”, “RSS agenda being executed”, “Modi is Mounimanmohan-2”, “Modi’s silence endorsement of communal hatred of fringe elements” and the like. Shiva Sena MPs’ thuggish behavior came quite handy. Was it really communal in nature? Sena MPs went berserk, no doubt, unbecoming of elected representatives, in Delhi’s Maharashtra Sadan on July 17. But did they indulge in any communal act atleast in this case?  A national English daily, after a lapse of six days, front-paged this news story on July 23^rd completely morphing the event with communal overtones. As if on cue, the national TV channels picked it up and communalized the issue for three days.

 According to an independent journalist’s column in the media portal (thehoot.org), “the Marathi media, print and electronic, had been reporting this incident from day one but none of them gave any communal colour to it. That includes the national daily’s Marathi counterpart. In fact, what was an issue for the Marathi media before, on and after July 17, was never considered worth reporting by the national media not even the vandalism by MPs inside a government property. So it is really puzzling to see the national daily to do a four day old story and add a communal angle to it.”

What comes easy for the national media is to tag such stories. This episode was branded “Chapati gate” The video clip that was telecast non-stop for 3 days with the anchors screaming that a Muslim was forcefed when he was fasting for Ramzan. Yes, there was an ATTEMPT, a most uncivilized and boorish attemept though, by the MPs to forcefeed the catering manager at the Maharashtra Sadan. But he was never forcefed if the video clip has to be believed. Of course, it was thrust on his face saying “Khake dheko”. According to the Hoot report, “almost all the media persons who were present on the spot were witness to the whole drama, as it unfolded, never thought there was a communal angle to the story which is why it was never reflected in any of the coverage of July 17 or later in the Marathi media”.

Therefore, the question is why was such a story planted in the national media after four or five days that too giving completely communal colour to it. It is alleged that the deliberate design was to divert the heat from Maharashtra chief minister Prithvirag Chavan who was already facing trouble on the Narayana Rane resignation issue. How the national television media shed tears for three days, non-stop, for the manner in which a Muslim employee’s religious sentiments was hurt is history. This is one clear example as to how national TV channels have compromised themselves for partisan politics.

The media could have continued even on the fourth day, but, Dr Lakshman, came to its rescue. Dr Lakshsman, who is not a known figure outside Hyderabad, would not have imagined that he would hit the national headlines. Yes, he was on the national news for all wrong reasons. He was only trying to corner the Telangana chief minister for his double standards and poor thing Sania Mirza was caught in the crossfire. The national media did not have time or patience to understand the background to the issue. There was not even a hint in Dr Lakshman’s statement that he was doubting the patriotism of Sania nor casting aspersions on her integrity. The entire protest was against KCR for choosing an ambassador who neither lives in Hyderabad nor speaks the language while nativity criterion was invoked for students. Whatever it is, Dr Lakshman enjoyed the status of a national icon for a couple of days. Fair enough.  And Sania could gain some sympathy with her tears for the camera.

Soon followed an outlandish statement from someone who is most influential.  She said: “Telangana and Jammu & Kashmir were both separate countries and forcibly annexed to the Indian Union after Independence. India needs to come out clean on J & K. Few parts were not ours, we should agree, we should redraw the international lines and move one”. If you think these pearls of wisdom could have been from Arundati Roy, you are mistaken. This was from our own TRS MP Kalvakuntla Kavitha Rao. What was the response from the MSM?  Deafening silence!