The New Yorker
Online Only
News Desk
Notes on Washington and the world by the staff of The New Yorker.
July 29, 2011
Oslo: A Badge from India
Posted by Salil Tripathi
badge.jpg
When Anders Behring Breivik came to Utoya Island, he was wearing a badge that showed a red dagger impaling a white skull; on the skull’s forehead were a crescent and star, a hammer and sickle, and a swastika—the symbols of Islam, Communism, and Nazism. Breivik’s rambling manifesto, which runs into fifteen hundred pages, reveals his hatred of Islam and Communism. The presence of the swastika in his axis of evil was more confusing, given Breivik’s reported ties with the European far right. But then logic cannot explain how Breivik’s mind works.
Breivik, it turned out, had ordered the badge from the Web site of the Indian Art Company, in Varanasi, a northern Indian city that Hindus consider holy. The company is actually a small shop of traditional craftsmen, many of them weavers, in operation since 1933 in a tiny lane in the crowded city. The man who runs the business, Mohammed Aslam Ansari, is Muslim.
About a year ago, Breivik placed an order for samples of the badge, one made of silk and one of metal, and Ansari expected an order of two hundred more after Breivik approved the sample. After receiving a modest payment (Breivik’s manifesto says he paid a hundred and fifty dollars; Ansari says he received about ten thousand rupees, or about two hundred and twenty-five dollars), Ansari sent the samples to Breivik’s address in Norway. The larger order didn’t materialize, and Ansari forgot all about it. Living in a city abounding with Hindu rituals, Ansari might not have found the swastika, which is also an ancient symbol Hindus consider auspicious, to be as unambiguously sinister as it appears in other countries. If he knew a bit more than that, he may not have seen the harm, or grasped its scale. Anyway, his e-commerce strategy hasn’t yielded much—only a few sporadic orders. (His son told an Indian journalist that they weren’t able to keep paying the bill to the company whose servers hosted the Web site.)
Then, this week, he began receiving phone calls from journalists around the world, informing him that his badge had become linked with the massacre. In television interviews since, Ansari has looked slightly puzzled, and pained, as he tries to figure out what happened.
Varanasi is a spiritual city. Situated on the banks of the holy river Ganga, its crowded ghats are often teeming with people, as Hindus come there to perform ablution rituals to wash away their sins. A death and cremation in this city is special, because it releases the Hindu from the cycle of rebirths, or samsara. Hindus immerse the ashes of the dead in the river and float little lamps commemorating the departed souls. Many Muslims live in the city, and their lives are interwoven, and largely free of tension, except when forces from outside Varanasi have intruded. One such force is Hindutva, or “Hinduness,” whose growth in the past two decades is partly an assertive reaction to what Hindutva’s adherents call the Indian government’s continued appeasement of Muslims.
Breivik’s manifesto praises Hindutva, citing amateur historians, many of whom are active in the darker alleys and corners of the Web, where they attract vociferous fans. He calls Hindus Christian fundamentalists’ natural allies in opposing Islam’s spread. At the same time, he sees Hindus (and Indians) not as his equals but fit only to perform certain tasks on a contractual basis. Leading Hindu politicians in India have distanced themselves from Breivik, except one parliamentarian from the Hindu-centric Bharatiya Janata Party, B. P. Singhal, who has been quoted as saying that Breivik’s ideas weren’t wrong, though his methods were.
Ansari is still coming to terms with the massacre in Norway. He tries to reassure a reporter from the news agency, Press Trust of India, “I have not done anything wrong intentionally. Still, I have a feeling of guilt…. If I was aware about the ill-intention of the man, I would have never accepted his business proposal.”
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/07/oslo-a-badge-from-india.html#ixzz1TiQV6HAF
|
July 31, 2011
Petition Calls Op-Ed by Harvard Summer School Instructor Offensive to Muslims
The Harvard Crimson
Petition Calls Op-Ed by Harvard Summer School Instructor Offensive to Muslims
Article advocated for steps such as disenfranchising non-Hindus as a means of combatting terrorism, provoking outrage and calls for his ouster
By Leanna B. Ehrlich, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
Published: Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Subramanian Swamy, seen above, is accused of penning an op-ed that is inflammatory towards Muslims.
A group of Harvard students have started a petition calling on the University to sever ties with Subramanian Swamy, a Harvard Summer School economics instructor who wrote an op-ed against Islamic terrorism that many have called offensive and inflammatory.
In an article published July 16 in the Indian newspaper Daily News and Analysis, Swamy recommended demolishing hundreds of mosques, disenfranchising non-Hindus who do not acknowledge their alleged Hindu ancestry, and banning conversion from Hinduism.
The op-ed came in response to a series of bombings in Mumbai that killed 23 on July 13.
“The first lesson to be learnt from the recent history of Islamic terrorism against India and for tackling terrorism in India is that the Hindu is the target and that Muslims of India are being programmed by a slow reactive process to become radical and thus slide into suicide against Hindus,” Swamy wrote.
His op-ed spurred over 200 people to sign a petition condemning Swamy and calling on Harvard to end its relationship with him.
“These are statements you’d expect a demagogue on the extreme right to say,” Umang Kumar, a student at Harvard Divinity School, said, “but a professor who comes here, who got his Ph.D. from Harvard?”
Kumar and Sanjay J. Pinto, a Ph.D. candidate in sociology and social policy, organized the petition with a small group of peers and then emailed it out to an initial group of 80 students.
“Both of us decided we really needed to take action,” Pinto said. “His comments are wrong on many levels. They put forth a vision of Indian society in which not all religious groups are welcome, which is very different from the India that both of us know.”
In an interview with The Crimson, Swamy said that he is a religiously tolerant person.
“I can’t condemn all Muslims. I’m not against them,” Swamy said. “I never said Muslims as a whole are terrorists.”
However, the petition accuses Swamy of using the July 13 bombings to write a piece that is inflammatory towards Muslims.
“Swamy has exploited this event not only to promote a vision of Indian society based on Hindu supremacy, but to disparage and cast suspicion on the entire Muslim community in India,” the petition states.
At the Summer School, Swamy teaches Economics S-110: “Quantitative Methods in Economics and Business” and Economics S-1316: “Economic Development in India and East Asia.”
In a statement sent by a spokesperson, Donald H. Pfister, the dean of Harvard Summer School, said that the school will examine the issue.
“At this point we have only a basic awareness of the situation and have not been contacted by the organizations involved," Pfister said. "Professor Swamy is a long-time member of the Harvard Summer School faculty who previously was a member of the Department of Economics here. We will give this matter our serious attention."
Pinto and Kumar plan to deliver their petition to the Harvard administration early next week.
“Swamy draws a lot of prestige and legitimacy from his position at Harvard,” Pinto said. “If the Hindu right were to come into power in India, he could very well be someone who takes up a position in government, so I think it’s important for members of this community to play a part in discrediting him and saying, ‘No, he does not represent us.’”
In India, Swamy leads the Janata party, a political party that held the majority of India’s Parliament decades ago but has since fragmented. At Harvard, he earned his Ph.D. in economics in 1965 and has served as an assistant and associate professor.
Swamy said that the Indian response to his op-ed has been positive.
“I don’t think anyone in India, except the left wing, has been upset by my article,” he said. “There has been wholesale support.”
But the backers of the petition were hardly supportive of the piece.
“Not allowing Hindus to convert to any other religion, not allowing other groups to vote unless they proudly declare their Hindu ancestry—it’s honestly kind of absurd,” Pinto said.
Kumar and Pinto both said that while freedom of speech is an integral part of a thriving academic community like Harvard, Swamy’s comments crossed a line.
“They stereotype an entire population of people,” Pinto said. “How can this man who expresses these views, who’s basically saying that India should only be for Hindus and not for other people, and denigrating all Muslims, how can he teach students at Harvard?”
—Staff writer Leanna B. Ehrlich can be reached at lehrlich@college.harvard.edu.
Petition Calls Op-Ed by Harvard Summer School Instructor Offensive to Muslims
Article advocated for steps such as disenfranchising non-Hindus as a means of combatting terrorism, provoking outrage and calls for his ouster
By Leanna B. Ehrlich, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
Published: Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Subramanian Swamy, seen above, is accused of penning an op-ed that is inflammatory towards Muslims.
A group of Harvard students have started a petition calling on the University to sever ties with Subramanian Swamy, a Harvard Summer School economics instructor who wrote an op-ed against Islamic terrorism that many have called offensive and inflammatory.
In an article published July 16 in the Indian newspaper Daily News and Analysis, Swamy recommended demolishing hundreds of mosques, disenfranchising non-Hindus who do not acknowledge their alleged Hindu ancestry, and banning conversion from Hinduism.
The op-ed came in response to a series of bombings in Mumbai that killed 23 on July 13.
“The first lesson to be learnt from the recent history of Islamic terrorism against India and for tackling terrorism in India is that the Hindu is the target and that Muslims of India are being programmed by a slow reactive process to become radical and thus slide into suicide against Hindus,” Swamy wrote.
His op-ed spurred over 200 people to sign a petition condemning Swamy and calling on Harvard to end its relationship with him.
“These are statements you’d expect a demagogue on the extreme right to say,” Umang Kumar, a student at Harvard Divinity School, said, “but a professor who comes here, who got his Ph.D. from Harvard?”
Kumar and Sanjay J. Pinto, a Ph.D. candidate in sociology and social policy, organized the petition with a small group of peers and then emailed it out to an initial group of 80 students.
“Both of us decided we really needed to take action,” Pinto said. “His comments are wrong on many levels. They put forth a vision of Indian society in which not all religious groups are welcome, which is very different from the India that both of us know.”
In an interview with The Crimson, Swamy said that he is a religiously tolerant person.
“I can’t condemn all Muslims. I’m not against them,” Swamy said. “I never said Muslims as a whole are terrorists.”
However, the petition accuses Swamy of using the July 13 bombings to write a piece that is inflammatory towards Muslims.
“Swamy has exploited this event not only to promote a vision of Indian society based on Hindu supremacy, but to disparage and cast suspicion on the entire Muslim community in India,” the petition states.
At the Summer School, Swamy teaches Economics S-110: “Quantitative Methods in Economics and Business” and Economics S-1316: “Economic Development in India and East Asia.”
In a statement sent by a spokesperson, Donald H. Pfister, the dean of Harvard Summer School, said that the school will examine the issue.
“At this point we have only a basic awareness of the situation and have not been contacted by the organizations involved," Pfister said. "Professor Swamy is a long-time member of the Harvard Summer School faculty who previously was a member of the Department of Economics here. We will give this matter our serious attention."
Pinto and Kumar plan to deliver their petition to the Harvard administration early next week.
“Swamy draws a lot of prestige and legitimacy from his position at Harvard,” Pinto said. “If the Hindu right were to come into power in India, he could very well be someone who takes up a position in government, so I think it’s important for members of this community to play a part in discrediting him and saying, ‘No, he does not represent us.’”
In India, Swamy leads the Janata party, a political party that held the majority of India’s Parliament decades ago but has since fragmented. At Harvard, he earned his Ph.D. in economics in 1965 and has served as an assistant and associate professor.
Swamy said that the Indian response to his op-ed has been positive.
“I don’t think anyone in India, except the left wing, has been upset by my article,” he said. “There has been wholesale support.”
But the backers of the petition were hardly supportive of the piece.
“Not allowing Hindus to convert to any other religion, not allowing other groups to vote unless they proudly declare their Hindu ancestry—it’s honestly kind of absurd,” Pinto said.
Kumar and Pinto both said that while freedom of speech is an integral part of a thriving academic community like Harvard, Swamy’s comments crossed a line.
“They stereotype an entire population of people,” Pinto said. “How can this man who expresses these views, who’s basically saying that India should only be for Hindus and not for other people, and denigrating all Muslims, how can he teach students at Harvard?”
—Staff writer Leanna B. Ehrlich can be reached at lehrlich@college.harvard.edu.
Gujarat Court to examine ex-British envoys in post-Godhra riot case
The Times of India
Court to examine ex-British envoys in post-Godhra riot case
PTI | Jul 31, 2011, 09.19PM IST
AHMEDABAD: A special court, hearing the post-Godhra riot case where four persons including three British nationals were killed in Sabarkantha district, has allowed an application seeking examination of three witnesses including top officials of the British High Commission.
The application was filed by the original complainant and prime witness in the case, Imran Dawood, a British national himself who had survived the attack on him and others near Prantij in Sabarkantha on February 28, 2002.
Special Judge Geeta Gopi hearing the case on Friday issued summons to the then deputy-British High Commissioners - Ian Reakes and Howard Parkinson. Court also summoned one of the relatives of the deceased, Bashir Sufi, who too is a British national. Imran had appeared before court through video conferencing from London.
The court had permitted examination of these witnesses after the prosecuting agency, Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) gave consent for it.
All three would be examined as prosecution witness on day-to-day basis through video conferencing, and the expenses in this regard will be borne by Dawood.
According to case details, three British nationals Saeed Dawood, Mohammed Aswat Nallabhai, Shakil Dawood and their Gujarati driver Yusuf Sulaiman were burnt to death during the post-Godhra violence on National Highway 8 near Prantij.
Court to examine ex-British envoys in post-Godhra riot case
PTI | Jul 31, 2011, 09.19PM IST
AHMEDABAD: A special court, hearing the post-Godhra riot case where four persons including three British nationals were killed in Sabarkantha district, has allowed an application seeking examination of three witnesses including top officials of the British High Commission.
The application was filed by the original complainant and prime witness in the case, Imran Dawood, a British national himself who had survived the attack on him and others near Prantij in Sabarkantha on February 28, 2002.
Special Judge Geeta Gopi hearing the case on Friday issued summons to the then deputy-British High Commissioners - Ian Reakes and Howard Parkinson. Court also summoned one of the relatives of the deceased, Bashir Sufi, who too is a British national. Imran had appeared before court through video conferencing from London.
The court had permitted examination of these witnesses after the prosecuting agency, Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) gave consent for it.
All three would be examined as prosecution witness on day-to-day basis through video conferencing, and the expenses in this regard will be borne by Dawood.
According to case details, three British nationals Saeed Dawood, Mohammed Aswat Nallabhai, Shakil Dawood and their Gujarati driver Yusuf Sulaiman were burnt to death during the post-Godhra violence on National Highway 8 near Prantij.
Photo of RSS activist B.S.Yeddyurappa who went on to become Karnataka Chief Minister
Yeddyurappa's active participation in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh brought him to the Sangh Parivar's political arm, the Bharatiya Janata Party. Thus began his political journey. In this Nov 2009 file photo B.S.Yeddyurappa is seen at an RSS convention in Bangalore. Photo: PTI
United Colors of Fundamentalisms: Terror attack Hits Norway
by Ram Puniyani
India hardly recovered from the ghastly terror attack of 13th July, 2011 Mumbai that terrorism struck in Norway. In Norway on 22nd July, Friday, around 3.20 PM in the afternoon the high-rise, where Prime Minister’s office is located in central Oslo, was targeted resulting in blowing out windows and facades of close by buildings; just few hours later a gunman putting the dress of a police officer opened fire on youngsters at a summer camp of ruling Labor Party, in Uloya Island. The twin acts of terror killed 93 innocent lives.
Even before the horror of the act was registered, the verdict about ‘who did it’ was out, and the usual suspects in acts of terror were named, all around, by media and experts. The ‘experts’, ideologically motivated commentators and section of media revolved their discussion around Al Qaeda chief Ayman-al Jawahitri, saying that he is the culprit of the act. It was commented that the Al Qaeda, the dreaded Islamic terrorists have done this. Incidentally Norway is also involved in the war in Afghanistan.
As it turned out the culprit was a Norwegian, Anders Behrig Breivik, a 32 year old Christian farmer who has been part of right wing ideology, a neo Nazi racist, opposed to multiculturalism, Islam; Muslims and immigration of Muslims, seething with anti Muslim sentiments. His blogs are reflective of his ideology whereby in the name of tradition he opposes the development of European Union and Multiculturalism. Also he profiles Muslims as being supporters of Al Qaeda and so of terrorism. It seemed through this act he was opposing the liberal policies related to immigration of the Norwegian Prime Minister.
Despite this being true, the common perceptions have been manufactured to hate Muslims and Islam by projecting them as the terrorists. Whenever the word terrorist is said the image of a bearded Muslim flashes up. This is mainly due to the machinations of US-CIA through the media. Same way in India, the Muslims are projected as terrorists and the perception here is that all terrorists are Muslims. Some commentators go further to say that while Muslims are terrorists due to religion’s preaching’s, those from other religions have political goals. All this is a total distortion of facts. Going to the depth of reality will unearth the role of US in creating the whole ‘Jihadi terror’ phenomenon, and it is US again which has played the worst role in doctoring the mass consciousness against Islam and Muslim.
The tragedy of this bomb attack reminds us of various phenomena in the society. To begin with the first and major suspicion for any attack on terror in India and at global level is put on the so called Jihadi groups, thereby on the Muslims. By now some of the verses of Koran have been taken out of context and misinterpreted to create Islamophobia. One recalls that the promotion of right wing Al Qaeda-Taliban was promoted by United States in its goal to throw away Russian armies from Afghanistan, which was occupied by them on the request from the local Communist Government. US planned to turn Russia’s Afghan occupation in to its Vietnam, as US had to bite the dust when it had attacked Vietnam.
Since US armies were totally demoralized due to the humiliating defeat in Vietnam, US- CIA planned to set up Madrassas in Pakistan in collusion with ISI. In these madrassas the radical version of Islam was taught to the young Muslim boys. The verses of Koran exhorting the Muslims to kill the infidels attacking them were taken out of context to indoctrinate the young Muslim boys. As a matter of fact these verses were meant for the war situation to protect the Muslims as a last resort. When seen in isolation it seems as if the advice to followers is to kill recklessly, when seen in the context, it is clear that these verses were said during the war and it was a defensive struggle for new converts to Islam.
A special syllabus was developed in Washington to be used in these Madrassas. These Madrassas produced the Al Qaeda breed. Osama, again a US creation was brought in as leader of Al Qaeda and was provided with 8000 million dollars and 7000 tons of armaments. The indoctrination of Al Qaeda-Taliban recruits was aimed to make them join anti Russian forces to defeat Russian army.
It is after 9/11 2001 that US media popularized the term ‘Islamic terrorism’, it was a deliberate propaganda to demonize Islam and Muslims to prepare the ground to attack Afghanistan and then Iraq. In India the likes of Osama, Swami Dayanand Pandey; Assemanand and Company, were bred and brought up in the organizations with the goal of Hindu Rashtra and these terror suspects were determined to show their ‘bravery’ by following the dictum of ‘Bomb for Bomb’. The association of Islam and Muslims with terrorism became firm in poplar mind and Indian investigation agencies have been recklessly arresting Muslim youth, even when the blasts have taken place in front of Mosques and other places of Muslim congregation. Even after 13/7 2011Mumbai attack, the similar theories have been put out by the agencies and one hopes that these authorities will start delinking their biases from professionalism.
As far as Europe-US are concerned we have seen in the past also that there have been terrorists and terror groups which have indulged in acts of terror. Irish Republican Army declared few years ago that they will not indulge in acts of terror. Timothy McWay bombed Oklahoma in 1995 killing nearly 165 people. The current rise of intolerant, right wing ideology in Europe and partly all over the World has a lot to do with the global changes, post the rise of US as the sole superpower. US has been dictating the world, for the sake of its economic interests, particularly those related to control over oil resources. The attack in Norway shows very interestingly as to how the economic problems, which are plaguing the World, are being diverted to the issues related to xenophobic, intolerant view of society. The Norwegian terrorist is not an isolated person voicing these views. In Europe there are various trends which promote hatred for Islam and Muslims and oppose the immigration of Muslims.
Swedish daily Expo claims that Anders is a part of group called Nordisk, which is a Neo Nazi group and focuses on political terrorism. He has leaning towards Christian Fundamentalism. Since at the moment Breivik’s fundamentalist ideas are focused against Islam-Muslims, he finds himself close to the Hindutva fundamentalism, no wonder as RSS led Hindutva fundamentalism is currently targeting Muslims in particular. Breivik may be unaware that these Hindu fundamentalists are also on the spree to kill and intimidate the Christians in Adivasi areas. As such the Breivik’s Manifesto seems to have derived lot of inspiration form the RSS Combine. He appreciates the acts done by Hindutva groups of targeting Islam and Muslims. Breivik has quoted from the Hindutva ideologues criticism of Islam and Muslims. No wonder B.P.Singhal of VHP, a RSS affiliate said the Breivik’s cause is correct but method is wrong.
Terror trends are so parallel all over the World, here a person inspired by Christian Fundamentalism is taking to terror, in Afghanistan-Pakistan Al Qaeda type of groups are fed on the diet of Islamic fundamentalism and the likes of Aseemanand and Pragya Singh Thakur base themselves on Hindu Fundamentalism. The culture of liberal values and ideology of struggle for dignity and rights of people are being substituted by the fundamentalist ideas all around. Fundamentalism generates Hate against ‘other’ religious communities leading to heinous crimes, witnessed in different parts of the World, particularly in South Asia and occasionally the one like this in Europe.
There is a deeper unity in the ideologies of all fundamentalisms. Globally there are two major factors promoting Fundamentalism in the name of this or that religion. One, when a privileged section of society feels threatened by the rise of assertion for equality by the deprived classes, women included. Two, when a superpower promotes it proactively to use the products of fundamentalist mind set for its economic-political goals. These trends come up in the wake of social changes where the weaker sections of society are trying to come up and assert their rights. In such situations the entrenched social groups resort to the politics in the language of religion. This in turn co-opts and uses the marginalizing section of people, those getting marginalized due to social processes, and unleashes an identity politics which ensure the status quo. At superficial level they target the people of other religions. At the deeper level this fundamentalist related political ideologies are opposed to the values of Democracy, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. They inherently believe in the birth based hierarchy of caste-class and gender. This is where Breivik will appreciate what Hindu Fundamentalists are doing in India. India must have been mentioned by him because it is here that ideological sophistry of Hindutva elements against Islam-Muslims is a so aggressive and visible from last few decades.
The tragedy is, one fundamentalism feeds another. Promotion of Al Qaeda and accompanying radical version of Islam is used as a pretext by other fundamentalist tendencies to strengthen them. The Norway tragedy should wake up the World to the reality of this dastardly economic-political reason of terrorism. Religion should be for moral values, terrorism is a political phenomenon. Like in Norway the economic crisis is leading to the rise of intolerant views. It is time we address the deeper political issues, we should work for global democratic system, we should also aim for global peace movement so that this aberration in the understanding about terrorism is overcome, so that we can really engage with the deeper issues related to the deprivations of society. This is what will help us eradicate the phenomenon of terrorism.
India hardly recovered from the ghastly terror attack of 13th July, 2011 Mumbai that terrorism struck in Norway. In Norway on 22nd July, Friday, around 3.20 PM in the afternoon the high-rise, where Prime Minister’s office is located in central Oslo, was targeted resulting in blowing out windows and facades of close by buildings; just few hours later a gunman putting the dress of a police officer opened fire on youngsters at a summer camp of ruling Labor Party, in Uloya Island. The twin acts of terror killed 93 innocent lives.
Even before the horror of the act was registered, the verdict about ‘who did it’ was out, and the usual suspects in acts of terror were named, all around, by media and experts. The ‘experts’, ideologically motivated commentators and section of media revolved their discussion around Al Qaeda chief Ayman-al Jawahitri, saying that he is the culprit of the act. It was commented that the Al Qaeda, the dreaded Islamic terrorists have done this. Incidentally Norway is also involved in the war in Afghanistan.
As it turned out the culprit was a Norwegian, Anders Behrig Breivik, a 32 year old Christian farmer who has been part of right wing ideology, a neo Nazi racist, opposed to multiculturalism, Islam; Muslims and immigration of Muslims, seething with anti Muslim sentiments. His blogs are reflective of his ideology whereby in the name of tradition he opposes the development of European Union and Multiculturalism. Also he profiles Muslims as being supporters of Al Qaeda and so of terrorism. It seemed through this act he was opposing the liberal policies related to immigration of the Norwegian Prime Minister.
Despite this being true, the common perceptions have been manufactured to hate Muslims and Islam by projecting them as the terrorists. Whenever the word terrorist is said the image of a bearded Muslim flashes up. This is mainly due to the machinations of US-CIA through the media. Same way in India, the Muslims are projected as terrorists and the perception here is that all terrorists are Muslims. Some commentators go further to say that while Muslims are terrorists due to religion’s preaching’s, those from other religions have political goals. All this is a total distortion of facts. Going to the depth of reality will unearth the role of US in creating the whole ‘Jihadi terror’ phenomenon, and it is US again which has played the worst role in doctoring the mass consciousness against Islam and Muslim.
The tragedy of this bomb attack reminds us of various phenomena in the society. To begin with the first and major suspicion for any attack on terror in India and at global level is put on the so called Jihadi groups, thereby on the Muslims. By now some of the verses of Koran have been taken out of context and misinterpreted to create Islamophobia. One recalls that the promotion of right wing Al Qaeda-Taliban was promoted by United States in its goal to throw away Russian armies from Afghanistan, which was occupied by them on the request from the local Communist Government. US planned to turn Russia’s Afghan occupation in to its Vietnam, as US had to bite the dust when it had attacked Vietnam.
Since US armies were totally demoralized due to the humiliating defeat in Vietnam, US- CIA planned to set up Madrassas in Pakistan in collusion with ISI. In these madrassas the radical version of Islam was taught to the young Muslim boys. The verses of Koran exhorting the Muslims to kill the infidels attacking them were taken out of context to indoctrinate the young Muslim boys. As a matter of fact these verses were meant for the war situation to protect the Muslims as a last resort. When seen in isolation it seems as if the advice to followers is to kill recklessly, when seen in the context, it is clear that these verses were said during the war and it was a defensive struggle for new converts to Islam.
A special syllabus was developed in Washington to be used in these Madrassas. These Madrassas produced the Al Qaeda breed. Osama, again a US creation was brought in as leader of Al Qaeda and was provided with 8000 million dollars and 7000 tons of armaments. The indoctrination of Al Qaeda-Taliban recruits was aimed to make them join anti Russian forces to defeat Russian army.
It is after 9/11 2001 that US media popularized the term ‘Islamic terrorism’, it was a deliberate propaganda to demonize Islam and Muslims to prepare the ground to attack Afghanistan and then Iraq. In India the likes of Osama, Swami Dayanand Pandey; Assemanand and Company, were bred and brought up in the organizations with the goal of Hindu Rashtra and these terror suspects were determined to show their ‘bravery’ by following the dictum of ‘Bomb for Bomb’. The association of Islam and Muslims with terrorism became firm in poplar mind and Indian investigation agencies have been recklessly arresting Muslim youth, even when the blasts have taken place in front of Mosques and other places of Muslim congregation. Even after 13/7 2011Mumbai attack, the similar theories have been put out by the agencies and one hopes that these authorities will start delinking their biases from professionalism.
As far as Europe-US are concerned we have seen in the past also that there have been terrorists and terror groups which have indulged in acts of terror. Irish Republican Army declared few years ago that they will not indulge in acts of terror. Timothy McWay bombed Oklahoma in 1995 killing nearly 165 people. The current rise of intolerant, right wing ideology in Europe and partly all over the World has a lot to do with the global changes, post the rise of US as the sole superpower. US has been dictating the world, for the sake of its economic interests, particularly those related to control over oil resources. The attack in Norway shows very interestingly as to how the economic problems, which are plaguing the World, are being diverted to the issues related to xenophobic, intolerant view of society. The Norwegian terrorist is not an isolated person voicing these views. In Europe there are various trends which promote hatred for Islam and Muslims and oppose the immigration of Muslims.
Swedish daily Expo claims that Anders is a part of group called Nordisk, which is a Neo Nazi group and focuses on political terrorism. He has leaning towards Christian Fundamentalism. Since at the moment Breivik’s fundamentalist ideas are focused against Islam-Muslims, he finds himself close to the Hindutva fundamentalism, no wonder as RSS led Hindutva fundamentalism is currently targeting Muslims in particular. Breivik may be unaware that these Hindu fundamentalists are also on the spree to kill and intimidate the Christians in Adivasi areas. As such the Breivik’s Manifesto seems to have derived lot of inspiration form the RSS Combine. He appreciates the acts done by Hindutva groups of targeting Islam and Muslims. Breivik has quoted from the Hindutva ideologues criticism of Islam and Muslims. No wonder B.P.Singhal of VHP, a RSS affiliate said the Breivik’s cause is correct but method is wrong.
Terror trends are so parallel all over the World, here a person inspired by Christian Fundamentalism is taking to terror, in Afghanistan-Pakistan Al Qaeda type of groups are fed on the diet of Islamic fundamentalism and the likes of Aseemanand and Pragya Singh Thakur base themselves on Hindu Fundamentalism. The culture of liberal values and ideology of struggle for dignity and rights of people are being substituted by the fundamentalist ideas all around. Fundamentalism generates Hate against ‘other’ religious communities leading to heinous crimes, witnessed in different parts of the World, particularly in South Asia and occasionally the one like this in Europe.
There is a deeper unity in the ideologies of all fundamentalisms. Globally there are two major factors promoting Fundamentalism in the name of this or that religion. One, when a privileged section of society feels threatened by the rise of assertion for equality by the deprived classes, women included. Two, when a superpower promotes it proactively to use the products of fundamentalist mind set for its economic-political goals. These trends come up in the wake of social changes where the weaker sections of society are trying to come up and assert their rights. In such situations the entrenched social groups resort to the politics in the language of religion. This in turn co-opts and uses the marginalizing section of people, those getting marginalized due to social processes, and unleashes an identity politics which ensure the status quo. At superficial level they target the people of other religions. At the deeper level this fundamentalist related political ideologies are opposed to the values of Democracy, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. They inherently believe in the birth based hierarchy of caste-class and gender. This is where Breivik will appreciate what Hindu Fundamentalists are doing in India. India must have been mentioned by him because it is here that ideological sophistry of Hindutva elements against Islam-Muslims is a so aggressive and visible from last few decades.
The tragedy is, one fundamentalism feeds another. Promotion of Al Qaeda and accompanying radical version of Islam is used as a pretext by other fundamentalist tendencies to strengthen them. The Norway tragedy should wake up the World to the reality of this dastardly economic-political reason of terrorism. Religion should be for moral values, terrorism is a political phenomenon. Like in Norway the economic crisis is leading to the rise of intolerant views. It is time we address the deeper political issues, we should work for global democratic system, we should also aim for global peace movement so that this aberration in the understanding about terrorism is overcome, so that we can really engage with the deeper issues related to the deprivations of society. This is what will help us eradicate the phenomenon of terrorism.
July 30, 2011
Press Statement by Committee for the Defence of Teesta Setalvad and Justice in Gujarat
Press Statement
Committee for the Defence of Teesta Setalvad and Justice in Gujarat
Nawab Building, 2nd Floor, 327, Dr. D.N. Road, Mumbai - 400 001
28th July, 2011
A.) Reason for the formation of the Committee:
Subversion of Justice is not a new Phenomena in the process of its administration. The recent turns of events in cases following the communal carnage in 2002 have borne its maximum brunt.
Citizens concerned for justice of the victims of Gujarat carnage have formed a Committee for the Defence of Teests Setalvad and Justice if Gujarat. The Committee would undertake appropriate action and activities to see that either Teesta Setalvad nor anybody is victimised for working for the cause of justice.
The Committee would also defend the Human Rights of vulnerable sections and would include but not limited it to monitoring cases slapped on Teesta Setalvad, to stand in solidarity with her to bring about detailed facts to the people pertaining to the selective victimisation of Teests Setalvad and those fighting for the cause of justice in Gujarat. The ultimate objective is to allow the Law and process of justice to take its own course without being subverted or influenced by vested interests.
The Committee thus in the process will gradually bring out the truth before the people of this country through statements, meetings, engagements with the media and all available other platforms. The Committee seeks to address issues not only from the legal angle but also look at Human Rights abuses in the wider ambit of achieving equitable social justice for all. The Plight of Muslims is not vibrant in so called “Vibrant Gujarat”
B.) Justice P.B. Sawant (Retd. Justice Supreme Court as Chairperson:
The Committee is headed by Shri P.B. Sawant, Retd. Justice, Supreme Court of India as the Chairperson, Shri Suresh Mehta, Fmr. Chief Minister, Gujarat & Dr. Azgaralli Engineer the Vice Chairpersons, Shri B.A. Desai, Sr. Adv. & Fmr. Addnl. Solicitor General of India is the Convener & Shri Irfan Engineer, All India Secular Forum is the Jt. Convener. 700 Eminent Persons from all over India are its members.
C.) Vadodara District Committee :
While the Committee was formed in Mumbai in May 2011 it is felt that the real work of the Committee is in Gujarat. The Committee is happy to announce that the first such District Committee in Gujarat is being set up in Vadodara, a great city of Sayajirao Gaikwad Maharaj with Prof. Juzer Bandukwala as President.
It is proposed to set up such District Committees in 19 Districts where such communal carnages have taken place in 2002.
D.) Teachings of Mahatma Gandhi :
The Committee also propose to propagate the true philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi as there is systematic effort by communal parties to destroy Gandhisam by making him a God, subverting and distorting his teachings and particularly the Concept of Communal Harmony.
Mahatma Gandhi was a Hindu and he had abiding faith in Hinduism. According to him "You cannot be a true Hindu if you hate any other religion. I consider myself a follower of Islam, Christianity, Zoroaster’s and every other religion because I am a true Hindu".
Mahatma Gandhi stated “Religion is not a part of nationality but a personal matter”. Man & his God, Religion is a personal affair of Hinduism. It must not be mixed up with Politics and National Affairs. The Committee in association with its distinguished members will Spread true teachings of Mahatma Gandhi!
In the dismal scenario where Violence in the name of Religion & Culture is becoming more frightening, the need for Beacon Light giving the Message of Peace is being felt very acutely.
E.) Immediate Concerns: -
To Gujaratis feel sad that a criminal trial in Best Bakery had by order of Supreme Court transfered to another State. Shri Rais Khan, then Secretary, Committee for Justice and peace played an Active role in giving aid support to the victims of Communal Carnage.
In spite of humiliation of transfer of Cr. Trial of Best Bakery case to another state, Zahira Shaikh once again turned hostile second time and Hon’ble Court sentenced her to one year in prison which she served. Best Bakery Case resulted in conviction.
We are not going into the details of subsequent events as the facts are well known to the people of Gujarat & particularly Vadodara.
Teests Setalvad is the grand-daughter of the doyen of India Bar Attorney General, M.C. Setalvad. She is a Gujarati and naturally felt that she should go to the succor of the victims of communal carnage. Also because she herself is a journalist & Editor of Communal Combat magazine.
It was felt that such winning over of the witnesses or making them turn hostile would stop.
F.) Yasmin Shaikh
One Yasmin Shaikh was an important witness it was alleged that she was tutored by Teesta Setalvad. The Trial Court negatived this accusation, squarely holding in 2006 that “The signs of having been tutored were not found while analysing the witness evidence.” After several years Yasmin Shaikh have moved the Bombay High Court that Teesta Setelvad influenced her to testify against the accused!
G.) Naroda Gam Case
Same Rais Khan, referred to above, who was dismissed from service with CJP has now made similar accusations against Teesta Setalvad and Naroda Gam Case and Police have registered a Cr. Case against her and she had to take protection from the Gujarat High Court by obtaining interim anticipatory Bail!
Shri Rais Khan is filing complaint in various fora alleging that Teesta Setalvad has tutored witnesses.
It is apprehended that many such cases may be filed against Teesta Setalvad and others who are helping the victims. There is a method in madness i.e. to muzzle the voice of Teesta and Ors. by getting them some how arrested. Hence the need for such Committee headed by Hon’ble Justice P.B. Sawant.
H.) Pandharwadas Mass Graves Case
This is another case which is foisted on Teesta Setalvad. It is not necessary to state details of this case. Suffice to say that the Police has filed charge sheet against relatives and friend of Massacred Victims and Rais Khan, under Sections 193, 194, 195,196 199 and 200 of I.P.C.
Same Rais Khan has made a confessional Statement in this case under Section 164 of Cr.Pr. Code making similar allegations against Teesta Setelvad. Teesta Setelvad is alreadey granted Anticipatory Bail by the High Court.
On 29th July 2011 Teesta Setalvad is summoned by Lundwadda Police Station! It is feared that to overcome Anticipatory Bail, Lundwadda Police may register a New Offence of Non-Bailable nature and arrest her!
Office bearers of said Defence Committee and Members are going to Lundwadda to give support to Teesta Setalvad.
Prof. Juzer Bandukwala Senior Advocate B. A. Desai
Vice President Convener
Committee for the Defence of Teesta Setalvad and Justice in Gujarat
Nawab Building, 2nd Floor, 327, Dr. D.N. Road, Mumbai - 400 001
28th July, 2011
A.) Reason for the formation of the Committee:
Subversion of Justice is not a new Phenomena in the process of its administration. The recent turns of events in cases following the communal carnage in 2002 have borne its maximum brunt.
Citizens concerned for justice of the victims of Gujarat carnage have formed a Committee for the Defence of Teests Setalvad and Justice if Gujarat. The Committee would undertake appropriate action and activities to see that either Teesta Setalvad nor anybody is victimised for working for the cause of justice.
The Committee would also defend the Human Rights of vulnerable sections and would include but not limited it to monitoring cases slapped on Teesta Setalvad, to stand in solidarity with her to bring about detailed facts to the people pertaining to the selective victimisation of Teests Setalvad and those fighting for the cause of justice in Gujarat. The ultimate objective is to allow the Law and process of justice to take its own course without being subverted or influenced by vested interests.
The Committee thus in the process will gradually bring out the truth before the people of this country through statements, meetings, engagements with the media and all available other platforms. The Committee seeks to address issues not only from the legal angle but also look at Human Rights abuses in the wider ambit of achieving equitable social justice for all. The Plight of Muslims is not vibrant in so called “Vibrant Gujarat”
B.) Justice P.B. Sawant (Retd. Justice Supreme Court as Chairperson:
The Committee is headed by Shri P.B. Sawant, Retd. Justice, Supreme Court of India as the Chairperson, Shri Suresh Mehta, Fmr. Chief Minister, Gujarat & Dr. Azgaralli Engineer the Vice Chairpersons, Shri B.A. Desai, Sr. Adv. & Fmr. Addnl. Solicitor General of India is the Convener & Shri Irfan Engineer, All India Secular Forum is the Jt. Convener. 700 Eminent Persons from all over India are its members.
C.) Vadodara District Committee :
While the Committee was formed in Mumbai in May 2011 it is felt that the real work of the Committee is in Gujarat. The Committee is happy to announce that the first such District Committee in Gujarat is being set up in Vadodara, a great city of Sayajirao Gaikwad Maharaj with Prof. Juzer Bandukwala as President.
It is proposed to set up such District Committees in 19 Districts where such communal carnages have taken place in 2002.
D.) Teachings of Mahatma Gandhi :
The Committee also propose to propagate the true philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi as there is systematic effort by communal parties to destroy Gandhisam by making him a God, subverting and distorting his teachings and particularly the Concept of Communal Harmony.
Mahatma Gandhi was a Hindu and he had abiding faith in Hinduism. According to him "You cannot be a true Hindu if you hate any other religion. I consider myself a follower of Islam, Christianity, Zoroaster’s and every other religion because I am a true Hindu".
Mahatma Gandhi stated “Religion is not a part of nationality but a personal matter”. Man & his God, Religion is a personal affair of Hinduism. It must not be mixed up with Politics and National Affairs. The Committee in association with its distinguished members will Spread true teachings of Mahatma Gandhi!
In the dismal scenario where Violence in the name of Religion & Culture is becoming more frightening, the need for Beacon Light giving the Message of Peace is being felt very acutely.
E.) Immediate Concerns: -
To Gujaratis feel sad that a criminal trial in Best Bakery had by order of Supreme Court transfered to another State. Shri Rais Khan, then Secretary, Committee for Justice and peace played an Active role in giving aid support to the victims of Communal Carnage.
In spite of humiliation of transfer of Cr. Trial of Best Bakery case to another state, Zahira Shaikh once again turned hostile second time and Hon’ble Court sentenced her to one year in prison which she served. Best Bakery Case resulted in conviction.
We are not going into the details of subsequent events as the facts are well known to the people of Gujarat & particularly Vadodara.
Teests Setalvad is the grand-daughter of the doyen of India Bar Attorney General, M.C. Setalvad. She is a Gujarati and naturally felt that she should go to the succor of the victims of communal carnage. Also because she herself is a journalist & Editor of Communal Combat magazine.
It was felt that such winning over of the witnesses or making them turn hostile would stop.
F.) Yasmin Shaikh
One Yasmin Shaikh was an important witness it was alleged that she was tutored by Teesta Setalvad. The Trial Court negatived this accusation, squarely holding in 2006 that “The signs of having been tutored were not found while analysing the witness evidence.” After several years Yasmin Shaikh have moved the Bombay High Court that Teesta Setelvad influenced her to testify against the accused!
G.) Naroda Gam Case
Same Rais Khan, referred to above, who was dismissed from service with CJP has now made similar accusations against Teesta Setalvad and Naroda Gam Case and Police have registered a Cr. Case against her and she had to take protection from the Gujarat High Court by obtaining interim anticipatory Bail!
Shri Rais Khan is filing complaint in various fora alleging that Teesta Setalvad has tutored witnesses.
It is apprehended that many such cases may be filed against Teesta Setalvad and others who are helping the victims. There is a method in madness i.e. to muzzle the voice of Teesta and Ors. by getting them some how arrested. Hence the need for such Committee headed by Hon’ble Justice P.B. Sawant.
H.) Pandharwadas Mass Graves Case
This is another case which is foisted on Teesta Setalvad. It is not necessary to state details of this case. Suffice to say that the Police has filed charge sheet against relatives and friend of Massacred Victims and Rais Khan, under Sections 193, 194, 195,196 199 and 200 of I.P.C.
Same Rais Khan has made a confessional Statement in this case under Section 164 of Cr.Pr. Code making similar allegations against Teesta Setelvad. Teesta Setelvad is alreadey granted Anticipatory Bail by the High Court.
On 29th July 2011 Teesta Setalvad is summoned by Lundwadda Police Station! It is feared that to overcome Anticipatory Bail, Lundwadda Police may register a New Offence of Non-Bailable nature and arrest her!
Office bearers of said Defence Committee and Members are going to Lundwadda to give support to Teesta Setalvad.
Prof. Juzer Bandukwala Senior Advocate B. A. Desai
Vice President Convener
Anders Breivick cites N.S. Rajaram the Hindutva laden historian
[Breivik cites Rajaram on p. 553 of his 1500+ page “manifesto”, which exists in many copies now online:
According to historian [sic!] N.S. Rajaram[101], “India, where the wounds inflicted by centuries of Islamic rule on a large segment of the Indian intelligentsia and the political class have been so debilitating that they continue to live in a state of constant fear. (...) Political freedom in India has not brought about spiritual freedom; politicians and the intelligentsia still act like oppressed colonial subjects when asked to face the truth about their country’s Islamic past.”
The citation comes from an article of Rajaram’s posted on a Hindutva site, “Jihad Watch”:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/06/rajaram-jihad-terrorism-and-dhimmitude.html
The Jihad Watch article begins, ominously:
Rajaram: Jihad, Terrorism and Dhimmitude
N.S. Rajaram writes from India. He is a historian whose primary focus is ancient history and pre-history. He occasionally writes on jihad and terrorism, and has lectured widely on Islamic terror in India, Europe, the U.S. and Australia. This is an illuminating piece on jihad and dhimmitude in India....
Plain text version below, in case the article is soon taken down.]
====================
According to historian [sic!] N.S. Rajaram[101], “India, where the wounds inflicted by centuries of Islamic rule on a large segment of the Indian intelligentsia and the political class have been so debilitating that they continue to live in a state of constant fear. (...) Political freedom in India has not brought about spiritual freedom; politicians and the intelligentsia still act like oppressed colonial subjects when asked to face the truth about their country’s Islamic past.”
The citation comes from an article of Rajaram’s posted on a Hindutva site, “Jihad Watch”:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/06/rajaram-jihad-terrorism-and-dhimmitude.html
The Jihad Watch article begins, ominously:
Rajaram: Jihad, Terrorism and Dhimmitude
N.S. Rajaram writes from India. He is a historian whose primary focus is ancient history and pre-history. He occasionally writes on jihad and terrorism, and has lectured widely on Islamic terror in India, Europe, the U.S. and Australia. This is an illuminating piece on jihad and dhimmitude in India....
Plain text version below, in case the article is soon taken down.]
====================
Rajaram: Jihad, Terrorism and Dhimmitude
N.S. Rajaram writes from India. He is a historian whose primary focus is ancient history and pre-history. He occasionally writes on jihad and terrorism, and has lectured widely on Islamic terror in India, Europe, the U.S. and Australia. This is an illuminating piece on jihad and dhimmitude in India:
Jihad is the central doctrine of Islam and dhimmitude its historical consequence. Both should be defeated for India and the world to be really free.
The meaning of Jihad
Jihad is the central doctrine of the Islamic state, ordained by its scripture. Thanks partly to the September 11 terrorist attacks on the New York World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the world now knows something of Jihad and its ties to Islamic terror. Nonetheless, Jihad continues to be presented as a noble internal struggle over one’s baser instincts— something like meditation and Yoga. Even when the violent aspect of Jihad is pointed out, its apologists claim that violence and terrorism cannot be justified as Jihad, as if “real Jihad” is something we should all welcome. As a result, a good deal of confusion prevails in the public mind with regard to the true nature of Jihad and its relationship to Islamic terror. The worst offenders in this game of sophistry are not the Muslims themselves but non-Muslim intellectuals and academics in India, Europe and especially America. It seems never to occur to these worthies that a medieval theocratic concept like Jihad has no legitimacy in a modern secular state— no matter what its real or imagined merits.
Another point worth noting is that terrorists worldwide acting in the name of Jihad cannot be defeated by redefining Jihad to suit our comfort level. The various Jihadis are drawn to the interpretation of Jihad given by the likes of Osama bin Laden and not the apologists that fill Indian and Western universities and newspaper columns. More significantly this “kinder, gentler” version of Jihad has no basis in either doctrine or history. It is necessary therefore to look at the primary sources to understand the place of Jihad in Islamic law and behavior. (Islamic law is part of its scripture.) What follows is a brief summary. More details on the place of Jihad in Islamic scripture and history can be found in Sita Ram Goel’s The Calcutta Quran Petition cited at the end of the article.
Dictionary of Islam defines Jihad as: “A religious war with those who are unbelievers in the mission of Muhammad [the Prophet]. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the Quran and in the Traditions [i.e., the Hadits or the ‘Acts of Muhammad’] as a divine institution, and enjoined especially for the purpose of advancing Islam and of repelling evil from Muslims.” The last point about “repelling evil” calls for an explanation: its primary goal is to prevent Muslims from deviating from the true teachings of Islam of unrelenting hostility towards Kafirs and lapsing into heresy. Movements intended to root out such ‘evil’—often called ‘purification movements’—are a feature of Islamic history. The Wahabi movement that led to the Saudi brand of Islam and the Tablighi movement in India are two recent examples of such purification.
Dictionary of Islam also observes: “Sufi writers say that there are two Jihads: al-Jihadu ‘l Akbar, or the ‘greater warfare,’ which is against one’s own lusts; and al-Jihadu ‘l Asghar, or the ‘lesser Jihad’ against infidels.” It is important to note this is a later Sufi innovation that has no scriptural sanction; in fact it is a heresy that is rejected by the orthodox. Historically, the Sufis have actively supported and participated in the violent version of the Jihad, the only one that has any scriptural sanction. The nonviolent version is the one that is invoked by apologists, though it has played hardly any role in history since no one follows it.
Dictionary of Islam is also perceptive in noting: “The duty of religious war (which all commentators agree is a duty extending to all time) is laid down in the Quran in the following verses, and it is remarkable that all the verses occur in the al-Madinah Surahs, being those given after Muhammad had established himself as a paramount ruler, and was in a position to dictate terms to his enemies.”
So any hint of compromise that one finds in the earlier al-Meccah Surahs can be explained by the fact that they were given at times when Prophet Muhammad felt besieged and was forced to compromise with his adversaries in order to gain time. These were erased by the later Surahs revealed when the Prophet had become the paramount ruler.
The following Surah (IX. 5,6) sheds light on the Prophet’s idea of Jihad or the war against the infidels: “And when the sacred months are passed, kill those who join other gods with God [Allah] wherever ye shall find them; and seize them, besiege them with every kind of ambush; but if they shall convert, and observe prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their way, for God [Allah] is Gracious, Merciful.” So the Mercy of God offers unbelievers the ‘choice’ of conversion or death! This is just one example of many Surahs in the same spirit. There is no room for compromise in Jihad.
Terrorism in history
Like Jihad, terrorism is an integral part of Islamic history and doctrine that cannot be separated from its scripture. Terrorism, by which we mean the threat and use of violence against innocents, has a long tradition in Islam going back to Prophet Muhammad himself. The Hadits (compilation of the acts of the Prophet) record that the Prophet had the poetess Asma bint Marawan assassinated while sleeping with her child. Her crime was satirizing the Prophet and his claims in some of her verses. There are other such examples in the Prophet’s career. More importantly, terrorism was not limited to the founding period, like what happened following the French Revolution. (Robespierre’s “Reign of Terror.”) Its use as an instrument of policy is not an aberration but an inseparable and continuing part of Islamic history down to the present.
The most famous of the early Islamic terrorist organizations was the Nizari Ismailiyun, a Shiite politico-religious sect, founded in 1094 by Hasan-e Sabah. He and his followers captured the hill fortress of Almaut in northern Iran and turned it into their base of operations. Hasan styled himself Grand Master and went on to set up a network of terrorist strongholds in Iran and Iraq. He had trained assassins, most of who according to Marco Polo were drug addicts. According to Marco Polo, young boys captured by the Grand Master were turned into addicts by giving them progressively larger doses of the drug hashish. This way they were totally dependent on him and would do anything in return for hashish. They came to be known as hashishin, from which get the word ‘assassin.’ So the deadly mix of terror and drugs is hardly new.
Hasan-e Sabah and his successor Grand Masters commanded an army of assassins who spread terror among the people throughout Iran and Iraq. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, The Grand Master had “a corps of devoted terrorists, and an unknown number of agents in enemy camps and cities, who claimed many victims among the generals and statesmen of the Abbasid caliphate as well as several caliphs.”
The Nizari Ismaliyun or the Order of the Assassins expanded into Syria after its founder’s death. In the 12th century, Rashid ad-Din as-Sinan, famous as the ‘Old Man of the Mountain,’ set himself up as an independent Grand Master of the Assassin Order in the impregnable castle of Masyaf in Syria. For more than a century and half, from 1094 to 1256, these Grandmasters and their assassins spread terror throughout the Middle East. Their end came at the hands of the Mongol warriors of Haleku Khan— the grandson of Chengis Khan. He captured and destroyed the assassin strongholds in Iran one by one, and finally Almaut itself fell in 1256. He mercilessly killed every one of the assassin agents and their leaders. Two years later, in February 1258, Haleku’s soldiers sacked Baghdad itself and ended the Caliphate by executing the Abbasid Caliph al-Mustasim and his sons.
The Syrian castles and strongholds were gradually reduced by the Baybars I, the Mamluk Sultan of Egypt. The Ismaili order gradually faded into insignificance, becoming a minor heresy. It still has some followers in Syria, Iran with India and Pakistan having the largest numbers. They are known as Khojas and are followers of the Aga Khan. They no longer indulge in terror. In Pakistan though they are considered non-Muslims and often persecuted.
As just noted, it was the Mongols who finished off the Caliphate. The Caliphate officially ended with the death of al-Mustasim at the hands of the Mongols in 1258. The 19th century claim of the Ottoman Turkish Sultans to be the inheritors of the Caliphate was not recognized by Muslims outside India. It was a political ploy by the Ottoman Sultans to keep together their crumbling empire. But Mahatma Gandhi made the restoration of the Turkish Sultan as Caliph the centerpiece of the disastrous Khilafat Movement in the support of which he launched the Non-Cooperation Movement in 1921. It resulted in a reign of terror in Malabar (Kerala) known as the Moplah Rebellion. It was the Khilafat that sowed the seeds of Partition. It also showed that terror could be used for political ends by invoking Islam.
Inspired by the terror that followed the Khilafat, Mohammed Ali Jinnah—a ‘liberal’ Muslim—resorted to terror to gain his political goal of partitioning India. In 1946, his call for ‘Direct Action’ in support of his demand for Pakistan led to street riots all across North India. The Congress capitulated and agreed to the Partition of India. So was Pakistan born.
In all this, there is an almost religious belief that terrorism is both legitimate and effective in gaining political ends. In the Pakistani official manual, The Quranic Concept of War by Brigadier Malik, it is explicitly stated: “Terror struck into the hearts of the enemy is not only a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into the opponent’s heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved... Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose upon him.”
The idea is to make the enemy live in a state of perpetual terror. The authority for this is the Koran (Anfal 59-60): “Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the enemies of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know.”
This is the seed of indiscriminate terror employed by Grand Masters of the Order of the Assassins centuries ago, and by Osama Bin Laden and a host of others today. This belief in the power of domination through terror, and its legitimacy, is what needs to be defeated. But first, it is necessary to recognize that this legitimacy rests on the scripture itself.
The basic truth is— terrorism runs like a thread throughout Islamic history. It is futile to try to separate Islamic terror from Islam.
Dhimmitude in India
Dhimmitude is a relatively recent concept among Islamic scholars though it has played a major role in the history of Islam. It was brought into focus by the pioneering work of the Egypt-born scholar Bat Ye’or. (Her penname, which means ‘Daughter of the Nile.’) Dhimmitude may be seen as the state of mind induced in the victims of Islamic terror, more particularly in the minds of the non-Muslim subjects in countries under Islamic rule. Like the famous ‘Stockholm Syndrome,’ which afflicts hostages by turning them into defenders of their kidnappers, dhimmitude also has the effect of turning the victims of harsh Islamic rule into its defenders; there is an unconscious fear that criticizing them might make their condition worse. It arose from the need of Islamic rulers to deal with non-Muslim subjects in their realm. It may be described as follows. In an Islamic state, the Word of God (The Quran) and the Acts of Muhammad (The Hadits) lay down the rules—sacred as well as secular—for all people and for all time. These are binding on believers as well as non-believers. This may appear strange until one recognizes that the ultimate goal of Islam is to bring the whole world under its sway. The instrument for achieving world domination is Jihad, and the legal code for ruling the Islamic lands (Dar ul-Islam) is the Sharia— loosely translated as the Islamic legal canon. The Sharia treats some non-Muslims living in Dar ul-Islam as dhimmis (‘protected flock’), whereby they are granted limited protection as second-class citizens under debilitating conditions. The Egypt-born Bat Ye’or has made a detailed study of the state of the Jews and Christians as Dhimmis, and the peculiar ‘Dhimmi Civilization’ that it gave rise to. (This may be compared to the ‘Slave Civilization’ in the United States before the Civil War.)
The behavior pattern of a good part of the non-Muslim world today is explained by dhimmitude. This is particularly the case in India, where the wounds inflicted by centuries of Islamic rule on a large segment of the Indian intelligentsia and the political class have been so debilitating that they continue to live in a state of constant fear. This has left its stamp even on the writing of history as the distinguished historian R.C. Majumdar found out. In his words:
The official history of the freedom movement starts with the premise that India lost independence only in the eighteenth century and had thus an experience of subjection to a foreign power for only two centuries. Real history, on the other hand, teaches us that the major part of India lost independence about five centuries before, and merely changed masters in the eighteenth century… The Hindu leaders deliberately ignored patent truth and facts of history… They live in a fancied fraternity and are sensitive to any expression that jars against the slogan of Hindu-Muslim bhai-bhai… That is to say, political freedom in India has not brought about spiritual freedom; politicians and the intelligentsia still act like oppressed colonial subjects when asked to face the truth about their country’s Islamic past. This is typical dhimmitude. To comprehend this, we need to go back to the early period of Islamic conquests, which resulted in countries under non-Muslim rule (Dar ul-Harb) coming under Islamic rule (Dar ul-Islam). Recognizing that a newly conquered land is bound to have a substantial non-Muslim population, the Sharia provides for laws to govern them. They essentially become dhimmis. At first, it was meant only for ‘People of the Book’— or Jews and Christians, soon including Zoroastrians because Iran was rapidly conquered by the Arabs. Somewhat later, when Islamic rule came to parts of India, Hindus were given grudging recognition as dhimmis though, as idolaters, they were not entitled to it. But the expediencies of politics and governance forced Islamic rulers of India to bend the rules of the Sharia against the blandishments of the clergy.
This brings up an interesting issue: the idolatrous Hindus whose choice under Sharia was limited to ‘Islam or death,’ were much more successful in resisting the onslaught of Islam than the ‘protected’ Jews and Christians. Even the Zoroastrians of Persia, then a great empire ruled by the Sassanids, had to migrate to Hindu India to keep their faith alive. Hindus and Hinduism proved much more resilient than these ‘Religions of the Book’ and their adherents.
The Hindus never stopped fighting the imposition of Islam and finally defeated it though at great cost in terms of both land and people. It is a battle that still rages. It accounts also for the extraordinary hatred of Hindu India borne by Muslim ‘leaders’ in India and Pakistan—for it is a living reminder of Islam’s failure. This suggests that one is better off having Islam as enemy than ‘protector’. The protector inevitably turns predator and eventually consumes its protected flock.
All this has left an indelible mark on the psyche of the Indian intelligentsia, especially the media. This dhimmitude, which is rooted in fear of Muslim violence, is what is really behind much of the secularist attitudes and posturing. No one would take the spiritual pretensions and justifications offered by Islam apologists seriously but for the lurking fear of large-scale violence.
It is this dhimmi state of mind that makes secularist ‘leaders’ engage in purely communal activities, and granting concessions in the name of secularism. Some examples help bring this out. Last year alone 125 crore rupees were given to Haj pilgrims. This is a consequence of the Haj Bill introduced in 1959 by the ‘secular’ Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. What is no less scandalous is the diversion of funds from Hindu temples to mosques, brought to light by Sri Sri Ravishankar of The Art of Living Center. In the state of Karnataka Hindu temples generate Rs 40 crores. The government gives them back only 50 lakhs. The mosques on the other hand generate only about 50 lakhs, but get Rs 8 crores from the government! This means the government is in effect taking money from temples and diverting it to mosques and madrasas. This is in spite of the fact that Karnataka has no major pilgrimage centers. The diversion of funds from temples to mosques, madrasas and waqf boards is much greater in Andhra Pradesh and Kerala, which have major temples like those at Tirupati and Guruvayoor. This is voluntary dhimmitude, for the Muslims never demanded any such largesse.
Here is another example. When some Hindu groups objected to M.F. Husain for painting Hindu goddesses in the nude, the secular intellectuals including the media defended his ‘artistic freedom’ do as he wished. But in 2002, a newspaper office in Bangalore was vandalized by a Muslim mob for publishing a perfectly innocent cartoon of Prophet Muhammad in its children’s section. And the newspaper apologized to the attackers. Imagine the victim apologizing to the assailants! Other papers in Bangalore—and at other places—have also apologized on similar occasions. So ‘artistic freedom’ means freedom to offend Hindu sensibilities only! This also is nothing but a manifestation of dhimmitude.
This brand of ‘dhimmi secularism’ not only distorts the truth, but also rationalizes cowardly behavior as the following example shows. Some years back the ‘secularists’ turned the killing of the Christian missionary Graham Staines and his sons into a national and international affair by blaming Hindu organizations. In 2002, a Christian youth Paul Raj and his Muslim wife Sameena were brutally murdered by the girl’s family because he did not convert to Islam. There was no public denunciation of this act of savagery either by the secularist politicians, the media or even Church officials. The Church officials would not even go near their orphaned child. It was finally adopted by a Hindu NRI family, which arranged for its care and upbringing. The same Church officials held public meetings and loudly denounced Hindu organizations, without any evidence, when a few windows in a church in Mysore were smashed by hooligans.
Dhimmitude in the Christian world
Dhimmitude can lead to absurdities as when a leading Indian politician attributed the advaita propounded by Sri Shankaracharya to Koranic inspiration! Even this pales into insignificance when compared to the behavior of religious leaders in the West. Pope John Paul II, during his visit to Egypt and Jerusalem, respectfully attended Muslim service without saying a word about the horrors inflicted on Coptic Christians. Likewise in India, he took the Indian Government to task for mainly imaginary atrocities against Christian minorities, while maintaining stony silence over the daily massacre of Christians in Islamic countries like Pakistan and Indonesia. This was taken a sordid step further by Church ‘leaders’ in India when they colluded with Muslim fundamentalist organizations like the Pakistan-based Deen-dar-Anjuman in engineering Church bombings with the sole purpose of discrediting the Indian Government. They seem driven by their hatred of the ‘heathen’ Hinduism as much as their Western counterparts by historic anti-Judaism. This has made them go on a propaganda spree in the West, denouncing Hinduism and the Indian Government, and inviting the US and the European Union to pressure on India to put an end to Hindu nationalist movements.
This is compounded by the growth of an extraordinary state of mind in a section of the Christian community in India. This group, made up mainly of followers of some American evangelical denominations (like Jehova’s Witnesses) but not limited to them believes that after defeating Iraq the United States will attack India and impose Christian rule. This fantastic belief appears to be part of the teachings of these religious groups founded on apocalyptic visions. This neurosis seems to be heightened by the rise of Hindutva, which it sees as the handiwork of anti-Christs who have arisen just before the Second Coming of Christ. This too lies at the center of their insane belief system.
In the long run, all this could have catastrophic consequences for Christians in India. The Hindu-baiters and the propagandists will not be there to defend them when there is the inevitable Muslim backlash against Christians in the wake of America’s war against terrorism, which the Muslims of the world see as a crusade against Islam. In the circumstances, the Christians’ best safeguard is the goodwill of the Hindus, but their state of mind of extreme dhimmitude seems to have made them antagonize the Hindus in the hope that the Muslims will reward them for their act!
This indicates that Christian organizations, beleaguered by declining fortunes in the ‘Christian’ West, are prepared to go to any length just to survive. The Church lives in constant fear of losing Rome to Islam as it lost Jerusalem to the Arabs in the first millennium and Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in the second. This existential fear is not helped by the presence of Islamic armies in Kosovo, a hundred miles from Trieste on the Italian border, aided and abetted by NATO and the US with their lopsided priorities. In the long run, this dhimmi state of mind poses a greater threat to the world than the Islamic warriors. And as a state of mind rather than anything physical (like Jihad), it is also harder to combat.
(Winston Churchill is quoted as saying: “An appeaser is one who keeps feeding a crocodile in the hope it will eat him last.” This is part of the dhimmi mindset also, especially among Christian leaders worldwide.)
That this is not just of historical interest but also of profound contemporary significance is clear from the general policy of appeasing Islamic sentiments being followed by the West. As Bat Ye’or observes: “Today, the United States and Europe compete for the favor of the Muslim world by once again abandoning the victimized peoples to its mercies. The Gulf War against Saddam Hussein on the question of oil interests (1991) was redeemed by the destruction of Yugoslavia and the creation of new centers of Islamist influence in the heart of the Balkans… The war to annihilate Serbia was intended to punish the crimes of Milosevic and his regime, but the media campaigns endeavored to calm the anti-Westernism in the Muslim world and of Muslim immigrants in Europe. It also helped to gain forgiveness for the war on Iraq by a strong pro-Muslim counterbalancing policy in the Balkans.” Even the terrorist state of Pakistan has profited from the West’s dhimmi mentality. Had India been a small country instead of a major power occupying a strategic position, she might have shared the fate of Serbia to ‘redeem’ the destruction of the Taliban in Afghanistan. But there is no room for complacency here, based on the naïve belief that the West will follow a moral course. The West too is not free from dhimmitude.
Conclusion
All told, Bat Ye’or’s concept of dhimmitude is an inspired insight that sheds light on how whole communities and even nations may be manipulated by fear and greed. Or as Brigadier Malik of Pakistan put in his seminal The Quranic Concept of War (sponsored by General Zia ul Haq, the Founding Father of Talibanism): “Once a condition of terror into the opponent’s heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved… Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose upon him.” Dhimmitude is nothing but negationist accommodation rooted in fear.
As far is India is concerned, she is still under the spell cast by two ghosts from her imperialist past. One is Macalayism imposed by European imperialism and the other dhimmitude forced by Islamic rule. The latter is proving to be far more lasting and debilitating to the national psyche. As long as these ghosts keep their hold on the people and the institutions of India, the country, though politically free cannot be spiritually free. And as long as dhimmitude is seen to work, the Muslims, their leadership in particular, will continue to harbor imperial visions. They will see every move towards equality and every growth towards nationalism as an assault on their fundamental right. India will become truly free only when this imperialist mindset and dhimmitude are both rooted out. This is the challenge before the next generation.
References
Dictionary of Islam (1885, reprinted 1999). Compiled by Thomas Patrick Hughes. RUPA & Co, New Delhi.
Bat Ye’or Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide (2002).
Translated from the French by Miriam Kochan and David Littman. Farleigh Dickinson University Press, Associated Universities Press, Cranbury, NJ, USA and Gazelle Book Services, Lancaster, England.
Goel, Sita Ram (1999). The Calcutta Quran Petition, 3rd edition. New Delhi: Voice of India.
Malik, Brigadier S.K. The Quranic Concept of War, with a Foreword by General Zia-ul-Haq (1979). Wajid Ali’s Limited, Lahore, Pakistan. Indian edition by The English Book Store, New Delhi.
Maharashtra minorities commission seeks action against Subramanium Swamy for xenophobic article
The Times of India
Subramanian Swamy's article draws criticism, rights body wants him arrested
IANS | Jul 30, 2011, 02.29PM IST
MUMBAI: Maharashtra's minorities commission on Saturday called for the arrest of Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy for his "extreme xenophobic right-wing thoughts" expressed in a newspaper article.
State Minorities Commission vice chairman Abraham Mathai wrote to Mumbai police chief Arup Patnaik, urging him to initiate criminal charges against Swamy under Section 153 (A) of the Indian Penal Code.
"I am writing to you following uproar and a feeling of insecurity among the minority community caused by an article written by Dr. Subramanian Swamy entitled 'How to wipe out Islamic terror' published in the DNA of 16th July 2011," the letter said.
Swamy, a doctorate from Harvard, penned an op-ed that advocated denial of voting rights to non-Hindus with the goal of stemming terrorist attacks in India.
"The extreme xenophobic right-wing thoughts expressed in it are quite disturbing and the article is socially irresponsible and completely anti-Islamic. It is also alarming that Dr Swamy is trying to incite Islamophobia using his freedom of expression to propagate hate through stereotyping," Mathai said.
Mathai also said that there are "Hindu terrorists" as well in jails who have equally perpetrated heinous acts.
"As a matter of fact, the Muslim community has as much stake as any in the progress, security and well being of India as a nation. Dr Swamy's bizarre solution is converting Muslims into Hinduism, rather than allowing each individual to choose to live as he/she wishes as expressed in Article 25 of the constitution," he said.
Subramanian Swamy's article draws criticism, rights body wants him arrested
IANS | Jul 30, 2011, 02.29PM IST
MUMBAI: Maharashtra's minorities commission on Saturday called for the arrest of Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy for his "extreme xenophobic right-wing thoughts" expressed in a newspaper article.
State Minorities Commission vice chairman Abraham Mathai wrote to Mumbai police chief Arup Patnaik, urging him to initiate criminal charges against Swamy under Section 153 (A) of the Indian Penal Code.
"I am writing to you following uproar and a feeling of insecurity among the minority community caused by an article written by Dr. Subramanian Swamy entitled 'How to wipe out Islamic terror' published in the DNA of 16th July 2011," the letter said.
Swamy, a doctorate from Harvard, penned an op-ed that advocated denial of voting rights to non-Hindus with the goal of stemming terrorist attacks in India.
"The extreme xenophobic right-wing thoughts expressed in it are quite disturbing and the article is socially irresponsible and completely anti-Islamic. It is also alarming that Dr Swamy is trying to incite Islamophobia using his freedom of expression to propagate hate through stereotyping," Mathai said.
Mathai also said that there are "Hindu terrorists" as well in jails who have equally perpetrated heinous acts.
"As a matter of fact, the Muslim community has as much stake as any in the progress, security and well being of India as a nation. Dr Swamy's bizarre solution is converting Muslims into Hinduism, rather than allowing each individual to choose to live as he/she wishes as expressed in Article 25 of the constitution," he said.
July 29, 2011
Saffron-Left alliance for textile workers housing in Bombay
The Times of India
Saffron-Left may call for bandh on Monday
by Ambarish Mishra, TNN | Jul 29, 2011, 06.01AM IST
MUMBAI: Papering over their differences and launching a combined offensive on the state government, the Shiv Sena-BJP-RPI alliance as well as the Left on Thursday threatened a Mumbai bandh on August 1 over the issue of providing free homes to mill workers. The government, on its part, plans to act tough and quash any such move.
The Raj Thackeray-led Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, which supported the morcha, though, is unwilling to back the bandh. "The opposition showed its strength by bringing out a morcha. Now, we should make the government move on the issue. This can be done in the legislature as well as the budget session. It is pointless to bring the city to a halt and put Mumbaikars to hardship," said MNS MLA Nitin Sardesai.
The morcha generated considerable interest in Mumbai as both Sena CEO Uddhav Thackeray and his estranged cousin, MNS chief Raj Thackeray, were slated to join the trek from Byculla to Azad Maidan where the morcha culminated into a public meeting.
However Raj, his MNS activists in tow, briefly joined in and left without addressing the meeting. "I am not here for speeches or photo-ops . I am here to extend my whole-hearted support to mill workers who are fighting for their legitimate demand," the MNS chief told mediapersons.
Addressing mill workers at Azad Maidan, Uddhav Thackeray said the state government should come up with a concrete package to provide free homes to mill hands over the next three days, failing which the opposition will go ahead with a bandh call on August 1 - the 91st death anniversary of Lokmanya Tilak. Lokmanya had a large following among Mumbai's mill workers in pre-Independence India.
Earlier, thousands of mill workers marched through the arterial Byculla-J J Hospital-Mohammad Ali Road stretch in a show of strength. The scene was straight out of 1960s when Mumbai was seen as the centre of labour movement. Several mill workers came from Konkan or western Maharashtra where they migrated after the 1982 textile strike petered off and mills began to shut. The morcha brought the fractious textile unions of Mumbai on a common platform.
"Chawls in central Mumbai have been replaced by malls. The state government should provide us with a roof over our heads," said Anusuya Pednekar, wife of a mill hand from Lower Parel.
Later, addressing the conclave , Uddhav Thackeray told mill workers that they will not get their houses by organizing indefinite fasts or morchas.
Thackeray, Athavale, Vinod Tawde of the BJP and Datta Iswalkar of the Girni Kamgar Sangharsha Samiti recalled the role of the textile workers in the Samyukta Maharashtra agitation of 1950s, which led to the creation of a separate linguistic state for Marathis.
Noted actor Nana Patekar spoke at the meeting and urged the Maharashtra government to provide homes to the dispossessed mill workers. "I have grown up in the BDD chawls. I am one of you, even if I may be earning a few pennies more than you," Patekar said.
By reviving the legend of 'Girangaon' , the once prosperous , fabled textile hub of Mumbai, and sinking their party differences, the Sena-BJP-MNS-RPI-Left parties plan to project a united opposition front ahead of the 2012 BMC elections. The Samyukta Maharashtra narrative also speaks of a grand opposition alliance against the then undivided Congress, say political observers. However, much depends on MNS, which is unwilling to let the Sena set the agenda for the opposition.
Saffron-Left may call for bandh on Monday
by Ambarish Mishra, TNN | Jul 29, 2011, 06.01AM IST
MUMBAI: Papering over their differences and launching a combined offensive on the state government, the Shiv Sena-BJP-RPI alliance as well as the Left on Thursday threatened a Mumbai bandh on August 1 over the issue of providing free homes to mill workers. The government, on its part, plans to act tough and quash any such move.
The Raj Thackeray-led Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, which supported the morcha, though, is unwilling to back the bandh. "The opposition showed its strength by bringing out a morcha. Now, we should make the government move on the issue. This can be done in the legislature as well as the budget session. It is pointless to bring the city to a halt and put Mumbaikars to hardship," said MNS MLA Nitin Sardesai.
The morcha generated considerable interest in Mumbai as both Sena CEO Uddhav Thackeray and his estranged cousin, MNS chief Raj Thackeray, were slated to join the trek from Byculla to Azad Maidan where the morcha culminated into a public meeting.
However Raj, his MNS activists in tow, briefly joined in and left without addressing the meeting. "I am not here for speeches or photo-ops . I am here to extend my whole-hearted support to mill workers who are fighting for their legitimate demand," the MNS chief told mediapersons.
Addressing mill workers at Azad Maidan, Uddhav Thackeray said the state government should come up with a concrete package to provide free homes to mill hands over the next three days, failing which the opposition will go ahead with a bandh call on August 1 - the 91st death anniversary of Lokmanya Tilak. Lokmanya had a large following among Mumbai's mill workers in pre-Independence India.
Earlier, thousands of mill workers marched through the arterial Byculla-J J Hospital-Mohammad Ali Road stretch in a show of strength. The scene was straight out of 1960s when Mumbai was seen as the centre of labour movement. Several mill workers came from Konkan or western Maharashtra where they migrated after the 1982 textile strike petered off and mills began to shut. The morcha brought the fractious textile unions of Mumbai on a common platform.
"Chawls in central Mumbai have been replaced by malls. The state government should provide us with a roof over our heads," said Anusuya Pednekar, wife of a mill hand from Lower Parel.
Later, addressing the conclave , Uddhav Thackeray told mill workers that they will not get their houses by organizing indefinite fasts or morchas.
Thackeray, Athavale, Vinod Tawde of the BJP and Datta Iswalkar of the Girni Kamgar Sangharsha Samiti recalled the role of the textile workers in the Samyukta Maharashtra agitation of 1950s, which led to the creation of a separate linguistic state for Marathis.
Noted actor Nana Patekar spoke at the meeting and urged the Maharashtra government to provide homes to the dispossessed mill workers. "I have grown up in the BDD chawls. I am one of you, even if I may be earning a few pennies more than you," Patekar said.
By reviving the legend of 'Girangaon' , the once prosperous , fabled textile hub of Mumbai, and sinking their party differences, the Sena-BJP-MNS-RPI-Left parties plan to project a united opposition front ahead of the 2012 BMC elections. The Samyukta Maharashtra narrative also speaks of a grand opposition alliance against the then undivided Congress, say political observers. However, much depends on MNS, which is unwilling to let the Sena set the agenda for the opposition.
India: Madrasas exempted from Right To Education Act
The Hindu
NEW DELHI, July 30, 2011
Madrasas exempted from RTE Act: Centre
by Aarti Dhar
HRD Ministry says the seminaries are protected under Articles 29, 30 of the Constitution
The Union Human Resource Development Ministry on Friday clarified that madrasas are protected under Article 29 and 30 of the Constitution, and hence the Right of the Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act does not come in the way of continuance of such institutions or the rights of children enrolled there.
Madrasas imparting religious instruction do not fall under the ambit of schools as defined under section 2(n) of the RTE Act, it said.
In a statement issued in response to the remark of Maulana Abdul Qasim Nomani, the new Vice-Chancellor of the Darul Uloom, Deoband who had criticised the RTE at a function on Wednesday and said he would oppose it, the Ministry said it had issued a guideline on November 23, 2010 under Section 35(1) of the RTE Act clarifying that such institutions (madrasas) were protected under the Constitution.
However, the Ministry implements the Scheme of Promotion of Quality Education in Madrasas. The objective of the scheme is to encourage traditional institutions such as madrasas by giving them financial assistance for introducing science, mathematics, social studies, Hindi and English in their curriculum so that students studying in these institutions attain academic proficiency.
The Ministry has also introduced an RTE Amendment Bill in Parliament, which provides for School Management Committees constituted under section 21 of the RTE Act in respect of aided minority schools, to function in an advisory capacity only, so that they will not be required to prepare the School Development Plan.
NEW DELHI, July 30, 2011
Madrasas exempted from RTE Act: Centre
by Aarti Dhar
HRD Ministry says the seminaries are protected under Articles 29, 30 of the Constitution
The Union Human Resource Development Ministry on Friday clarified that madrasas are protected under Article 29 and 30 of the Constitution, and hence the Right of the Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act does not come in the way of continuance of such institutions or the rights of children enrolled there.
Madrasas imparting religious instruction do not fall under the ambit of schools as defined under section 2(n) of the RTE Act, it said.
In a statement issued in response to the remark of Maulana Abdul Qasim Nomani, the new Vice-Chancellor of the Darul Uloom, Deoband who had criticised the RTE at a function on Wednesday and said he would oppose it, the Ministry said it had issued a guideline on November 23, 2010 under Section 35(1) of the RTE Act clarifying that such institutions (madrasas) were protected under the Constitution.
However, the Ministry implements the Scheme of Promotion of Quality Education in Madrasas. The objective of the scheme is to encourage traditional institutions such as madrasas by giving them financial assistance for introducing science, mathematics, social studies, Hindi and English in their curriculum so that students studying in these institutions attain academic proficiency.
The Ministry has also introduced an RTE Amendment Bill in Parliament, which provides for School Management Committees constituted under section 21 of the RTE Act in respect of aided minority schools, to function in an advisory capacity only, so that they will not be required to prepare the School Development Plan.
Why separate courts to try Hindu and Muslim accused? Jyoti Punwani's critique of the Communal Violence Bill
Infochange News & Features, July 2011
Flaws in the Communal Violence Bill
Will the new Communal Violence Bill finally be the panacea for communal riots and the inevitable after-effects of justice never being done?
Policemen not shy of admitting that their force treats only one community as guilty during communal riots, and judicial commissions inquiring into riots, have both concluded that a riot can be prevented, or at least contained within 24 hours, given the will, both of the government and the police force. This has happened in Maharashtra, Bihar and West Bengal.
In Maharashtra, when the Shiv Sena came to power four years after the 1992-93 riots in which it was a major player, it was keen to rid itself of its communal image and therefore succeeded in controlling the one Hindu-Muslim riot that took place within its reign within a day. (That doesn’t mean it provided a secular government.) In Bihar, which had seen the horrific Bhagalpur riots in 1989 (and others earlier), Laloo Prasad, for whom secularism is serious business, was determined not to allow communal riots. Not only would he camp at riot sites, but he had made it clear that the concerned district magistrate and superintendent of police would be held responsible for any communal violence. That worked like magic. The CPI(M) that ruled Bengal for three decades did not play communal politics, hence little communal violence took place there and when it did, it was handled swiftly.
But mostly, riots are allowed to run their course. Sometimes politicians and policemen themselves instigate and indulge in the violence. None of them is made to pay, at least not in terms of legal punishment.
Prevention is even easier than containment. The police are supposed to monitor inflammatory speech and writing. The Srikrishna Commission of Inquiry into the 1992-93 Mumbai riots revealed that the Mumbai police were in fact keeping a record of communal utterances and writings prior to the riots, but they didn’t arrest the offenders, nor did they deny permission for gatherings where such speeches would most certainly be made, right up to D-Day (December 6, 1992, the day the preparations for the construction of the proposed Ram temple were to begin. The Babri Masjid was demolished that afternoon). The reasons the police gave to the Commission for this inaction were many, but can be summarised as i) the police didn’t think these speeches were inflammatory and ii) arresting Shiv Sena activists was a no-no because of the `backlash’ that would follow.
The new Communal Violence Bill addresses these concerns by creating new offences such as `dereliction of duty’ and `breach of command responsibility’ applicable to public servants, which include both prevention of communal violence as well as acts of commission and omission, as also failure to control subordinates. The range of `dereliction of duty’ is wide, but its punishment inadequate -- imprisonment from two to five years, and a fine. Surely those who enjoy power over citizens’ lives need more stringent punishment for not exercising those powers?
The offence relating to breach of command responsibility is seriously flawed. The commanding officer can be held liable only if he knew, given the circumstances, that those under his command would commit an offence relating to communal violence, and (not or) he failed to take necessary steps to prevent the offence or failed to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution.
Now, can a commanding officer know the extent to which those under him will exceed the brief given to them? And even if he does, will he testify that he did know?
In Mumbai, a few citizens have been trying to get the state government to punish ex-commissioner R D Tyagi, indicted by Justice Srikrishna for the death of eight innocents, for the last 13 years. On directions of the Supreme Court, the government filed a charge of murder against him and 17 of his subordinates. But within two years, he and eight of his co-accused were discharged by a sessions court. The state government, which worked actively to help him get this discharge, naturally didn’t appeal against it. But one of his victims did, all the way to the Supreme Court which upheld his discharge in early-July.
Under the new Bill, Tyagi would have been prosecuted only if it prima facie seemed that he knew that the men whom he sent into the Suleman Usman Bakery, with orders to ``use minimum force’’ and arrest the terrorists allegedly firing from its terrace, would go berserk and kill eight unarmed innocents. Who could imagine that they would shoot point blank into someone who was clutching their feet, pleading his innocence? Or that they would drag a handicapped maulana down the stairs and shoot him? Even as hardened a cop as Tyagi might not have known this.
The next question is – who will prosecute these public servants?
The Bill provides for a National Authority which will receive and act on complaints against public servants. This is both good and bad. Until now, citizens have had to go to court to get public servants punished. In Mumbai, despite the Srikrishna Commission Report recommending `strict action’ against 31 policemen, citizens have had to move court, and 13 years after the Report was tabled, none of these 31 policemen have been punished (unless you count withholding increments and promotions as punishments). This isn’t only due to routine judicial delays, but also to active thwarting of the judicial process by the Maharashtra government which is bent on protecting its cops.
Governments, made up of bureaucrats and politicians, aren’t likely to change when it comes to punishing policemen for targeting Muslims. Let’s remember that the `secular' Congress-NCP, not the Sena-BJP, have been in power in Maharashtra since 2000. So, there needs to be someone above communal governments to see that the men in uniform are held accountable for the unnecessary deaths of innocents.
But will the National Authority serve the purpose? The Bill makes it out to be almost a superstate, with civil servants sending the same reports to it that they are supposed to send to the home ministry. But its recommendations are not binding. However, instead of being thrown into the dustbin, as are the recommendations of judicial commissions, or the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and the National Minorities Commission (NMC), governments must give their reasons for not acting on them within seven days.
What prevents a state government from saying that its own inquiry has exonerated the police officer against whom the NA wants action to be taken? The Maharashtra government has done this to save at least six of the 31 cops indicted by Justice Srikrishna.
The NA can also approach the courts. Of course, courts are more likely to pay heed to petitions filed by a body appointed by the PM and the leader of the opposition, rather than those filed by private citizens. The NHRC’s intervention in the Gujarat matter was pretty effective. Do we need another National Body to intervene solely in cases of communal violence? Why not then the National Minorities Commission?
The only body whose writ runs across states and parties is the Election Commission. That’s because it is truly autonomous, and has proved a pain for all political parties without exception. The NHRC and the NCM are neither autonomous nor are their advisories binding, so they remain toothless. Ditto with judicial commissions. What then is the use of another advisory body meant to deal with communal violence?
It’s the continuing failure of central and state governments to prevent and control communal violence that has resulted in the quest for a non-government authority that would monitor the continuing communal propaganda of Hindutva parties, take steps to curb them and arrest the offenders to ensure the security of minorities. Then there are organisations like SIMI. It was banned in 2001, but it had been active for a decade before that. No action was taken when it put up inflammatory posters and conducted huge meetings where incendiary speeches were made. The politicians, bureaucrats, and policemen who allow such propaganda and activities, which act like slow poison, need to be punished.
This Bill recognises this; indeed, one of its most welcome clauses is the presumption that where communal acts of a widespread or systematic nature have occurred, the concerned public servant who could have prevented it has failed in his/her duty. It also holds the head of an organisation responsible for the actions of his/her subordinates. Thus the constant blackmail by all the Thackerays that they can’t be blamed if their followers react to a certain demand not being met, also would become an offence.
But who will bell the cat? The NA? Through the very institutions on which we have depended until now -- communal governments and a slow-acting judiciary?
There is an even more basic flaw in this Bill. Undoubtedly, most communal riots have ended with Muslims bearing the brunt of both Hindutva and state violence. The Indian state has shown itself to be communal, whichever party may be in power. But there are enough instances of violence against Hindus by Muslims, sometimes large-scale, sometimes incredibly brutal. The Radhabai Chawl incident of the Mumbai riots, in which masked Muslims set afire six Hindus, of whom only one was a man, and the burning of Coach S6 of the Sabarmati Express at Godhra are two recent examples.
However, this Bill makes only that communal violence an offence which is directed against a religious or linguistic minority. This includes Hindus in Kashmir and Punjab and Nagaland. But this Bill would not apply to the Radhabai Chawl incident or the Godhra incident because in Maharashtra and Gujarat, Hindus are a majority. To these incidents, only the normal laws would apply.
The framers of this Bill say that whenever the majority is attacked, the state loses no time in arresting members of the minority community. That is true. When the minority is attacked, the state tends to look the other way, they argue. That too is true. But does the remedy lie in a separate law for the minorities or in forcing the state to be impartial by having the same law for all?
Imagine a situation in a Hindu-majority state, in which 90% of the violence is against Muslims or Christians, but 10% is against Hindus. When the cases come to trial, separate laws would apply!
This Bill provides for special courts with special judges and public prosecutors to try the offences listed under it. Special courts are an absolute must after every communal riot. This Bill also has wonderful provisions empowering the victims in the legal process. Currently, unless they are witnesses, victims are kept out of the entire legal process. It also provides for witness protection once the trial begins.
But these vital provisions will not apply to Hindu victims of Muslim violence! Do the framers of this Bill think that accused Muslims are not capable of threatening Hindu victims/witnesses? In one TADA case of the Mumbai riots, two brothers, notorious in their area, were acquitted because the complainant, a Hindu, himself turned hostile. Yet, the framers of this Bill have made him ineligble for protection from the court that his neighbour, a Muslim riot victim, will be able to get.
It needs to be pointed out here that TADA was applied to the Radhabai Chawl case and the TADA court had convicted 11 Muslims for the incident. They were acquitted by the next court of appeal, the Supreme Court. For the burning of Coach 6 at Godhra too, POTA was applied, then challenged and finally withdrawn from the case. Thirty-one Muslims were convicted and 63 acquitted under normal laws by the Gujarat High Court.
So the framers of the Bill would seem to be right – where Hindus are the victims, very strict laws are applied to punish the Muslim accused; and the lower courts tend to convict the accused.
But that’s not the entire story. And Gujarat is not the rest of India. After the Mumbai riots, TADA was applied to many cases, not just the Radhabai Chawl case. In most of them, Muslims, not Hindus, were the victims. The accused included Shiv Sainiks. Though all of them were acquitted, they did spend time in jail as bail was almost impossible under TADA. Now, under this new Bill, will such even-handed treatment be possible? The state, which is not going to suddenly turn secular, will see that Muslim victims are protected by a special law. So, it will not only make sure that Hindu victims are similarly protected (by using draconian laws such as MCOCA and UAPA), but will go out of its way to see that Hindus accused under this new law get acquitted.
This happens anyway. In Gujarat, the public prosecutors (PPs) supposed to represent Muslim victims were aligned to the BJP – the main perpetrator of the Gujarat violence. In Mumbai, the PPs were underpaid and indifferent – except in the Radhabai Chawl case. Where Tyagi was the accused, the PP was openly on his side. But in not-so-serious cases of the Mumbai riots, involving rioting and arson, both Hindu and Muslim victims got the same legal (mis)treatment -- indifferent PPs, lethargic judges, policemen unwilling to find the real culprits... I have seen enough instances in court of Hindu and Muslim accused cursing the police equally, often in the same case! Hindus have forgiven Muslims charged with destroying their properties, and gone home with them.
Now you have a law that differentiates between Hindu and Muslim victims. You have separate courts trying Hindu and Muslim accused. You legitimise communal resentment and polarization more successfully than the BJP can ever do.
Unless the definition of a `group’ changes to include all communities, be they majority or minority, this Bill cannot be supported.
(Jyoti Punwani is a freelance journalist based in Mumbai. She has reported extensively on issues related to communalism in India)
Flaws in the Communal Violence Bill
A law that differentiates between Hindu and Muslim victims and proposes separate courts to try Hindu and Muslim accused only legitimises communal resentment and polarisation, writes Jyoti Punwani in this analysis of the Communal Violence Bill
Communal riots in India
Will the new Communal Violence Bill finally be the panacea for communal riots and the inevitable after-effects of justice never being done?
Policemen not shy of admitting that their force treats only one community as guilty during communal riots, and judicial commissions inquiring into riots, have both concluded that a riot can be prevented, or at least contained within 24 hours, given the will, both of the government and the police force. This has happened in Maharashtra, Bihar and West Bengal.
In Maharashtra, when the Shiv Sena came to power four years after the 1992-93 riots in which it was a major player, it was keen to rid itself of its communal image and therefore succeeded in controlling the one Hindu-Muslim riot that took place within its reign within a day. (That doesn’t mean it provided a secular government.) In Bihar, which had seen the horrific Bhagalpur riots in 1989 (and others earlier), Laloo Prasad, for whom secularism is serious business, was determined not to allow communal riots. Not only would he camp at riot sites, but he had made it clear that the concerned district magistrate and superintendent of police would be held responsible for any communal violence. That worked like magic. The CPI(M) that ruled Bengal for three decades did not play communal politics, hence little communal violence took place there and when it did, it was handled swiftly.
But mostly, riots are allowed to run their course. Sometimes politicians and policemen themselves instigate and indulge in the violence. None of them is made to pay, at least not in terms of legal punishment.
Prevention is even easier than containment. The police are supposed to monitor inflammatory speech and writing. The Srikrishna Commission of Inquiry into the 1992-93 Mumbai riots revealed that the Mumbai police were in fact keeping a record of communal utterances and writings prior to the riots, but they didn’t arrest the offenders, nor did they deny permission for gatherings where such speeches would most certainly be made, right up to D-Day (December 6, 1992, the day the preparations for the construction of the proposed Ram temple were to begin. The Babri Masjid was demolished that afternoon). The reasons the police gave to the Commission for this inaction were many, but can be summarised as i) the police didn’t think these speeches were inflammatory and ii) arresting Shiv Sena activists was a no-no because of the `backlash’ that would follow.
The new Communal Violence Bill addresses these concerns by creating new offences such as `dereliction of duty’ and `breach of command responsibility’ applicable to public servants, which include both prevention of communal violence as well as acts of commission and omission, as also failure to control subordinates. The range of `dereliction of duty’ is wide, but its punishment inadequate -- imprisonment from two to five years, and a fine. Surely those who enjoy power over citizens’ lives need more stringent punishment for not exercising those powers?
The offence relating to breach of command responsibility is seriously flawed. The commanding officer can be held liable only if he knew, given the circumstances, that those under his command would commit an offence relating to communal violence, and (not or) he failed to take necessary steps to prevent the offence or failed to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution.
Now, can a commanding officer know the extent to which those under him will exceed the brief given to them? And even if he does, will he testify that he did know?
In Mumbai, a few citizens have been trying to get the state government to punish ex-commissioner R D Tyagi, indicted by Justice Srikrishna for the death of eight innocents, for the last 13 years. On directions of the Supreme Court, the government filed a charge of murder against him and 17 of his subordinates. But within two years, he and eight of his co-accused were discharged by a sessions court. The state government, which worked actively to help him get this discharge, naturally didn’t appeal against it. But one of his victims did, all the way to the Supreme Court which upheld his discharge in early-July.
Under the new Bill, Tyagi would have been prosecuted only if it prima facie seemed that he knew that the men whom he sent into the Suleman Usman Bakery, with orders to ``use minimum force’’ and arrest the terrorists allegedly firing from its terrace, would go berserk and kill eight unarmed innocents. Who could imagine that they would shoot point blank into someone who was clutching their feet, pleading his innocence? Or that they would drag a handicapped maulana down the stairs and shoot him? Even as hardened a cop as Tyagi might not have known this.
The next question is – who will prosecute these public servants?
The Bill provides for a National Authority which will receive and act on complaints against public servants. This is both good and bad. Until now, citizens have had to go to court to get public servants punished. In Mumbai, despite the Srikrishna Commission Report recommending `strict action’ against 31 policemen, citizens have had to move court, and 13 years after the Report was tabled, none of these 31 policemen have been punished (unless you count withholding increments and promotions as punishments). This isn’t only due to routine judicial delays, but also to active thwarting of the judicial process by the Maharashtra government which is bent on protecting its cops.
Governments, made up of bureaucrats and politicians, aren’t likely to change when it comes to punishing policemen for targeting Muslims. Let’s remember that the `secular' Congress-NCP, not the Sena-BJP, have been in power in Maharashtra since 2000. So, there needs to be someone above communal governments to see that the men in uniform are held accountable for the unnecessary deaths of innocents.
But will the National Authority serve the purpose? The Bill makes it out to be almost a superstate, with civil servants sending the same reports to it that they are supposed to send to the home ministry. But its recommendations are not binding. However, instead of being thrown into the dustbin, as are the recommendations of judicial commissions, or the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and the National Minorities Commission (NMC), governments must give their reasons for not acting on them within seven days.
What prevents a state government from saying that its own inquiry has exonerated the police officer against whom the NA wants action to be taken? The Maharashtra government has done this to save at least six of the 31 cops indicted by Justice Srikrishna.
The NA can also approach the courts. Of course, courts are more likely to pay heed to petitions filed by a body appointed by the PM and the leader of the opposition, rather than those filed by private citizens. The NHRC’s intervention in the Gujarat matter was pretty effective. Do we need another National Body to intervene solely in cases of communal violence? Why not then the National Minorities Commission?
The only body whose writ runs across states and parties is the Election Commission. That’s because it is truly autonomous, and has proved a pain for all political parties without exception. The NHRC and the NCM are neither autonomous nor are their advisories binding, so they remain toothless. Ditto with judicial commissions. What then is the use of another advisory body meant to deal with communal violence?
It’s the continuing failure of central and state governments to prevent and control communal violence that has resulted in the quest for a non-government authority that would monitor the continuing communal propaganda of Hindutva parties, take steps to curb them and arrest the offenders to ensure the security of minorities. Then there are organisations like SIMI. It was banned in 2001, but it had been active for a decade before that. No action was taken when it put up inflammatory posters and conducted huge meetings where incendiary speeches were made. The politicians, bureaucrats, and policemen who allow such propaganda and activities, which act like slow poison, need to be punished.
This Bill recognises this; indeed, one of its most welcome clauses is the presumption that where communal acts of a widespread or systematic nature have occurred, the concerned public servant who could have prevented it has failed in his/her duty. It also holds the head of an organisation responsible for the actions of his/her subordinates. Thus the constant blackmail by all the Thackerays that they can’t be blamed if their followers react to a certain demand not being met, also would become an offence.
But who will bell the cat? The NA? Through the very institutions on which we have depended until now -- communal governments and a slow-acting judiciary?
There is an even more basic flaw in this Bill. Undoubtedly, most communal riots have ended with Muslims bearing the brunt of both Hindutva and state violence. The Indian state has shown itself to be communal, whichever party may be in power. But there are enough instances of violence against Hindus by Muslims, sometimes large-scale, sometimes incredibly brutal. The Radhabai Chawl incident of the Mumbai riots, in which masked Muslims set afire six Hindus, of whom only one was a man, and the burning of Coach S6 of the Sabarmati Express at Godhra are two recent examples.
However, this Bill makes only that communal violence an offence which is directed against a religious or linguistic minority. This includes Hindus in Kashmir and Punjab and Nagaland. But this Bill would not apply to the Radhabai Chawl incident or the Godhra incident because in Maharashtra and Gujarat, Hindus are a majority. To these incidents, only the normal laws would apply.
The framers of this Bill say that whenever the majority is attacked, the state loses no time in arresting members of the minority community. That is true. When the minority is attacked, the state tends to look the other way, they argue. That too is true. But does the remedy lie in a separate law for the minorities or in forcing the state to be impartial by having the same law for all?
Imagine a situation in a Hindu-majority state, in which 90% of the violence is against Muslims or Christians, but 10% is against Hindus. When the cases come to trial, separate laws would apply!
This Bill provides for special courts with special judges and public prosecutors to try the offences listed under it. Special courts are an absolute must after every communal riot. This Bill also has wonderful provisions empowering the victims in the legal process. Currently, unless they are witnesses, victims are kept out of the entire legal process. It also provides for witness protection once the trial begins.
But these vital provisions will not apply to Hindu victims of Muslim violence! Do the framers of this Bill think that accused Muslims are not capable of threatening Hindu victims/witnesses? In one TADA case of the Mumbai riots, two brothers, notorious in their area, were acquitted because the complainant, a Hindu, himself turned hostile. Yet, the framers of this Bill have made him ineligble for protection from the court that his neighbour, a Muslim riot victim, will be able to get.
It needs to be pointed out here that TADA was applied to the Radhabai Chawl case and the TADA court had convicted 11 Muslims for the incident. They were acquitted by the next court of appeal, the Supreme Court. For the burning of Coach 6 at Godhra too, POTA was applied, then challenged and finally withdrawn from the case. Thirty-one Muslims were convicted and 63 acquitted under normal laws by the Gujarat High Court.
So the framers of the Bill would seem to be right – where Hindus are the victims, very strict laws are applied to punish the Muslim accused; and the lower courts tend to convict the accused.
But that’s not the entire story. And Gujarat is not the rest of India. After the Mumbai riots, TADA was applied to many cases, not just the Radhabai Chawl case. In most of them, Muslims, not Hindus, were the victims. The accused included Shiv Sainiks. Though all of them were acquitted, they did spend time in jail as bail was almost impossible under TADA. Now, under this new Bill, will such even-handed treatment be possible? The state, which is not going to suddenly turn secular, will see that Muslim victims are protected by a special law. So, it will not only make sure that Hindu victims are similarly protected (by using draconian laws such as MCOCA and UAPA), but will go out of its way to see that Hindus accused under this new law get acquitted.
This happens anyway. In Gujarat, the public prosecutors (PPs) supposed to represent Muslim victims were aligned to the BJP – the main perpetrator of the Gujarat violence. In Mumbai, the PPs were underpaid and indifferent – except in the Radhabai Chawl case. Where Tyagi was the accused, the PP was openly on his side. But in not-so-serious cases of the Mumbai riots, involving rioting and arson, both Hindu and Muslim victims got the same legal (mis)treatment -- indifferent PPs, lethargic judges, policemen unwilling to find the real culprits... I have seen enough instances in court of Hindu and Muslim accused cursing the police equally, often in the same case! Hindus have forgiven Muslims charged with destroying their properties, and gone home with them.
Now you have a law that differentiates between Hindu and Muslim victims. You have separate courts trying Hindu and Muslim accused. You legitimise communal resentment and polarization more successfully than the BJP can ever do.
Unless the definition of a `group’ changes to include all communities, be they majority or minority, this Bill cannot be supported.
(Jyoti Punwani is a freelance journalist based in Mumbai. She has reported extensively on issues related to communalism in India)
Norway killer's common cause with Hindutva - excerpts from Anders Breivik’s manifesto
Source: expressindia.com
Express news service, July 27, 2011
Norway killer Anders Breivik’s manifesto for a new European order, posted online, mentions India in various contexts. Excerpts:
Common cause with Hindu nationalists
On the Indian subcontinent the history is tragic indeed, that’s where the Hindu holocaust took place in medieval times, a little-known episode in the history of Islam in the Western world, but one that left a deep traumatic mark on the people of the region and where the conflict is still present in the province of Kashmir.
All standard reference books agree that the name “Hindu Kush” of the mountain range in eastern Afghanistan means “Hindu Slaughter” or “Hindu Killer”. Most likely, the mountain range was deliberately named as “Hindu Slaughter” by Muslim conquerors, as a lesson to the future generations of Indians. However, Indians in general and Hindus in particular are completely oblivious to this tragic genocide.
If the name Hindu Kush relates such a horrible genocide of Hindus, why are Hindus ignorant about it? And why doesn’t the Government of India teach them about Hindu Kush? The history and geography curricula in Indian schools barely even mention Hindu Kush. The Indian government, instead of giving details of this “dark chapter” in Indian history, is busy in the whitewash of Muslim atrocities and the Hindu holocaust.
In 1982, the National Council of Educational Research and Training issued a directive for the rewriting of school texts. Among other things it stipulated that “characterisation of the medieval period as a time of conflict between Hindus and Moslems is forbidden”. Thus denial of history or negationism has become India’s official “educational” policy.
Hindu nationalism
Saffronisation is a political neologism (after the saffron robes of the Hindu clerics), used to refer to the policy of right-wing Hindu nationalism (or Hindutva) which seeks to make the Indian state into a “Hindu nation” and its Sikh, Buddhist and Jain minorities incorporated into Hinduism. These nationalist movements are also called Sanatana Dharma movements.
A related term, the Saffron Brigade, is used as a descriptor of people and organisations in India that promote Hindu nationalism such as the Sangh Parivar by their critics, who allege a militant Hindu agenda. The Sanatana Dharma movements or Hindu nationalists in general are suffering from the same persecution by the Indian cultural Marxists as their European cousins.
The thing is, Indian government (current government United Progressive Alliance coalition led by Indian National Congress) is (made up of) Socialist-Leftist Liberalists. The other side is National Democratic Alliance led by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a political arm to the RSS: these people are of Hindu right-wing nationalism comprising Hindu parties (including Sikh, Buddhist, and Jain sub-sects), strongly supported by Jewish and Zoroastrian minorities.
The UPA relies on appeasing Muslims and very sadly proselytising Christian missionaries who illegally convert low-caste Hindus with lies and fear, alongside Communists who want total destruction of the Hindu faith and culture.
The irony in India is that the Hindus who are living abroad (expatriate Hindus) are more concerned about Hindu culture than the ones in India, because from abroad, they can get an eagle’s view of what’s happening in India while Indian Hindu residents don’t see it being on the scene.
The only positive thing about the Hindu right wing is that they dominate the streets. They do not tolerate the current injustice and often riot and attack Muslims when things get out of control, usually after the Muslims disrespect and degrade Hinduism too much. This behaviour is nonetheless counterproductive. Because instead of attacking the Muslims they should target the category A and B traitors in India and consolidate military cells and actively seek the overthrow of the cultural Marxist government.
India will continue to wither and die unless the Indian nationalists consolidate properly and strike to win. It is essential that the European and Indian resistance movements learn from each other and cooperate as much as possible. Our goals are more or less identical.
The PCCTS, Knights Templar support the Sanatana Dharma movements and Indian nationalists in general.
Flip side: Indians as labourers, servants
Tombstone
A future overseer organisation should provide and subsidise a standard edition of the Justiciar Knight tombstone. A European tombstone carver, preferably specialised in traditional tombstone architecture, is likely to charge more than 5,000-10,000 Euro in order to create the stone.
As such, producers in low-cost countries should be contacted for the task of creating one or multiple stones in the future. Perhaps Armenia and even China or India should be considered as well. Creating unique accessories (such as commendations, medals, tombstones etc) in India or China will allow us to save up to 80% of the estimated cost. I realise that this might sound hypocritical considering the fact that cultural conservatives in general oppose Indian or Chinese membership in WTO and the fact that we generally prefer insourcing as many industries as possible. However, conserving our funds is a central part of our struggle.
Cheap labour
It would be logical to use cheap foreign labour, especially within the construction sector. These workers should be given 12-month “focus contracts” and must return to their country of origin after the term has ended. One of the primary arguments for modern mass immigration is to justify the demand for labour, jobs the indigenous Europeans are unwilling to take. Now, who will take these jobs when we have halted immigration completely and deported all the Muslims?
Six-to-12-month “focus contracts” will be offered to individuals from Bangladesh, Pakistan and India (these services may be reserved for Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists considering our hostile stance towards the global Islamic Ummah). These will be flown in in bulk every month and will leave at the end of the contract. During their stay they will work 12 hours a day for the duration of their contracts (6 or 12 months) and will then be flown back to their homelands. There should be at least a 6-month quarantine period between every 12-month contract to prevent the individuals from becoming too culturally attached.
These individuals will live in segregated communities in pre-defined areas of each major city and must be provided free medical services, free housing in restricted barrack towns and subsidised food/essentials and subsidised transportation costs. This will allow them to return with a larger portion of their salary. They will be compensated at a rate equivalent to 300% of what they would have earned in their country of origin.
This might sound cynical to especially females (this is not slavery as slavery is taking away people’s freedom) but it is in fact much more generous than what currently Arab countries are offering their guest workers from Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and the Philippines. Furthermore, these arrangements are not very different from what the southern states in the US are currently offering Latin American guest workers.
The economical impacts of extensive usage of these “guest worker” arrangements will have significant impacts on the competitiveness of our civilisation... It will allow us to become the economical powerhouse of the world and the beacon of light for all humanity. It will allow us to contribute significantly to the furtherance of mankind.
Hip-hop youth: Pakistani friend, gangs and a broken nose
Since I was 12 years old, I was into the hip-hop movement. If you wanted girls and respect then it was all about the hip-hop community at that time. The more reckless you were, the more respect and admiration you gained.
I remember my friends at that time, Jon Trygve, Richard and Arsalan; we did everything together. In fact, it was my Muslim friend who sparked my interest for Christianity, Islam and politics in general. At the time, I couldn’t understand why he loathed Norway and my culture so much.
I remember during the first Gulf War, he used to cheer loudly whenever a scud missile was launched against the Americans. His total lack of respect for my culture (and Western culture in general) actually sparked my interest and passion for it. Thanks to him, I gradually developed a passion for my own cultural identity. This was apparently very annoying for him, as I was unwilling to convert to Islam. Instead, I suggested he convert to Christianity and embrace our norms and culture.
We used to hang out with GSV crew, or B-Gjengen as they are popularly called today, a Muslim Pakistani gang, quite violent even back then. “Gang alliances” were a part of our everyday life at that point and assured that you avoided threats and harassment. We had close ties with B-Gjengen (B-Gang) and A-Gjengen (A-Gang), both Muslim Pakistani gangs, through my best friend Arsalan who was also a Pakistani. I was one of the protected “potatoes”, having friends and allies in the Jihadi-racist gangs such as the A and B gangs and many other Muslim gangs.
One day there was an incident and my close friendship with them ended. They chose to continue the same path without me...
I’ve only experienced eight assaults, attempted robberies and multiple threats. I’ve never actually been severely ravaged, robbed or beaten by Muslims (a broken nose is the worst thing that occurred) but I know more than 20 people who have.
(At the age of) 16 years, an older and much stronger/bigger Pakistani hit me without provocation in front of Majorstuenhuset. Apparently, he wanted to subdue me in front of my “friend” Arsalan who apparently had told him to do it. This concluded, for my part, my friendship with him and I re-connected with my old friends after this incident.
People reading this might ask if I contributed in any way to the above conflicts. The answer is no... As all my friends can attest to, I wouldn’t be willing to hurt a fly and I have never used violence against others.
Role models
(The rhetorical questions are asked and answered by Breivik himself)
Name one living person you would like to meet.
The Pope or Vladimir Putin. Putin seems like a fair and resolute leader worthy of respect. I’m unsure at this point whether he has the potential to be our best friend or our worst enemy though. He’s very hard to psychoanalyse. Obviously, he has to openly condemn us at this point which is understandable.
[Russia reacts: “Breivik is the devil incarnate, absolutely mad. No matter what he wrote or said, this is the delirium of a madman” — Putin's spokesman Dmitri S Peskov, as per an NYT report quoting Kommersant newspaper]
Other people you’d want to meet?
The following people have to condemn us at this point which is fine. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Geert Wilders, Radovan Karadzic, Lee Myung-bak and Taro Aso. But isn’t Radovan Karadzic a mass murderer and a racist?! As far as my studies show, he is neither. I condemn any atrocities committed against Croats and vice versa, but for his efforts to rid Serbia of Islam he will always be remembered as an honourable Crusader and a European war hero.
Model countries: Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are today the most peaceful societies due to their monocultural model... our role models for the conservative movement. They are peaceful and anti-imperialistic just like we have aspirations to be. Our aim should be to implement a cultural conservative political model similar to (theirs), which is the same model used in Europe in the 1950s.
Express news service, July 27, 2011
Norway killer Anders Breivik’s manifesto for a new European order, posted online, mentions India in various contexts. Excerpts:
Common cause with Hindu nationalists
On the Indian subcontinent the history is tragic indeed, that’s where the Hindu holocaust took place in medieval times, a little-known episode in the history of Islam in the Western world, but one that left a deep traumatic mark on the people of the region and where the conflict is still present in the province of Kashmir.
All standard reference books agree that the name “Hindu Kush” of the mountain range in eastern Afghanistan means “Hindu Slaughter” or “Hindu Killer”. Most likely, the mountain range was deliberately named as “Hindu Slaughter” by Muslim conquerors, as a lesson to the future generations of Indians. However, Indians in general and Hindus in particular are completely oblivious to this tragic genocide.
If the name Hindu Kush relates such a horrible genocide of Hindus, why are Hindus ignorant about it? And why doesn’t the Government of India teach them about Hindu Kush? The history and geography curricula in Indian schools barely even mention Hindu Kush. The Indian government, instead of giving details of this “dark chapter” in Indian history, is busy in the whitewash of Muslim atrocities and the Hindu holocaust.
In 1982, the National Council of Educational Research and Training issued a directive for the rewriting of school texts. Among other things it stipulated that “characterisation of the medieval period as a time of conflict between Hindus and Moslems is forbidden”. Thus denial of history or negationism has become India’s official “educational” policy.
Hindu nationalism
Saffronisation is a political neologism (after the saffron robes of the Hindu clerics), used to refer to the policy of right-wing Hindu nationalism (or Hindutva) which seeks to make the Indian state into a “Hindu nation” and its Sikh, Buddhist and Jain minorities incorporated into Hinduism. These nationalist movements are also called Sanatana Dharma movements.
A related term, the Saffron Brigade, is used as a descriptor of people and organisations in India that promote Hindu nationalism such as the Sangh Parivar by their critics, who allege a militant Hindu agenda. The Sanatana Dharma movements or Hindu nationalists in general are suffering from the same persecution by the Indian cultural Marxists as their European cousins.
The thing is, Indian government (current government United Progressive Alliance coalition led by Indian National Congress) is (made up of) Socialist-Leftist Liberalists. The other side is National Democratic Alliance led by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a political arm to the RSS: these people are of Hindu right-wing nationalism comprising Hindu parties (including Sikh, Buddhist, and Jain sub-sects), strongly supported by Jewish and Zoroastrian minorities.
The UPA relies on appeasing Muslims and very sadly proselytising Christian missionaries who illegally convert low-caste Hindus with lies and fear, alongside Communists who want total destruction of the Hindu faith and culture.
The irony in India is that the Hindus who are living abroad (expatriate Hindus) are more concerned about Hindu culture than the ones in India, because from abroad, they can get an eagle’s view of what’s happening in India while Indian Hindu residents don’t see it being on the scene.
The only positive thing about the Hindu right wing is that they dominate the streets. They do not tolerate the current injustice and often riot and attack Muslims when things get out of control, usually after the Muslims disrespect and degrade Hinduism too much. This behaviour is nonetheless counterproductive. Because instead of attacking the Muslims they should target the category A and B traitors in India and consolidate military cells and actively seek the overthrow of the cultural Marxist government.
India will continue to wither and die unless the Indian nationalists consolidate properly and strike to win. It is essential that the European and Indian resistance movements learn from each other and cooperate as much as possible. Our goals are more or less identical.
The PCCTS, Knights Templar support the Sanatana Dharma movements and Indian nationalists in general.
Flip side: Indians as labourers, servants
Tombstone
A future overseer organisation should provide and subsidise a standard edition of the Justiciar Knight tombstone. A European tombstone carver, preferably specialised in traditional tombstone architecture, is likely to charge more than 5,000-10,000 Euro in order to create the stone.
As such, producers in low-cost countries should be contacted for the task of creating one or multiple stones in the future. Perhaps Armenia and even China or India should be considered as well. Creating unique accessories (such as commendations, medals, tombstones etc) in India or China will allow us to save up to 80% of the estimated cost. I realise that this might sound hypocritical considering the fact that cultural conservatives in general oppose Indian or Chinese membership in WTO and the fact that we generally prefer insourcing as many industries as possible. However, conserving our funds is a central part of our struggle.
Cheap labour
It would be logical to use cheap foreign labour, especially within the construction sector. These workers should be given 12-month “focus contracts” and must return to their country of origin after the term has ended. One of the primary arguments for modern mass immigration is to justify the demand for labour, jobs the indigenous Europeans are unwilling to take. Now, who will take these jobs when we have halted immigration completely and deported all the Muslims?
Six-to-12-month “focus contracts” will be offered to individuals from Bangladesh, Pakistan and India (these services may be reserved for Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists considering our hostile stance towards the global Islamic Ummah). These will be flown in in bulk every month and will leave at the end of the contract. During their stay they will work 12 hours a day for the duration of their contracts (6 or 12 months) and will then be flown back to their homelands. There should be at least a 6-month quarantine period between every 12-month contract to prevent the individuals from becoming too culturally attached.
These individuals will live in segregated communities in pre-defined areas of each major city and must be provided free medical services, free housing in restricted barrack towns and subsidised food/essentials and subsidised transportation costs. This will allow them to return with a larger portion of their salary. They will be compensated at a rate equivalent to 300% of what they would have earned in their country of origin.
This might sound cynical to especially females (this is not slavery as slavery is taking away people’s freedom) but it is in fact much more generous than what currently Arab countries are offering their guest workers from Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and the Philippines. Furthermore, these arrangements are not very different from what the southern states in the US are currently offering Latin American guest workers.
The economical impacts of extensive usage of these “guest worker” arrangements will have significant impacts on the competitiveness of our civilisation... It will allow us to become the economical powerhouse of the world and the beacon of light for all humanity. It will allow us to contribute significantly to the furtherance of mankind.
Hip-hop youth: Pakistani friend, gangs and a broken nose
Since I was 12 years old, I was into the hip-hop movement. If you wanted girls and respect then it was all about the hip-hop community at that time. The more reckless you were, the more respect and admiration you gained.
I remember my friends at that time, Jon Trygve, Richard and Arsalan; we did everything together. In fact, it was my Muslim friend who sparked my interest for Christianity, Islam and politics in general. At the time, I couldn’t understand why he loathed Norway and my culture so much.
I remember during the first Gulf War, he used to cheer loudly whenever a scud missile was launched against the Americans. His total lack of respect for my culture (and Western culture in general) actually sparked my interest and passion for it. Thanks to him, I gradually developed a passion for my own cultural identity. This was apparently very annoying for him, as I was unwilling to convert to Islam. Instead, I suggested he convert to Christianity and embrace our norms and culture.
We used to hang out with GSV crew, or B-Gjengen as they are popularly called today, a Muslim Pakistani gang, quite violent even back then. “Gang alliances” were a part of our everyday life at that point and assured that you avoided threats and harassment. We had close ties with B-Gjengen (B-Gang) and A-Gjengen (A-Gang), both Muslim Pakistani gangs, through my best friend Arsalan who was also a Pakistani. I was one of the protected “potatoes”, having friends and allies in the Jihadi-racist gangs such as the A and B gangs and many other Muslim gangs.
One day there was an incident and my close friendship with them ended. They chose to continue the same path without me...
I’ve only experienced eight assaults, attempted robberies and multiple threats. I’ve never actually been severely ravaged, robbed or beaten by Muslims (a broken nose is the worst thing that occurred) but I know more than 20 people who have.
(At the age of) 16 years, an older and much stronger/bigger Pakistani hit me without provocation in front of Majorstuenhuset. Apparently, he wanted to subdue me in front of my “friend” Arsalan who apparently had told him to do it. This concluded, for my part, my friendship with him and I re-connected with my old friends after this incident.
People reading this might ask if I contributed in any way to the above conflicts. The answer is no... As all my friends can attest to, I wouldn’t be willing to hurt a fly and I have never used violence against others.
Role models
(The rhetorical questions are asked and answered by Breivik himself)
Name one living person you would like to meet.
The Pope or Vladimir Putin. Putin seems like a fair and resolute leader worthy of respect. I’m unsure at this point whether he has the potential to be our best friend or our worst enemy though. He’s very hard to psychoanalyse. Obviously, he has to openly condemn us at this point which is understandable.
[Russia reacts: “Breivik is the devil incarnate, absolutely mad. No matter what he wrote or said, this is the delirium of a madman” — Putin's spokesman Dmitri S Peskov, as per an NYT report quoting Kommersant newspaper]
Other people you’d want to meet?
The following people have to condemn us at this point which is fine. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Geert Wilders, Radovan Karadzic, Lee Myung-bak and Taro Aso. But isn’t Radovan Karadzic a mass murderer and a racist?! As far as my studies show, he is neither. I condemn any atrocities committed against Croats and vice versa, but for his efforts to rid Serbia of Islam he will always be remembered as an honourable Crusader and a European war hero.
Model countries: Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are today the most peaceful societies due to their monocultural model... our role models for the conservative movement. They are peaceful and anti-imperialistic just like we have aspirations to be. Our aim should be to implement a cultural conservative political model similar to (theirs), which is the same model used in Europe in the 1950s.
July 26, 2011
Norway killer sourced crusader badge from India
The Hindu, July 26, 2011
Norway killer sourced crusader badge from Varanasi
Vinay Kumar
Related
PHOTOS
The badge of the Justiciar Knight.
Weaver recalls the design he made, shocked at the massacre
An uncanny Indian connection has emerged in Friday's Oslo shooting incident, which left 76 persons dead. A self-confessed Muslim-hating fundamentalist Christian, the 32-year-old Norwegian Anders Behring Breivik, chose an Indian art firm to produce badges for his crusader organisation.
As details from his manifesto become known, it has come to light that the “badge of the Justiciar Knight” was sourced from far off Varanasi in Uttar Pradesh. The name of the firm is “Indian Art Company,” situated in one of the narrow lanes of Varanasi, home to the ancient city's traditional weavers who are struggling to eke out a living in a rapidly changing economic environment.
“Yes, I had made two samples for somebody from Norway but that was about a year ago,” Mohammad Aslam Ansari of the ‘Indian Art Company' confirmed when The Hindu spoke to him on the phone on Monday.
Slightly taken aback by a newspaper calling him from New Delhi, Mr. Ansari could not connect the badges he had made to what happened in Norway. When told about the violent massacre near Oslo, his shock and surprise was evident. “I do not even recall the name of person who had contacted me through e-mail and had asked me to send a sample of the badge,” he said in a mixture of Hindi and broken English while trying to give expression to his feelings in a jaw-dropping tone.
“The badge of the Justiciar Knight illustrates a white skull marked with the symbols of communism, Islam and Nazism on the forehead, impaled on the cross of the martyrs,” the Breivik manifesto says.
How and when did Breivik make contact? Mr. Ansari said he had advertised through a couple of websites hoping for some international business and got an e-mail from Norway. Mr. Ansari recalled the design of the badge — a skull with a dagger passing through it (“khopdi aur khanjar”). He made two samples based on a design settled by email and sent them to Norway by courier about a year ago.
“I had hoped to get some bulk order but after sending two samples, nothing was heard and no message came from Norway,” he told this correspondent. Some token amount was sent to him through Western Union as advance (Breivik's diary says he paid $150 for the two badges).
The Internet did not prove to be the bonanza Mr. Ansari had hoped for. In the past eight months, he said, his account had been hacked and his dreams of getting work through the e-world had come to naught. “I am back to square one, doing jobs on my family loom for others. Generally, we are paid Rs. 150 per metre, of which half goes to the weaver who is working on the loom. It is too meagre to meet even our daily needs,” Mr. Ansari said.
A matriculate, Mr. Ansari, hailing from a family of traditional weavers, passed out from school in 1984. Since then, he said, the business has only dwindled.
Vijay Prashad's comment on Breivik's attack in Norway and the far right groups in europe
Counterpunch, July 25, 2011
Marxist-Multiculturalists for BDS
Palestine's Norwegians
By VIJAY PRASHAD
Sitting on an Amtrak train from New Haven to Washington, DC on Friday, I was enjoying my thriller, Kjell Ola Dahl's The Man in the Window. Dahl's police procedural novels are set in Oslo, Norway, where the remarkable detectives Frank Frølich and Gunnarstranda confront the heart of modern evil: Property is often the hub of the conflict, but so too is the ineluctable history of Nazism and the Second World War. Abrave history of pacifism, partly contained in the Norwegian Labour Party, kept the country out of World War I. Its ports and a direct route to Swedish iron ore made it irresistible to the Nazis, whose forces invaded a largely unprotected Norway in 1940.
To run the country, the Nazis turned to the leader of the Norwegian Nasjonal Samling, the local Nazi Party, Vidkun Quisling (from whom we get the noun for traitor). It was the Quisling era (replete with concentration camps) that planted the tree of Nazism in Norwegian soil. The remnants of Scandinavian Nazis regrouped after World War II, but they remained small and obscure.
Scandinavian social democracy stumbled by the 1980s as the economic benefits of its welfare state were reduced. Anti-immigrant and anti-left sentiment grew amongst sections of the dispossessed working-class and middle-class, whose more militant element formed the Skinheads. They were the rump of the revival of neo-Nazism in the 1990s. It was as a consequence of this emergence that in 1995 the Swedish left created Expo, the anti-racist magazine edited by Stieg Larsson. It is also the reason why Scandinavian police procedural novels and thrillers are so very good (from Henning Mankell to Larsson to Jo Nesbø): they produce superb artfrom the hypocritical bourgeois denial of the existence of Nazism, and how it is the soft-Right of the "moderates" that tolerates and encourages the far-Right.
In Norway, the Skinheads morphed into groups such as the Boot Boys, who spent their time trolling the streets seeking out those who appear to be migrants. In 2002, three of the Boot Boys killed a fifteen year old, Benjamin Hermansen. When this incident occurred, the newspaper Dagsavisen wrote, "This must open the eyes of the authorities and all those who don't want to acknowledge the existence of Nazism and racism in Norway." On February 1, 2002, 40,000 of the 4.4 million Norwegians gathered in Oslo to demonstrate against this murder. The crowds included Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and Crown Prince Haakon. The Centre Against Racism in Oslo notes that since the late 1980s, there have been almost two thousand incidents of racism in the country, some of it enhanced by the rhetoric of the so-called Progress Party and of course the Nazi sects.
My I-Phone pinged, and news came of the bombing in Oslo and the massacre on Utøya Island. The dead at the latter were from the Workers' Youth League (AUF), linked to the Norwegian Labour Party, but with roots in the Communist and Socialist movements of the 1920s. The current Prime Minister of Norway, Jens Stoltenberg, was once leader of the AUF. The initial reaction in the West was that the attacks had been conducted by Muslim jihadis. This has become a habit – after the 1995 bombing in Oklahoma City, CBS's Jim Stewart said, "The betting here is on Middle East terrorists." Of course this was more Mid-West than Mid-East, but there was no apology from the media to the Muslims in America.
The first reports from the New York Times suggested that the Oslo bomber was a jihadi (Professor Will McCants tweeted that the perp was Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, something repeated by the Times, who later said that "the group was previously unknown and might not even exist"). When the fog of Islamaphobia partly cleared, and the Norwegian police was allowed its moment, they revealed that the actual killer was a Nazi, Anders Behring Breivik, who could very well have been a character from a Dahl novel.
A few hours later, Breivik's manifesto began to appear on various websites. Here Breivik fulminated against "Marxist-Multiculturalists." This has become a familiar refrain among the defenders of Fortress Europe: they want to secure their continent from the re-conquest of the Moors. The tendency is hateful toward immigrants and Islam. But these are not marginal socio-paths. Their views flow down the center of the stream of European conservatism. In October of last year, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that multiculturalism "has utterly failed." Immigrants needed to be force-marched into German culture, and if this is not possible, they should not be allowed to enter the country.
In February of this year, Britain's Cameron and France's Sarkozy followed Merkel's lead. Cameron blamed the "doctrine of state multiculturalism" for encouraging migrants to "live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream." France's Sarkozy gave a bitter speech against multiculturalism and then told the MPs of his "Union for a Popular Movement" party that he wanted laws to rein in Islam. Electorally, Sarkozy wanted to outflank the increased popularity of Martine Le Pen's National Front. "We had a debate on the burqa," he said, "now we should have a debate on street preachers." This is less a debate and more a vitriolic campaign against Islam and those who look like Muslims.
European Conservatism takes a harsh position vis-Ã -vis its African and Asian migrants. There is not much that separates these sophisticated leaders from their antecedents (namely, Enoch Powell and his 1968 "rivers of blood" speech) and the neo-Nazis (namely, Breivik). This strand of Conservatism hates difference and diversity, and promotes mono-cultures in social life. It cannot fathom that human beings are able to live convivial lives with those who are different. It would like to blame society's problems on difference. The last thing imaginable is to put the onus on the hierarchies of property, power and propriety, all of whom are generally alien to the commonplace conviviality of everyday people.
When Breivik writes that "indigenous Europeans" are committing "cultural suicide" by accommodating these migrants, he displays the typical ignorance of Nazism – they have no sense of the long centuries of interaction across the continents, of the mechanisms of colonial ideology that continued those interactions amidst the growth of a toxic racism, and of the recent histories of polycultural social life that has become so important to the lives of people in his own Europe. Watching television footage from Utøya, one could see that the Labour youth had among them children of migrants from Sri Lanka and North Africa. Their Norway was not Breivik's Norway.
BDS.
On July 20, days before the shooting, the leader of the AUF Eskil Pederson gave an interview to the tabloid Dagbladet. The AUF had held a rally for the boycott of Israel at Utøya Island, and it had strengthened its position vis-à -vis the BDS campaign (Boycott-Divest-Sanctions). Pederson told the tabloid that he believed that"the time has come for more drastic measures against Israel." He wanted the Norwegian Foreign Ministry to impose an economic boycott against Israel. "We in the Labour Youth will have a unilateral economic embargo of Israel from theNorwegian side."
Norway has a very advanced position on the international campaign against the Occupation of the Palestinian people. The Norwegian trade union federation (LO), which includes a fifth of the country's population, divested from a series of Israeli firms, such as Africa Israel Investments,Danya Cebus, and Elbit Systems. This is one of the largest sovereign funds in the world, and its move puts pressure on other funds. Norway also has an arms ban on Israel. Norwegian civil society has been very active in pushing for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel (support comes from 42% of the population, including the Norwegian soccer coach Egil 'Drillo' Olsen, who is a member of the Norwegian Worker Communist Party). Last year, the Norwegian Foreign Ministry refused to allow the Germans to test submarines that are slated for sale to Israel in Norwegian waters. A few days before the shooting, Norway's Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre visited the AUF youth, who told him that they wanted the boycott strengthened. A picture of Støre at the AUF camp walking past a sign that said "Boikott Israel" ran in the tabloids.
Støre's visit to the AUF camp came just after he met with Palestinian Authority leader Mahmud Abbas to reaffirm Norway's support of the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations later this year. It is significant that Oslo was the home to the Israel-Palestinian peace accords in 1993. Israel's obduracy since then has changed the equation. "I don't think that any Palestinians or anybody around the world are in doubt that Norway supports Palestinians' right to statehood," Støre said. Støre is also a great supporter of diversity in Norway; he often uses the expression "the New We" to refer to Norwegian society. His "we" includes the asylum seekers and migrants, the Muslims and the Jews.
Above my desk I have a poster from a demonstration led the Anti-Fascistik Aktion in Copenhagen in June 1995. "No Fucking Fascists," it says. That is the sentiment of the more than ninety young people of the AUF killed last week. Breivik was certainly a right-wing militant, and without a doubt inspired by the Euro-fascism of Merkel-Sarkozy-Cameron. The press might be obsessed by their "lone gun-man" theory. They see things in the police's terms, which is to say, in terms of who actually acted, and who provided material support for the action. The action in Utøya was not the act of a madman, and it was not a human tragedy. It was an act of political murder against people who had committed themselves to a convivial world not only for their beloved Norway, but also for those who live under Occupation elsewhere.
Vijay Prashad is the George and Martha Kellner Chair of South Asian History and Director of International Studies at Trinity College, Hartford, CT His most recent book, The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World, won the Muzaffar Ahmad Book Prize for 2009. He can be reached at: vijay.prashad@trincoll.edu
Marxist-Multiculturalists for BDS
Palestine's Norwegians
By VIJAY PRASHAD
Sitting on an Amtrak train from New Haven to Washington, DC on Friday, I was enjoying my thriller, Kjell Ola Dahl's The Man in the Window. Dahl's police procedural novels are set in Oslo, Norway, where the remarkable detectives Frank Frølich and Gunnarstranda confront the heart of modern evil: Property is often the hub of the conflict, but so too is the ineluctable history of Nazism and the Second World War. Abrave history of pacifism, partly contained in the Norwegian Labour Party, kept the country out of World War I. Its ports and a direct route to Swedish iron ore made it irresistible to the Nazis, whose forces invaded a largely unprotected Norway in 1940.
To run the country, the Nazis turned to the leader of the Norwegian Nasjonal Samling, the local Nazi Party, Vidkun Quisling (from whom we get the noun for traitor). It was the Quisling era (replete with concentration camps) that planted the tree of Nazism in Norwegian soil. The remnants of Scandinavian Nazis regrouped after World War II, but they remained small and obscure.
Scandinavian social democracy stumbled by the 1980s as the economic benefits of its welfare state were reduced. Anti-immigrant and anti-left sentiment grew amongst sections of the dispossessed working-class and middle-class, whose more militant element formed the Skinheads. They were the rump of the revival of neo-Nazism in the 1990s. It was as a consequence of this emergence that in 1995 the Swedish left created Expo, the anti-racist magazine edited by Stieg Larsson. It is also the reason why Scandinavian police procedural novels and thrillers are so very good (from Henning Mankell to Larsson to Jo Nesbø): they produce superb artfrom the hypocritical bourgeois denial of the existence of Nazism, and how it is the soft-Right of the "moderates" that tolerates and encourages the far-Right.
In Norway, the Skinheads morphed into groups such as the Boot Boys, who spent their time trolling the streets seeking out those who appear to be migrants. In 2002, three of the Boot Boys killed a fifteen year old, Benjamin Hermansen. When this incident occurred, the newspaper Dagsavisen wrote, "This must open the eyes of the authorities and all those who don't want to acknowledge the existence of Nazism and racism in Norway." On February 1, 2002, 40,000 of the 4.4 million Norwegians gathered in Oslo to demonstrate against this murder. The crowds included Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and Crown Prince Haakon. The Centre Against Racism in Oslo notes that since the late 1980s, there have been almost two thousand incidents of racism in the country, some of it enhanced by the rhetoric of the so-called Progress Party and of course the Nazi sects.
My I-Phone pinged, and news came of the bombing in Oslo and the massacre on Utøya Island. The dead at the latter were from the Workers' Youth League (AUF), linked to the Norwegian Labour Party, but with roots in the Communist and Socialist movements of the 1920s. The current Prime Minister of Norway, Jens Stoltenberg, was once leader of the AUF. The initial reaction in the West was that the attacks had been conducted by Muslim jihadis. This has become a habit – after the 1995 bombing in Oklahoma City, CBS's Jim Stewart said, "The betting here is on Middle East terrorists." Of course this was more Mid-West than Mid-East, but there was no apology from the media to the Muslims in America.
The first reports from the New York Times suggested that the Oslo bomber was a jihadi (Professor Will McCants tweeted that the perp was Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, something repeated by the Times, who later said that "the group was previously unknown and might not even exist"). When the fog of Islamaphobia partly cleared, and the Norwegian police was allowed its moment, they revealed that the actual killer was a Nazi, Anders Behring Breivik, who could very well have been a character from a Dahl novel.
A few hours later, Breivik's manifesto began to appear on various websites. Here Breivik fulminated against "Marxist-Multiculturalists." This has become a familiar refrain among the defenders of Fortress Europe: they want to secure their continent from the re-conquest of the Moors. The tendency is hateful toward immigrants and Islam. But these are not marginal socio-paths. Their views flow down the center of the stream of European conservatism. In October of last year, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that multiculturalism "has utterly failed." Immigrants needed to be force-marched into German culture, and if this is not possible, they should not be allowed to enter the country.
In February of this year, Britain's Cameron and France's Sarkozy followed Merkel's lead. Cameron blamed the "doctrine of state multiculturalism" for encouraging migrants to "live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream." France's Sarkozy gave a bitter speech against multiculturalism and then told the MPs of his "Union for a Popular Movement" party that he wanted laws to rein in Islam. Electorally, Sarkozy wanted to outflank the increased popularity of Martine Le Pen's National Front. "We had a debate on the burqa," he said, "now we should have a debate on street preachers." This is less a debate and more a vitriolic campaign against Islam and those who look like Muslims.
European Conservatism takes a harsh position vis-Ã -vis its African and Asian migrants. There is not much that separates these sophisticated leaders from their antecedents (namely, Enoch Powell and his 1968 "rivers of blood" speech) and the neo-Nazis (namely, Breivik). This strand of Conservatism hates difference and diversity, and promotes mono-cultures in social life. It cannot fathom that human beings are able to live convivial lives with those who are different. It would like to blame society's problems on difference. The last thing imaginable is to put the onus on the hierarchies of property, power and propriety, all of whom are generally alien to the commonplace conviviality of everyday people.
When Breivik writes that "indigenous Europeans" are committing "cultural suicide" by accommodating these migrants, he displays the typical ignorance of Nazism – they have no sense of the long centuries of interaction across the continents, of the mechanisms of colonial ideology that continued those interactions amidst the growth of a toxic racism, and of the recent histories of polycultural social life that has become so important to the lives of people in his own Europe. Watching television footage from Utøya, one could see that the Labour youth had among them children of migrants from Sri Lanka and North Africa. Their Norway was not Breivik's Norway.
BDS.
On July 20, days before the shooting, the leader of the AUF Eskil Pederson gave an interview to the tabloid Dagbladet. The AUF had held a rally for the boycott of Israel at Utøya Island, and it had strengthened its position vis-à -vis the BDS campaign (Boycott-Divest-Sanctions). Pederson told the tabloid that he believed that"the time has come for more drastic measures against Israel." He wanted the Norwegian Foreign Ministry to impose an economic boycott against Israel. "We in the Labour Youth will have a unilateral economic embargo of Israel from theNorwegian side."
Norway has a very advanced position on the international campaign against the Occupation of the Palestinian people. The Norwegian trade union federation (LO), which includes a fifth of the country's population, divested from a series of Israeli firms, such as Africa Israel Investments,Danya Cebus, and Elbit Systems. This is one of the largest sovereign funds in the world, and its move puts pressure on other funds. Norway also has an arms ban on Israel. Norwegian civil society has been very active in pushing for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel (support comes from 42% of the population, including the Norwegian soccer coach Egil 'Drillo' Olsen, who is a member of the Norwegian Worker Communist Party). Last year, the Norwegian Foreign Ministry refused to allow the Germans to test submarines that are slated for sale to Israel in Norwegian waters. A few days before the shooting, Norway's Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre visited the AUF youth, who told him that they wanted the boycott strengthened. A picture of Støre at the AUF camp walking past a sign that said "Boikott Israel" ran in the tabloids.
Støre's visit to the AUF camp came just after he met with Palestinian Authority leader Mahmud Abbas to reaffirm Norway's support of the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations later this year. It is significant that Oslo was the home to the Israel-Palestinian peace accords in 1993. Israel's obduracy since then has changed the equation. "I don't think that any Palestinians or anybody around the world are in doubt that Norway supports Palestinians' right to statehood," Støre said. Støre is also a great supporter of diversity in Norway; he often uses the expression "the New We" to refer to Norwegian society. His "we" includes the asylum seekers and migrants, the Muslims and the Jews.
Above my desk I have a poster from a demonstration led the Anti-Fascistik Aktion in Copenhagen in June 1995. "No Fucking Fascists," it says. That is the sentiment of the more than ninety young people of the AUF killed last week. Breivik was certainly a right-wing militant, and without a doubt inspired by the Euro-fascism of Merkel-Sarkozy-Cameron. The press might be obsessed by their "lone gun-man" theory. They see things in the police's terms, which is to say, in terms of who actually acted, and who provided material support for the action. The action in Utøya was not the act of a madman, and it was not a human tragedy. It was an act of political murder against people who had committed themselves to a convivial world not only for their beloved Norway, but also for those who live under Occupation elsewhere.
Vijay Prashad is the George and Martha Kellner Chair of South Asian History and Director of International Studies at Trinity College, Hartford, CT His most recent book, The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World, won the Muzaffar Ahmad Book Prize for 2009. He can be reached at: vijay.prashad@trincoll.edu
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
