100 MLAs from Andhra, Rayalaseema regions quit

December 10, 2009 by janamejayan

Andhra Pradesh Bureau

Protests erupt over Centre’s decision on Telangana

— PHOTO: P. V. SIVAKUMAR

Up in arms: Congressmen from coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema protest outside Gandhi Bhavan in Hyderabad on Thursday against the Centre’s decision to initiate the process for formation of a separate Telangana State.

HYDERABAD: Expressing outrage at the sudden decision of the central Congress leadership to initiate the process for formation of a Telangana State, MLAs and other elected representatives from the Rayalaseema and Andhra regions, cutting across political lines, submitted resignation letters en masse.

A political crisis emerged when 100 MLAs, including 58 from the Congress, 29 from the Telugu Desam and 13 from the Praja Rajyam, handed over their letters of resignation to Speaker N. Kiran Kumar Reddy by Thursday evening; more than 35 MLCs too put in their papers. Reports here suggest that about a dozen Congress MPs are contemplating similar action.

Activists of political parties and students from coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema staged demonstrations against the Congress decision. Protests turned violent in Kadiri, Gooty and other towns, with police caning the activists who set buses on fire. The parties also called a bandh in Rayalaseema and coastal Andhra for Friday in protest against the announcement made without taking them into confidence. Students in Visakhapatnam observed a ‘black day’ and called for a two-day bandh from Friday.

Amid the heightened political crisis, the State Cabinet held an emergency meeting under the leadership of Chief Minister K. Rosaiah, but there were with differences between Ministers from the Telangana and Andhra regions over abiding by the party high command’s decision.

The government asserted that there would be no going back on tabling a resolution on Telangana in the Assembly.

The day started with Congress MLAs from Andhra and Rayalaseema upping the ante as the implications of the Centre’s announcement began to sink in. Telugu Desam MLAs too joined the revolt, though the party decided to support the resolution. Most of the MLAs felt that they would not be able to face the anger of their constituents.

Shocked at the sudden turn in political developments, TDP president N. Chandrababu Naidu blamed the Congress for plunging the State into a crisis and bringing disrepute to the Telugu people.

The decision of the Praja Rajyam Party MLAs to put in their papers too came as a surprise for many, including their president, K. Chiranjeevi, as the party in principle was not opposed to a separate Telangana State.

The Telangana Rashtra Samiti, which had launched an agitation to press for a separate State, described the rash of resignations as “a political gimmick.”

Congress leaders were apparently caught by surprise over the fast paced developments. The Ministers too were thoroughly divided.

http://www.hindu.com/2009/12/11/stories/2009121157370100.htm

VHP PRESS STATEMENT on SAVE GANGA MOVEMENT

December 10, 2009 by janamejayan

VHP PRESS STATEMENT on SAVE GANGA MOVEMENT:

Minister Dr Jairam Ramesh assures positive steps on the issue to Sri Ashok Singhal and Dr Subramanian Swami

New Delhi, December 10, 2009

The International President of the Vishva Hindu Parishad [VHP], Shri Ashok Singhal and the Janata Party President & former Union Cabinet Minister, Dr. Subramanian Swamy together met the Union Environment and Forests Minister Dr. Jairam Ramesh last evening for 45 minutes to discuss the state of the holy river Ganga.

Shri Singhal at the outset made it clear that the VHP and all the recognized Hindu religious leaders are resolutely opposed to the destruction of the Holy Ganga that is happening due to ill-conceived power generation projects of the Centre in construction at several places along the river from Gangotri to Haridwar.

These projects will tunnel out the Ganga river from its traditional path from its source to Haridwar and render the river bed dry and bereft of what is today the purest Ganga jal flow.

Shri Singhal warned that if the Union Government failed to devise reasonable alternative projects in place of the present hydel projects to generate electricity for the hill people of Uttarakhand, the Hindu Sants and other leaders will decide at the coming Maha Kumbh Mela to launch a nation-wide “do or die” mass agitation. He suggested alternative projects which are more cost-effective and environment-friendly such as bio-gas projects, nuclear reactors, solar energy, wind power, etc.

Dr. Jairam Ramesh told the two visiting leaders that following the receipt of letters from them last October, the Prime Minister as chairman of the National Ganga River Authority had in the last meeting on October 5th directed a stay of all the hydel projects under construction and asked for a review by a high powered committee. That Review Report has now been received by the Authority and is being studied for action to be taken.

He said as far as scrapping the projects in favour of other alternative ways of generating electricity is concerned, he said it required further study which is being contemplated as to what is to be done about the construction already carried out and what dangers to environment would be posed if the structures already in place are simply abandoned.

Dr. Ramesh added that as an Indian he would not like India to be transformed from a civilization of rivers to a nation of tunnels, and hence he would seek a harmonization of our spiritual traditions and imperatives of economic development.

Hence, he urged the two leaders to wait till January end when a formal decision would be taken on how to proceed further. Till then all the existing projects under construction will remain stayed.

-Released by

VISHVA HINDU PARISHAD

Sankat Mochan Ashram, Sector-VI, Ramakrishna Puram,

New Delhi-110 022, Bharat (India).

TeleFax (00-91) (011) 2610 3495, 2617 8992; Fax: 00-91-11-2619 5527

Emails: vhpintlhqs@gmail.com; vishwahindu@gmail.com; hinduvishwa@gmail.com

Lankan war memorial at Prabhakaran’s death site

December 10, 2009 by janamejayan

P K Balachandran | ENS

In an act of tremendous political-military significance, Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa on Wednesday ceremonially opened a national war memorial at Pudumattalaan, near the site where LTTE supremo Velupillai Prabhakaran was killed.

The memorial is located near the mangroves in Nanthikadal lagoon where Prabhakaran fell to the bullets of the Sri Lankan forces in the third week on May. The “Victory Monument” was unveiled before a galaxy of military officers.

The President was accorded a Guard of Honour by the Commando Regiment. Minutes later, the President hoisted the National flag and the Tri-Service Commanders simultaneously hoisted the flags of their respective services.

Adding colour and dignity to the occasion was the raising of the Wanni Security Forces Headquarters flag, and the flags of all Divisional and Task Force flags, representing all war heroes who contributed to the recently-concluded Eelam War IV known in government parlance as a “humanitarian operation”.

“The blue background to the monument depicts the blue ocean and the flowers around it the Sri Lankan nation. Four Lions at the four corners of the memorial immortalize the contribution of the war heroes who came from all four directions to win the final battle. The soldier who carries a weapon symbolizes valour and gallantry.The National flag on it demonstrates the sovereignty, independence and dignity of the nation,” the army said in a release.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa addressing a 5000 strong gathering of army personnel after opening of the monument paid a glowing tribute to their invaluable contribution. .

SIGNIFICANCE OF PUDUMATTALAAN

Pudumattalaan is situated in the Pudukudiyiruppu region , which saw the heaviest battle in Eelan War IV.

The LTTE had fought its hardest in the Puthukudiyiruppu town and the surrounding areas in April, before Prabhakaran and his band migrated to the so-called No Fire Zone in the far east, but only to perish on the banks of the Nanthikadal lagoon in May.

The battles fought in this area were so intense in the use of fire power, that not a single building was left standing. The town and its environs were a rubble, with scores of vehicles charred and overurned, when journalists were taken there.

The President visited the Tamil war refugees in a camp at Chettikulam in Vavuniya district, and also prayed at the 300 year old Catholic church of St. Mary at Madu in Mannar district ,which had previously been in the hands of the LTTE.

THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE TO TAMIL SPEECH

At Chettilulam, the President made a speech before the refugees in Tamil, in which he said that he would arrange to send all of them back to their villages in the former war zone in the Wanni by January 31 next year.

He was cheered lustily by the massive Tamil crowd, very pleased with the fact that he spoke in their mother tongue.

The refugees told reporters accompanying the President that though camp life had its shotcomings and trials, they were thankful to the government for what it did for them and that they were looking forward to going back to their villages.

At Madu church, the Catholic priests  blessed President Rajapaksa, the first Head of State to visit the church in the last three decades.On reciept of the news that the President was at the church, crowds thronged it. The people thanked the President for liberating  them from terrorism that engulfed their lives for 30 long years.

ELECTORAL SIGNIFICANCE

The inauguration of a Sri Lankan national war memorial, that too in an area dominated by the LTTE for three decades, and which had served as its military nerve centre, has great significance for the Presidential election due on January 26 next.

By his act ,Rajapaksa has scored over his main rival, former Army Chief, Gen.Sarath Fonseka, by visiting the war torn north when Fonseka had said that he would not go and canvass in these areas unless he was provided adequate security.

The President had also spoken to the refugees in the camps in Tamil and told them that they would be free by January 31.His visit to the Catholic chuch in Madu, even though he is a Buddhist, is bound to go down well Catholics ,especially Tamil Catholics, who are a significant minority in Sri Lanka.

Minorities like Tamils and Catholics are set to play a key role in the Presidential election given the fact that Sinhalese-Buddhist majority’s vote might be divided 50:50.

http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Lankan+war+memorial+at+Prabhakaran%E2%80%99s+death+site&artid=dmrDnjGC9D8=&SectionID=oHSKVfNWYm0=&MainSectionID=oHSKVfNWYm0=&SEO=sri+lanka,+president+rajapaksa,+pudumattalan,+LTTE&SectionName=VfE7I/Vl8os=

Andhra chaos: a prelude to a greater political crisis in India?

December 10, 2009 by janamejayan

Sonia completed 64 years and by next year she will be retired from the Indian politics!

Andhra made her and the same Andhra is going to unmake her!

I knew it when Shiva took YSR out in a stunning accident!

Aum Namasivaya!

Andhra chaos: MLAs, MPs to quit over Telangana

December 10, 2009 by janamejayan

IANS

First Published : 10 Dec 2009 03:01:48 PM IST

HYDERABAD: A day after the central government agreed to the formation of a separate Telangana state, Andhra Pradesh plunged into political chaos with at least 73 legislators and several MPs from other regions of the state resigning or threatening to quit to protest the “unilateral” decision to divide the state.

As many as 45 legislators of the ruling Congress, 17 of the main opposition Telugu Desam Party (TDP) and 11 of the Praja Rajyam Party (PRP) have reportedly quit or offered to resign.

Two MPs of the Congress party have resigned – L. Rajagopal from Vijayawada Lok Sabha constituency in coastal Andhra was the first to send his resignation to the speaker. Another MP R. Sambasiva Rao has also resigned.

At least two other Congress MPs have also offered to quit. These reports are yet to be confirmed.

Congress president Sonia Gandhi has called an emergency meeting of party MPs from Andhra and Rayalaseema regions in New Delhi Thursday evening, party sources said here.

Many legislators, who either resigned or offered to resign, said they did not want to support the resolution to be tabled in the assembly for formation of Telangana state.

Former minister and senior legislator J.C. Diwakar Reddy of the Congress was the first among legislators to resign.

In his letter to speaker Kiran Kumar Reddy, he said he was resigning to protest the division of the state. Diwakar Reddy hails from Rayalaseema region.

Chief Minister K. Rosaiah, however, said he had no information about the resignations.

TDP president N. Chandrabbau Naidu and PRP chief K. Chiranjeevi have called emergency meetings of their party legislators.

http://tinyurl. com/y9zvy8u

A Million Mutinies Now: Cong MLAs resign enmasse protesting Telangana decision

TIMES NEWS NETWORK & AGENCIES 10 December 2009, 02:30pm IST

HYDERABAD: A million mutinies now. This is what the knee jerk reaction of the Congress high command to concede Telangana will lead to, say analysts. “I am in shock and awe. What was the need for blinking. Soniaji’s birthday gift to Telangana on her birthday will destroy the party in Andhra Pradesh. It’s like shooting yourself on the foot,” said a Congress MP on conditions of anonymity. “I don’t think a resolution for creation of Telangana state can be passed in the AP assembly. MLAs will resign rather than be a party to this decision,” he asserted.

“There will be revolt in the Congress in the Andhra region and in Telangana, K Chandrasekhar Rao will take the political advantage of Telangana. Don’t forget he joined Advani’s rally in Amritsar even before the election results were announced. So what do we gain?” the Congressman pointed out. A revolt in the Congress party has already broken out with the MP from Vijayawada, Lagdapati Rajagopal who has always been anti-Telangana having submitted his resignation from the Lok Sabha. Later in the day two more Congress MPs from coastal Andhra and two more from Rayalaseema are expected to quit their Lok Sabha seat in protest. About 50 Congress MLAs – nearly one third of the Congress’s strength in the assembly will also quit the assembly later in the day and one minister has already done so in the morning. Analysts say that they would have no choice, their constituents will lynch them if they do not oppose Telangana tooth and nail. Even TDP MLAs are expected to follow suit.

Though there has been a popular demand for a separate state of Telangana in the region (which accounts for 10 districts in Andhra Pradesh) in the rest of the state there has been equal opposition to the idea. “This is one state speaking one language. States in India were formed on linguistic basis so why does anybody want to break up a Telugu speaking state? Why don’t they break up a Marathi speaking state or a Kannada speaking state. This is a conspiracy against the prosperous and rapidly developing state of Andhra Pradesh,” asked Harish D, an incensed student from Vishakapatnam?” Reports indicate that large scale protest rallies are being planned in the coastal Andhra region.

Political analysts point out that the sudden reaction of the Congress high command was to prempt the possibility of large scale violence breaking out in the streets of Hyderabad during the course of the Chalo Assembly rally that was slated for Thursday. Though there was massive police bandabost, intelligence reports had suggested that extreme left ultras and goondas from the badlands of Rayalaseema had infiltrated the ranks of agitators and that they could create disturbances. “This would force the police to open fire in which lives would be lost. Ultimately this was the perception that made the high command agree to Telangana. But Andhra Pradesh chief minister K Rosaiah who is more in touch with the realities on the ground opposed the move tooth and nail But he was over ridden,” an inside Congress source told TOI.

Analysts said that though the demand for Telangana was fast acquiring the hue of a backward class movement, the sane way would have been to co-opt them into the political process. “The tragedy of Andhra Pradesh is that it is a bipolar polity with two main parties – the Congress and the Telugu Desam Party. Both of them represent higher caste interests viz that of Reddys and Kammas. The interest of the backward castes is represented nowhere. Chiranjeevi tried to form a backward caste party through Prajarajyam but it is yet to be a formidable force,” a political analyst said.

Major trouble is expected to ensue about the future of Hyderabad, the capital of Andhra Pradesh, which is technically in the Telangana region. “In the past Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh have also been divided. But never was the fate of Patna, Bhopal or Lucknow in contention. Here the state capital will be part of the breakaway state. This is a totally new situation,” a political analyst said. What is going to further complicate the matter now is the fact that people from rest of Andhra have made huge investments in Hyderabad and made their city their home. They will be apprehensive about their well being in the new state. Yet they would not be able to go back because they have moved lock stock and barrel to Hyderabad. “Yet you cannot deny Hyderabad to Telangana because Telangana will be nothing without Hyderabad. It will be like offering mutton biryani to a hungry man and telling him that you can eat the rice but not the mutton,” an analyst pointed out.

http://timesofindia .indiatimes. com/articleshow/ msid-5322325, prtpage-1. cms

Andhra Police unleash reign of terror

December 8, 2009 by janamejayan

P Hareesh

HYDERABAD: After lying low for a week, police on Monday took the Osmania University campus under control and unleashed a reign of terror at the nearby Manikeshwar Nagar, without it seems, a reasonable provocation.

Not just ordinary police but Greyhounds, the elite anti-Naxal force, the Central Reserve Police Force and the Rapid Action Force, marched into Manikeshwar Nagar and caned all those who had the misfortune to be in their sight.

They barged into houses and thrashed not only students but also the elderly, women and even children. They did not spare the media either.

Manikeshwar Nagar, adjacent to the OU campus, is home to many OU students.

At one point of time, East Zone DCP Stephen Ravindra disregarded a direct order from no less a person than Home Minister Sabita Indra Reddy prompting the latter to offer her resignation.

The khaki terror began early around 2 a.m. The city police assisted by the special forces sealed the OU campus and began searching hostels for members of the OU students’ Joint Action Committee (JAC). However, the JAC members went underground.

The police forces then tried to uproot a tent in front of the Arts College where the students had been staging protests for the past few days. Nonetheless, despite their heavy bandobust, about 200 students managed to converge at the Arts College and stage a silent protest.

Meanwhile, those students who were residing in the nearby Manikeshwar Nagar tried to enter the campus.

The police prevented them inviting their wrath. The irate students chased away the police till the OU police station.

Thus began a bloody confrontation that ended in the police shedding every bit of their inhibitions. The policemen regrouped and launched an all-out assault on the students.

Not content with driving them back into the locality, they entered Manikeshwar Nagar themselves and caned everybody.

Taken aback by the sudden attack, the local residents too joined the students and fought a pitched battle with the police.

Everytime, the locals gathered, the police chased them into the bylanes and beat them up leaving several injured.

‘‘I was sitting in front of my house when I was beaten for no fault of mine,’’ a profusely bleeding local, Venkatesh, said.

Mediamen were abused and beaten up by the police. Several mediamen suffered injuries and one reporter of a private television channel had to be shifted to a hospital. The journalists later staged a demonstration at the OU police station.

BJP State president Bandaru Dattatreya and other leaders, who tried to pacify the police, had to leave the place. So adamant were the cops. Leaders and representatives of civil society, who tried to enter the campus, were arrested.

The police softened only after a team of the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) visited the OU campus and Manikeshar Nagar. The panel directed the cops not to enter Manikeshwar Nagar without provocation. By evening, the police withdrew from the OU campus.

http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Police+unleash+reign+of+terror&artid=GoYqbqA9M7c=&SectionID=e7uPP4|pSiw=&MainSectionID=fyV9T2jIa4A=&SectionName=EH8HilNJ2uYAot5nzqumeA==&SEO=

Bengal Temples are Violently Attacked by the Muslim Fascists.

December 4, 2009 by janamejayan

Temple & Hindu Properties grabbed by Bengal Talibans.

Posted by hinduexistence on December 4, 2009

Some shocking news both from Bangladesh and West Bengal recognize the onslaught of Bengali Hindus there.

Bangladesh Minority Watch (BDMW) Dhaka received an appeal from the Hindu victims/devotees requesting us to take initiative to protect their rights of religion and also for legal assistance in the court.

Peaceful Hindus last year on 23.11.2008 went to cremate Hindu dead bodies at their cremation ground situated at Mukunda Patty Baneswardee Area at Nagarkanda Upazila of Faridpur District. But they had been intercepted by some Muslim perpetrators. As a result Hindus lodged general diary entry number 875 dated 23.11.2008 at Nagarkanda police station apprehending danger in future.

But again on 26.01.2009 at about 9.30 a.m. the perpetrators namely:-

1)     Sheikh Serajul (60) son of late Sheikh Abdus Sattar, 2) Showkat Sheikh (40) , 3) Yead Ali Sheik (35) sons of both Sheikh Serajul, 4) Asad Sheikh (18) son of Showkat Sheikh, 5) Sahadat Sheikh (45), 6) Wadud Sheikh (40), 7) Sarwar Sheikh (35), all of late Sattar Sheikh  and  *8) Mintu Mollah (40) son of late Amjad Mollah and more 15 to 20 persons of the same locality armed  with country-made weapons attacked Hindu temple and their cremation ground.

The perpetrators also with intent to destroy the temple and cremation ground set fire on the Kali temple and destroyed the deity- Ma Kali. As a result of burning the deity Ma Kali burnt into ashes substantially. The cost of temple burnt with other belongings would be around Taka 50,000/-. When the fire broke spread out in the locality the Hindu communities came forward for protection of their temple and deities, but in the meantime their temple and deities burnt to ashes and the perpetrators escaped.

Devotees -Monoranjan Biswas, Sawpan Kumar Mondal, Nani Gopal Biswas, Jagadish Mondal instantly informed the matter to local Chairman Khaondakar Ohidul Bari Alam who visited the spot and he tried to console Hindus.

Monoranjan Biswas being complainant of the case lodged F.I.R. at Nagarkanda police station on 27.01.2009 against those perpetrators under section 295/297/436 of Bangladesh penal code which was registered as case No. 20 dated 27.1.09.

Perpetrators surrendered before the court of Sessions Judge, Faridpur and the court granted them ad interim bail on 10.08.2009.

It is also alleged that after getting bail from the court the perpetrators again intimidating the Hindus to withdraw the case.

The matter has been reported in different news papers of Bangladesh.

A copy of F.I.R., picture of the burnt deity Ma Kali and its temple are attached herewith.

Bangladesh Minority Watch contacted with the respective Deputy Commissioner and the Superintendent of Police today on this matter. They informed me that the case has been proved and police has already submitted charge sheet against the perpetators and the matter is pending in the court of Sessions Judge,Faridpur.

Bangladesh Minority Watch (BDMW)  also decided to investigate the matter at the spot. Sri Rabindranath Ghosh, Senior Advocate of Bangladesh takes the task on behalf  of persecuted minority Hindus as repots came in. Reports of hindu persecution of Bangladesh mae be watched in the acclaimed site :  www.bdmw.org

Another report of temple destruction and Hindu land grabbing in Bangladesh came through the above source :

Hindu protesters assembled in front of a Old Hindu Temple targeted by Bangla Talibans.

********Protest against demolition of structure and forceful occupation of Hindu Temple and its properties situated at Hatbaria of Jhenaidaha District of Bangladesh (The Daily Sangbad dated 24th November, 2009)************ ********

BDMW Correspondent from Jhenaidaha:

Structures of two hundred years old houses of worship for Hindu community situated at Hatbaria of Jhenaidaha district demolished by some powerful perpetrators. On last Sunday morning perpetrators partially demolished the religious places ( Kali Mandir ) and brought 8 to 10 trucks of dust and soil to occupy those lands.

Rishi Hindu community protested this desecration of their religious places at Hatbaria.

Yesterday from Monday last hundreds of Rishi community irrespective of men and women assembled in front of their religious place. In this connection agitation, procession in favour of their religious rights continued in the street in protest of forceful occupation of religious places and temple thereon. The agitated procession centred round at the Office of Deputy Commissioner, Jhenaidaha.

Later on a group of Rish Community leaded by Khagendra Nath Das, Bidyut Kumar Das, Dulal Das, Kalipada Das and others submitted a Memorandum to Sheikh Rafiqul Islam – Additional Deputy Commissioner, Jhenaidaha with an appeal for speedy remedy.

In the said Memorandum they alleged that since two hundred years Rishi Community had been worshiping in this “Ganga Tala Kali Mandir” situated at Hatbaria. But on last Sunday on 22.11.09 morning some powerful perpetrators under the leadership of Bakul Munshi the said temple was desecrated and demolished. Perpetrators also brought 8 to 10 trucks of sands for forceful occupation of this religious place.

The Rishi communities on each occasion celebrate daily Seva Puja such as Ganga Puja,, Chaitra Shankranti etc. on this religious place.

Mr.Matiar Rahman – Officer-in-Charge of Jhenaidaha police station informed that he heard this news and he will look into the matter and investigate incident.

Bangladesh Minority Watch communicated with Deputy Commissioner, Superintendent of Police, Jhenaidaha over telephone, they informed BDMW Dhaka that the incident took place is not an incident of religious persecution or an attempt to defame Goddess, it was an accident and it would be amicably settled very soon.

Ms.Roma Rani Roy – Deputy Commissioner of Jhenaidaha was contacted over her telephone cell no. +01715213041. Ms. Roma Rani Roy informed us that she got a Memorandum of appeal from Rishi Community and he would look into this appeal with sympathy.

I also communicated with the Superintendent of Police-Jhenaidaha asking him to take necessary steps for protection of religious rights of Rishi communities. He informed me that he would look into the matter.

I also talked with Mr.Matiar Rahman–Officer-in-Charge of Jhenaidaha police station and requested him to assisting me supplying the General diary entry made by police in connection with this unfortunate incident.  Mr. Matiar Rahman became very angry and threatened me disconnecting his telephone line with angry mood. (+01713374192 ). I also informed this misbehaviour shown by Matiar Rahman to Superintendent of Police today.

In West Bengal the situations of Hindus are worst in many areas than their counterparts in Bangladesh as such oppressesion and onslaughts upon Hindus are suppressed by the Secular Press and pro-Muslim and anti-Hindu Political Parties. Hindus are unheard an not even permitted in the Police Stations. Nobody knows this.

Three Hindu Temples attacked and damaged by Muslims in Park Circus in Kolkata.

The Kolkata people again saw a flash of Pakistan in Kolkata heartland on 29th Oct. ’09 evening, behind the Chittaranjan National Medical College and hospital at a distance of few furlong crossing the railway lines from there. Through Ram Mohan Bera Lane (Kolkata-700 046), the procession of Jagadhatri Goddess of local `Bipul Sangha’ Club was heading for its emersion ceremony. When it was passing by a small mosque there named `Madrasha Arabia Jamaetul Ulema’, the insiders from the mosque came out to protest and stop the mike and band party with the procession. But the processionists did not care to hear such unreasonable claim. For this turmoil the procession was with held for the time being.

In the meanwhile the opportunist Muslims announced from the Mosque’s loud speakers that Islam is in danger. They also announced a (fake) attack upon Mosques. Within a moment some 2000 Muslims gathered there at 10.30pm to attack the procession and a wishful rampage upon Hindus. They broke the mikes and lights of the procession. Moreover they did not spare the chance to attack upon the nearby Hindu temples. The Kali temple by the side of `Bipul Sangha’ Club was attacked first. Then the Muslim hoodlums started to enter far areas to attack and loot Hindu temples and houses. The images of Shiva temple and Kali temple of Adhibas Choudhury Lane in Darapar were broken at some 500 meters away from the Mosque. 20-25 Hindu houses were attacked and damaged. 20 Hindus were injured in this startling attack upon uncared and unprepared Hindus. Hindus of the area spent an unsecured and frightened hours in that night.

In the very next day on Friday on 30th Oct. more than thousand Muslims gathered near  the small Mosques to show the Islamic solidarity in the name of Jumma Namaz there. Generally 40-50 Muslims pay Namaz in each Friday. The outsider Namazis jammed the road to pay Namaz and threatened the local Hindus for severe consequences. The frightened Hindus did not dare to make a diary in the police station, while the actual offenders of Muslim community lodged FIR against seven victimized Hindus in the charge of scuffle and looting.

As there was downpour on 3rd November, the Hindu residents of the attacked and damaged houses faced a severe problem in the rain water. They managed the situation anyway by using plastic tarpaulins and some of them make a diary in the police station to register their plight and protest.

The situation is not a new thing in the Park Circus area as this area saw a severe hooliganism and destroy of public properties by the fanatic Muslims lead by Md. Idrish Ali on 21st Nov. 2001 in the protest of Taslima Nasrin’s staying in Kolkata. Under the pressure and persecution many lanes, bye lanes  and areas are turned Hinduless and rest of the Hindus are also preparing for leaving the Park circus areas for ever.

This is the situation of Park Circus a part of Kolkata, Capital City of West Bengal. The story of inner Bengal is so grim and dreadful designed by the Islamofascists in Bengal promoted by all Political parties there as described by some Hindu Human Rights Group working in the region.

Some reflection of the same came to us from a southern districts of West Bengal.

Land of 80 Years old Shiva Temple has been grabbed by fanatic Muslims and Temple de-sanctified by anti-Hindus, in Mograhat, West Bengal.

After losing its home and hearth in the recent polls, Communists in Bengal are trying hard to stalemate the Trinamool strategey of Muslim appeasement. Both of them are playing with fires of Islamic fundamentalism.

As the Black Stone Shiva Symbols are desecrated and uprooted twice, the earthen symbols are worshiped now after the original shifted elsewhere.(Pic. Prokash Das.)

An . absolutely dilapidated temple, named Prachin Shiva Mandir, is situated in the village named Dihi Kalash of Mograhat – I Block in South Pargans has been desecrated at least thrice including uprooting and throwing the Shiva Linga (Black stone Shiva Symbol). The nearby Muslim residents have been occupied the Devottar Sampatti ( Land permanently given to the service of God) through the sidelines of some 23 Satak (Decimal) land of the temple of Shiva.

Though the land bearing JL No. 112, Khatian No. 965, Touji No. 155 is clearly recorded in the Government survey and demarcated as Temple Land, the majority Muslims forcefully grabbed the portion of the Hindu Land as a mark of Muslim Supremacy spearheading in rural Bengal now a days.
The scheduled caste Hindus in that village of Dihi Kalash a bare minority and get no help from any so called Big Hindu Organisations and even any support of caste Hindus of the adjacent areas. In Mograhat Block Hindus are minority (In 1981 Hindus in Mograhat were 87% and 2001 it came down to 45% under an unbelievable strategic operation) and they do not dare to protest even, as all political parties do not here the Hindus for such case of violation of religious rights.

The sevayet ( trustee or manager) of the Shiva Temple, Madhusudan Nasker told the Bengal Spotlight that the situation of Hindus concerning the protection of the Temple is unbearable and nobody gives us justice. There is a case for the illegal occupation of temple land by Abdul Gazi Gani being M/C No. 12/96 in Diamond Harbour Civil Court but the proceedings are being hampered for the non-appearance of the land grabbers. It is believed that one of the illegal occupier of the temple land, Md Hanna Gazi has such a rapport in the system that all the papers frequently disappear from the court itself.

Madhusudan Nasker is standing upon the temple ground unlawfully occupied and domestically used by the Muslim zealots. (Pic. Prokash Das)

Madhusudan Babu reported the matter everywhere in Police and Administration including Human Rights Commission, but it yields no result so far. With a very ardent zeal and devotion Mr Nasker and his wife are striving for restore the dignity of this 80 years old Shiva temple where their forefathers worshiped there earlier.

posted by Hinduexistence Kolkata Correspondent.

December 4, 2009 by janamejayan

Fonseka in India, triggering speculation



Sri Lankan Gen.Sarath Fonseka. AP
//

COLOMBO: The joint opposition candidate in the Sri Lankan Presidential election, Gen.Sarath Fonseka, is currently in India on a short visit.Informed sources told Express that the General turned politician was on a religious pilgrimage. He reportedly went to Mumbai and might perhaps go to Bodh Gaya in Bihar..As to whether he would make a dash to New Delhi for a pow wow with the Indian leaders is not known. He had however made a request to the Indian High Commissioner Ashok K.Kantha, for arrangements to meet Indian leaders in New Delhi.According to reports, Fonseka is expected back in the island on Friday. Importance of India to FonsekaFonseka has been showing a tendency to reach out to India in many ways. His remarks that he was very close to the Indian military and that he loved everything Indian, were meant to curry favour with India, a country which the Sri Lankan opposition believes is tilted towards the Rajapaksas.It is known that India has reservations about him given his extremist majoritarian (Sinhalese) nationalist views. But since becoming a candidate he has been singing a totally different tune, which must intriguiing New Delhi as much as it does people here in Sri Lanka.An UNP source said that Fonseka was so worried about the denial of adequate security to him by the Rajapaksa government that he had gone to consult the Indian authorities on the security that he ought to have.Fonseka was reportedly disturbed by the Attorney General’s uncompromising attitude in the Supreme Court when his petition on inadequate security came up for hearing. He was mollified only when the court set an early date for the Attorney General to come up with a formal assessment of the security requirement.As for the Indian leaders, they would certainly like to open a line of communication with a top- of- the- line Presidential candidate put up by a major political party like United National Party (UNP). They would also like to hear him first hand on the devolution of power to the Tamils ,whether he was serious about his statement made in Sinhalese, that he was prepared to go beyond the Indian-inspired 13 th amendment in this regard, and whether he would indeed abolish the Excutive Presidency.    Ranil not to be Caretaker PMMeanwhile, the General Secretary of the UNP, Tissa Attanayake, told the media that it was not true that the UNP leader and the Leader of the Opposition Ranil Wickremesinghe  was aiming to be the caretaker Prime Minister after the victory of Gen.Fonseka in the January 26 Presidential election.“Wickremesinghe will not be the caretaker PM. The UNP will not accept any important office in the caretaker government,” Attanayake said. Opposition to sign MOU with FonsekaThe Democratic Peoples’ Front leader Mano Ganeshan told the media here on Thursday that the parties backing Gen.Fonseka in the Presidential election would sign an MOU with him soon.The MOU would touch all important issues underlying the parties’ support for Fonseka, including those relating to the Tamil question, especially devolution of power. Pillayan pledges support to RajaapaksaOne more anti-LTTE Tamil party has joined the Mahinda Rajapaksa bandwagon. The leader of the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Puligal (TMVP) and the Chief Minister of the Eastern Province, Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan alias Pillayan, told the media after meeting President Rajapaksa that he was supporting his candidature for President.Asked if Rajapaksa had promised him full implementation of the devolution package contained in the 13 th Amendment of the constitution, Pillayan said that he did not believe in getting caught in “jargon” like the 13 th or 17 th, amendment, but in action on the ground for the betterment of his people..The other Tamil parties supporting Rajapaksa are the Ceylon Workers’ Congress (CWC); Up Country Peoples ‘Front (UPF); Eelam Peoples’ Democratic Party (EPDP); Peoples’ Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eeelam (PLOTE); Eelam Peoples’ Revolutionary Liberation Front (Padmanaba).The Tamil National Alliance and the Tamil United Liberation Front are yet to make up their minds.

http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=India+wants+peace+process+revived+in+Sri+Lanka&artid=pOhPN0Qs8T8=&SectionID=b7ziAYMenjw=&MainSectionID=b7ziAYMenjw=&SEO=Fonseka,++India&SectionName=pWehHe7IsSU=

Post-YSR era: What’s going on? (1)

December 4, 2009 by janamejayan

What Jagan Reddy  Veerappa Moily secretly discusssed on Andhra Congress politics in Central Hall?

By delhi bureau

by RR

4-12-2009

Union Minister Veerappa Moily and Jagan Reddy MP today
intimately talked – for more than half an hour in Central Hall of Parliament
in the glare of many MPs and Ministers.

Many Andhra Congress MPs were not keen to go to that particular
bench where Moily Reddy were ‘whispering”

This was a scene fo Jagan Reddy and Moily
was a treat  for TDP MPs who cut jokes with boisterous
laughter said  that ‘kuch kuch hotahai”

One lady Andhra Minister said namaste to Veerappa Moily, the talk
with jagan reddy was so serious that Moily did not even acknowledge
the greetings from lady minister from AP.

Two Andhra MPs Vundavalli Aruna Kumar and Hari Sabbam both MPs were seen standing
behind the bench where Jagan Reddy and Veerappa Moily were seated.

Nowadays some Andhra MPs have begun to distance from one particular
group say jagan camp, are now migrating towards Keshav Rao and D Srinivas
camps. Complete division is seen amongst the Andhra Congress MPs
and that could be felt by seeing their different stances and approaches.

Ayodhya: selective lies and shoddy justice

December 4, 2009 by janamejayan

Liberhan doesn’t even notice that underneath Babri structure were temples.

Here is a precise report (not from Liberhan!):

Open source literature indicates that from 1975 through 1980, the Archaeological Survey of India under the Directorship of Professor B.B. Lal, a former Director General of the Survey, undertook an extensive programme of excavation at Ayodhya, including the very mound of the Ramajanmabhumi on which the so-called “Janmasthan Masjid” or Babri Mosque once stood and was later demolished on 6th December 1992. He discovered a Hindu temple built on archaeological levels formed prior to 13th century AD. Supporting Prof. Lal’s discovery was Shri K.K. Muhammad , Deputy SuperintendentArcha eologist ( Madras Circle ), who was a trainee at that juncture. He had written : ” I can reiterate this (ie. The existence of the Hindu Temple before it was displaced by the Babri Masjid) with greater authority – for I was the only Muslim who had participated in the Ayodhya excavations in 1976-’77 under Prof. Lal as a trainee. I have visited the excavation near the Babri site and seen the excavated pillar bases. The JNU historians have highlighted ONLY ONE PART OF OUR FINDINGS WHILE SUPPRESSING THE OTHER.”

Then came the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court mandated ASI excavations at the site in the summer of 2001, using ‘ground penetrating radar’. Here again the ASI team discovered the ruins of a demolished 16th Century A.D. Hindu Temple.

The fact of the matter is that the archaeological evidence is irrefutable and has already shown the existence of two Hindu Temples at the site – one belonging to the Delhi Sultanate Period and the second during Babur’s reign. That these  never appeared in the media is an altogether different story.

H. Balakrishnan

Liberties Liberhan took

Chandan Mitra

Remember Gulzari Lal Nanda? Although he was Prime Minister twice, I can bet only the 60-plus generation of informed citizens and quiz show participants will recall the name, fame or lack of it. GL Nanda last hit the news pages about 20 years ago when he was unceremoniously thrown out bag and baggage from a flat in Delhi’s Defence Colony for non-payment of rent. The elderly Gandhian leader died shortly thereafter in near-penury after leading a long ascetic life. The ramrod straight Congress leader of yesteryear used to wash his own clothes and cook his own meals till he was too old, infirm and bed-ridden. Upon the death of Jawaharlal Nehru in 1963 and Lal Bahadur Shastri in early 1966, Nanda was sworn in as Prime Minister for brief periods by virtue of being the senior-most member of the Cabinet. Although described as Acting PM by the media, his name adorns the record books because the Constitution does not recognise any category as ‘Acting’. He dutifully resigned on both occasions after the party chose Shastri and Indira Gandhi respectively to head the Government and was re-inducted into the Cabinet by both his successors.

Poor Gulzari Lal Nanda has been resurrected once more, this time in rather unflattering light. On page 336 of the 1,000-page-plus Justice MS Liberhan Report, there is a stinging indictment of Nanda along with former RSS chief Prof Rajendra Singh (Rajju Bhaiyya) and Dau Dayal Khanna (a respected advocate of post-Partition refugee rehabilitation) . They have been blamed for being “ardent Hindus” who created an atmosphere in which radical Hindu sentiment could grow. Nanda’s ashes must be churning in their urn at the bracketing. But more sinisterly, Liberhan insinuates that the efforts by leaders like GL Nanda eventually culminated in the demolition of the Babri Masjid!

If anyone has the patience or masochistic passion to labour through Liberhan’s voluminous essay on the state of the Indian polity since Independence, he will discover many prize gems of this nature. Still one thing must be said in Liberhan’s favour: Loyalist ho toh aisa! The man who appointed him to the job to which Liberhan clung on for 17 long years emerges as the silent hero of the so-called inquiry report. And why not, for thanks to PV Narasimha Rao, the retired Supreme Court judge was able to secure a bungalow in Central Delhi, a posse of staff, vehicles and other facilities at his disposal. As a result of Rao’s largesse and the indecision of subsequent United Front, NDA and UPA Governments, Liberhan’s Commission cost the exchequer a whopping Rs 8 crore in salaries alone! We don’t as yet know what the total extent of us taxpayers’ money that was squandered on producing the costliest essay in history!

Having plodded through much of this alleged report, I was left wondering who actually wrote the document. Almost every page reeks with JNU’s left-secularist ardour, barring the occasional bad grammar. It seems so pre-determined that the entire purpose of undertaking what was meant to be an “impartial inquiry” becomes a breathless blitz against Hindu sentiment. Terms like pseudo-moderate, used particularly to lampoon Atal Bihari Vajpayee give the game away. It’s typically JNU intelligentsia’s too-clever-by- half retort to LK Advani’s famous coinage — pseudo-secularist. There are long passages of pedestrian political philosophy lamenting how some politicians prioritise pursuit of power, as if politicians are supposed to renounce politics, abjure power, migrate to the jungles and meditate over their destiny!

Copious tears are shed over the presumed attempt by some people to perpetuate casteism (what’s that got to with Babri?) and damage India’s secular fabric although that is a basic feature of the Constitution. (The word ‘secular’, incidentally, was introduced in the Preamble of the Constitution along with ‘socialist’ only by an amendment passed during the Emergency years by Indira Gandhi). Also ironic is the fact that Justice Liberhan took nearly 182 months to compile his report when the same thing was completed by the CBI in 9! Cases are going on in various courts on the basis of CBI charge-sheets since then. In other words, the Liberhan report is of mere academic interest today although the use of ‘academic’ in the context of this boring essay is rather misplaced.

It is not my intention to compete with Justice Liberhan to produce an antidote for insomnia. I shall, therefore, refer only to something that concerns me personally. Having just come across LK Advani’s testimony before the Commission spanning from April 2001 to January 2002, I was surprised by the number of references to my reports regarding the fateful events of December 6, 1992, that appeared in Hindustan Times (of which I was then Executive Editor). On several occasions, the Commission’s counsel Anupam Gupta, whose ideological affinities are well known, attempted to trip up Advani by referring to passages in two reports I filed from Ayodhya (“All domes collapse under kar sewaks’ onslaught” published December 7 and “Control room that had no control”, December 8, 1992). In his reply to one of Gupta’s queries, Advani said: “I would think that as Chandan Mitra has said this, Chandan Mitra would be a very valuable witness before the Commission because I can affirm that he was present on the terrace (Ram Katha Kunj, makeshift dais where BJP/VHP leaders had assembled) for most of the time. And, therefore, if the Commission were to hear from him what precisely he saw and heard, that would be a very valuable testimony.”

Interestingly, I never got any summons from the Commission although it questioned 1,500 witnesses and virtually every journalist who was present in the Ram Mandir/Babri Masjid complex that day. In its report, the Commission narrates at length the alleged manhandling of Ruchira Gupta who was reporting for Business India those days. It reproduces without verification her (patently false) claim that she was manhandled by kar sewaks and her clothes torn. Had the Commission summoned me I would have testified under oath that nothing of the kind happened. She accompanied me, despite my pleas to the contrary, when I decided to visit the structure under destruction. In fact, she was saved by an assistant to Pramod Mahajan who pushed her out of the way because some kar sewaks got agitated by her remarks and demanded to know who she was, doubting her claim to be a kar sewak despite the saffron bandana she wore to pretend being a member of the demolition squad.

I was not remotely associated with the BJP those days and my reports in HT were factual and non-commentative, unlike those of my Leftist compatriots. Those two reports are still widely referred to by Western researchers into the demolition and its aftermath. Yet, the Commission never thought it fit to call me for evidence. But then, I am in august company. Justice Liberhan who liberally savages Atal Bihari Vajpayee in his report, never called him to testify either. After the leak of the document, Liberhan even denied on camera that Vajpayee had been pilloried. I can excuse the retired judge. If anybody takes 17 years to compile a litany of half-truths and untruths, memory can well play truant. Unless, of course, the report’s authorship itself is in some doubt!

http://dailypioneer .com/219008/ Liberties- Liberhan- took.html

VISHVA HINDU PARISHAD

Sankat Mochan Ashram, Sector-6, R. K. Puram, New Delhi-110022

Tel. 011-26178992, 26103495 Fax : 26195527

Dec. 1, 2009

ANALYSIS OF THE LIBERHAN AYODHYA COMMISSION OF INQUIRY REPORT

COMMISSION EXPOSED MORE THAN THE FACTS

The Commission was constituted with the following terms of reference to enquire into the following issues:-

1. Sequence of events leading to, and all the facts and circumstances relating to, the occurrence in the RJBM complex at Ayodhya on 6th December, 1992 involving the destruction of the RJBM structure.

2. The role played by the Chief Minister, Members of the Council of Ministers, Officials of the Government of Uttar Pradesh and by the individuals, concerned organizations and agencies in or in connection with the destruction of the Ram Janambhoomi- Babri Masjid structure.

3. The deficiencies in the security measures and other arrangements as prescribed or operated in practice by the Government of Uttar Pradesh which might have contributed to the events that took place in the Ram Janambhoomi- Babri Masjid complex, Ayodhya town and Faizabad on 6th December, 1992.

4. The sequence of events leading to, and all the facts and circumstances relating to, the assault on media persons at Ayodhya on 6th of December, 1992 and

5. Any other matter related to the subject of enquiry.

Preliminary observations:

The Commission took seventeen long years to present its final report. The Commission has cost the nation tens of crores of rupees. It has failed to come up to the expectations of the people. It has failed to dig out facts and serve the purpose for which it was constituted. The report appears to be the handiwork of a prejudiced mind that had made up his mind to give the report on a particular persons &/or institutions. The Commission seems to have decided beforehand to give a report of guilty to some individuals and organizations and to give a clean chit to others. In the process, the Commission has ended in exposing itself more than exposing the truth behind the episode. The report stands punctured with numerous contradictions and anomalies.

It is important to note that the Commission has rarely visited the spot where the alleged incident took place. Its report is paralyzed with the absence of detailed visit of Ayodhya and the fact that it has been written only in office. Further, the office of the Commission was declared by the Government of India to be in Lucknow, but he never functioned from there but from Delhi.

Went beyond the terms of reference:

1.       The Commission in its report in Chapter No. 14 (Conclusions) on Page 942, Paragraph No. 166.8 says… .”The much repeated and much denied remarks attributed to Govindacharya ———— ——— -

Comments: It is absolutely misplaced and irrelevant to the terms of reference. The alleged comments are also reported to have been made (and also denied) much after December, 1992.

2.       At Page No. 958, Para No. 171, the Commission has listed, among others, the some persons as culpable, viz., Deoraha Baba, A.B. Vajpayee, Badri Prasad Toshniwal, Moropant Pingle, Onkar Bhave, Prof. Rajendra Singh, Gurjan Singh, G.M. Lodha, Champat Rai and so many others.

Comments: But all these persons were never called to defend themselves by the Commission. If there was any evidence or proof against any individual, then it was a legal and moral binding on the Commission to have called them to present their case and defend themselves. As a judge of High Court he should have known that this was a primary requirement for justice under the law of jurisprudence and nobody could be held guilty unless he was called to defend himself.

3.     In this list, Commission has mentioned the name of Shri Pravin Togadiya also. On or before December 06, 1992, the sphere of activities of Shri Togadiya was limited to Gujarat only. And so, he was neither on the dais nor amongst the speakers of the day.

4.       At Page 931, Para 162.2 Commission says: “There is no requirement that the media must be unbiased or independent or that it must not take sides”

Comment: Everywhere in the world in any form of govt. has anybody so far said that the media should not be free, fair, impartial and objective. The above comment of the commission ventures to promote a fourth estate that is unethical, irresponsible and not honest to itself.

5.       At Page No. 935, Para No. 163.2 the commission says

“For instance, the intransigent stance of the High Court of Uttar Pradesh, the obdurate attitude of the Governor, the inexplicable irresponsibility of the Supreme Court’s observer and the shortsightedness of the Supreme Court itself are fascinating and complex stories, the depths of which I must not plumb.”

Comment: This is a highly irresponsible comment by the Chairman of the Commission who himself was a judge of the High Court. This unbecoming comment amounts to contempt of the Supreme Court. Interestingly, the Commission did not call the then Governor of Uttar Pradesh to appear before him. Yet, he made these disparaging remarks against the Governor. The Commission also failed to understand that he was only a judge of the High Court and a judge of the High Court has no right to comment on the Apex court, that is the Supreme Court.

Conspiracy

6.       At Page 917, Para 158.9 the commission says

“………Prognosis of evidence leads to the conclusion that the mobilisation of the Karsevaks and their convergence to Ayodhya and Faizabad was neither spontaneous nor voluntary. It was well-orchestrated and planned….. .”

But, the same report states:-

At Chapter No. 1, Page No. 15, Para No. 7.4, the Commission states

…”…no evidence was lead or information provided to the Commission with respect to the conspiracy or pre-planning or the joint common enterprise by any of these counsels…” (of the Muslim organisations) .

Of the above same chapter in Para 7.5, ”……there was no effective participation on behalf of Muslims as a community or otherwise. No alternative theory or any version was put forth on behalf of the Muslims before the Commission.. .”

In the same paragraph 7.5, it states ”…responsible educated literate citizens claiming to be the leaders of a particular community or the ones who participated in negotiations preceding the demolition etc. never came forward to disclose any material or fact in any form…..”

At Chapter 10, page 775, para 130.5

“No documentary or direct evidence is possible in a conspiracy of this nature, nor unimpeachable and firm evidence of some action of planning of demolition was obtainable”

At page 782 para 130.24 commission says:

“….Home secretary Godbole stated that there was No information of planning and as such it could not be inferred that there was a conspiracy of the Congress & BJP for demolition,. ..”

Comment: Then, on what grounds, evidence and justification has the Commission come to the conclusion that it “was well-orchestrated and planned”.

At the same time it needs to be taken note of the fact that after demolition of the alleged structure on December 06, 1992 three organizations namely RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal were banned through Government notifications under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 on 10th December, 1992. As per the requirement of this Act, a Tribunal headed by Justice P.K. Bahri, the sitting Judge of Delhi High Court was constituted on 30th December, 1992. Being a constitutional body, after due trial, the tribunal delivered its verdict on 18th June, 1993 which has been published by the Government in official gazette (The Gazette of India Extraordinary, Part-II, Section-3, Sub-section- II).

At Page 71 of this gazette, the tribunal holds “…It is pertinent to mention that PW-7 has categorically admitted that there was no material evidence to show that these associations had pre-planned the destruction of the disputed structure. It is admitted by PW-7 again that a video recording of the events which took place on the fateful day on December 06, 1992 at Ayodhya was prepared by the IB…”

On page No. 72 in the same verdict Justice Bahri states “…even the white paper prepared by the Central Government does not support this theory of pre-planning for destruction of the disputed structure by these associations or their workers…”

It is worth mentioning that PW-7 Mr. Padhi was a very senior officer of the Intelligence Bureau and authorised by the Government of India to present the case before the Bahri Tribunal.

The above facts clearly shows the prejudiced mind of the Commission which has written its report in a pre-meditated manner. Justice Bahri was a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court and the Tribunal he was heading, was a judicial body whose verdict was binding on the Government. On \the other hand, the report of the Liberhan Commission has no legal binding on the Government and is just recommendatory in nature which the Government may or may not accept.

The Commission seems to have been suffering from the same ailments which he mentions in Page No. 1, Chapter No. 1 (Introduction) , Para No. 1.1 ”…For some, the temptation of power is supreme. The usual means for acquiring power is through politics. There is always an urge and quest to use politics for acquiring power and for one’s own purpose — nothing matters beyond political desirable results, however achieved. In the process of acquisition of power the consequence of the process on the institution, the nation, individuals and society as a whole does not matter. Life itself becomes politicised. Objectivity or intellectual honesty or logic is lost in the process…”

Comment:  His words apply more aptly to the Commission itself. Despite government orders and wish, he never functioned from Lucknow. He stuck to Delhi with “an urge and quest to use politics for acquiring power and for one’s own purpose”.

Supports Ramjanambhoomi

By accident or design, the Commission seems to have made some inadvertent observations which cannot be contradicted or controverted. He has ended up supporting the Ramjanambhoomi case:

In Chapter No. 2 (Ayodhya & its Geography)

page No. 23 the Report says:

Para 9.1:    ”Ayodhya is accepted in popular Hindu tradition as the birth place of the Hindu God Rama and is therefore regarded as a holy and historical city.”

Para 9.2:    ”Ancient Ayodhya was traditionally the epitome of Hindu life, culture and a paradigm of coexistence of a multi-religious society. It was a peaceful place with a regular influx of visitors, pilgrims, Sadhus and Sants, monks, travellers, tourists.”

Para 9.3 :   ”Ayodhya was also known variously as Vishala, khosla(sic) or Maha Khosla, Ikshvaku, Ram Puri, Ra Janam Bhoomi”

Para 9.4:    ”Ayodhya is of special and specific importance for the sect of Ram believers or those loosely term as the Ramanandis in Hindu Religion. The place was the place of unequaled pilgrimage for Hindus, Monks, travelers, pilgrims,sadhus & sants irrespective of their region & faith.”

Para 9.5 :   …”This Place had become emotive issue owing to its position as the birth place of Ram, a theme present in every facet of the culture, connecting the past with the present & the future. this religious fervour had kept the town for centuries alive after success ruler had gone by.

Page 25, Para-10.3 :

“On the East of Ayodhya is Faizabad town with a population of about 2,10,000. It has a large number of temples mostly dedicated to the Hindu God Vishnu.”

Page-26, Para-10.10

“The town is currently inhibited (sic) (inhabited!) With a multi-religious population consisting of Muslims, Buddhist, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, etc., but the majority of the population is Hindu. The temples were open to public of all denominations.”

Page 29, Para 12.1

“There are large numbers of temples, mosques, shrines, tombs, gardens and other religious monuments spread over a large area; rather, metaphorically it is said that in Ayodhya every house is a temple.”

Page 29, Para 12.2

“Prominent temples were Sankat Mochan Mandir, Shakti Gopal Mandir, Shesh Avatar temple, Ved Mandir, Maniram Ki Chawni, Hanuman Garhi, Preethi Ke Thakur, Kanak Bhawan, Rang Mahal, Anand Bhawan, and Kasushalya Bhawan…… ..”

Page 32, Para 12.12

“The topography and facts about Ram Katha Kunj, Ayodhya town or the Ram Janambhoomi complex or Ram Katha Kunj or the disputed structure are however not disputed. The facts are corroborated by NC Padhi in his statement with no contradiction.”

Chapter-4 (Sequence of Events)

Page 61, Para 18.6

“In the year 1528, the Mughal Emperor Babar ordered his commander Mir Baqi to erect a mosque at Ayodhya. Protagonists of the present movement claimed that after demolishing the temple at the birth place of Ram, Mir Baqi constructed the mosque i.e. the “disputed structure.”

Page 61, Para 18.8

“Worship of idols installed on the Ram Chabutra by Hindu devotees in general was performed for a considerable period. There was no objection from the Muslims staking the counter claim prior to the shifting of idols into the disputed structure in 1949.”

Page 62, Para 18.9

“It is, however, not the Commission’s mandate to record a finding with respect to the exact question of history and a discourse on whether a mosque was constructed at the place of temple is outside the Commission’s purview. Suffice to say, the construction of the mosque by Mir Baqi in 1528 is now an admitted fact.”

Page 63, Para 18.13

“Although, there was no order restraining the Muslims from going to the disputed structure or from offering Namaz therein either by the judiciary or from the administration, yet namaz was not offered at the disputed structure since 1934. No processions were taken out inside the disputed structure nor any grave dug there about.”

Comment:  This clearly shows that the Commission indirectly confirms that a mosque was constructed at the site of the temple. Ayodhya is in existence from times immemorial while Babur came much afterwards and the mosque was constructed in 1528 CE.

Page 88, para 26.2 say:

“…It is noteworthy that no member of the Muslim community from Ayodhya was a member of the Babri Masjid Action committee or other committee protesting the opening of locks at the disputed structure. Sultan Shahabuddin Owaisi, aMember of Parliament from Hyderabad challenged the opening of locks alongwith some others became a forerunner for taking on the Hindu organisation”

Page 89 Para 26.4 says:

“Muslims variously protested between 1st of January to the 30th of March, 1987. Apart from giving calls for, boycotting Republic Day (which call was later withdrawn), Bandhs were observed and a public rally held at Boat Club in Delhi.Public threats of violence were made by personalities no less than the Shahi Imam of the Jama Masjid, Shahabuddin and Suleiman Sait, etc.”

Comment: Yet the Commission fails to make any adverse comment on these individuals.

In Paragraph 158.3 the Commission says that it “…never became a movement…”. Whereas, in Para 158.9 & 159.10, it contradicted itself with the contention as to “…entire process of the movement” and “…leaders of the movement”.

Chapter 1 (INTRODUCTION)

Page 15, Para 7.3

“Prominent members of the Muslim community claimed on behalf of their constituents, to be adversely affected by the demolition, in their sentiments and emotions. They claimed that their religious feelings were hurt. Initially various councils (sic) (counsels) representing the Babri Masjid Action Committee, Waqf Board, other Muslim organizations and individuals appeared and associated with the Commission before and during the framing of the Commission’s rules.”

Page 15, Para 7.4

“Thereafter, it was in the last stages, i.e., almost after a decade, that the counsel for the Muslim Law Board joined the proceedings. Mushtaq Ahmed started appearing before the Commission after half a decade of its existence; before the joining or associating of the Muslim Law Board before the Commission. Azad Makhmal representing Shahabuddin and another lawyer A. Haq showed up once or twice but made no worthwhile contribution to the inquiry. Mushtaq Ahmed did, however, cross-examined some witnesses intermittently. After a decade of the Commission’s inquiry, one Bahar-ul-Barki representing the AIMLB appeared along with senior Counsel, Yusuf Muchhala representing the Muslim Personal Law Board and cross-examined some key witnesses like L.K. Adjani in part. No evidence was led or information provided to the Commission with respect to the conspiracy or pre-planning or the joint common enterprise, by any of these counsels. O.P. Sharma, advocate who also joined almost the fag end of the inquiry conducted himself equally ineffectually.”

At Page 17 Para 8.3 the Commission says:

“The dispute with respect to disputed structure is proclaimed to be as ancient as history. Innumerable writings in books and research papers, commission proceedings were placed on the record of the commission. The title of the property was never settled much less finally by any civil court which is still pending before the honourable high court till date. From time to time rulers of the time permitted the people of their faith the possession.”

Story of acquisition of 2.77 acres of land surrounding the structure:

The 2.77 acres land was acquired by the UP Govt. on Oct. 1991 for public purpose. This acquisition was challenged in the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High court  by a local Muslim. The case was heard by full bench comprising of Hon’ble justice H.C. Mathur, Hon. Justice Brijesh Kumar & Hon. Justice S.H.A. Raza. The arguments were over by Nov.04, 1992. The date fixed for the pronouncement of the judgement was 4th December 1992. Justice Mathur & Justice Brijesh Kumar had already written their openion regarding this acquisition order. But the justice Raza delayed the pronouncement of its Judgement to the 11th of December 1992 which was after the 6th December, date fixed for commencement of karsewa.

This deliberate delay in pronouncement of the order infused a sense of disappointment in the mind of the people to get justice and ultimately led to the incidents. The Kar sevaks broke loose and climbed up the disputed structure. The structure was made to collepse in five hours and a temporary canopy (makeshift structure) was errected on the debris of the disputed structure where the Pooja is going on.

A few words regarding the civil suites:

The first civil suit regarding the title of Ram Janambhoomi was filed in 1950 (presently Numbered as O.O.S No. 1/1989). The second suit was filed in 1959 (presently Numbered as O.O.S No. 3/1989). The third suit was filed in 1961 (presently Numbered as O.O.S No. 4/1989). The fourth suit was filed in 1989 (presently Numbered as O.O.S No. 5/1989). For 40 years the cases remained hanging fire in district court of Faizabad.

After 40 years, in 1989 these cases were transferred to the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court. Since then another twenty years have passed. Due to the retirement of one or the other judge, the bench had to be reconstituted eleven times and consequently the justice is not only been delayed but also derailed and denied.

Conclusion:

Even after 40+ extensions during seventeen long years of the country’s valuable time and wasting four years in marely preparing huge volume of useless report, the commission declared  many prominent personalities as culpable without giving them a chance of hearing. It is shameful that in its long list of culprits one had already been died before the date of incident and seventeen therafter before submission of its report. The adverse comments made towards the apex judiciary of the country, Media, head of the state(governor) and other respectable segments of the society are highly unacceptable.

Convened by Chamapat Rai, Joint General Secretary-VHP, and compiled by members of the team i.e. Amba Charan Vashisth, K.K. Sharma, Vinod Bansal, Rakesh Upadhyay.

Kindly Note & Circulate to all your contacts.
REGARDS

VINOD BANSAL
(MEDIA COORDINATOR)
VISHWA HINDU PARISHAD, Delhi
M – 98109 49109

ivhpmedia@gmail. com