Saturday, September 24, 2011

NATIONAL MINORITIES COMMISSION AND ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA vs DR.SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY
V.SUNDARAM I.A.S.
All India General Secretary (Ideology)
Janata Party
    
As politically planned, organized, orchestrated and launched by Firangi Memsahib Sonia Gandhi, and ably assisted by her known Islamic political crook and advisor Ahmed Patel, many petitions were engineered by the Sonia Congress Party operating from No.10 Janpath New Delhi against Dr.Subramanian Swamy, President of the Janata Party, and sent to different Constitutional Authorities in India. What was the crime committed by Dr.Subramanian Swamy? His ‘great and unpardonable’ crime lay in the fact that he had written an Article on ‘How to wipe out Islamic Terrorism ?” in the DNA English newspaper of Mumbai on 16th July 2011, immediately after the Mumbai Blasts of 13th July 2011.  Great political care—I mean Islam embracing, Christianity coveting and Hindu baiting care—was taken to see that only Muslims and Christians participated in this subtarreanean Sonia drama of baseless petitions sent against Dr.Subramanian Swamy to the Minorities Commission of Maharashtra, National Commission for Minorities in New Delhi etc. etc.
Further many petitions against Dr.Subramanian Swamy were sent by unscrupulous and mercenary petitioners to the Election Commission of India requesting for the criminal prosecution of Dr.Subramanian Swamy for having hurt the religious feelings and rights of Minorities. These petitioners had also requested the Election Commission of India to take immediate action for de-recognizing the Janata Party of which Dr.Subramanian Swamy is the President. 
Naveen Chawla, the Former Chief Election Commissioner was defiantly arrogant and supremely proud to function as a whole-time political agent of the Firangi Memsahib Sonia Gandhi. This inglorious political tradition of abject servility to Sonia Gandhi continues to reign supreme in the Election Commission of India even today. It is not therefore surprising that a Notice was issued to Dr.Subramanian Swamy by Mr. Varinder Kumar, Secretary, Election Commission of India in Ref.No.56/581/2011-PPS-II/32 on 1-9-2011.
I have not seen this Notice issued by the Election Commission to Dr.Subramanian Swamy. I have however seen the straight and hard hitting reply given by Dr.Subramanian Swamy to Mr. Varinder Kumar, Secretary, Election Commission of India on 13-9-2011. I am presenting below the copy of this reply by Dr.Swamy which speaks for itself.
                                                                                                September 13, 2011.
Mr. Varinder Kumar,
Secretary,
Election Commission of India,
Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road,
New Delhi.
Dear Mr. Kumar,
                                    Your Ref.No.56/581/2011-PPS-II/32, dt. 1.9.2011.
            Please refer to my letter dated 5th September, 2011 to which I have not yet received a response. In view of the delay from your end, and in continuation thereof, I would like to state my stand on the concerned matter thereon.
            I stand by my views stated in the article published in DNA newsdaily titled “How to Wipe Out Islamic Terror in India” written after deep and scholarly study of the problem. It is my submission, the ideas expressed therein are squarely within the parameters of the Constitution of India in which sacred document I have always had full faith and belief and defended it as in the case of Emergency (1975-77). 
         I deplore having to waste my time to reply to every ignorant and foolish call for my prosecution and/or explanation for such views.  I would expect that before a constitutional body like the Election Commission of India or for that matter, the National Commission of Minorities – takes cognizance of such vapid complaints, there would be some attempt to understand and analyse the law on the subject. 
The Election Commission of India has failed to do elementary homework on the two complaints received, and any action based on these two complaints would result in ridicule from the public and a devaluation of the high status of the institutions.
In the Supreme Court judgment in the matter of Indian National Congress (I) Vs. Institute of Social Welfare and others {reported in AIR (2002) SC 2158} the Hon’ble Court has very clearly laid down the extent of the power of the Election Commission to deregister a political party. It is in this judgment stated:
“The Election Commission while exercising its powers to register a political party under Section 29A of the Act, acts quasi judicially and decision rendered by it is a quasi judicial order and once a political party is registered, no power of review having been conferred on the Election Commission, it has no power to review the order registering a political party for having violated the provisions of the Constitution or for having committed a breach of undertaking given to the Election Commission at the time of registration”.
           
            Moreover, the Janata Party does not fall within any of the three exceptions made in the judgment– including the third exception where it is a very clearly stated “any like ground where no enquiry is called for on the part of the Commission” (emphasis supplied).
            I would like to refrain from actually stating that the Election Commission’s aforesaid Notice amounts to misfeasance in office and a malafide exercise of its powers; but I do require you to withdraw your Notice forthwith.  Officials of the ECI who decided to flout the Supreme Court judgment by sending this Notice must be taken to task and made accountable.
                                                                                    Yours sincerely,
                                                                        (SUBRAMANIAN  SWAMY)
I am very shocked to note that a high Constitutional Authority, like the National Minorities Commission, should have sent a Letter to the Election Commission of India recommending the withdrawal of recognition to the Janata Party of which Dr.Subramanian Swamy is the President, for having written an article titled ‘How to wipe out Islamic Terrorismin the DNA newspaper in Mumbai on 16-7-2011.
The popular saying that ‘Ignorance of Law is no excuse’ may be a well known truism in all parts of the world excepting India. In India one of the most sacred and nationally accepted truisms is that ‘Ignorance of Law—nay defiance of Law and the Law of the Constitution is an inviolable Minority Right’. This is the declared political philosophy of the pseudo-secular anti-Hindu (and so anti-national because Hindus constitute more than 80% of the population!) Sonia Congress Government. I cannot help drawing the inference that Wajahat Habibullah, Chairman of the National Commission for Minorities (NCM), derives his inspiration from this perverted political philosophy of the Sonia Congress Government. He has officially proclaimed his Minority Right to fundemental ignorance of the Law of the Constitution and the legal and constitutional powers of the Chief Election Commissioner of India S.Y.Quraishi by sending a letter to him to deregister Janata Party as a Political Party.

I am presenting below the full text of the machinating and malicious, melodramatic letter sent by Wajahat Habibullah, Chairperson of the National Commission for Minorities (NCM), Government of India to the Chief Election Commissioner of India on 30-7-2011. I have given my comments within brackets in red colour in respect of four of the truly Islamic Minority Right points—pointless and baseless in my opinion—-made by Wajahat Habibullah in his letter to the ECI.
FULL TEXT OF THE NCM LETTER TO ECI
30th July 2011
Sub: Request for deregistration of Janata Party as a political party
Reference: Article titled “Analysis: How to wipe out Islamic terror” written by Subramanian Swamy, President of the Janata Party, published in the DNA Newspaper on 16.07.2011
1. I am writing to you in my capacity as Chairperson of the National Commission for Minorities, Government of India, established in accordance with the provisions of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992.
2. The Commission has received a complaint dated 29.7.2011 from Shehzad Poonawalla, regarding the commission of a criminal offence. At Annexure A hereto is a copy of the said complaint. After perusing this complaint and the article written by Shri Subramanian Swamy, President of the Janata Party, in the DNA Newspaper, (as downloaded from the websites of the Janata Party and the DNA) on 16.7.11, the National Commission for Minorities is of the view that the said article amounts to the commission of a criminal offence. Accordingly, the Commission, after looking into the complaint, has decided to take up this issue by making this complaint to you. (The Chairperson of the NCM is reacting like a bullying Sub-Inspector of Police in a remote tribal area in one of the States in Northern India! What is the crime committed by Dr. Subramanian Swamy? Who is leading him or misleading him to this landmark conclusion regarding the criminal offence committed by Dr.Subramanian Swamy? Who has determined the nature, extent, content and intent of Dr.Swamy’s mens rea? Shehzad Poonawalla? Wajahat Habibullah?)
3. This article figures prominently on the website of the Janata Party and is available at http://janataparty.org/articledetail.asp?rowid=30. It can be viewed by people throughout the country. It was downloaded from the Janata Party website. Most important, it therefore follows that the views therein are the views currently held by the Party and its President. Articles similar to the offending article have also figured prominently on the Janata Party website. Hence, this Commission will petition you to cancel the registration of the Janata Party. (How many terrorist Muslims in India, how many Muslims supporting terrorist Muslims in India, State-wise, read the above article of Dr.Swamy? Do you have any detailed description of how their Minority Religious feelings and sentiments were affected and hurt? How many Muslim Madrasas in Muslim Majority Pockets were contacted to ascertain the truly Islamic data to come to this conclusion of a commission of a criminal offence by Dr.Swamy?)
`
4. The offending parts of the article above mentioned which constitute a criminal offence are, inter alia, as follows:
“Hindus cannot accept to be killed in this halal fashion, continuously bleeding every day till the nation finally collapses…
Muslims of India are being programmed by a slow reactive process to become radical and thus slide into suicide against Hindus…
That they do I will not believe unless they acknowledge with pride that though they may be Muslims, their ancestors were Hindus. If any Muslim acknowledges his or her Hindu legacy, then we Hindus can accept him or her as a part of the Brihad Hindu Samaj (greater Hindu Society) which is Hindustan. India that is Bharat that is Hindustan is a nation of Hindus and others whose ancestors were Hindus. Others, who refuse to acknowledge this, or those foreigners who become Indian citizen by registration, can remain in India but should not have voting rights (which means they cannot be elected representatives)…
Strategy: Remove the masjid in Kashi Vishwanath temple and the 300 masjids at other temple sites…
Declare India a Hindu Rashtra in which non-Hindus can vote only if they proudly acknowledge that their ancestors were Hindus…
Annex land from Bangladesh in proportion to the illegal migrants from that country staying in India…
Goal 5: Denigrate Hinduism through vulgar writings and preaching in mosques and churches to create loss of self respect amongst Hindus and to make them fit for capitulation.”(I fully endorse the view of Dr.Subramanian Swamy on all these points. I assert my fundamental constitutional right to freedom of speech and more importantly freedom after speech. Since I was also in the Indian Administrative Service from 1965 to 1994, my knowledge of the Law of the Constitution can be no less than that of Wajahat Habibullah. The National Minorities Commission can send a beautiful proposal for safe-guarding communal harmony to the Union Government for the creation of a Firing Squad under the total control of the National Minorities Commission. The Chairman of the Commission should be vested with absolute power to order the killing of any non-muslim or non-christian by this Firing Squad whenever or wherever the Chairman of this Commission comes to the conclusion that such an individual has hurt the imagined or imaginary feelings and sentiments of the minority. The view of the Chairman cannot be challenged in any Court of Law! In short the Chairman should be legally empowered to display all the vagaries of an Oriental Potentate of Medieval History like Genghis Khan, Kublai Khan, Tamerlane, Allaudin Khilji etc.)
5. This article promotes or attempts to promote, on the ground of religion, disharmony and feelings of enmity, hatred, and ill-will between Hindus and the minorities. It promotes hatred against Muslims which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between Hindus and Muslims and it is likely to disturb public tranquility. The article imputes that Muslims cannot, by reason of their being Muslims, bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India or uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India. The article asserts and propagates that Muslims, by reason of their being Muslims, should be denied and deprived of their rights as citizens of India to vote. According to the article, all minorities must be told to acknowledge their Hindu ancestry failing which they should be denied voting rights. The article asserts and pleads that all Muslims are under an obligation to acknowledge their Hindu ancestry and this causes and is further likely to cause disharmony, feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between Muslims and Hindus. The article and its publication is a deliberate and malicious act intended to outrage the religious feelings of Muslims and deliberately and maliciously distorts history and facts to insult the Muslim religion and the beliefs of the Muslims. The article was written and published with the intent to cause fear and alarm to the public in general and Muslims in particular because it seeks to induce sections of the public to remove 300 masjids and deprive Muslims of their right to vote. The article and its publication were intended to incite persons to commit offences against the state and against public tranquility. The article and its publication was intended to incite Hindus to commit offences against Muslims by removing their masjids and denying Muslims the right to vote and further promotes international odium by calling on the public to promote hostilities against Bangladesh for the annexation of land. (What are the ‘Islamic Minority Rights’ view of the Chairman of the Minorities Commission on the savage attacks on Hindu temples by his co-religionists in different parts of India not during Islamic Rule from 1000AD to 1707 AD but during the Savage Sonia Congress Rule from 2004 till date?)
6. Poonawalla is therefore right when he says: “The term “Halal” is closely associated with Muslim culture and has an unmistakable reference point to Muslims given that “Halal”, in common everyday parlance and ordinary usage, involves a short recital of “kalma” and a religiously mandated procedure to slaughter any meat meant for consumption as food. To use the term “Halal”, which has a level of sanctity and religious attachment for Muslims, in an insulting manner to hurt religious sentiments deliberately and maliciously as has been done by the accused and to insinuate that Islam as a faith is predisposed to violence, is a violation of section 295(A) of IPC 1860”
7. The article and its publication also promotes disharmony and ill-will among Hindus inasmuch as the majority of Hindus who do not agree with the mindset of Subramanian Swamy have been stigmatized and denigrated in the article as if they are not true Hindus. Almost all Hindus ascribe to the constitutional mandate of India as a secular nation and do not believe that in order to be a true Hindu one must ascribe to the notion of India as a “nation of Hindus”. The statements abovementioned were deliberately and maliciously made with the intention of outraging the religious feelings of the majority of Hindus and insulted the religious beliefs of Hindus who believe that Hinduism is a compassionate, flexible and peace loving religion and that Hindus coexist with other religious communities in a secular state governed by a secular constitution. This community of persons – secular Hindus in India – have had their religious feelings outraged by the incitement, in the article to Hindus to remove 300 masjids, annex the lands of the Bangladesh and deny Muslims the right to vote.
8. The article and its publication also promotes disharmony and ill-will between Hindus and Christians inasmuch as Goal 5 abovementioned has insulted the religious beliefs of Muslims and Christians by falsely stating that mosques and churches denigrate Hinduism by promoting vulgar writings and preaching’s.
9. The recent events in Norway where a person with fundamentalist views mercilessly killed innocent civilians and was unrepentant shows how important it is for democracies to take hate speech crimes that incite people to violence against communities very seriously and to stamp it out with all the power available in the legal system.
10. This complaint is being made to you to have the registration of the Janata Party granted under section 29 A of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 cancelled.
11. 29 A of the Act allows for registration of political parties. Sub section 5 lays down certain requirements for the Memorandum or Rules and Regulations of the political party in the following terms: “such memorandum or rules and regulations shall contain a specific provision that the association or body shall bear faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established and to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy, and would uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India”.
12. The requirement of law is that a political party while obtaining registration or to continue to maintain its registration is required to abide by the principle of secularism and bear faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India. The article of Subramanian Swamy abovementioned clearly shows that he and his Party does not abide by secularism as set out in the judgments of the Supreme Court , that the Party stands for “Hindu Rashtra”, that the Party has a pronounced anti Muslim stand which is hostile to secularism and therefore, since the stand of the Party is contrary to the Constitution of India and actively opposed to constitutional provisions, the Janata Party has lost the right to continue to enjoy registration under the Act and must be deregistered by the Election Commission of India.
13. In conclusion I draw to your attention to the definitive ruling of the 9-Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in S.R. Bommai Vs. UOI (1994 3 SCC 1), wherein the Court declared that “secularism is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. The relevant provisions of the Constitution by implication prohibit the establishment of a theocratic State…”.
Sincerely
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Shri SY Qureshi
Chief Election Commissioner of India
Nirvachan Bhavan
New Delhi.

Copy to Shri Salman Khurshid, Minister, Minority Affairs, Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex, New Delhi for information
(Wajahat Habibullah)
In addition to the points I have made within brackets above, I would also like to put to the National Minorities Commission, the heathenish, paganish and superstitious views of a practising Hindu!
II Am I right in presuming that the National Commission for Minorities (NCM) do not have the official, ‘political’, moral or ethical courage to send a letter to the Press Council of India stating that the Editor of the DNA Newspaper has hurt the religious feelings of the Minorities in India by publishing Dr.Subramanian Swamy’s article and thus calling for action against him under 295(A) of IPC 1860 for its violation? (In my view the Editor deserves the highest public praise and award for having displayed great courage to maintain and uphold the sacred and inviolable cause of Press Freedom)
III If so why should Wajahat Habibullah, Chairman of the National Commission for Minorities (NCM) and Abraham Mathai, Vice Chairman of the Maharashtra State Commission for Minorities act in deliberate and planned unison to allege that Dr.Swamy’s article has hurt the religious feelings of the Minorities (Muslims and Christians) in India? ( In my view, the average Muslim or Christian citizen in India has in no way been affected by Dr.Subramanian Swamy’s article on ‘How to combat Islamic Terrorism’.)
IV Why are they creating imaginary and imagined fiction of hurt feelings of Muslim and Christian Minorities? (In my view , Wajahat Habibullah and Abraham Mathai are only functioning  whole-time to promote the Muslim Minority Appeasement Programmes and Policies and Plots of Sonia Gandhi and her wholly owned Private Property called the Sonia Congress Party?)
SY. QURAISHI
SY Quraishi, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) has publicly stated several times that the Election Commission of India does not have any power to deregister political parties that are ‘redundant’ or were ‘bogus’ in the first place.
In the Open Opinion Page of The Hindu, dated 6-8-2011, Raji Raouf wrote an article under the title We Muslims are mature, we can take criticism”. In this article he strongly disagreed with Dr.Swamy’s article in the DNA newspaper published on 16th July 2011. In order to assist all the readers of my blog in a very friendly manner I am reproducing below the full text of Raji Raouf’s article.
We Muslims are mature, we can take criticism
Raji Raouf
I strongly disagree with Dr. Subramanian Swamy’s views on Muslims he expressed recently in a prominent newspaper. And if chance should have it that I meet him, I would invite him to my humble home for a cup of tea. And if the ambience is just right, we might end up discussing Mark Twain and Wodehouse. For, I am a Muslim and though deeply hurt by his views, I am required by every strand of morality and justice in me to stand for his right to express his views, however unreasonable.
I believe that we Muslims are being taken for a ride by some of these “minority bodies” when they call for the arrest of a senior statesman for our benefit. How can arresting him improve even an iota of our conditions? Whatever he said is out there and the only sensible thing to do now would be to have healthy debates on his views and expose how catastrophic it would be if his ideas were ever to see the light of day. Many senior politicians and academicians have already expressed their dissent.
Whenever Islam or Muslims are criticised, ridiculed or insulted, a very minuscule segment of society gives the call to take up arms and to let all hell loose. And that is a six-course meal for the news and media circus. From books and cartoons to blogs and tweets, every form of the media has been used by various individuals and groups to ridicule, criticise or question Muslim beliefs and lifestyle. And what has been our response? We have asked for the banning of books, expulsion of writers, and the closure of embassies. And the sad thing is that many of these demands have been met. We forget that this paints us as weak, intolerant, boring and an uncreative lot, which we are not.
Muslims have come a long way and for every Satanic Verse hurled at us, we have within our community talented writers, artists and actors more than capable of expressing the other side of the story in the most creative manner. Our history is replete with anecdotes where insults and mudslinging have been met with the highest levels of tolerance and creativity. We have every right to be angry when we are hurt by the expressions of some of the most insensitive individuals around us. But picketing, fatwas and call to violence are not the approach of a mature society. Where we have a chance to play the better role, we should play it. Where we have a chance to show our tolerance of nonsense, we must show it. And when it comes to vulgarity and obscenity, it is sure to offend all individuals irrespective of race and creed and it is in solidarity with them that we should take steps to curb or downplay the significance of such elements in society.
Let it not be misconstrued that I am hereby advocating an eye for an eye policy. Rather, I am advocating that we draw a bigger circle to include those who are seeking ways to expel us from their very small and misinformed circles. Give writers and artists the freedom to criticise and question every fibre of our society and beliefs, for we have acquired that level of maturity that we can stand up to any amount of criticism. As for those elements merely seeking to sow the seeds of discord and conflict between communities by raising non-issues and brandishing vulgarities, let us educate the masses so as to render their efforts futile. The only role such elements would have in shaping our history and future is the one we accord them. Let us be generous and record their failures in attempting to create schisms in a progressive society of all creeds.
Freedom of expression is of paramount importance. How else would certain politicians exert their inalienable right to make a complete fool of themselves?
On the whole, I fully endorse the spirit of Raji Raouf’s article above. He seems to be talking as a seasoned, cultivated and refined citizen. He seems to be echoing the immortal words of Voltaire:” I disagree with every word of what you say but I shall defend to the death your right to say it”.
One sworn inveterate intellectual opponent of any refined and broad minded Muslim is another Muslim! I am not therefore surprised that Faizur Rehman, in his article, titled ‘Muslims and Hindus are mature, the Sangh Parivar is not’ in the Open Page of The Hindu dated 14-8-2011, has not agreed with many of the views of Raji Raouf which he had expressed in his article in the Open Page of The Hindu dated 6-8-2011. For the convenience of the Readers of this Blog, I am presenting below the Full Text of Faizur Rehman’s article.

Muslims and Hindus are mature, the Sangh Parivar is not
A. Faizur Rahman
‘If the Sangh Parivar is honest it can co-exist with Muslims on the basis of the values that Islam and Hinduism share’
Raji Raouf in his article “We Muslims are mature, we can take criticism” (The Hindu, August 7, 2011) cautioned Muslims against getting ruffled by provocative articles such as the recent one written by Dr. Subramanian Swamy in DNA which, among other things, sought disenfranchisement of Muslims for racist reasons. But then, of late Indian Muslims have shown a remarkable sense of maturity, be it the Mecca Masjid, Ajmer or Malegaon blasts or, for that matter, any other issue wherein they were wrongfully targeted. There have been no calls from Muslim organisations “to take up arms and to let all hell loose” and this controverts the caricature of their immaturity painted by Mr. Raouf in his article.
This, of course, is not to deny the existence of extremist Muslim outfits, but only to point out that the moderates are gradually gaining the upper hand in the struggle against extremism which is also evident from the fact that Muslims have not resorted to any kind of retaliatory mudslinging against Hindus to express their dissent against Dr. Swamy’s incendiary article. And if “minority bodies” such as the National Commission for Minorities have issued notices to Dr. Swamy they have acted well within their rights to charge him for violating the Indian law by calling for the denial of rights to Muslims guaranteed under our Constitution. Therefore, Mr. Raouf is not justified in saying that “Muslims are being taken for a ride” by the minority bodies.
If truth be spoken, it is not a question of Muslims or Hindus displaying maturity when ridiculed. Indeed, both communities enjoy a great rapport at the people-to-people level. The big question is whether the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)-backed Sangh Parivar is willing to let these communities live in harmony. Unfortunately, the saffronites are displaying a kind of majoritarian masculinity that seems to suggest that it is below their dignity to treat Muslims as equal citizens of this country. Demolition of mosques is being justified on the ground that a mosque is less sacred than a temple, and hence it may be bulldozed to make way for a holier place, the temple. The sad part is that persons spreading such disinformation know full well that it has the potential to disturb communal amity.
It must be said that if the Sangh Parivar is honest it can co-exist with Muslims on the basis of the values that Islam and Hinduism share. For instance, in a verse which could be described as the bedrock of inter-faith harmony, the Koran says that if God did not check the mischiefmongers “there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques where the name of God is commemorated in abundant measure” (22:40). And it has been declared in the Bhagavad Gita that an absence of enmity for people (nirvairah sarvabhutesu), even though they might have done great harm, is one of the important virtues of the best of the devotees (XI-55).
Having said this, it may be misleading to see the communalism of Hindutva writers as purely a Hindu-Muslim problem. It actually concerns the entire nation, and could seriously affect its development if allowed to continue. It is common knowledge that poverty and backwardness in many African countries are mainly the result of continuous, violent, internal conflict. And nearer home, one of our own neighbours finds itself in deep trouble, financial and otherwise, for failing to contain sectarian violence, and in some cases promoting it as a matter of policy to further its vested interests.
The Sangh Parivar, therefore, must realise that by adhering to the Golwalkarian thought it is sowing the seeds of disharmony between Hindus and non-Hindus. It must understand that it would be unwise to continuously talk in terms of a Hindu Rashtra or a fantasised confrontation between Islam and Hinduism at a time when all our energies are required to be focussed on equitable distribution of the fruits of our nation’s economic growth. In other words, it is time Hindutva ideologues gave up their anti-Muslim agenda and went beyond the idea of conflict resolution into the realm of conflict transformation, by which both communities join hands to work towards the larger goal of making India an epitome of peace, stability and progress.
(The author is secretary-general of the Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought among Muslims. He may be reached at faizz@rocketmail.com)

 

Dr.Subramanian Swamy has given a fitting rebuttal to the above article of Faizur Rehman in his article titled  Strategy To Combat IslamicTerrorism In India in the Open Page of The Hindu dated 17-8-2011. In order to assist my readers I am presenting below the Full Text of Dr.Swamy’s article.
Strategy To Combat Islamic Terrorism In India
Subramanian Swamy
A rebuttal to the Open Page article ‘MUSLIMS AND HINDUS ARE MATURE, THE SANGH PARIVAR IS NOT.’
This rebuttal is to the piece
in The Hindu titled “Muslims and Hindus are mature, the Sangh Parivar is not” (“Open Page,” August 14, 2011) written by Mr. A. Faizur Rahman, claiming to represent the “moderate” spectrum of thought in the Muslim community.
Although Mr. Rahman’s piece was written in reference to an earlier piece (“We Muslims are mature, we can take criticism,” “Open Page,” August 7, 2011), by Mr. Raji Raouf, he engages in disinformation about my op-ed piece in another newspaper. Hence it has become essential for me to rebut what Mr. Rahman has written in your columns.
MR. RAHMAN’S DEFINITION OF A MODERATE MUSLIM IS ONE WHO DOES NOT REACT TO WHAT HE CALLS PROVOCATIVE ARTICLES SUCH AS MINE. HE HOWEVER FAILS TO DEFINE WHAT THE SO-CALLED MODERATE MUSLIM’S REACTION SHOULD BE TO THOSE “TERRORISTS” WHO HAVE BEEN KILLING THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT INDIANS IN VARIOUS PARTS OF THE COUNTRY, INCLUDING DRIVING 5,00,000 HINDUS OUT FROM THE KASHMIR VALLEY.
He states that moderate Muslims are content that the National Commission for Minorities sent a notice to me, rather than respond to the call from Muslim Organisations [his words] to “take up arms and to let all hell loose (sic).” Thank you for the consideration, Mr. Rahman!
HOWEVER, HIS CONCEPT OF MODERATION CLEARLY SEEMS TO BE AN OXYMORON BECAUSE IT MEANS A TACIT ACQUIESCENCE IN THE ATROCITIES OF THE ISLAMIC TERRORISTS. HE FAILS TO OFFER ANY CONCRETE STEPS FOR MUSLIMS TO DISOWN OR COUNTER MEASURES TO MEET THE CHALLENGE OF THE JIHADI BRAND OF ISLAM. AT THIS JUNCTURE, I AM ENTITLED BY THE “EQUAL TIME PRINCIPLE” TO STATE WHAT I HAD IN SUBSTANCE WRITTEN IN MY OP-ED ABOUT COMBATING ISLAMIC TERRORISM, THAT IS TERRORISM INVOKING THE TENETS OF ISLAM ESPECIALLY JIHAD.
Terrorism is an act of violence that targets civilians to overawe a legally constituted government and the people in the pursuit of political or ideological aims.
In 2004, the U.N. Security Council, in its Resolution No.1566, referred to “criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a Government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act”.
Hence, every government, separately and collectively, has a duty to take effective counter-terrorism measures, to prevent and deter future terrorist attacks and to prosecute those who are responsible for carrying out such acts. At the same time, countering of terrorism poses grave challenges to the protection and promotion of human rights. Every nation is therefore called upon to resolve the conflicting demands of combating terrorism and protecting human rights. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO IS NOT “LINEAR,” BUT “NON-LINEAR.” THAT IS, IT IS NOT TRUE THAT THE LESS WE PROTECT HUMAN RIGHTS, THE MORE WE CAN COMBAT TERRORISM. THE CONVERSE IS ALSO NOT TRUE. THERE IS, THEREFORE, AN “OPTIMUM COMBINATION” OF MEASURES TO COMBAT TERRORISM AND THE LEVEL OF SAFEGUARDS THAT ENSURE HUMAN RIGHTS. The law of diminishing returns operates in this trade-off. Hence we need a strategy of deterrence with minimal intrusion on human rights. This is what I wrote to stir a debate — and not invite and disinformation abuse as Mr. Rahman has done.
Strategy
The fundamental question here today is that since in India we are the worst affected by jihadi terrorist attacks, how to formulate a strategy to deal with Islamic terrorism.
The strategy we choose for terrorist attacks should not be worse in the long run than the consequences of these attacks as in the Rubaiya Sayeed kidnap case of 1989 and the Kandahar IC-814 plane hijack case. Terrorism in India worsened as a consequence of the deal made by the NF and NDA governments to free the notorious terrorists in custody. More innocent people, for example, have been killed in terrorist attacks since the release of Maulana Azhar, Umar Qureshi and Zargar in exchange for the passengers and crew in the Kandahar case. These three upon reaching Pakistan, continued as heroes in their terrorists acts against India including 26/11 in Mumbai.
Thus we need a clear-cut policy, which means a clear-cut statement of objectives, defining the priorities of these objectives, the strategy to achieve the objective, and the committing of necessary human, financial and infrastructural resources.
We need, most of all, a strategy of deterrence. Secular intellectuals may wax eloquent about “true Islam” being humane and peaceful, on TV programmes, but it is clear that they have not read any authoritative translations of the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith. These three holy books together constitute the theology of Islam. Hence instead of talking about the “correct interpretation” of Islam, those who call themselves “moderates” in the Islamic community, ought instead to urge for a new reformed Islamic theology that is consistent with democratic principles.
IN ISLAM, THE WORD OF THE PROPHET IS FINAL. NO TRUE MUSLIM CAN DISOWN THESE VERSES, OR SAY THAT THEY WOULD REWRITE THE OFFENSIVE VERSES OF THE KORAN. IF THEY DO, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO RUN FOR THEIR LIVES.
We Hindus have a long recognised tradition of being religious liberals by nature. We have already proved it enough by welcoming to our country and nurturing Parsis, Jews, Syrian Christians, and Moplah Muslim Arabs who were persecuted elsewhere, when we were 100 per cent Hindu country. Today, Hindus being targeted by Islamic terrorists, have to stand up for themselves.
What does it mean in the 21st century for Hindus to stand up? I mean by that mental clarity of the Hindus to defend the nation by effective deterrent retaliation.
This also entails an intelligent co-option of other religious groups into the Hindu cultural continuum. That is why I advocated that Muslims accept what has been scientifically established by DNA genetic studies, that we have common ancestors and share the hoary Hindu past.
(Dr. Subramanian Swamy is President, Janata Party.)
In the last paragraph of the above article Dr.Subramanian Swamy has said that recent DNA Genetic Studies have scientifically established the fact that the Muslims of India and the Hindus of India have common ancestors and share the hoary HINDU PAST. This statement of Dr.Swamy can stand any judicial scrutiny in any Court of Law in India. I know it will be dismissed outright as ‘SANGH PARIVAR Generated Nonsense’ by all the Madarasas of India!
I am not very sure whether the Chairperson of the National Minorities Commission is aware of the fact that the DNA  of Sunni and Shia Muslims of UP State in India has been studied and the Research Results communicated to the world by the National Centre for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) at the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) in their message dated 14th August 2011 under the Heading North Indian Muslims: Foreign DNA or Hindu converts? Shared Y-chromosomal heritage between Muslims and Hindus in India. This message contains search results of the bio-medical research conducted by Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, University Park, Miami, FL 33199, USA. (1. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2007 Jul;133(3):1004-12. North Indian Muslims: enclaves of foreign DNA or Hindu converts? Terreros MC, Rowold D, Luis JR, Khan F, Agrawal S, Herrera RJ.)
The abstract of their findings as communicated by (NCBI) at the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) in their message referred to in the above paragraph is as follows.
Abstract of findings on DNA of Indian Muslims
The mtDNA composition of two Muslim sects from the northern Indian province of Uttar Pradesh, the Sunni and Shia, have been delineated using sequence information from hypervariable regions 1 and 2 (HVI and HVII, respectively) as well as coding region polymorphisms. A comparison of this data to that from Middle Eastern, Central Asian, North East African, and other Indian groups reveals that, at the mtDNA haplogroup level, both of these Indo-Sunni and Indo-Shia populations are more similar to each other and other Indian groups than to those from the other regions. In addition, these two Muslim sects exhibit a conspicuous absence of West Asian mtDNA haplogroups suggesting that their maternal lineages are of Indian origin. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the maternal lineage data indicates differences between the Sunni and Shia collections of Uttar Pradesh with respect to the relative distributions of Indian-specific M sub-haplogroups (Indo Shia > Indo Sunni) and the R haplogroup (Indo Sunni > Indo Shia), a disparity that does not appear to be related to social status or geographic regions within India. Finally, the mtDNA data integrated with the Y-chromosome results from an earlier study, which indicated a major Indian genetic (Y-chromosomal) contribution as well, suggests a scenario of Hindu to Islamic conversion in these two populations. However, given the substantial level of the African/Middle Eastern YAP lineage in the Indo-Shia versus its absence in the Indo-Sunni, it is likely that this conversion was somewhat gender biased in favor of females in the Indo-Shia.
(c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PMID:
17427927
2. Hum Genet. 2006 Nov;120(4):543-51. Epub 2006 Sep 2.
A shared Y-chromosomal heritage between Muslims and Hindus in India.
Gutala R, Carvalho-Silva DR, Jin L, Yngvadottir B, Avadhanula V, Nanne K, Singh L, Chakraborty R, Tyler-Smith C.
Source
Department of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Abstract
Arab forces conquered the Indus Delta region in 711 AD: and, although a Muslim state was established there, their influence was barely felt in the rest of South Asia at that time. By the end of the tenth century, Central Asian Muslims moved into India from the northwest and expanded throughout the subcontinent. Muslim communities are now the largest minority religion in India, comprising more than 138 million people in a predominantly Hindu population of over one billion. It is unclear whether the Muslim expansion in India was a purely cultural phenomenon or had a genetic impact on the local population. To address this question from a male perspective, we typed eight microsatellite loci and 16 binary markers from the Y chromosome in 246 Muslims from Andhra Pradesh, and compared them to published data on 4,204 males from East Asia, Central Asia, other parts of India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Iran, the Middle East, Turkey, Egypt and Morocco. We find that the Muslim populations in general are genetically closer to their non-Muslim geographical neighbors than to other Muslims in India, and that there is a highly significant correlation between genetics and geography (but not religion). Our findings indicate that, despite the documented practice of marriage between Muslim men and Hindu women, Islamization in India did not involve large-scale replacement of Hindu Y chromosomes. The Muslim expansion in India was predominantly a cultural change and was not accompanied by significant gene flow, as seen in other places, such as China and Central Asia.
PMCID: PMC2590854
Free PMC Article
PMID:
16951948
Apart from Dr.Swamy, another fire-brand web journalist Vijayan (highly communal, highly barbarous, superstitious and ill-informed Hindu) has given a rejoinder to Faizur Rehman, with rapier-like arguments in the internet. For the benefit of my readers I am presenting below Vijayan’s  rejoinder in regard to the main points advanced by Faizur Rahman. I have put Vijayan’s points within brackets in red colour and italics. The words in black colour are the points of Faizur Rahman.
Muslims and Hindus are mature, the Sangh Parivar is not – A. Faizur Rahman
‘If the Sangh Parivar is honest it can co-exist with Muslims on the basis of the values that Islam and Hinduism share’ Raji Raouf in his article “We Muslims are mature, we can take criticism” (The Hindu, August 7, 2011) cautioned Muslims against getting ruffled by provocative articles such as the recent one written by Dr. Subramanian Swamy in DNA which, among other things, sought disenfranchisement of Muslims for racist reasons. But then, of late (like from when Fuzzy Mian started writing his moderately thoughtless article?)
Indian Muslims have shown a remarkable sense of maturity, be it the Mecca Masjid, Ajmer or Malegaon blasts or, for that matter, any other issue wherein they were wrongfully targeted. (Were the Hindus burnt on the Train Rightfully targeted by this Indian and his Muslims? Were the three lakhs Hindus killed in Kashmir and the three lakhs driven out of their homes rightfully targeted? Have the Hindus killed in Deganga been rightfully targeted by his Muslims? Was Akshardam rightfully targeted? Or the Mumbai Blasts, Coimbatore Blasts etc etc? Surely all these killer Muslims did not come down from Mars? And surely all those masjids that have sprung up all over India have NOT been built by Hindus to spite the Indian Muslim? Like there are more masjids in India than in the rest of the Mohammedan world put together? That these blackguards deliberately see to it that their Masjid and its chand-tara towers over every other structure in the neighbourhood, and more particularly it must be at least 50% taller than any Hindu Temple nearby? In certain mohammedan majority areas, ghettos if you will, like Malapuram and Mhow, no one Hindu, Christian or tourist can take even a sip of water publicly during this Roja fest. No Tea shop may sell tea. Then you have Chief Ministers of Kashmir and sundry other Muslim Luminaires threatening death and destruction if terrorists Afzal Guru or Kasab are hanged as ordered by the Supreme Court. Who is wrongfully Targetting who, and why are these Fuzzy-wuzzies incapable of seeing what is and has been going on right under their noses?)
There have been no calls from Muslim organisations “to take up arms and to let all hell loose” and this controverts the caricature of their immaturity painted by Mr. Raouf in his article. (Oh YEAH!!!! Calls are only issued six times a day from the Minarets.)
This, of course, is not to deny the existence of extremist Muslim outfits, (All muslim outfits are terrorist outfits – name the ones that are not.) but only to point out that the moderates are gradually gaining the upper hand in the struggle against extremism (Since the so-called religion of theirs sanctions Taqiya and only know what other forms of deceit to infiltrate and destroy the Kaffir, what price Fuzzy and his “moderate” circus?) which is also  evident from the fact that Muslims have not resorted to any kind of retaliatory mudslinging against Hindus to express their dissent against Dr. Swamy’s incendiary article. (They have retaliated against Swamy, and that is technically not the same thing as retaliatory mudslinging against Hindus okay.) And if “minority bodies” such as the National Commission for Minorities (which is headed by a muslim) have issued notices to Dr. Swamy they have acted well within their rights to charge him for violating the Indian law by calling for the denial of rights to Muslims guaranteed under our Constitution. (As we remember, all Muslims were to run off to Pakistan – exchange of population as originally envisaged during the Partition. But the masters of Taqiya and preferred to stick on here and wreck the nation from inside.) Therefore, Mr. Raouf is not justified in saying that “Muslims are being taken for a ride” by the minority bodies.
If truth be spoken, it is not a question of Muslims or Hindus displaying maturity when ridiculed. Indeed, both communities enjoy a great rapport at the people-to-people level. (Like we were forced by a Stupidly pseudo-secular government and sicklier Courts to put up with Hussain and his obscene Paintings, but Indian MCs led by their “organisations” will riot, run amok and set fire to Indian property over Danish Cartoons which do not have even a fraction of the filth and venom conveyed by the Muhammedan Artist, now luckily dead, though not by a Hindu Hand.) The big question is whether the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)-backed Sangh Parivar is willing to let these communities live in harmony. (The question is whether MC Organisations will let Hindus live at all, let alone in Harmony with Muslims which is a Globally acknowledged impossibility.) Unfortunately, the saffronites are displaying a kind of majoritarian masculinity (SO why don’t you disgruntled elements run off to Pakistan or Bungladesh as originally planned, instead of smuggling in all your relatives to come here and spoil Harmony?) all your that seems to suggest that it is below their dignity to treat Muslims as equal citizens of this country. Demolition of mosques is being justified on the ground that a mosque is less sacred than a temple, and hence it may be bulldozed to make way for a holier place, the temple. (Demolition of Hindu Temples was part of your inherited ethos and your Islamic Culture, and is being carried out in a big way in every shariat Muslim Country in the world, and even within certain pockets of India as in Kashmir, UP, Waste Bengal. Assam and the North Eastern States. And the other sad truth is that new mosques are springing up all over Secular India at the rate of one very day.) The sad part is that persons spreading such disinformation know full well that it has the potential to disturb communal amity. (Wrong. The sad part is that Truth, Objectivity and Fair Play are being suppressed in the name of warped notions of Secularism, and the worst practitioners of this sort of disinformation who go around vandalising the Truth, wherever it tries to rise up above filthy Vote Bank Politics.)
It must be said that if the Sangh Parivar is honest it can co-exist with Muslims on the basis of the values that Islam and Hinduism share. (Try writing some articles describing these “Shared Values” instead of columns of pure falsehood.)
For instance, in a verse which could be described as the bedrock of inter-faith harmony, the Koran says that if God did not check the mischiefmongers “there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques where the name of God is commemorated in abundant measure” (22:40). (And Truly lakhs of Hindu Temples have been pulled down, looted, and desecrated by hordes of Islam..) And it has been declared in the Bhagavad Gita that an absence of enmity for people (nirvairah sarvabhutesu), even though they might have done great harm, is one of the important virtues of the best of the devotees (XI-55). Jesus also said to turn the Other Cheek, and heap coals of fire, and this has also been exploited – for buggering the Hindu.)
Having said this, it may be misleading to see the communalism of Hindutva writers as purely a Hindu-Muslim problem. It actually concerns the entire nation, and could seriously affect its development if allowed to continue. (Like the massive, unchecked growth of Muslim Population including by infiltration from across the border.) It is common knowledge that poverty and backwardness in many African countries are mainly the result of continuous, violent, internal conflict. (Encouragement of this conflict is the Main Objective of Organised Islam.) And nearer home, one of our own neighbours finds itself in deep trouble, financial and otherwise, for failing to contain sectarian violence (??) and in some cases promoting it as a matter of policy to further its vested interests. (Consider it as an inseparable aspect of Islam – that when they have killed off all the kaffirs, they create sects among themselves and start fighting.)
The Sangh Parivar, therefore, must realise that by adhering to the Golwalkarian thought it is sowing the seeds of disharmony between Hindus and non-Hindus. (The non-Hindus must also understand that Democracy is all about Majorities, and 85% of the people here are Hindus. And if they tried these old divisive policies of their Prophets and Popes they will reap the whirlwind.) It must understand that it would be unwise to continuously talk in terms of a Hindu Rashtra or a fantasised confrontation between Islam and Hinduism at a time when all our energies are required to be focussed on equitable distribution of the fruits of our nation’s economic growth. In other words, it is time Hindutva ideologues gave up their anti-Muslim agenda and went beyond the idea of conflict resolution into the realm of conflict transformation, by which both communities join hands to work towards the larger goal of making India an epitome of peace, stability and progress. (If any Muslim, past or present had such notions there would have been no Partition, no large scale ethnic cleansing of Hindus, no Islamic Nations.)
CONCLUSION
I would like to invite the kind attention of all my readers to the following observations of Sir.Winston Churchill on Militant Islam in 1899 in his book titled’ The River War’ first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899):

FRONT COVER OF THE 2 VOLUMES OF SIR,WINSTON CHURCHILL’S BOOK
‘THE RIVER WAR’
“A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities – but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”
–Sir Winston Churchill, from The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).

http://ennapadampanchajanya.blogspot.com/

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s