Monday, October 28, 2024
Home Blog Page 780

No Gandhi but there could be many Godses

Ashish Shukla
-
0
No Gandhi but there could be many Godses

Nathuram Godse killed Mahatma Gandhi on 30th January 1948. We also know the provocation was Gandhi’s insistence to newly-formed Indian government that Pakistan be paid the obligated Rs.55 crores from the treasury.

Godse’s full statement in his trial was banned for 20 years till the Bombay High Court lifted it in 1968. It bears a reminder now for both Hindus and Muslims lest a similar communal frenzy overtakes the nation in our lifetimes, abetted by forces who don’t have the interests of Muslims, certainly not of Hindus, and most definitely not of the nation we know as India.

Godse believed Muslims were appeased by Gandhi at the cost of Hindus. He cited several instances such as Khilafat Movement in the early 20s; the move to separate Sind from Bombay presidency in 1928; Mahatma’s “neither support nor opposition” to the Government of India Act of 1935 which allowed elections on communal lines and prepared the way for the horrific Partition; and the Great Calcutta Killings and Noakhali Riots where lakhs of Hindu men and women paid with their lives and honour.

The Muslim League feared Hindu domination. Hinduphobia was built upon by Jinnah and other leaders of the Muslim League, abetted by British policy of “divide-and-rule.” Gandhi’s desire for a united front of Hindus and Muslims against British never materialized. His doctrine of Ahimsa didn’t work. It only caused rivers of blood to flow in front of his eyes. His turned out to be violent pacifism.

MODERN TIMES: Muslim viewpoint:

Fast forward to modern times. Muslims perceive a hostile climate against their lives and food habits abetted by the central BJP government. They don’t stop to question:
(a) If BJP indeed is communal how come it doesn’t react to hundreds of Hindu killings in Kerala and Bengal? Why Advani’s Ayodhya’s Rath-Yatra was completely bloodless;
(b) How come its first act was to provide new subsidy to Islamic schools;
(c) If BJP indeed was fundamentalist, how come the most strident Hindu voices such as Arun Shourie and Dr. Subramanium Swamy were never inducted in the Cabinet?
(d) Every time a stray voice, such as Sakshi Maharaj or Jyoti Niranjan go extreme, the government most vehemently come down on it;

HINDU VIEWPOINT:

Hindus have their own grouse.
(a) Hindus pride in their religion is termed as “bigotry”;
(b) Hindus can’t come to terms with Ayodhya where Rajiv Gandhi himself had allowed Hindus to worship in 1986 and where all the eminent historians, such as Romila Thapar and Irfan Habib were shown to be manipulating history and archaeology by the three-member jury;
(c) Hindus detest when their nose is rubbed on the ground on their cultural sensibility, such as “Jallikattu”, “Durga Puja”, “Padmavati” among others;
(d) They feel helpless when the organized intelligentsia of this country (media, academia, Left-Liberals) deny them the platform to air their views. Their viewpoint is never represented.

Above all, Hindus feel that media/Left-Liberals/academics for too long have played the role of British “divide-and-rule” in this country. Fed by foreign money and preachers, missionaries of specific countries of monotheist religions such as Islam and Christianity, every effort is being made to make a pagan religion like Hinduism suffer, and if possible, to disappear.

Englightened Hindus feel aghast that their Muslim brethrens can’t look at the example of the Vajpayee government (1998-2004) and see through this game.
(a) These very same experts had predicted Hindu fascism and that “all Muslims into the Indian Ocean” under the Vajpayee regime;
(b) Despite the Kargil outrage in 1999, Vajpayee stopped the Army to strike across the border at invaders’ base;
(c) It was BJP which had thrown the Indian media market open to foreign media ownership despite the strident opposition by these very forces who today champion the idea of “freedom of speech.”

Hence, I propose a following manifesto for Hindus and Muslims for the safety of their future generations and unity of India (for god’s sake, how many divisions you want, you stupid):
(a) That we are different but we have lived in harmony in the past and we can live in harmony in present and future;
(b) That we would learn our historical lessons and wouldn’t allow India-breakers to play on our fault-lines;
(c) That we would see each other’s point of view on cow-slaughter, such as food habits and religious sensibility and accommodate each other strictly on the laws of the land;
(d) That Hindus would come forward on killings in the name of cow-vigilante and Muslims likewise would question the media’s narrative on Bengal and Kerala as well as constant attempt to denigrate our armed forces.

Above all, our religious moorings shouldn’t be allowed to override our concern for One India, One Unity. A Uniform Civil Code isn’t an attack on Shariat. And if it is, Muslims anyway submit to such rulings in France or Australia. The majority in this country has chosen BJP to lead India’s destiny till 2019 and we ought not to let our communal prejudice or bias interfere in its task.

And certainly not allow these India-breakers a field day. They are desperate and fast losing ground. Their propaganda has no effect on the electorates. India is a virtual heaven in modern comity of nations. Muslims are safer here than in any other non-Muslim country of the world. We shouldn’t become a pawn to a handful of India-breakers who are subsisted, funded and promoted by foreign forces.

Just remember: we can all wear our religious glasses but it must show the horrible future which our children would suffer in times to come.
Jai Hind.

Cow related violence- A historical perspective

sudharshan80
-
0
Cow related violence- A historical perspective

The media and the #notinmyname nonsense would have you believe that beef related violence has started only since Mr Modi took charge, but nothing could be further from the truth than this calumny. Before I begin, I must clarify that even one instance of violence is one too many, what I am objecting to here is the coverage by the media and portraying it as though this is a new phenomenon.

Beef and cow slaughter has always been a sensitive topic in India ever since the Islamic invasions began. Humayun was the first Mughal emperor to personally stop eating beef (pp 83, Tezkerah al-Vakiat). This change of heart took place after a clash between his soldiers and Hindu civilians over the consumption of beef.

Akbar was the first Mughal ruler to ban cow slaughter. He also personally gave up eating beef, and banned the slaughter of animals on Hindu festival days.

The “love of Cow” is not some invention by the sangh, as is suggested by some of our esteemed “liberals”. The Ain I Akbari which talks quite extensively on the “cow question” has this to say,

“Throughout the happy regions of Hindustan, the cow is considered auspicious and held in great veneration.”

The Ain I Akbari then goes on in detail about the cow for a full chapter. Akbar loved his cows and is said to have purchased one for 5,000 hupees (sic).

Akbar, the treatise goes on to say, paid much attention to the improvement of cattle and created an administrative structure for all the Royal cattle. There is a further chapter on the nature of servants to be employed in cow stables.

The same work then says that and I quote,

He also believed that it was wrong to kill cows, which the Hindus worship and interdicted (sic) the use of beef.

The treatise then says that Akbar’s doctors confirmed the Emperor’s views that beef produced diseases and was indigestible. The Emperor even made the very act of touching beef a crime. As an aside, the Emperor also foreswore garlic and onions (one proper Jain Muni he seems to have been). On Diwali, the Emperor had cows adorned and brought before him, something his subjects liked.

Clearly, the love for cows and beef bans aren’t new or restricted to Hindus.

Shah Jahan upheld these laws as well. It is telling though that Aurangzeb, when he was the governor of Gujarat chose to slaughter a cow within the premises of a very holy Jain temple and then converted it into a mosque.

Moving on, the earliest Beef riots are recorded during the Raj:

Gene R Thursby in his Hindu Muslim relations: A study of controversy & conflict  says that cow protection amongst Hindus goes back to the 4th century AD.

He records that the first recorded planned agitations took place in the 1880’s. He lists three steps by which this was achieved (pp 77). Alarmed by the popular support this gained the Raj as always played both sides. On one hand Hindus are given assurances that their demands would be looked into, while the Muslims were told that their interests wouldn’t be affected.

The violence started in 1881 in Multan, on 21st April riots broke out over beef and needed the army to step in. Casualties are unknown. Post the riots, the tensions were so high that a permanent police force (paid for by a special tax levied on the town) was stationed there.

In 1883, disturbances and riots broke out over beef in Bombay and Varanasi.

Lahore in 1884 saw tensions rise, but thankfully no riots.

The book then says and I quote,

The next three years witnessed further ritual pressure exerted by Muslims in Delhi, in 1884 the number of cows sacrificed on Eid rose from 25 to 170 and by 1886 was at 450 (pp 79)

What follows are a series of bloody riots caused by Beef or as the British termed it, “the cow question”.

1886 saw riots in several cities in Punjab (during Eid) over the “cow question” as the British termed it. 1886 also saw Diwali coincide with Muhharam and saw bloody riots in Delhi, Hoshiarpur, Ambala, Etwah, Faridpur and Alapur.

1893 saw riots erupt in the United Provinces resulting in a 100 dead.

In 1909, Muslims sacrificed a cow in public in Calcutta this resulted in bloody riots. Army needed to quell the riots.

1912 Riots in Ayodhya, needing the Army to step in.

1912 Riots in Fyzabad, again the Army needed to quell the riots.

1911 Riots in Muzafarbad.

1916 Patna.

Sept 1917, bloody riots in Shahbad, Gaya, Patna.

30th Sept 1917 saw a 25k strong Hindu mob descend on Ibrahimpur.

2nd Oct 1917, riots again erupt in Shahbad district.

1918, intense riots in Saharanpur, 30 Muslims burned to their deaths, army needed to quell the riots.

1924 and 26, severe riots hit Delhi.

June 1926, 12 major civil disturbances over the cow question.

1928 see riots in Punjab.

This particular work stops with 1928 Riots, but other sources mention these riots near continuously till 1947.

As you can see, the “cow question” is at least 600 years old and not some evil sanghi invention. The media need to stop projecting it as such. The problem is a failure of law and order and undoubtedly the states need to crackdown hard. But let’s not invent a conflict just to push an agenda. The fault lines over beef run deep, and definitely, over time the violence has reduced. It is possible (I have not studied any data points for the recent past) that we are seeing a spike in violence over the past 3-4 years, but let us not whitewash our own bloody past.

A past that has seen the “cow question” cause 100’s of bloody riots resulting in large numbers of both Hindus and Muslims being murdered. Lynching or mob violence has no place in a civilized society, and we should definitely be raising our voices and get the powers that be to take strict action. Pushing a one sided agenda though, is not the solution, and if anything will only serve to exacerbate issues more and create a polarisation where none exists.

The scourge of great expectations- How Modi must not allow the narrative to be seized by the detractors

mayankkay
-
0
The scourge of great expectations- How Modi must not allow the narrative to be seized by the detractors

It is tough being a Modi supporter these days. It is even tougher to apply critical reasoning in an attempt to distinguish between the narrative and the reality. There is a certain disconnect from what the news channels, both pro and anti Modi, would have you believed as compared to what is, essentially, the everyday life- on a train/bus, on the dusty roads or in the crowded markets, far away from the daily hyperbole and social media outreach. A war of the narratives is on.

Given the riveting aura created around the persona of Modi, cult following and the heavy mandate in 2014 elections, the burden of expectations was natural. He was pitched as the new Lee Kuan yew who had catapulted Singapore from a poor landlocked nation into an economic powerhouse, someone who would unshackle the country from its baggage of the past and pave the way for a golden future.

These great expectations have perhaps become his greatest scourge.

Right through his campaign in 2014, till his inauguration, then through the first year as the PM, Modi ignited the imagination of all classes alike. The middle classes and the educated youth were amongst his biggest supporters. The conversations in train journeys or during the evening gupshup over tea or drinks generally revolved around how the new PM is going to change the fortunes of this country. There were seldom any counters. The only people who weren’t really excited about him were the elite (the non business rich, English speaking left leaning ones now more famous as the pseudo liberals or Lutyen’s club etc).

Post the electoral setbacks in Delhi and Bihar and finding himself cornered for being a jet setting Prime Minister aloof from the public, Modi made the great pivot! Instead of emulating Deng Xioping who made the pivot to the right in 1978, setting China towards the trajectory of immense growth, Modi swung far left and landed himself deep into the heart of the Indian poor. Demonetisation, the word has dominated the Indian lexicon ever since it was announced. The move has been unequivocally supported by strong loyalists, teared into by the detractors and debated threadbare by the intelligentsia for its economic merits and demerits. Only time and numbers (indexes like GDP, IIP etc) will tell the real effect. Despite their differences on the economics front, the experts are unanimous in their view that this was a political master stroke. Add the free LPG connections, Jan Dhan accounts, affordable housing, GST taxes favouring the poor and further squeezing the rich, and the unmooring of the farm loan waivers by states, most of them BJP ruled, and the dramatic arc of the new paradigm looks complete.

This shift is not without reason. According to a recent study on global incomes by the Pew Research centre, USA , contrary to the popular view only 2% of the total Indian population constitute the Middle class, taking roughly ₹700/- per day per person income as the datum. (In the US anyone earning below ₹1000 or $16 a day is considered to be below poverty line). Which means anybody who is not the real middle class, and not rich, is basically a prospect voter, who can be swayed by a new promise. They don’t call Amit Shah a wizard for nothing! Today, Modi finds himself in a unique position where he has successfully juxtaposed himself as a ‘Garibon Ka Masiha’ while still advocating development and inviting CEOs of companies from all over the world to invest in India. He also manages to be extremely popular with the Military, and commands great respect abroad within the Indian diaspora.

But somehow this jiggery pokery of appeasing everyone, swinging between the right and the left and lack of a clear vision for sprucing up the economy, esp manufacturing, does not inspire much confidence in the companies who had pledged to invest in the country. So, it is not surprising that a new counter narrative is slowly emerging which focuses on his failures, and simply outlays the PM as a no-gooder, dream seller, ‘Jumla man’, who is active in promoting himself but inept at leading the country. In their recent cover story, leading international journal, The Economist, never known to be kind to Modi, or to the right wing for that matter, has gone on a diatribe against him for failing to capitalize on opportunities such as low oil prices, India’s young demographic and skilled labour force. The publication, considered an authority on all matters Economics, finds Modi to be a fine administrator but a poor reformer, doing ‘fix this’ jobs for the industry-finding land for a factory or expediting construction of a power station.

Prejudice aside, there’s indeed some truth to the criticism. Except for the Ministries of Power, Transport and External affairs who are doing an exemplary job chasing targets and achieving deadlines, the other ministries and departments of the govt are in disarray. Railways remains a laggard. Premium or non premium, the trains just don’t run on schedule. The entire railway infrastructure, including its work culture needs a reboot. The same parable may be applied for all the glitzy initiatives like Make in India or Skill India. Or even Air India! On time delivery is the key. In agriculture, Modi’s much touted real time price index, central fund for farmers, crop insurance and scaling up of warehouses nationwide, visionary ideas during the 2014 campaign which were thought to be the cure to farmer suicides, are yet to see the light of the day. Smart cities are still on the blue print stage and barring a few exceptions such as the Jeep factory at Pune or the upcoming Apple facility in Bengaluru, foreign investment based manufacturing hasn’t really taken off. If only all these ideas were implemented as policy with the same gusto and sense of urgency as the Cow and Cattle laws have, one wonders!

To be fair, the overall performance of this govt can be said to be just about OK. There are no scams yet. The economy, despite the ‘Demo’ shocks is cruising at a healthy 6.1%, although we have lost the tag of the fastest growing economy in the world. Die hard Modi supporters couldn’t agree more. “We are doing just fine” “give him more time to prove himself”. The otherwise reticent Manmohan Singh was doing just OK too, till the scams came tumbling out. The question that the citizens and the Modi supporters should ask is ‘are we ok with an ok?’ To borrow a leaf from The Economist, a once in a generation golden opportunity is being squandered away to make way for political compulsions. Trying to do everything and please all segments of the society all at once, signals the departure from the ideology on which this govt rode to power.

Poverty and oppression are fertile grounds for breeding extremism of any kind, political or religious. It is indeed the duty of every leader to alleviate poverty but it shouldn’t become a case of doling out freebies. That is economic harakiri.

In one of his campaign speeches in 2014 Modi had said “I don’t want the poor of my country to beg for what is rightfully theirs. I will create so many industries and avenues like roads, cities and infrastructure that there will be no dearth of jobs.” These words resonated with the appeal of an ideology, long subdued by the pacifist philosophy of the left-liberals. An ideology whose time had finally come. None of those words sounded like a Jumla. The people of this country await those promised opportunities. Modi’s failure will not be his alone, but a collective failure of the idea. It is thus incumbent upon the PM not to let the narrative be seized by the detractors. There are chinks in the armour that need to be identified and addressed on an immediate basis. It is also the duty of his supporters to ask the govt for accountability where required, and not get swayed with the hyperbole of nationalism or patriotism.

The time has come to do the disruptive. With two years more to go for his first term to end, the PM must unleash bold reforms disregarding the political costs. Shut down the loss makers and laggards or divest them. Build those cities and bridges, unshackle that war chest of cash collected as excise duty on oil. Invest in education, specially primary education. Invest in research and development in all fields by creating institutions on the lines of IISC, Tata institute of social sciences and JIPMER Puduchery, don’t mindlessly replicate the  IITs. Usher the tax reforms of GST with the intent of making it a one nation one tax system as was originally envisaged. Infuse capital into existing manufacturing industries and get those factories running. Shut down the cow vigilantism by exemplary punitive action, the nation has bigger things to worry about. Most importantly, place the right individuals in the right ministries, not mere yes men, empower them to take the initiative and pursue an agenda, do not worry about the statistics and numbers as they will never depict the entire picture anyway.

Lastly, groom a group of probable political successors, and then, pass on the baton and retire timely, as the PM, in 2024!

When a dumb Sagarika Ghose shared a dumber article

Saket Suryesh
-
0
When a dumb Sagarika Ghose shared a dumber article

There is a distasteful exercise currently being undertaken by the media, which instead of reporting the news, has taken it upon itself to create news and become an opposition to the Government. This is manifestation of a frustration over having lost the pimping rights to the policy formation of the nation with the change of Government in 2014.

Most editors and journalists of leftists-leaning ideology and beneficiaries of erstwhile Congress government – when they acted as conduits and go-between for arranging policies, portfolios and favors – have been so clinical in their hatred that they are no longer bothered with truth.

This is not a fool-hardy step for them as they risk their credibility; it is a well-calculated attempt of desperation – to restore the old order of the Lutyen’s. The credibility is already at all time low, further compounded with absurdly nonsensical tweets; for instance, senior journalists crazily tweeting about riot situation, and then deleting them once pointed out about the baselessness of such the tweet.

They are almost campaigning for a political party; abundantly praising a party for great infrastructure, which magically evaporates once the party that the leftist-liberal media did not support comes into power in UP, to their dismay.

The tweets would come, exist for a while, create outrage, come well-coordinated, blatantly identically-worded from the fraternity of foolishly arrogant journalists, and then when pointed out for being factually incorrect, will be deleted, if the journalist has any shame or fear, which is rare these days.

One such journalist, tweeted this article by Jeff Kingston in the Japan Times. This came right around the time, the journalist couple and their tactical team of traitors began tweeting about a protest defaming the historically tolerant culture of India; a nation which had a majority Hindu community, first ruled by Muslims for a period of around 400 years and then by Christian whites for around 200 years.

The nation got freedom in 1947, and while the partitioned geography, which currently cries hoarse about alleged fall in secular values in India, promptly became theocratic Islamic state, India remained a secular state.

Indian Constituent assembly which was tasked with the designing of the structure of newly-independent state, chose to not be a Hindu nation, as was envisioned by the British when they created Pakistan for Muslims and India for Hindus. On their own, with an overwhelming Hindu majority, whom Voltaire called “a peaceful and innocent people, equally incapable of hurting others or of defending themselves” decided to base the nation on secular policies.

The state was to be secular, with equal rights to all religions. Congress, which ruled the nation for the largest part its independent history, however, with a view of holding on to power, turned the laws of secularism on their head and tried consolidate Non-Hindu voters, thriving on the inherent fissures in the Hindu society.

Their own tenure a living proof of incompetence and corruption, they turned heat on Hindus. With a foreign-born, Indian citizen who opted for Indian citizenship after a decade of deliberation, at the helm, things became worse. Cow-slaughter, most unlikely a part of the religion which came from deserts of middle-east, was positioned as an essential part of faith. Hindus were asked to provide scientific data to substantiate their faith in the case of Ram Mandir.

A religion which opposes fixed structures and idols for worship, which had no clue of Cow and its role in an agrarian society in its history, nudged by Congress and the media which became friends to it post-emergency, made it both a rallying point. This was not to innocently defend their faith, rather it was to rub to nose of Hindu majority of the nation in dirt.

Slowly, but surely this nefarious design of Congress started getting exposed, as they used secularism as a way to hide not only incompetence, but also their blatant corruption. Once thrown out of power, Congress threatened riots and went about creating one, dutifully, fanning fissures in the Indian society.

The current scheme of protests, logistically planned and organized by Congress and colluding media houses is one such attempt. In a nation of 125 Crore people which has seen huge number of deaths in terror acts running in thousands, selective mention of around a dozen Muslim victims over the last three years since the change of government is being used to paint entire country as Lynchistan.

A well-coordinate protest was organized, in India and abroad. Public Lynching, or mob-murders are deplorable and must be condemned. We have seen the worst of mob outrage at display in 1984 when thousands of Sikhs lost their life and while many Congress leaders were named, none could be convicted, thanks to support from a compliant police and bureaucracy. The genocide was so thorough and one-sided that not one non-Sikh was killed by the state in the attempt to control the riots.

This did not prompt the media and the so-called intelligentsia to come out and organize multi-city protest in the tune of #NotInMyName, this was not done for 600 deaths in Mumbai train blasts, not in case of 300 deaths in 26/11, or in case of 70 deaths in Delhi Blasts. We are not even going to Bhagalpur Riots where huge number of Muslims were killed under Congress’ watch and Kashmir where the minority Hindus were driven out of their homes with a view of changing demographics and eventual establishment of Islamic state.

Sagarika Ghosh, the grand dame of fake news factory and a known Hinduphobe, tweeted the aforementioned article by Jeff Kingston in Japan Times, well timed to build the traction for the media-created fake protest, designed to create fault-lines in the Indian society on the lines of religion. The eventual protests carefully crafted the narrative around Muslim victims in BJP states, totally ignoring systematic killings in Kerala, Karnataka, Kashmir and West Bengal of Hindus and also nationalist Muslims, confirmed the doubts every neutral individual had.

The idea was to humiliate Narendra Modi after US declared Syed Salahuddin a global terrorist, thereby taking away the façade of democratic freedom-fighters off the faces of Jihadist terrorists of Kashmir. In the process, if it humiliated India, they won’t mind.

A write-up by an academician offers immediate legitimacy to the facts mentioned, even if they be the worst of the lies. The write-up begins with the references to the Jihadist supremacists in Bangladesh, Philippines (writer calls it insurgency) and elsewhere.

In the very second paragraph the ignorance and hatred is wide open. Writes Jeff Kingston- Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who embraces Hindutva, a Hindu Chauvinism that sanctifies and perpetuates the politics of hate.

One could see why this article excited a known Hinduphobe Sagarika Ghosh. It is sad that Jeff while comments on the majority religion of foreign country, without even checking how the western world always considered it one of the most tolerant religions in the world.

JR Oppenheimer called the Vedas – the greatest privilege of this century; Voltaire said- …Everything has come down to us from the banks of Ganges; Thoreau wrote – In the morning I bathe my intellect in the stupendous philosophy of Bhagvad Gita…in comparison with which… our modern world and its literature seems puny and trivial; Schopenhauer called reading the Upanishads – It is the most satisfying and elevating reading which is possible in this world; it has been a solace to my life and solace to my death.

If I have to be persuaded by Western wisdom on how one should view Hindutva, I would rather go with a Voltaire, Emerson or a Schopenhauer, than Shri Jeff Kingston, who writes commentary on Indian socio-political scenario from the campus of Columbia University, in a country which is known to fund not only Saudis and Pakistanis, but also Taleban and the ISIS, at one point of time or other.

In the most modern context, the Supreme Court of India, which I am sure, Mr. Kingston, reeling under the white man’s burden of uplifting the brown pagans would have no respect for, decided in 1995 that Hindutva or Hinduism reflects the way of life of the people in the sub-continent and dismissed the idea of equating it with narrow fundamentalist Hindu bigotry.

That Teesta Setalvad (married to a Muslim, possibly converted to Islam) and Shamsul Islam sought the court to once again define and reject Hindutva in 2017, without any street protest against them by the Hindus demonstrate a great tolerance is another matter. The court refused to revisit the 1995 decision and thus the Court’s decision holds.

Jeff Kingston then claims that Modi’s campaign was run on the back of slogan “Vote for Modi, Give life to the Cow.” It seems Mr. Kingston has been fed on the data by his advisers who were planning for a protest to push the government on the back foot and somehow, drive the elected majority government out of power solely on the strength of shrill rhetoric. Sadly, his advisers turn out to be liars.

Their intention was to use the intellectual credit of an Academician to run fake message, and they did not seem to care that in process they have turned the intellectual into a foolish propagandist. Modi’s key electoral slogans, which anyone who actually followed the Indian Polity were as below, mentioned with translations:

  • Abki baar, Modi Sarkaar (This time, Modi Government)
  • Main desh nahin Jhukne doonga (I will not let the nation be humiliated)
  • Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikaas (With everyone, and For Progress for everyone)

The slogan which the Professor attributes to Modi and also cites as the reason Indian society, as a whole, for having elected Narendra Modi on the back of those wrongly-attributed slogans opposing Cow Slaughter, were never there. Although it would not have been terribly wrong for an electoral candidate to promise adherence to the Directive Principles of the Constitution of India, but this promise was not in BJP’s campaign and the Professor is simply lying to the wider world both about Indian Prime Minister and Indian People, who he posits voted for Modi because he promised ban on Cow Slaughter (even when 70 percent of Hindus, he later claims depend on beef for food).

The learned professor then extends his lie by claiming that Modi then banned beef in 18 states since he came to power in 2014. That the cow has been a sensitive issue for Hindus, not from today but since forever. It was used forever, to rub the collective nose of Hindus in the dirt by Mughals and British at one time or other, while under slavery of the invaders. It has been banned by rulers who felt that the state ought to be considerate of the religious feelings of majority religion of the land, even in those days, off and on. It is only recently that those who support Hijab in the name of accepting religious diversity are absolutely up-in-arms against any ban on Cow slaughter.

However, let us look at the factual position of Prof Kingston regarding Modi Government having imposed Cow slaughter in 18 States since it came to power. Indira Gandhi as Prime Minister of India under Congress Government wrote to 14 state Governments in 1982 that a ban (as per the Directive Principles of the Constitution) be imposed on Cow Slaughter in letter and spirit, and desired a structure to regulate cow slaughter. Take a quick view, when the legislations banning cow slaughter state-wise in key Indian states, were passed is as below to understand the lie being promoted in Indian and globally by vested interests that Modi government has imposed Beef Ban:

Andhra Pradesh – 1977
Assam- 1950
Bihar- 1955
Chattisgarh (and MP)- 1959
Goa – 1978
Delhi- 1994
Gujarat- 1954
Haryana- 2015 (The new Act replaces earlier The Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, which was more stringent)
Himachal- 1955
Jammu and Kashmir- 1932
Jharkhand- 1955
Karnataka- 1964
MP- 1959
Maharashtra- 1976
Odisha- 1960
Puducherry- 1968
Punjab- 1955
Rajasthan- 1995
Telengana -1977
UP- 1955
Uttrakhand- 1955
West Bengal- 1950

As we can see that there is a pre-existing ban on Cow Slaughter and Beef sale in these Twenty-Two state, years before the Hindutva Government, which the Professor calls the current government derisively, came into power. The only thing this government tried to do in 2017, is regulate the slaughter market to ensure there is no animal cruelty and before that tried to enforce the pre-existing laws.

Is the learned professor objecting to the enforcement of the laws which are already in place, or is he trying to make a case of illegal slaughter, unregulated, with the government turning blind eye to activity prohibited by the laws enacted by earlier government (though in accordance with Indian constitution’s guiding principles?

The learned professor then makes another strong case for opposing beef- ban allegedly enforced by Narendra Modi Government. He writes protecting Cow is fine, but what about Poor? He writes Christians, Muslims and those outside the fold of upper-caste Hindus, depend on beef as few of cheaply available source of protein. From the data available, 70 percent of Hindus fall under the category which the Professor defines as those out of Upper-caste Hindus (SC/ST and OBC). This 70 percent in addition to other religions, who as per Prof. Kingston depend on beef for daily protein requirement would mean between 60-80 percent of Indian Population must be beef eaters. As per the Data available, India makes for society with fewest meat-eaters, as against 24.7 kg per capita of Beef, Indian number is lowest at 0.5 Kg per capita.

This myth that Indian Dalits and OBCs have Beef as a staple diet is a carefully-crafted, cunning, communist lie designed to draw wedge among Hindus while negating the shared cultural heritage of Dalit and Non-Dalit Hindus. No religion officially mandates beef-eating and therefore any restriction on cow-slaughter in India remains as secular as ban on Horse slaughter in the Professor’s country and is consistent with the idea of India respecting the sensitivities of majority of Indian citizens.

Both the contentions of the Professor that this Government has imposed ban on Cow-slaughter in 18 states and that it impinges on the rights of majority of Indians who eat beef fall flat on the face. Professor is either dependent on his sources like Sagarika Ghosh for information about India or has decided to lie about India out of keen desire to defame the world largest democracy and historically oldest, cultural melting pot, deliberately ignoring inherently accommodating nature of Hinduism.

As is the wont of the Communists and Leftist-liberals, they will quote one of their own to substantiate their claims, Professor then quotes leftist Historian Dwijendra Narayan Jha, to claim that Beef has always been a part of Hinduism, and then the one who comes later will quote the Professor. This is how the aura of fake truth is created around worst of the lies.

Jha claims that Indians started avoiding Beef in 1st century AD. On pure logic, it is totally astounding that once Christianity and Islam started to arrive in India, presumably with love for Beef, suddenly when supported in their ancient practice of beef-eating by other incoming religions, Hindus began eschewing beef. And this avoidance became such that soon they began worshipping cows and hating those who ate them. Thus a race which was cow-eater, turned vegetarian when those in power around them, for last 600 years and in power, turned out to be beef-eater!

And rather than complying with those invaders from foreign land who became absolutist rulers; Hindus of India decided to shun ancient beef-eating practice and began eating pumpkin to annoy their rulers and eventually to elect Modi, to avenge them, centuries later.

It does not hold, Dear Professor, even when you try to stand on the crutches of Communist conspirators out to destroy the cultural heritage of India.

Dear Professor, you have become a tool in this destroy India Campaign being run by interested forces in Indian Media, for whom their old days of unquestioned and unhindered power will return only if Modi is not in the chair and who will not stop attacking Modi even if it means attacking the Idea of India.

Idea of India doesn’t run contrary to the faith of majority population, it is consistent of it. And you got Hindutva all wrong. It is not a religion, as the Supreme Court said, it is the way we, the people of India live, irrespective of their religions.

Please focus on Black Lives matter and Gun-Control before getting on the pulpit to lecture us. Wishing you a healthy, protein-rich life in the US. I hear that Horse is a rich source of Protein too.

#NotInMyName- A new bottle with old wine

chiragkhetan
-
0
#NotInMyName- A new bottle with old wine

After “Rising Intolerance”, “Award Wapasi” the new campaign of pseudo- seculars, liberals, intellectuals and few journalists to defame India is “#NotInMyName” campaign.

According to them, it is a protest against the Mob Lynching ‘innocent people’ in recent days. But is it true? Is it about every innocent citizen of India who is lynched by mob, irrespective of caste and religion or not?

This is the map which was used by the protesters against Mob lynching. If you see it closely the names of victims are from a particular community only, in fact the name of J&K Dy SP Mohammad Ayub Pandit who was lynched by mob in Srinagar recently was missing. Many on social media pointed out this and questioned the hypocrisy of those taking part in such protests.

 

Not Just this, these protests were also given communal angle by showing the placards which had Anti- Hindu slogans written on them.

My conclusion is that this so called protest against mob lynching is nothing but just the return of Intolerance gang and Award Wapasi gang to defame India and the present Indian government. All these protest have some or other hidden agenda and one of it is to break and divide India.

It is duty of every true Indian to stay away from these type of agenda driven protests and work towards a strong and united India.

Azam Khan spew venom against the Indian Army

chiragkhetan
-
0
Azam Khan spew venom against the Indian Army

Former Uttar Pradesh Cabinet Minister Azam Khan, MLA from Rampur, who is close to Samajwadi Party President Akhilesh Yadav and his father Mulayam Singh Yadav today spewed venom against Indian Army.

Speaking at an Iftar Party in his constituency he said that when terrorists killed and defiled the bodies of our soldiers, they didn’t mutilate their hands or legs, but their private parts, insinuating that the Army’s involvement in sexual harassment of women. “This is a very big message and the entire country should be ashamed and we must think what message we are sending to the world”, Khan said.

His statement created an outrage and was condemned by other political parties

This is not the first time Azam Khan have given such nonsensical, anti India and anti Army statement.  He has a long history of making such controversial remarks.

Do criminals from minority communities sometimes get away with lenient sentences for horrific crimes?

wednesdaysentiments
-
0
Do criminals from minority communities sometimes get away with lenient sentences for horrific crimes?

After Yakub Memon was hanged, Kashmiri separatists, secular gang, as well as some (left-leaning) journalists claimed that he got death punishment because he was a Muslim. Later, they were silenced due to the results of a study conducted by Death Penalty Research Project of the National Law University (NLU). It pointed out that out of 1,414 convicts hanged since independence, only 72 were Muslims.

Let it be so, I mean, should they be allowed to walk away with lighter punishment after killing someone just because they belong to a special community? You might feel bemused, but there are cases that show how criminals from minority community get away with lighter punishments, compared to Hindu criminals involved in similar crime. Such cases can force you to think. Does our justice system show leniency towards criminals from certain communities?

Well, to get detailed stats about this, an enormous task of screening the judiciary data (since independence) needs to be performed by the government.

This seems to be difficult, especially because such order would ruin the govt’s carefully crafted secular image.  For now, Twitter handle- @a_truthsayer has highlighted cases that can prove to be possible examples of the bias. Let’s take a look at tweets and details about some of the cases mentioned.

https://twitter.com/a_truthsayer/status/861923906059481094

Techie Nayana Pujari’s three killers rightly got the death penalty. On the other hand, rapist, and murderer Sajjad Pathan got life term for killing lawyer Pallavi Purkayastha. While dictating the judgment, honorable judge-Vrushali V Joshi-shared her opinion that she does not think the case was rarest of the rare to award death sentence to Pathan. Details of the crime were chilling in both cases. Pallavi was stabbed 16 times and throat was slit, then, the dead body was raped.

Later, Pathan got bail with his strong bureaucratic connections and escaped out of India while on parole as per reports. In December 2016, the Bombay HC asked state govt to submit a report about steps taken to track Sajjad Pathan, and the file probably lies somewhere, covered with dust.

The point to be noted is that the same honorable judge had awarded death sentence to Esther Anuhya’s rapist and murderer Chandrabhan Sanap. The level of brutality was almost similar in both cases. Anyway, criticizing a judge can result in a jail term. So, let’s not criticize anyone, I don’t have a battery of lawyers to defend me.

https://twitter.com/a_truthsayer/status/661548775240937472

https://twitter.com/a_truthsayer/status/860831259836076033

Everyone knows details about Siwan double murder case. This is just one of the 20 cases (including murders, half murders, and cases related to anti-national activities) that former RJD MP Mohammed Shahabuddin is facing. In Siwan double murder case, two victims were drenched in acid before killing and their brother was forced to watch the same. Yet, no one from the justice system looks at Mohammed Shahabuddin as a threat to the country. He is enjoying his life imprisonment. In fact, he manages to control Bihar’s law and order from inside the jail according to Republic TV’s report.

https://twitter.com/a_truthsayer/status/710875646872780800

Instead of arresting and exposing the culprits in Constable Vilas Shinde murder case, the Maharashtra state government asked media to not to release the murder footage and name of even the adult culprit because they are Muslims.

Mohsin Sheikh was allegedly murdered by HRS members in Pune’s Kondhwa area. His family got cash and state govt has promised govt job for brother. On the other hand, Hindu victim of communal violence, Sawan Rathore’s family has received zero compensation as of now.  In fact, police and the public prosecutor have not even acknowledged the communal angle in this case.

https://twitter.com/a_truthsayer/status/864151782707953664

Former NCP leader Aslam Shaikh’s criminal record is probably as impressive as Mohammed Shahabuddin. Aslam Shaikh alias Bunty Jahagirdar is a man of many hats. His criminal record looks like something straight out of a spy film. The former ‘NCP activist’ helped Pakistani spy with critical information, allegedly leaked military secrets, sold weapons to bomb blast accused, funded Pune’s JM Road blast, but has still managed to stay out of jail. Today, he remains a free bird!

https://twitter.com/a_truthsayer/status/776364963531071488

Not just Kerala, but the entire nation was horrified due to Soumya murder case details. According to the police, the victim was dropped down from the running train and Govindachamy alias Charly jumped from the train, pulled the girl away from tracks and raped her even while her face was full of blood oozing out from injuries. After raping the victim, Charly left her to die. But, this was not rarest of the rare case for the honorable Supreme Court and Charly’s death sentence was changed to life imprisonment after considering all the evidence of course. The so-called beggar criminal also managed to get a top lawyer to defend him. This fellow charges Rs 15 Lakh as per the report released by The Quint.

https://twitter.com/a_truthsayer/status/690197760595755008

https://twitter.com/a_truthsayer/status/534045305046462464

It’s obvious that verdicts or statements are made by judges after carefully studying evidence and arguments from both sides. Investigators need to investigate properly and then submit all the necessary details to the public prosecutor. It can be observed that in many cases, criminals walk free as the public prosecutor and investigators fail to submit the required material. Even our police force still fails to get access to basic things like cold storage for storing forensic evidence. Plus, former central ministers like Shinde had openly urged the police mechanism to give concession to ‘innocents’ from one community. Thus, blaming the judiciary alone for failure in delivering justice does not make sense.

The article does not intend to question or criticize the justice system in any way. It cannot be used as evidence against the author in any court of law around the world.

Lynchistan: Another lie of Indian media

Satish Kumar
-
0
Lynchistan: Another lie of Indian media

Indian liberal intelligentsia and media is gearing for yet another mourning over the murder of a 16 years old boy Junaid, who was beaten to death by group of people when argument related to seats took nasty turn in a train near Mathura-Delhi stretch. Being the vanguard of liberal values and individual freedom, the intelligentsia must be concerned but their concern is representative of selective amnesia and exaggeration of certain incidents by perpetrating falsehood, in order to demonize Hindus and present government.

Quartz and Scroll declared India to be a “lynchistan” as a 16 years old boy was beaten to death in a country of more than 1.25 billion people. Before someone starts wondering about the meaning of lynchistan, let me quote Nassim Nicholas Taleb (A polymath specializing in Probability, Randomness and Decision Theory), “A mathematician thinks in terms of numbers, a lawyer thinks in terms of laws but an idiot thinks in terms of ‘words’.” This quote of Taleb precisely sums up the meaning of terms like lynchistan but I’ll take the pain of refuting the thesis advanced by certain media houses that Hindus have started lynching Muslims suddenly and turning India into a lynchistan.

When I was growing up in not so urban India, Hindi newspapers being my only source of information, there used to be one headline which kept on surfacing now and then which was: “भीड़ ने पीट पीट कर की हत्या…” which can be translated as “the mob beat the person to death.” I can’t recall any incidence of media raising the alarm that country is turning into a lynchistan or anything of such sort as these news either didn’t reach in English mainstream media or they found it too rustic to cover.

However, when I suddenly see the sudden interest of English media and academia about lynching incidents, I grow suspicious as it can’t be their natural reaction devoid of ideological and political implications. In the aforementioned article of Quartz, the author quotes murder of Junaid and another one from Rajasthan to establish the fact that Hindus have become the brutal community killing Muslims. One can wonder that how half dozen killings occurring in three years period can determine the predatory nature of Hindus. Interestingly, lynching of DSP Ayub Pandit by Muslims in Kashmir was insufficient to deliver verdict about nature of Muslims but the author has the audacity to lecture Hindus.

In order to find their outrage over India turning into lynchistan was justified or not, I did a google search with “भीड़ ने पीट-पीट कर की हत्या…” for the simple reason that English media seldom cover the scores of lynching taking place in rural India as they don’t fit in their narrative of demonizing Hindus. Google search results indicate that within three months, there have been more than a dozen lynchings which wasn’t enough to shake the conscience of our enlightened liberals. On May, 6 people were killed near Jamshedpur in Jharkhand by mob as they were suspected to be child traffickers. Our liberal media had falsely reported it to be another killing by cow vigilantes but quickly backtracked when truth emerged.

Some other incidents of lynching were: A person alleged of murdering a BJP leader named Nathuram Verma, being killed by mob in Agra on 5 June, 2017; A rapist being killed by local people in Aligarh four days ago; An E-Rickshaw driver killed by a group of students in Delhi on 27th May, 2017; A man who killed the husband of his girlfriend was subsequently killed by mob in Ashoknagar in MP. Anyone can easily wonder that why these grotesque killings by mob couldn’t jolt the conscience of Indian liberals.

It doesn’t take much effort to get the simple truth that media become interested in lynching only when the victim is either Muslim or Dalit and criminal is Hindu. There is a further hierarchy of importance of victims in which if a Dalit has been killed by Muslims then it must be ignored as it will not fit in the narrative. In India, it’s undeniable truth that law and order problem persists despite all the efforts applied by government. When people don’t find police when any crime happens, the patience of people seriously deteriorates and often they resort to delivering justice in their own way. In any sane society, such kind of people can’t be tolerated.

However, when media and intelligentsia start finding political and ideological gains in such serious issue, the narrative takes an ugly turn. When a Muslim is killed by Muslim mob, it’s alright in their worldview, but the moment the victim is Muslim, the crime becomes religious in nature, but when victim is Hindu as was the case with a Pune boy burnt alive after a group of Muslims asked his religion, the nature of crime is secular!

The narrative of branding India as intolerant country for religious minorities, fake incidents of attacks on churches, some lone incidents of attacking Africans as racist ones etc have achieved a prominence since the day Modi became the PM of India. Narrative is a story with purpose, and the purpose behind such stories isn’t hard to guess. Earlier, the Colonialists, Orientalists, and Christian missionaries were propagating the narrative of India being a country of savage barbarians, this narrative was continued by Marxists and Left-liberals after independence, who continue to dominate the media and academia today.

Due to this sinister motive, Hindustan Times ran a campaign of #Let’s Talk About Racism after four Nigerians were attacked in Greater Noida as if Indians have become racists after one incident. Founding father and also the Third President of USA, Thomas Jefferson was quite apt on target when he said, “The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.” Perhaps, the emergence of social media is changing the scenario but this remark is sufficient to sum up the whole story.

Movie that an Adarsh Liberal would hate: Paithrukam

Madhavan
-
0
Movie that an Adarsh Liberal would hate: Paithrukam

Motivation:

Earlier this year there was an incident involving Hindi movie director, Sanjay Leela Bhansali, in Rajasthan. While shooting for a film, Mr Bhansali was allegedly slapped around by a group of people who had issues with the subject of his film. Anyone who follows news in India must have heard about this. As this won’t be these days in the leftist Indian media, there was a deluge of opinion write ups linking the incident to what they consider right wing politics in the country. One such piece that I happened to read was in an online portal called The News Minute written by Ramanathan S (note: I am intentionally not including a link to that website or article). The piece followed the typical left-liberal template of unsubstantiated assertions, intellectual snobbery and pusillanimous name-calling.

The standard protocol of the left-liberals to counter any adverse opinion involves either dismissing the person or entity as intellectually inferior or to respond to the least skillful criticism. On social media, for example, whenever a  left-liberal’s hypocrisy or post-truth is called out, the typical response is either to label the critic as a troll or respond to the occasional abusive counter from an anonymous account and play victim. Ramanathan too employs this technique in his write up. He highlights Pahlaj Nihalani and Gajendra Chauhan as typical examples of who he calls right-wing’s “unremarkable and substandard” film personalities. It would, of course, not suit his narrative of right-wing’s failure to “successfully influence films” if he were to talk about K. Viswanath or Anupam Kher. The write-up includes such assertions as:

What then frustrates the Hindu right-wing in India is that popular cinema, across languages, has not been effectively used as a tool for their propaganda. Pop cinema could be elitist or nationalist, is most definitely casteist and patriarchal, but it has never been effectively used to propagate Hindutva.

So, I thought it would be a delightful exercise to highlight a few movies made by masterly filmmakers whose subject matter would make the left-liberals squirm uncomfortably in their seats. First up in this series is a Malayalam movie titled Paithrukam (പൈതൃകം).

Paithrukam (heritage, विरासत) released in 1993 and was directed by Jayaraj (trivia: he adapted Othello and Macbeth to Malayalam cinema as Kaliyattam and Veeram). The movie’s story is of a conservative Vedic scholar, Devadattan Chemmadirippad, his atheist son Somadattan Nambudirippad and the conflict between their philosophies. Devadattan was played expertly by late Narendra Prasad (for which he won a Kerala state award) and Somadattan was played by Suresh Gopi. The movie begins with Somadattan, till then working with Times of India in Delhi, returning to his village in Kerala and taking over as the president of the local chapter of an atheist’s association. As a “rationalist”, he deems it his duty to stand against everything that his father had believed in all his life and uses every opportunity to spite him. Like, buying a house that his father advises others not to because he considers it to be inauspicious.

One very impressive feature of the movie’s narration is the subtle manner in which it highlights the contrast between the aggression of the vacuous Somadattan and the dignified humility of his father. This is established from the loud dialogue and aggressive body language of Gopi and the understated performance of Prasad. The first major confrontation between father and son ensues when Devadattan agrees to perform a Sudarsana Homam after much pleading by leftist Chief Minister of Kerala to secure his political future. Somadattan finds an opportunity in this to gain publicity for his cause and organizes a protest at the minister’s house. He abuses the minister as a traitor who betrayed the cause of working class after using it to gain power (isn’t that what commies do everywhere in the world?) and as practicing 5000 year old tribalistic rituals to stay there. Following the protest at minister’s home, Somadattan is confronted by his father who is astonished that all the education and exposure had not inculcated civility in his son. Somadattan accuses his father of profiteering from exploiting the superstitions of the gullible. He vehemently disregards his father’s clarification that though he was not as educated or intellectual as his son, he had always acted in good faith to do whatever he could to help others and has never done anything that might cause harm.

As the story moves along, it does a great job of exposing the hypocritical attitude of the leftist activists. While the conservative father is accommodative of differing opinion, even abuse, the self proclaimed rationalist son is highly intolerant of anyone who doesn’t agree with him. After falling out with his father, Somadattan marries his mentor’s daughter, Gayathri and moves into the house that he purchased against his father’s advise. Following a miscarriage, when Gayathri becomes pregnant again, and starts experiencing complications as before, she abandons her atheism and turns to spirituality for solace. This conversion enrages Somadattan so much that he serves an ultimatum on Gayathri that she either gets in sync with his political ideology or move out of his home. After even her father disowns her for having abandoned the leftist ideology, Gayathri is invited into his home without any reservations by the “conservative” Devadattan.

One of the best scenes in the movie is after Gayathri moves in with her in-laws and gives birth to a son. Somadattan, who never attempts for a reconciliation with his father till then, meets with him upon the later’s request. When asked for his views on how his son be brought up, Somadattan insists that the kid would have nothing to do with his Brahminical tradition. He continues with this insistence even after being informed that Gayathri wishes otherwise and declares that he is going to be the one to bring up the child. The meeting ends with Somadattan being reminded by his father that he did show a similar insistence on bringing his son up in his own image and allowed him to take his own course. This, in my view, is one of the iconic scenes of Malayalam cinema for the brilliance of Narendra Prasad’s understated performance.

As the movie’s climax approaches, a group of villagers approach Devadattan requesting him to perform Athirathram, a ritual they believe will cause rain in the water starved region. There is a scene at the beginning of the movie where a couple of foreign tourists approach Devadattan with a request to perform a Soma Yagam, so they can witness it. In seeing them off, he clarifies that these Vedic rituals are to be performed only as a means of public good and not as a spectacle. Again in the climax, though reluctant to perform Athirathram, as he wishes to retire, he relents as a means to help the villagers. At this point, the movie includes one more scene that discusses the typical modus operandi of the left-liberal activists in India. Somadattan is frustrated by the villagers’ plan to perform Athirathram and intends to prevent it from happening. He proposes an action plan where they would initially canvas with the people to not support the ritual and if that fails, use violence. He confronts Devadattan and other scholars and warns them not to proceed with the rituals. When they do not relent, he challenges his father: will he become an atheist if it does not rain at the end of Athirathram? Devadattan humbly submits to fate and accedes to the challenge, without asking back what his son would do if it does rain.

And it does rain, as soon as the Yaagashaala is burnt down, forcing Somadattan to concede defeat and regret his attitude towards his father and traditional values. But the humble scholar has enough of the abuses and insults from his own for no reason other than that he was not prepared to despise his heritage. The movie ends with Devadattan sacrificing his life at the fire altar and Somadattan, having accepting his father’s Vedic legacy, preparing to pass it on to his own son.

If you understand Malayalam, watch the full movie on Youtube: https://youtu.be/zLNfYhQfCME

Note: The above article was originally published on my blog, information factory.

Online cyber security- Is Aadhaar and other data safe with government?

Abhishek Jain
-
0
Online cyber security- Is Aadhaar and other data safe with government?

In the last few weeks, there has been lot of attacks and attempts to hack various private companies, government servers and other important website globally. From the latest Wannacry Ransomware to the recent hacking of India Based Online restaurant search & discovery service Zomato where Data of 17 million users was hacked. With PM Narendra Modi’s vision of Digital India and fast approaching digitization of functioning in our daily lives it’s important to look into one Major aspect of this and that is Online Security of Data. Someone rightly said that ‘Data is the new Oil’.

Aadhaar which is at the core of this digital movement & also one of the most important concerns of many individuals has to be looked at from a more objective point of view when it comes to security of our digital data. There are close to 120 socio-eco schemes which are being run by government at various levels, PM Modi wants to link all these schemes with Aadhaar by 2019. It is imperative that our biometric data remains safe and secure.

But it doesn’t look like the case. I heard a first hand account of how the Government hired a company to test Aadhaar authentication device as the government has given some companies permission to make fingerprint scanner that can authenticate Aadhaar and an API (Application Program Interface) will generate Aadhaar data. But the government also gave them Aadhaar biomatric data to test those devices & other modules which was stored by the private vendors which puts it all at risk.

Now the government is trying to troubleshoot this issue but already lot of companies have data saved for lot of individuals those who have made fingerprint scanners for the government. GoI should make a centralized repository or data warehouse for all the data and address concerns for privacy by using algorithms and hiring a security agency, or build one like NSA.

Government is now expanding its digital footprint in digital payments after BHIM app by bringing a new E-Wallet app based on Aadhaar, so it will be crucial for them to give assurance of data safety.

Important thing to note here is that neither RBI or Ministry of Finance have laid down any guidelines on online data protection by E-wallet companies, meaning companies like Paytm & Mobikwik don’t have to provide any assurance of data protection to the government and it’s all based on their own personal preference of the security levels they want to keep. So if the security of a certain company is weak company and it gets hacked whom to blame? Government or the company? This needs to be addressed by ministry of IT as soon as possible as it’s not very assuring knowing that there is no law protecting millions of financial data after huge growth in E-Wallet usage.

Ultimately, the Bureaucracy is not equipped to handle the challenges thrown by the new digital world hence even the big companies like Microsoft or Google cut corners when it comes to government tenders as they know that no one from the government’s side will understand the difference between what was asked and what was delivered. Like last year, HRD ministry enrolled help of Microsoft to develop an education app called ‘SWAYAM’. The app is not upto the standard what one would expect from a company like Microsoft. On Andriod app store it has only 10 thousand downloads which was said to be a step towards digital education but at the moment the lack of good UI or regular updates makes this app not the perfect tool one had hoped for. Is the fault with Microsoft or with the bureaucrat who was handling this project from the government side and didn’t utilize the resources at hand?

If Prime Minister’s vision for Digital India needs to take shape all these loops holes need to be looked at with more serious outlook. Government can’t do this without enrolling expertise of the IT field and not relying on Ministers or Bureaucrats who don’t understand the fast changing technology and the need to be updated on the latest developments. We have seen how countries have suffered drastically when lot of crucial online data was stolen or hacked by either enemy countries or hacker groups. The intent is there but with intent there needs to be steps to ensure this intent is implemented in the best of the manner.

Second Level of Cyber Security professionals are needed at the moment in India who are hands-on experts who are skilled in the five major functional areas of cyber security as defined by NIST (National Institute of Standards & Technology) – Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond and Recover. An estimation by NASSCOM’s Cybersecurity Task Force, India needs 1 million trained such Cyber security professionals by 2020. The current estimate in India is around 50,000. All government websites should be SSL compliant and since many are not there should be a regular security audits. Security Patch updates of underlying operating system and system software must be done for all government data.

Aadhaar is an important step in ensuring that there is no corruption and also a way to curb black money and many important government initiatives but is government doing enough to ensure its safe? I hope as a citizen our personal data remains secure otherwise even this initiative will fail with rogue elements using loopholes for their benefits.

1...779780781...890Page 780 of 890

Contact: [email protected]

About us

User generated chapter of OpIndia. Selected articles submitted here are published at main English or Hindi websites of OpIndia.

ऑपइंडिया

OpIndia

© OpIndia.com