Is surrendering sovereignty the real agenda of the government in India ? Javed Naqvi would make you think like that

I read this article in http://www.dawn.com/weekly/jawed/20070511.htm on 11/5/2007 and found it to as usual, be incorrect and way too biased. He has failed to respond to my emails in past and as such I am putting my viewpoints over here in a blog format. Judge for yourself. 

The real agenda: surrender of sovereignty by hook or by crook

If I remember right it was the eminent Pakistani historian Mubarak Ali who witnessed the assault on Christian minorities in Gujarat’s Dang region some years ago. His conclusion? “We do the same with our minorities in Pakistan. The difference is we do it under martial law and you do it under parliamentary democracy.” The strangely equal rule applies also to our national sovereignty. Pakistan surrendered it to a foreign power long ago through military rule and India is getting there through a quasi-parliamentary route.
Above statement attributed to Mr Mubarak Ali would led the readers believe as if assault on Minorities have happened only during Martial Law and not at other times. This is not correct and does not corroborate the facts on ground. Assault on Minorities have been an ongoing process in Pakistan and have been prevalent during the democratic rule as well. It’s a cunning and vicious approach to take moral high ground by only blaming Martial Law. Javed Naqvi is trying to say that India is surrendering its sovereignty via quasi-parliamentary route. Can he really explain that ? It is one thing to take ones own spin on the events of the day and if it is needed to keep his job as a journalist/columnist ( I am not sure what should I be calling him but whatever definition fits him would do), that’s understandable but please don’t become ridicule yourself in this process and totally make a mockery of articles.
In fact the arriving surrender of India’s sovereignty (as reflected for example in its coerced anti-Iran votes at IAEA or in its leader’s willingness to accept the Hyde Act which requires us to follow Washington’s lead in foreign policy or the suspected deliberate prevarication on the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline agreement and finally the scaling down of diplomatic interest in the Shanghai initiative) is not being pushed so much by the parliamentary route as it is sought to be ushered through the backdoor with under-hand methods. There is an attempt to create the illusion of popular will when the actual process involves a careful subversion of that will.
It is in India’s interest to vote against IAEA as we would be better off with an Iran (which is a Islamic state) that’s does not have nuclear weapons. India should continue to do all that’s needed to make sure that Iran is not a nuclear state. That is helpful things in maintaining and defending India’s sovereignty. I am not sure how come Javed Naqvi had come to a conclusion that Iran with nuclear weapons would help India’s national interest. Javed Naqvi is so busy in spinning the things to suit his own agenda that he sometimes forget the simple facts.  Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline is not in India’s interest because this supply route goes through Pakistan and as such is subject to supply disruption because of the volatile political situation in Pakistan that most of times spins against Indian Interests. Not only that we  would always be at the mercy of the Pakistan’s political establishment special cyclical phases of tense relationship. And we have to bear the majority of the cost of the construction of the pipeline as well as pay Pakistan Royalty fees. Pricing of the gas is also high and not at the levels originally agreed upon. I don’t see this as long term benefit but a long term liability. We will be better off investing resources explores resources in Indian Ocean as well as Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal. If we have to import gas, do it from a route that goes under the sea bed (if its feasible).
India is today run by the Congress party, which has fewer seats in parliament than the 153 it got even after suffering the “rout” of the post-emergency polls in 1977. The absurdity is there for all to see. A tally of 153 seats in 1977 was called a rout and a tally of 145 in 2004 is described as a mandate to overturn a foreign policy. Its percentage of votes too fell substantially in 2004 from its count in 1999. Effectively the Congress is heading a minority government and with a prime minister who was never elected directly by the people. On the contrary he holds his membership of the Rajya Sabha thanks to an outlandish residential address he gave in the remote state of Assam to avoid a challenge even for a safe seat in the upper house.
Seems like Javed Naqvi is now realizing that Congress party is in minority. Welcome into world of coalition politics. He may be new but with bubbling regional aspirations and enough reason to quarrel on limited resources, Coalition politics is the order of the day and that said, whoever can establish a workable coalition, will rule the country. I am not sure what point is he trying to make here ?
Worse has happened in the subversion of Indian democracy, which is not unrelated to an agenda to transform its foreign policy and economy to dovetail with external minders. It has not been widely discussed that there would be no economic reforms of Dr Manmohan Singh had a clutch of tribal MPs from Jharkhand not been bribed, as was only subsequently proved in the court of law which also convicted the guilty to prison sentences. So its was bribery that saved the government, in which Dr Singh was finance minister, from being voted out in a close confidence test. It has never been asked as far as I know what the then finance minister thought of the way his globally applauded agenda was actually predicated on an underhand vote in parliament.It has also not been sufficiently discussed how a so-called thriving democracy went all out to prevent Sonia Gandhi, the person who actually won the mandate, if there was one, in 2004 from being sworn in as prime minister.
It’s a far fetched idea to assume that coalition era that has come to stay in Indian political situation is because of any external influence even though one can not ignore the power of fertile mind that Javed Naqvi seems to have. He can take his own spin on the events of history and argue external forces are responsible for the current state of affairs. To me it seems as if he does not want India to have the civil nuclear agreement with US and it is possible that a sovereign democratic setup like that of India, political pressures of coalition politics may eventually abort such an agreement, but if this happens, it will be against Indian National Interests. It is democracy my friend ! I do not want foreign born nationals to hold India’s topmost post and protests are legal and perfectly democratic way of expressing one view point. Same is the case is US ? Will you mind doing some fact checks ?
The orchestrated move by the opposition to stall her by brazenly unconstitutional means, the bizarre fall in the stock market in alleged fear of Gandhi’s coronation (the truth of which is yet to be made public) and the keenness shown by some from within the Congress who shored up as the alternative choice a person who was best credited with policies that lost the Congress the elections in 1996 would make for a gripping thriller.
I am not sure what opposition moves were unconstitutional ? What is the role expected of opposition. I am sure if there is any truth of some kind of conspiracy in the fall of stock market in the context of Gandhi’s coronation, it should come out.  I would like to hear it. Seems like there are some facts that Mr Javed Naqvi is hiding from all of us and we demand that those facts be made public. I would love to read a gripping thriller ! I wonder if external forces are responsible for the events of Indian political setup and are hatching conspiracy of some kind against Indian interests, why didn’t they(the external forces) find Sonia Gandhi to be an unsuitable candidate ! That does not make sense.
The question of why despite all the numbers she had in May 2004 Ms Gandhi was forced to make what came to be known as a much celebrated ‘sacrifice’ has not been asked either. It should be of interest to anyone who has seen last week’s revelations by her former close aide and foreign minister Natwar Singh. According to this revelation, Sonia Gandhi was initially opposed to the nuclear deal with the United States. It is significant and most probably an accurate account of the story because the truth of how an independent minded potential leader was sidelined and a pliable one installed in her place is couched somewhere there.
Now Javed Naqvi is trying to portray Sonia Gandhi as the greatest political leader with an inspiring vision for the country. Someone who can see the pitfalls of nuclear deal (which I fail to see) and was opposed to it on its merit (or lack thereof).
There is of course no palpable link between a democracy or a dictatorship and a government’s tendency to compromise its sovereignty in the name of national interest. Indira Gandhi’s emergency rule, which lasted for 19 months, is a good example of a dictatorial government that refused to budge on its foreign policy or its stated economic principles. Conversely, the Janata Party, a coalition of disparate interests, which rode a tide of popular support, though briefly, was able to put the focus sharply on “genuine non-alignment”, euphemism for a markedly pro-American tilt.
We have been recognized by everyone inside India or outside the world that even though we were a leading Non-Aligned Nation, we were heavily inclined towards Soviet empire. This is the first time, I am hearing that genuine non-alignment is a euphemism for a markedly pro-American tilt. Well done twisting the facts !
In Pakistan by contrast the one leader who challenged the traditional military-led alliance with the West was summarily hanged. His successors are perceived to be under pressure to give up their populist rhetoric in favour of a free-market mantra being practised by the current dispensation led by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz.
Is he referring to Mr Bhutto ? Did Mr Bhutto challenged the military led alliance with the West or the military ? Again a perfect example were Mr Naqvi is conveniently ignoring the facts and twisting it to suit his own argument.

Neo-con economic policies are thus being pursued at will right across South Asia, from Afghanistan and Pakistan in the west, to India and Bangladesh in the east and Sri Lanka (which still calls itself a socialist republic!) in the south. It is being licked into shape by former Citibank executive Shaukat Aziz in Pakistan, or a bevy of former World Bank executives surrounding the prime minister of India as advisers, or Fakhruddin Ahmed, a Princeton-educated former World Bank employee who is heading a somewhat unending looking interim government in Bangladesh with the military’s support.
I am amazed. Seems like market friendly practices are only restricted in South Asia ? I am sure China is opposed to it and is not reaping the rewards of market friendly economy. On the same note, most of the countries outside South Asia hate the Market friendly policies !Benazir Bhutto on her return to Karachi after eight years in exile had remarked that she had come there to serve the poor of Pakistan. This is not quite the impression we are left with if we read for example what Salman Shah, economic adviser to Pakistan’s prime minister, had told me in September. What Mr Shah had said presents a different story. Any new government in Pakistan following fresh elections, he stressed, must continue the current economic policies if the 7 per cent plus growth is to be maintained or even overhauled.“This is an election year,” he said in September. “Election year in Pakistan is always boisterous and you have a very high decibel levels. And ultimately I think the electorate always gives a good result. Right now our economy is doing very well. Growth rate is 7 per cent plus. Stock market is very high, foreign investments are coming in at a level that was unthinkable seven years ago. So I think the economic growth has weathered the political decibels.”
I am sure having a growth rate of 7 percent is a bad thing because that is only possible because of the market friendly economic policies and as such all of the world is ready to surrender its sovereignty. I can see that NORTH KOREA is not ready to surrender its sovereignty and as such must have massive economic prosperity based on ideas proposed by Mr Javed Naqvi.
Asked if the free-market policies of the present government could be reviewed by a new party in power, particularly given PPP’s history of populism in the country, Mr Shah said: “We believe that whoever comes into power would have to follow (our) policies. We have a very independent media, we have an independent judiciary and we have, I think, very well informed people.“So any mismanagement of the economy will not be tolerated — for the simple reason that the bench-marks that have been established in Pakistan in terms of fiscal management, in terms of monetary policy, in terms of exchange rate policies would brook no lowering of the bar,” Mr Shah said. “And the level of the growth, and the level of the investment, if it is not better than before, if any government will not be able to maintain it, will have a very tough time surviving.”
And that leads to surrendering sovereignty. Wonderful !

Does the description by Mr Shah of the state of the economy in September come anywhere close to the bleak picture painted by Gen Pervez Musharraf in the reasons he cited to proclaim emergency? And yet economic priorities can’t be far behind in his agenda to align the country with the prescriptions from abroad. He can of course always say, not without a degree of authority, that the same policies could just as easily be pursued under the cover of democracy, like in India.Wonderful, so idea of emergency is a prescription form abroad ? Sure Gen. Musharraf is doing it for US and other international interests and not for his personal desire to cling to power under any circumstance. I am sure Gen. Mussharraf is a very pious and is not corrupted by the power he is enjoying for last 8 years. Yes absolute power corrupts absolutely but leaves a few like Gen. Mussharraf. 

Does Muslim societies provide freedom of expression and civil liberties to religious or ethic minorities ? A letter from Dawn.com

I read this letter in http://www.dawn.com/2007/11/05/letted.htm#1 on 11/5/2007 and found it to be factually incorrect and way too biased. Since it is coming from a personal who claims to be a professor of a college in Pakistan, it is important that facts be restated else incorrect information will be taught to his students in a biased manner which will not be helpful.

Letter has been reproduced here as it is.
APROPOS of Sam Baidya’s letter, ‘Need for dialogue, (Oct 26), I should like to say that Baidya has made unfounded observation about Muslim societies and countries which need clarification to put a true perspective before the readers. I mention some historic examples:

1. When Jerusalem went under control of Muslims during the time of Hazrat Omar, he permitted Jews to settle there. These Jews were thrown out when Roman Christians earlier took over Jerusalem. No Christian was forced out of Jerusalem. All churches were guaranteed freedom to practise their religion.

2. After Christian retake of Muslim Spain in 1492, thousands of Muslims and Jews were deported from Spain to Muslim North Africa and South America. From that time Jews are living in Morocco and Tunis peacefully and constitute wealthy elite till this time. It will be interesting to note that Musa bin Maimun (Maimonides), a famous physician (a Jew) who had earlier migrated from Muslim Spain to Egypt, was the personal physician to Sultan Salahuddin Ayubi and royal family and enjoyed greatest possible esteem in Egypt.3. Although the Middle East and North Africa are under Muslim rule for more than 1300 years, there is still nearly 17.5 million Christians living among Muslims without any coercion or fear for centuries. Boutros Ghali, former UN secretary-general, was an Egyptian Coptic Christian.
It would be incorrect to say that Christians have been living there without any coercion or fear. Their number have been significantly reduced and in most of cases, they have been reduced to abysmal minority status in most of these lands that EICE MUHAMMAD has been talking about.

4. In recent times millions of non-Muslims, i.e. Christians, Hindus, are working in Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Muscat and Libya enjoying all civil liberties. Has there been any news of expulsion or persecution of these non-Muslims from these countries? While see the plight of Muslims in India, Kashmir, Bosnia who are being massacred even though their ancestors had settled in India and Europe more than 1,000 and 600 years earlier. What happened to Buddhists and Jains at the hands of Hindus in India, and Red Indians, Mayans, Aztecs, Australians and New Zealandic aborigines at the hands of Christians in those countries. Brutal ethnic cleansing was done there.
Do the Christians, Hindus and other non-muslims living in Saudi Arabia enjoy all of the civil liberties ? Is this correct ? Are they able to redress their grievances and get settlement on equal footing as Arabs ? Are they allowed to build their place of worship ? Are they able to practice their religion in public ? Are they able to propogate their religion without fear or favor ? Are they out of blashamy laws ? It would be wonderful to hear Prof. EICE MUHAMMAD’s response. He talks about plight of Muslims in India in the same breadth as that of Bosnia and other places. Can he describe the similarities ? He is talking about the Muslims whose ancestors had settle in India for 1000+ years. Does he know who are the ancestors of majority of Muslims in India today ? And of the rest of minority of these Muslims, do you know how did they came to India and how did the settle and at what cost ? What happened to Buddists and Jains at the hand of Hindus in India ? Can he elaborate ? I would like to know what happened. Because I don’t see anything happening to them. Jains are still there in India and they have not be killed in a Genocide (as proclaimed or assumed) by Prof. EICE MUHAMMAD. And there is no ethnic cleansing of either JAINS or SIKHS or BUDHIST because of all the three religions have evolved from so called HINDUS themselves.  So its not a case of ethnic cleansing ! Does he even know about the tragedy caused by the Muslim militants who with explicit support of local Muslim population not only displaced the minority Hindu Pundits but did far worse! Raped and Killings and Torture as well as forceful conversions…all of these have happened in the land of Kashmir !
5. What did Christian Adolph Hitler and Germany do to Jews in World War II? Earlier in European history the word ‘ghetto’ was coined for secluded slums where Jews used to be confined as condemned race. Similar incarceration of humanity is seen in the form of ‘shudars’ in Indian society who had no human rights. Now another shudar class has been added in India, ie Muslims (read Sachar Report).
I wonder if Mr Prof. EICE MUHAMMAD really has studied history at all ? May be he only knows the heavily biased and incorrection version of history. Because ‘Shudars’ is actually written as ‘Shudras” and was used to denote a group or section of people who were not part of the so called “upper castes”. Is he referring to “Dalits” here ? It has been the tendency of intellectuals like him to fish in troubled waters or follow the age old principle of divide and rule, but I will address his point here. It is true that CASTE SYSTEM as a social process has been harsh of this group and through the centuries has been biased against them. Nothing can be said in defense of the discrimination and inhuman treatment meted out to these groups, but atleast this proves that they were exposed to brutal ethnic cleasing because they are still in majority in India. For all said and done, India’s constitution has been authored by a DALIT and has been in use in last 60 years of Indias independence. INDIAN system of Government swears by this constitution and law does not promote CASTE system.  INDIA boost of LAW MAKERS, MINISTERS at central government and regional governemnts, CHIEF MINISTERS, PRESIDENT and a good number of bureacracy that comes from this DALITS. How many presidents can Pakistan count that are from religious Minorities ? Can Saudi Arabia or for that matter any Muslim nation can claim that it has a MINORITY (HINDU or CHRISTIAN) the topmost ranking post of governance ? Is there one ? INDIA had three PRESIDENTS from MINORITIES (MUSLIMS) ? Forget the past, India is currently ruled by groups who are either a minority or are weaker section of the society. We have a woman president, a MUSLIM vice-president, a SIKH prime minister and a CHRISTIAN woman as the heard of ruling party. Does Pakistan even remotely have such credentials of secularity ?  I would request Prof. EICE MUHAMMAD  to challenge these facts. For starters like him, One of the richests Indian  (in India and also in the World) is a MUSLIM by birth (AZIM PREMJI). Can he tell me a few billionaires from minorities in Pakistan that have made it to the big league ?
6. If countries like Britain, America, Canada, Australia are accepting Muslims, they are also accepting Hindus, Buddhists and Christians for running their auxiliary services and menial jobs their own citizens do not want to do.
Prof. EICE MUHAMMAD can not be far from wrong. Most of these minorities in countries like USA are not being forced to do the auxiliary services and menial jobs.  INDIAN story is too well known and as such I will not mention them here.  Many Pakistanis have made it big here. They are DOCTORS, ENGINEERS, PRESIDENT and CEOS, ENTERPRENERS. Pakistan’s current prime minister was VICE PRESIDENT of a huge financial services company before being hand picked for the current job? Most of these jobs are well paying jobs. Off-course folks who have immigrated illegally and are not well educated tend to do menial jobs just like everyone else from that background.
7. Where does Muslim-Christian dialogue stands when countries like France and America are re-opening controversial issues like killings in Armenia 85 years earlier when every authentic history clearly reveals that on sensing defeat of Turkey in World War I, Armenian Christians started massacre of Turks and it was only in retaliation that Turks paid back.
As a corollory, Is Prof. EICE MUHAMMAD saying that MUSLIMS have not been invaders and brutal killers as suggested by facts of History ? How did Muslim came to Europe and rest of Asia from Saudi Arabia ? By peace talks ?
Who is actually interested in Muslim-Christian dialogue? Are those in power echelons in India, Europe and America illiterate or are their universities manned by men suffering from amnesia of what they have done to Muslims when they conquered the Muslim countries a few hundred years back. Don’t they know that when Christian armies took back Jerusalem in crusades, they killed all Muslims and Jews?
I wonder whether it is Prof. EICE MUHAMMAD that needs treatment for amnesia related symtoms or the rest of the world. Even though I agree that Christian crusaders did share the part of brutal killings and invasions all across world but that in no way make MUSLIMS pios and saint.
It is wise not to incriminate Muslim societies unnecessarily. Muslims have shown great consideration to the followers of other religions throughout more than 1400 years of Islam.
Prof. EICE MUHAMMAD can not be further from truth. Muslim invaders have never shown any consideration to followers of other religions in last 1400 years ? Why go that far in past. TALIBAN of Afganistan and their acts against Bamiyan Buddhas is well known. Who started color coded dressing for religious minorities in Afganistation ?
PROF (DR) EICE MUHAMMAD
Sheikh Zayed Medical College
Rahim Yar Khan

My comments from atrocitynews.wordpress.com

15 Responses to “Test of Democracy: Inhuman BJP (Modi) uses caste-virus as Weapon”  

Feed for this Entry Trackback Address

My comments on Harinder Baweja’s editorial introduction/article on “Gujarath: Truth”

Original article appears at thhe following website. If the following link does not work, go to the website homepage and search for this article. All copyright information is duely acknowledged. By very nature, Blog is analysis of the news, (as I understand it), I have to provide the source of the news as its content will be examined critically and analysed for any error or bias. This article (or forward to article) is originally written by HARINDER BAWEJA and is aptly acknowledged to comply with all copyright laws. http://www.tehelka.com/story_main35.asp?filename=Ne031107Editor’sCut.asp  She very well says that “FOR ALL of us at TEHELKA, Gujarat 2002: The Truth is the most important investigation of our time.” I can count atleast 100+ such events which are far more serious and damaging to human race all over the world in last 5-6 years than this one. I can see Darfur tragedy in Sudan for example (http://www.savedarfur.org ) wherein hundreds of thousands of innocent people have been displaced, tortured, killed and/or their woman raped and children murdered in Darfur since 2002. Lets put it in some general context. In Gujarat 2002: The Truth what we are taking about are deaths of 2000+ individuals in a gruesome manner and lets face it, It did happen in India. But that said, millions of lives have been lost in this world in last 5-6 years in far gruesome and chilling events. I wonder why it has not taken attention of folks at Tehelka. May be they have a score to settle with the BJP government and is timed with the elections. Dont take my word for it. Think for yourself. Far more lives have been lost in invasion of IRAQ on both sides (American losses of 3828+ itself are far more than the losses we are talking about in Gujarat carnage) and for that matter if we add ordinary Iraqi losses, lives lost would run into hundreds of thousands if not more. I can go on like that, Take the example of our next door neighbors (Bangladesh, Pakistan and its creation Taliban) and you would see that Indian sub-continente is infected with Islamist Jihadi groups and their gruesome tragedies. I am pretty sure lives lost or displaced because of these fundamentalist groups, would count in thousands if not more !. What about 9/11 ? Many inocent people lost lives because of a pre-meditated strike. Well, some one will argue that all of these events even though significant have happened outside India and as such are beyond the scope of Tehelka.com. (I interestedingly noted that they have writers based in Pakistan. I wonder why their much intellligent team failed to register any gruesome event over there).  All right, lets focus on India. Ethnic cleansing of Hindu Pundits in Kashmir is not far from memory. Whether it is the number of lives lost, or number of people displaced or number of girl and woman raped/murdered and forcefully converted would be in high thousands if not more! I can give numbers if need be so. I am sure annihilation of Hindi speaking minority in Assam can speak for the kind of intolerance that Harinder Baweja is referring to. Tehelka guies may think and argue otherswise, but is it not as important or as urgent as the Gujarat episode ? Or we have to differentiate because lives lost are primarily not that of Muslims ? (So what if they are in minority in a state like Kashmir) ? Or is it because counter examples given by me do not subscribe to pre-planned/pre-meditated action ? Would such revelation make the approach a bit more balanced and would that not be in the national interest ? Just like Gujarat carnage, is other events  about our fundamentals/ourselves?. Kashmir tragedy is a perfect example of hopelessly one-sided perpetration of violence on hapless Hindu Pundits and I ams sure is one of the biggest ruptures of recent times (if we have to go by the number game or gruesomeness of the attack) ? Kashmir tragedy is a corrosive rupture to our frabric ? Isnt it ? Assamese tragedy including the most recent one in which poor hindi speaking labours have been killed falls in the same category ? Will it not be a nation’s shame ? We all knew that not just state but whole country(read Pakistan) had conspired in the events of Kashmir tragedy. Dont we know who did  the tragedies that I am referring to ? You dont have faces yet ? The groundbreaking exposé — is it really the work of one gutsy, truth-hungry journalist, armed with nothing but two buttonsized cameras ? Takes the lid off all that was known but never established? To be balanced, yardstick has to be the same. I read through the expose and found out that yardstick was not the same. To get the truth from Hindu tormentors of tragedy, Journalist pretended to be a hardcore Hindutva follower and instigated them into saying things that have been said. I am not sure if this trick always works. Sometimes it leads to bluffing on the part of tormentor and they claim to take credit (assuming this gruesome act is worth taking credit for ?) for things that they have not even committed.  Its not just the chilling details that is coming first hand from the accused but a lot of bluff as well. The accused damn themselves (I am sure some of what they have said might be partially true but watching the videos sounds as if they are bluffing to impress a hardcore hindutva journalist – so as to get some free leverage). “ The revelations are important because they are entirely voluntary.” No its not voluntary. Volutary information comes when that person knows the real face of the journalist (not the mascot of Hindu fundamentalist). I know the argument that if that was done, they would not have said such thing. But my point is its not voluntary. They have been framed by this expose’. And they were not made under the inducement of falsified glory. Wads of notes were not brandished to elicit them but a fradulent method was used where Journalist in the mascot of a Hindu fundametalist taking notes on history would have glorified their acts. Extraordinary stories need extraordinary methods,- but they must be fair and justified. This extraordinary investigation, when looking into the Godhra Carnage and cross checking the withness, did not think of taking the mascot of an Islamic Fundamentalist. I wish had the journalist (or Tehelka) give enough thought  to these basic facts, we would have seen other side of the story as well.  Tehelka ddi make to to get one side of the story because it presented the mascot of a student researching Hindu resurgence. What they said was checked and cross-checked but the same stick was not applied when verifying the details of Muslim tormentors of the tragedy (Orignial event that led to the Tehelka carnage)