facts about Ram and India

m

This is not the RAMAYAN STORY, but the facts about Ram and India as the most ancient civilization in the world.   Good to read and to share with others   The story of Shri Rams' life was first narrated by Maharishi Valmiki in the Ramayana, which was written after Shri Ram was crowned as the king of Ayodhya. Maharishi Valmiki was a great astronomer as he has made sequential astronomical references on important dates related to the life of Shri Ram indicating the location of planets vis-a-vis zodiac constellations and the other stars (nakshatras).    Needless to add that similar position of planets and nakshatras is not repeated in thousands of years. By entering the precise details of the planetary configuration of the important events in the life of Shri Ram as given in the Valmiki Ramayan in the software named "Planetarium," corresponding exact dates of these events according to the English calendar can be known.   Mr Pushkar Bhatnagar, of the Indian Revenue Service, had acquired this software from the US. It is used to predict the solar/lunar eclipses and distance and location of other planets from earth. He entered the relevant details about the planetary positions narrated by Maharishi Valmiki and obtained very interesting and convincing results, which almost determine the important dates starting from the birth of Shri Ram to the date of his coming back to Ayodhya after 14 years of exile.     Maharishi Valmiki has recorded in Bal Kaand sarga 19 and shloka eight and nine (1/18/8,9) that Shri Ram was born on ninth tithi of Chaitra month when the position of different planets vis-a-vis zodiac constellations and nakshatras (visible stars) were:  i) Sun in Aries; ii) Saturn in Libra; iii) Jupiter in Cancer; iv) Venus in Pisces; v) Mars in Capricorn; vi) Lunar month of Chaitra; vii) Ninth day after no moon; viii) Lagna as Cancer (cancer was rising in the east); ix) Moon on the Punarvasu (Gemini constellation & Pllux star); x) Day time (around noon).   This data was fed into the software. The results indicated that this was exactly the location of planets/stars in the noon of January 10, 5114 BC. Thus, Shri Ram was born on January 10, 5114 BC, 7121 years ago. As per the Indian calendar, it was the ninth day of Shukla Paksha in Chaitra month and the time was around 12 to 1 noon time. This is exactly the time and date when Ram Navmi is celebrated all over India.     Shri Ram was born in Ayodhya. This fact can be ascertained from several books written by Indian and foreign authors before and after the birth of Christ - Valmiki Ramayan, Tulsi Ramayan, Kalidasas' Raghuvansam, Baudh and Jain literature, etc. These books have narrated in great detail the location, rich architecture and beauty of Ayodhya which had many palaces and temples built all over the kingdom.    Ayodhya was located on the banks of the Saryu river with Ganga and Panchal Pradesh on one side and Mithila on the other side. Normally, 7,000 years is a very long period during which earthquakes, storms, floods and foreign invasions change the course of rivers, destroy the towns/buildings and alter the territories. Therefore, the task of unearthing the facts is monumental. The present Ayodhya has shrunk in size and the rivers have changed their course about 40 km north/south.   Shri Ram went out of Ayodhya in his childhood, 13th year as per Valmiki Ramayan, with Rishi Vishwamitra who lived in Tapovan (Sidhhashram). From there, he went to Mithila, King Janakas' kingdom. There, he married Sita after breaking Shiv Dhanusha. Researchers have gone along the route adopted by Shri Ram as narrated in the Valmiki Ramayan and found 23 places which have memorials that commemorate the events related to the life of Shri Ram. These include Shringi Ashram, Ramghat, Tadka Van, Sidhhashram, Gautamashram, Janakpur (now in Nepal), Sita Kund, etc. Memorials are built for great men and not for fictitious characters.     Date of exile of Shri Ram: It is mentioned in Valmiki Ramayans' Ayodhya Kand (2/4/18) that Dashratha wanted to make Shri Ram the king because Sun, Mars and Rahu had surrounded his nakshatra and, normally, under such planetary configuration, the king dies or becomes a victim of conspiracies.    Dashratha's zodiac sign was Pisces and his nakshatra was Rewati. This planetary configuration was prevailing on the January 5, 5089 BC, and it was on this day that Shri Ram left Ayodhya for 14 years of exile. Thus, he was 25 years old at that time (5114-5089). There are several shlokas in Valmiki Ramayan which indicate that Shri Ram was 25-years-old when he left Ayodhya for exile.   Valmiki Ramayan refers to the solar eclipse at the time of war with Khardushan in later half of 13th year of Shri Rams' exile. It is also mentioned it was amavasya day and Mars was in the middle. When this data was entered, the software indicated that there was a solar eclipse on October 7, 5077 BC, amavasya day, which could be seen from Panchvati. The planetary configuration was also the same: Mars was in the middle, on one side were Venus and Mercury and on the other side were Sun and Saturn.     On the basis of planetary configurations described in various other chapters, the date on which Ravana was killed works out to be December 4, 5076 BC, and Shri Ram completed 14 years of exile on January 2, 5075 BC, and that day was also Navami of Shukla Paksha in Chaitra month. Thus, Shri Ram had come back to Ayodhya at the age of 39 (5114-5075).     A colleague, Dr Ram Avtar, researched on places visited by Shri Ram during his exile, and, sequentially, moved to the places stated as visited by Shri Ram in the Valmiki Ramayan, starting from Ayodhya he went right upto Rameshwaram. He found 195 places which still have the memorials connected to the events narrated in the Ramayana relating to the life of Shri Ram and Sita. These include Tamsa Tal (Mandah), Shringverpur (Singraur), Bhardwaj Ashram situated near Allahabad, Atri Ashram, Markandaya Ashram (Markundi), Chitrakoot, Pamakuti on banks of Godavari, Panchvati, Sita Sarovar, Ram Kund in Triambakeshwar near Nasik, Shabari Ashram, Kishkindha (village Annagorai), Dhanushkoti and Rameshwar temple.     In Valmiki Ramayan, it is mentioned that Shri Rams' army constructed a bridge over the sea between Rameshwaram and Lanka. After crossing this bridge, Shri Rams' army had defeated Ravana.    Recently, NASA put pictures on the Internet of a man-made bridge, the ruins of which are lying submerged in Palk Strait between Rameshwaram and Sri Lanka. Recently the Sri Lankan Government had expressed the desire to develop Sita Vatika as a tourist spot. Sri Lankans believe this was Ashok Vatika where Ravana had kept Sita as a prisoner in 5076 BC.   Indian history has recorded that Shri Ram belonged to the Suryavansh and he was the 64th ruler of this dynasty. The names and other relevant particulars of previous 63 kings are listed in 'Ayodhya Ka Itihas' written about 80 years ago by Rai Bahadur Sita Ram.    Professor Subhash Kak of Lousiana University, in his book, 'The Astronomical Code of the Rig Veda,' has also listed 63 ancestors of Shri Ram who ruled over Ayodhya. Sri Rams' ancestors have been traced out as: Shri Ram, King Dashratha, King Aja, King Raghu, King Dilip and so on. From Kashmir to Kanyakumari and from Bengal to Gujarat, everywhere people believe in the reality of Shri Rams' existence, particularly in the tribal areas of Himachal, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and the North-East.    Most of the festivals celebrated in these areas revolve around the events in the life of Shri Ram and Shri Krishna.   The events and places related to the life of Shri Ram and Sita are true cultural and social heritage of every Indian irrespective of caste and creed. Therefore, it is a common heritage. After all, Shri Ram belonged to the period when Prophet Mohammed or Jesus Christ were not born and Muslim or Christian faiths were unknown to the world. The words Hindu - residents of Hindustan - and Indian - resident of India - were synonymous. India was also known as Bharat - land of knowledge - and Aryavarta - where Aryans live - and Hindustan - land of "Hindus"  derived from the word Sindhu.   During Ram Rajya, the evils of caste system based on birth were non-existent. In fact, Maharishi Valmiki is stated to be of shudra class - scheduled caste - still Sita lived with him as his adopted daughter after she was banished from Ayodhya. Luv and Kush grew up in his ashram as his disciples.    We need to be proud of the fact that Valmiki was perhaps the first great astronomer and that his study of planetary configurations has stood the test of times. Even the latest computer softwares have corroborated his astronomical calculations, which proves that he did not commit any error.     Shabri is stated to be belonging to the Bheel tribe. Shri Rams' army, which succeeded in defeating Ravana, was formed by various tribes from Central and South India. The facts, events and all other details relating to the life of Shri Ram, are the common heritage of all the Indians including scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, Muslims, Christians, etc.   Prophet Mohammad was born 1,400 years ago. Jesus Christ was born 2,000 years ago. Gautam Buddha was born 2,600 years ago, whereas Ram was born 7,000 years ago. Hence, discovering the details relating to Shri Rams' life would be lot more difficult as destruction caused by floods, earthquakes and invasions etc., would be far greater. But, should that stop our quest for learning more about our cultural heritage?       As Indians, let us all take pride in the fact that the Indian civilisation is the most ancient civilisation today. It is certainly more than 10,000 years old. Therefore, let us reject the story of Aryan invasion in India in 1,500 BC as motivated implantation.    In fact Max Mueller, who was the creator of this theory, had himself rejected it. Let us admit that during the British Rule, we were educated in the schools based on Macaulay school of thinking which believed that everything Indian was inferior and that entire "Indian literature was not worth even one book rack in England." If there were similarities in certain features of Indian people and people from Central Europe, then automatic inference drawn was that the Aryans coming from Europe invaded India and settled here.    No one dared of thinking in any other way. Therefore, there is urgency for the historians and all other intellectuals to stop reducing Indian history to myth. There is need to gather, dig out, search, unearth and analyse all the evidences, which would throw more light on ancient Indian civilisation and culture.     There is need for the print and the electronic media to take note of these facts and create atmosphere which would motivate our young and educated youth to carry out research and unearth true facts about the ancient Indian civilisation and wisdom and would also encourage them to put across the results of their research before the people fearlessly and with a sense of pride!   by Saroj Bala, The Pioneer The author Saroj Bala is in IRS, Commisioner of Income Tax posted at Delhi.

 Can you identify any one of your young friends / relatives who is free and interested in doing some research work on this aspect to take it up further. I would have liked to do it but for my age. I can however give lot of background support from sanskrit scriptures . Jai Sri Ram. R. Ramamurthy

http://www.niticentral.com/2013/10/21/communal-violence-bill-is-sonias-game-plan-148602.html

Communal Violence Bill is Sonia’s game plan

Sandhya Jain
October 21, 2013

The Muzaffarnagar riots in Uttar Pradesh which put the ruling Samajwadi Party on the defensive, and Narendra Modi’s taunt that his State had ‘passed’ him with distinction while the Congress still had to give an account of itself, have driven the latter to revive the contentious Prevention of Communal and Targetted Violence Bill, now slated to be introduced in the Winter Session of Parliament. The coveted prize is the Muslim vote-bank, put into jeopardy since Deoband’s Maulana Mehmood Madani reprimanded the party for trying to instil fear of the Gujarat strongman among Muslims.

The Bill, widely perceived as anti-Hindu, is the brainchild of Sonia Gandhi’s National Advisory Council. It has been opposed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and some regional parties, and is certain to be resented by public servants who are liable to be penalised for ‘dereliction of duty’ and ‘breach of communal responsibility’ in the event of targetted violence against a community.

Muzaffarnagar can be a good benchmark against which to judge the presumptions governing the Bill. 

It is widely known that a young school girl was constantly harassed by a boy from the minority community. Two members of her family confronted the miscreant, who died in the altercation between them; the duo was brutally murdered in retaliation. When the police arrested seven of the alleged assailants, they were ordered by a senior Cabinet Minister of the State to release the men; this triggered a series of group meetings of both communities and the subsequent spiral of violence. 

How will the proposed Bill apportion guilt and deliver justice to the victims on both sides?

The original version of the Bill, drafted by UPA-I in 2005, was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee, which submitted its report in December 2012. Minority Affairs Minister Rehman Khan, who mooted revival of the Bill after the Muzaffarnagar riots, is reportedly busy giving it more teeth. This could intensify opposition to the Bill when finally presented in Parliament this winter.

The extant draft has been resisted because it empowers the Centre to declare an area in a State as “communally disturbed” on its own and send Central forces without the State’s request, thus compromising the federal structure of the Constitution and creating situations of potential confrontation between the Centre and the States. The BJP, Akali Dal, Shiv Sena and Bahujan Samaj Party opposed this as usurping the rights of States.

A contentious provision is transfer of cases outside the State concerned for trial (as happened in Gujarat), ostensibly to protect witnesses. This could establish a dangerous precedent of presuming the entire judiciary of a State as incapable of delivering justice to victims of riots. If riots simultaneously break out in several States (as Maoist violence has affected many at the same time), how feasible will it be to shunt cases, witnesses and lawyers across the country? Who will bear the cost of this exercise? Controversies pertaining to some Gujarat riot victims (who claimed they had not been raped and did not know that this allegation figured in their sworn affidavits which were in English) establishes that it is not proper to leave witnesses and victims to the mercy of NGOs and activists who may have their own agendas, and may tutor their wards to that end.

The essential criticism of the Bill is its flawed conception, which aims to prevent and control targeted violence, including mass violence, against Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and religious and linguistic minorities in any State. Large sections of society that do not fall in any of these categories, and might fall prey to communal violence, are denied protection under this legislation.

Worse, it does not extend to Jammu & Kashmir, where Kashmiri Pandits were targetted and driven out of the Valley in the 1990s, and where Hindus of Jammu Province are now in the crosshairs of jihadi elements who want to drive them out of the entire State. This was recently witnessed in Kishtwar, where a private arms factory was generously opened to help miscreants arm themselves against an unarmed populace of anther community. If ever there was a State where citizens need the protection of such legislation, it is Jammu & Kashmir.

As rape and gang rape is one of the specific crimes listed in the Bill, it bears asking if rape will be considered as having occurred only on the statement of an alleged victim, or will have to stand medical scrutiny? Secondly, there is no recognition that a communal conflict could be triggered by the targetting of girls from the majority community, a phenomenon widely known as ‘love jihad’.

As for public servants who are to be held responsible for failing to control a situation, it needs to be mentioned that the proposed Bill offers no protection against political interference in the arrest and prosecution of culprits. The extant Bill places disproportionate emphasis upon the role of public servants (police, civil servants), who are all too often forced to abide by the whims of a political class. Nowhere does the legislation provide for punishment for political interference leading to the release of arrested persons in a riot situation.

The proposed National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation, if retained in the final draft, will likely be a sinecure for unelectable politicians and other cronies of the ruling dispensation.The Authority seems to duplicate the functions of the National Human Rights Commission, National Commission for Minorities, National Commission for Women, National Commission for Scheduled Castes, and National Commission for Scheduled Tribes. A six year term for the Members, along with attendant permanent bureaucracy, seems an entirely avoidable drain on the exchequer in an era of economic meltdown.

The draft proposes to make all offences committed under the Act as cognizable and non-bailable. This is not objectionable in itself, except for the fact that political interference (as seen in Muzaffarnagar) could ensure arrests from a single community, which may even be the victim/aggrieved community. And if culprits who are arrested are promptly released due to political interference, such persons will roam free with impunity throughout the trial and prosecution of the case, and will have ample freedom to tamper with or intimidate witnesses. The whole legislation is thus flawed in conception and certain to be unfair in implementation.

The proposed National Authority / State Authority has been given the power to order further investigation or re-investigation of cases deemed not to have been carried out in a fair, impartial or unbiased manner. But under the Code of Criminal Procedure, the power to order re-investigation is vested only in a competent court, and further investigations also needs court permission. 

Clearly, the UPA is trying to make a mockery of the established law of the land for petty political gains.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FROM THE ARCHIVES PLEASE :


http://dailypioneer.com/340369/NAC-drafted-Bill-to-kill-State-Govts.html


COLUMNIST | Sunday, May 22, 2011 

NAC-drafted Bill to kill State Govts

Swapan Dasgupta

The next time a partisan Government at the Centre decides to facilitate the dismissal of an elected State Government with majority support in the Assembly, it will not have to appoint a less ham-handed version of Karnataka Governor HR Bhardwaj. The former Law Minister who was sent to Bengaluru on a mission of subversion failed because both the political culture and Supreme Court judgments have made it difficult (but not impossible) for the Centre to impose President’s Rule on flights of whimsy. Gone are the days when Governors such as Ram Lal, BD Tapase and Romesh Bhandari could subvert the Constitution’s federal principles with impunity.


No, the next time an inconvenient BS Yeddyurappa or a Narendra Modi has to be destabilised and eventually dismissed, the role of the Governor will become secondary. The principal part may well be played by an emerging body of professionals who will have the power to hold any State to ransom. Like the wedding organiser and party organiser who have made life incredibly easy for people with sufficient money to burn, a breed of riot organisers will be very much in demand in the coming years. That is if the draft of the Communal Violence Bill prepared by the Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council is passed by Parliament.


India has always been indulgent to bad ideas.The Nehru-Gandhi family in particular has taken exceptional care to nurture quackery and cretinism as long as they were packaged in the garb of ‘progressive’ politics. Just as the Planning Commission was the nursery for bad economics for four decades, the NAC is fast becoming the instrument for Sonia Gandhi’s misapplication of mind. Its contribution to the derailing of India’s global competitive potential will be assessed (and, hopefully, even quantified) by economic historians in the future. However, mercifully, the NAC had so far desisted from imposing its grubby paw prints on the basic features of the Constitution — although the centralist ‘one size fits all’ philosophy was a recurring feature of all its proposals. The draft Communal Violence Bill marks a departure.


The implications of the Bill are grave. To destabilise a difficult State Government, a cynical dispensation at the Centre will merely have to engage the services of a riot organiser. The riot organiser will simply have to either orchestrate tensions in a chosen locality — not a very difficult project — and trigger a little riot against either a minority community or local Dalits and tribals. No administration, however well-meaning and committed to social harmony can prevent a determined bid to foster disharmony.Under the proposed law, that local disturbance will become the pretext for the Centre to use Article 355 to intervene in the State.


Next, the seven-member National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparationmade up, presumably, of ‘non-partisan’ grandees such as Harsh Mander and Teesta Setalvad, will get into the act. Blessed with statutory sanction, this committee of the good and virtuous will stricture the local administration and the State Government for its alleged lapses and suspected complicity in the riots and make a case for the breakdown of the Constitutional machinery.The committee’s report, in turn, will become the occasion to file FIRs against ‘difficult’ State leaders and an obliging Bhardwaj-like Governor will recommend the imposition of Article 356 on the State.


Yes, a few innocent citizens would have died or had their property destroyed in the exercise. But at least they would have died so that the supercops of secularism could rule.


The Communal Violence Bill proposed by the NAC is not merely flawed, it is positively dangerous. In a country where laws sometimes exist to be subverted, the proposed legislation will be a direct incitement to made-to-order rioting and political destabilisation. The presence of a legally-sanctioned committee of the wonderfully virtuous overseeing the State administration is calculated to undermine any elected Government and make administrators accountable to two masters. Governance would be made dysfunctional and the primary focus of every official would be to keep the Centre happy. Even an issue as localised (but no less regrettable) as the violence in Greater Noida over the quantum of compensation for land acquisition would become the pretext for the Centre to first intervene directly and subsequently dismiss the Mayawati Government.


There is a strong case for ensuring that the State Government (which has ultimately responsibility for law and order and the preservation of peace) carries out its obligations diligently and without fear or favour. The best way to ensure this is all-round vigilance. Many district-level committees made up of local notables can be constituted to be an informal watchdog body and even assist the local administration. But political power ultimately vests with an elected Government and not with do-gooders nominated by the Government because they have the right aesthetic and NGO credentials. Sonia Gandhi has chosen to exercise power without making herself accountable. Now she seems determined to foist this model of colonial paternalism on the rest of the country.


India is a federal country and the more federal it becomes the better. The attempt to regress to back-door centralism has to be resisted. The issue is not riots versus secularism; the choice is between federalism and centralism, between a Delhi Sultanate and local democracy. Parliament should choose wisely. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RELATED LINK PLEASE :

NAC seeks public views on draft communal violence bill

May 20, 2011 

The National Advisory Council on Friday placed in the public domain for comments the draft 'Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011'.

The same had been presented by the NAC's working group on April 28, 2011.

The draft of the bill can be downloaded here (external link)

A press release issued by the NAC said comments may be sent to it by June 4, 2011 by email atwgcvb@nac.nic.in or by post to Secretary, National Advisory Council, 2 Motilal Nehru Place, Akbar Road, New Delhi, 110011

The Working Group Draft of the Bill can be downloaded here.

Communal & Sectarian Violence Bill, 2010 Advisory Group

Constituted by National Advisory Council Working Group

Time Frame: August 1, 2010 – January 31, 2011

Advisory Group Members

1. Abusaleh Shariff
2. Asgar Ali Engineer
3. Gagan Sethi
4. H.S Phoolka
5. John Dayal
6. Justice Hosbet Suresh
7. Kamal Faruqui
8. Manzoor Alam
9. Maulana Niaz Farooqui
10. Ram Puniyani
11. Rooprekha Verma
12. Samar Singh
13. Saumya Uma
14. Shabnam Hashmi
15. Sister Mary Scaria
16. Sukhdeo Thorat
17. Syed Shahabuddin
18. Uma Chakravarty
19. Upendra Baxi

1. Aruna Roy, NAC Working Group Member
2. Professor Jadhav, NAC Working Group Member
3. Anu Aga, NAC Working Group Member

Joint Conveners of Advisory Group

• Farah Naqvi, Convener, NAC Working Group
• Harsh Mander, Member, NAC Working Group

Communal & Sectarian Violence Bill, 2010 Drafting Committee

Constituted by National Advisory Council Working Group
Time Frame: August 1, 2010 – February 28, 2011

Drafting Committee Members

• Gopal Subramanium
• Maja Daruwala
• Najmi Waziri
• P.I.Jose
• Prasad Sirivella
• Teesta Setalvad
• Usha Ramanathan (upto 20 Feb 2011)
• Vrinda Grover (upto 20 Feb 2011)

Conveners of Drafting Committee

• Farah Naqvi, Convener, NAC Working Group
• Harsh Mander, Member, NAC Working Group

http://nac.nic.in/communal/com_bill.htm

skip to main content

Home>Working Groups>Communal & Sectarian Violence Bill

• Home

• Constitution of NAC
• Member's Profiles
• NAC Secretariat
• Meetings
• Working Groups
• Press Releases
• Communications to Government
• Right to Information

Draft ‘Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011

• Advisory Group
• Drafting Committee
• Key Elements

As agreed by the NAC at its meeting on July 14th, 2010, the NAC Working Group on the Communal Violence Bill, has set up an Advisory Group and a Drafting Committee to develop a draft bill on communal and sectarian violence. The bill shall be drafted on the basis of certain key elements accepted by the National Advisory Council.

Scope, mandate and timelines for the Drafting Committee & Advisory Group

• To draft a bill that can provide effective prevention and control of communal and sectarian violence, and justice and comprehensive reparations to survivors and victims of communal and sectarian violence. This would be ensured on the basis of certain essential elements accepted by people’s groups, civil society groups and the NAC, including the key principle of accountability of public officials.
• To frame relevant provisions, including rules, for relief, compensation, rehabilitation, resettlement, restitution, and reparations, keeping in mind the rights of internally displaced persons.
• To frame relevant provisions, including rules, of evidence, procedure, and victim-witness rights.

The Working Group Draft of the Bill can be downloaded here.

Citizen’s submissions and feedback

• Suggestions on this Working Group Draft may be sent by 4 JUNE 2011 to wgcvb@nac.nic.in

• Copyright Policy
 
• Hyperlinking Policy
 
• Privacy Policy 
• Terms and Conditions

Content owned & maintained by
National Advisory Council,Government of India
Website hosted by
National Informatics Centre, Department of Information Technology,
Government of India
Page Last Updated on 20 May, 2011

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:

Take the case of JUST THREE of the LUMINARIES mentioned above :


Teesta Setalvad:

(A) - Teesta’s House in Disarray

By Sandeep | Published: December 23, 2008

http://www.sandeepweb.com/2008/12/23/teestas-house-in-disarray/

(B) - Teesta, it Hit Your Face

By Sandeep | Published: April 14, 2009

http://www.sandeepweb.com/2009/04/14/teesta-it-hit-your-face/

(C) - A Lie Split Wide Open

By Sandeep | Published: April 22, 2009

http://www.sandeepweb.com/2009/04/22/my-op-ed-a-lie-split-wide-open/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HARSH MANDER :
The Press Council of India, found Mr. Harsh Mander "GUILTY" of spreading "FALSE RUMOURS" in his column "HINDUSTAN HAMARA", in the case of 'Krishen Kak V/s Times of India, vide its decision '14/106/02-03 dated 30 June 2003.

To know more about this "NAC WORTHY", please read :

Scoring Against Paganism: Untangling the Manderweb

Krishen Kak

26 Apr 2009

http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=530

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASGHAR ALI ENGINEER :

Dr. Koenraad Elst, the Belgian historian, whose writings on Ayodhya and 'communalism in India', stand vindicated by the Aodhya verdict delivered by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, had in his book  "Ayodhya: The Finale", Voice of India, New Delhi (2003),mentioned in 'detail' the 'riot vulture' called Asghar Ali Engineer !! It is worth quoting at length !! Here goes !!

QUOTE:


3.10. Public opinion engineering

These days, much-acclaimed characters like John Dayal, Harsh Mander and Arundhati Roy lie in waiting for communal riots and elatedly jump at them when and where they erupt. They exploit the anti-Hindu propaganda value of riots to the hilt, making up fictional stories as they go along to compensate for any defects in the true account. John Dayal is welcomed to Congressional committees in Washington DC as a crown witness to canards such as how Hindus are raping Catholic nuns in India, an allegation long refuted in a report by the Congress state government of Madhya Pradesh. Arundhati Roy goes lyrical about the torture of a Muslim politician’s two daughters by Hindus during the Gujarat riots of 2002, even when the man had only one daughter, who came forward to clarify that she happened to be in the US at the time of the “facts”. Harsh Mander has already been condemned by the Press Council of India (decision 14/106/02-03 dd. 30 June 2003, Dr. Krishen Kak vs. Times of India) for spreading false rumours about alleged Hindu atrocities in his famous column Hindustan Hamara (Times of India, 20 March 2002; incidentally a title borrowed from a poem by Mohammed Iqbal, who claimed “our India” for Islam and became the spiritual father of Pakistan).
[ Note: Harsh Mander is a 'current member' of the 'SUPER CABINET' @ 10 Janpath, that goes by the nomenclature :
"National Advisory Committee" !! ]

These riot vultures do a lot of damage to India,among other reasons because they are so eagerly believed abroad. Yet they don’t interest me too much, if only because they pale in comparisonwith the past master of their art, the one who was already doing the same job long before these newcomers had discovered the uses of riot “reporting” in anti-Hindu hate-mongering.I mean Asghar Ali Engineer.


Since approximately the Stone Age, Engineer has been travelling to riot spots in India (butchering of minorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh somehow doesn’t interest him as much) with prefabricated riot reports invariably showing the same ingredients: Hindu pre-planning, Muslim victimhood, anti-Muslim complicity of the police and some local politicians. With the “facts” of the matter fixed beforehand, the main purpose of his visits is to note down some local names in order to give his reports more credibility.


Admittedly, Engineer is of a different calibre than his followers, in the sense that he doesn’t mix his mendaciousness in the service of the hate cause with mendaciousness for self-promotion. People like Harsh Mander and Arundhati Roy easily come across as laughable because their corrupting concern for their own image-building detracts mightily from the force of their propaganda against Hinduism: Roy posturing as an environmentalist all while setting up shop in a villa in a protected forest zone, Mander taking early retirement in peacetime from the civil service but falsely claiming that he had “resigned” (which implies loss of pension rights and other privileges) as an act of protest against the Gujarat riots, etc.Engineer won’t be an impeccable human being, but at least his human defects don’t come in the way of his effectiveness as an anti-Hindu campaigner.


In the present debate, he has predictably contributed his two cents’ worth: “Archaeological excavations and temple”, Secular Perspective, 1 Sep. 2003. The text goes through most of the tactical moves discussed in the preceding sections.Engineer is not an archaeologist nor a historian,but he makes the most of newspaper reports as if these were primary and reliable sources. He is not above quoting even anonymous sources as arguments of authority.


His best source, a “senior archaeologist” who was “speaking on condition of anonymity”, has “stated categorically, ‘There is no evidence of a temple. In fact, as we go deeper, we are seeing more evidence of Islamic influence.’” Surely Mr. Engineer should know that Islam originated in 7th-century Arabia, yet at the Ayodhya site where findings date back two thousand years earlier, it only gets more Islamic as you recede deeper into the past? Could it be that under Hindu 
influence, Islam in India had a few previous incarnations?


Predictably, Engineer invokes the authority of “noted archaeologist” Suraj Bhan and of “historian”Irfan Habib without
informing the readers about their status as long-standing servants of the Babri Masjid lobby. Yet, in his case this may be due to mere carelessness, as elsewhere he does reveal that one Supriya Verma of Panjab University “spent months in Ayodhya as an expert of the Sunni Waqf Board”. Indeed, he knows from lawyer Zafaryab Jilani that the Waqf Board has six archaeologists under contract to follow the diggings and study the conclusions at length. It just makes you wonder where the Waqf Board is getting all this money from.


But it’s good to see what Engineer quotes Habib for: “When digging was ordered, many historians like Irfan Habib had warned that excavation could not lead to a clinching evidence for the existence of a temple.” Which merely amounts to saying that those historians, knowing how the evidence would go against them, had prepared their escape from facing the facts by declaring these impossible beforehand.


As for Waqf Board emissary Supriya Verma, she makes the most of the animal bones found at different layers: “If any shrine
and a temple existed, how can anyone account for the animal bones?” As per the ASI findings, the site lay in ruins several
times, circumstances in which animals may have made their home in it. Is she really an archaeologists that she doesn’t know how the strangest objects accumulate at sites of interest over the millennia? Or did she mean to say that the animals indicate a Muslim rather than a Hindu presence, with mosques as sanctuary for our four-legged brethren? It seems the anti-temple experts are clutching at straws in desperation.


Like so many others, Engineer uses the counterbalancing posture, pretending that the ASI’s scientific findings are evened
out by the obstinate anti-scientific protests of the usual suspects: “However, the report will be subject to different interpretations and would not go unchallenged.” Yes, just as even the most cast-iron evidence in a court case never goes
unchallenged by the disfavoured party’s lawyer.


It’s also what he had heard Irfan Habib predicting: “The artefacts could be interpreted differently.” True enough, Engineer notes with satisfaction: “And this is precisely what is happening. The final report submitted by ASI seems to be highly controversial and is bound to be challenged.” Well, well, those who were predicting trouble are now exulting in the realization of their prediction. Only, everyone can see that it’s merely they themselves who are creating the predicted trouble.


Like many others, Engineer disingenuously plays off the interim report with its allegedly “negative” result against the final report: “Now we have the final report of the ASI which says that there could have been a temple-like structure below Babri Masjid. Is it not a glaring contradiction? All through the digging no definite indications of any temple-like structure were found and suddenly the final report discovers temple-like structure there.” Once more, old lies are falsely presented as facts to counter new facts.


This had been done before, viz. with B.B. Lal’s findings. Like most secularists in 1990-91, Engineer is still contrasting B.B. Lal’s public statements about his excavation results with his remark in his published ASI report summary that “the late period was devoid of any special interest”. To our crusading secularist, this means that B.B. Lal speaks with forked tongue: “But later in 1990 Lal began to claim that certain brick bases he had excavated in the seventies were meant to support pillars and thus suggested ‘the existence of a temple-like structure in the south of the Babri Masjid’.”


The true story has been explained threadbare long ago, but for poor listeners like Mr. Engineer, we may repeat that Lal’s
excavation focused on the ancient period and that from the viewpoint of Ramayana studies, the medieval layer with its
unmistakable temple foundations was indeed devoid of much interest. The discovery of temple remains was nothing unexpected or controversial at the time, given the consensus (still prevalent in the late 1970s) on the site’s known history of Islamic iconoclasm. Yet, after the normal bureaucratic and human-inertial delays, as the 1980s were advancing, the ASI started deliberately postponing the formal publication of Lal’s findings because secularist opinion had started mobilizing against the longstanding historical consensus. The reason for the endless procrastination must have been the same reason why the court case has been dragging on for decades: fear of getting involved in controversy, particularly one where the facts would force a stance favoured by the Hindu side. In other words, fear of being demonized by the secularist establishment with its bloodhound attitude towards dissent.


If anyone expected Mr. Engineer to be above personal attacks on the ASI experts, he’d better wake up. Taking umbrage behind two Waqf Board lawyers whom he quotes with approval, he has Abdul Mannan dismiss the report as a “saffron report”, while Zafaryab Jilani is quoted as saying: “It was prepared under political pressure.” Not meaner than what most secularist reporters have alleged, but just as unfounded. [Engineer of course does not mention, just as Irfan Habib and ‘secularist’ publications never do, that four out of the twenty authors of the ASI report itself were Muslims. Are these Muslim archaeologists also ‘saffronized’? It seems more likely that Irfan Habib is an Islamist masquerading as a Marxist. – Vishal Agarwal]


Finally, another false semblance of balance in Engineer’s text is the one between two evaluations of the report. All manner of experts and so-called experts are quoted as denouncing the excavation report, but neither the ASI team, nor other archaeologists nor even VHP-affiliated experts were called to contribute even one sentence in defence of the ASI findings. For his semblance of balance, however, Engineer had to also relay a pro-evidence voice. So he has picked one, only one, and that one is the voice of “RSS spokesman Ram Madhav”, not an expert but a political leader. This way, our spin-doctor creates the impression that on the one hand you have “the expert archaeological opinion”, which “may not give much credenceto the ASI report”, while on the other hand you only have partisan Hindu nationalist opinion.When in reality, the opposite asymmetry holds good: genuine expert opinion supports the ASI report and only politically motivated secularists, whether sporting academic titles or not, denounce it.



Undeniably, Asghar Ali Engineer remains a formidable master of disinformation. This makes him an excellent representative
of Indian secularism and of the anti-temple campaign in particular.


UNQUOTE