Eye for an Eye. PM Modi gives it back to obstructionist Congress!

Honestly, it is rank hypocrisy to try and stall Parliament over the Prime Minister’s rather clever response to his predecessor for his downright provocative description of demonetisation as “organised loot and legalised plunder”. What had possessed the usually meek and soft-spoken Manmohan Singh we cannot tell, he was not known to speak in such offensively hyperbolic terms. Those remarks were particularly odious. Not even the worst critics of notebandi had called it an “organised loot and legalised plunder”.

It was certainly badly executed, but there was no doubting either the laudable objective behind the scrapping of big notes, nor the gains that are eventually set to flow from it. To tell the truth, the real guilty are those who had allowed the money supply to more than double from six to over twelve per cent of the GDP under their watch. In fact, Modi most courageously undertook to reduce the excessive cash sloshing around in the economy. Modern economies have four to five per cent money in circulation. If the US and Japan have more, it is due to entirely different reasons, the former because it is a global currency and the latter because the old and ageing Japanese tend to keep a lot of cash handy.

Indeed, one likely reason for excessive cash in the economy might be the open “loot and plunder” of the public sector banks during the UPA decade, something P. Chidambaram ought to realise, when he now feigns surprise at the rising NPAs. If the bad debts of banks are now mounting, it is not because the Modi ministers are nudging the banks to lend to all comers, as was the case under the previous regime. It is because Modi has stopped evergreening of the old and failed loans, a practice so prevalent under UPA that hundreds of crores were given to Vijay Mallya, in spite of resistance by various banks.

We have digressed. To get back to Modi saying that only Manmohan Singh “knows the art of taking bath in the bathroom while wearing a raincoat, no one else does” there are two straightforward ways to quell the howls of protest from the Congress. One, by dwelling on what the PM most probably meant. Simply put, that in spite of presiding over one of the most corrupt governments in free India, in spite of himself handling the coal ministry when the coal scam happened, Singh continues to bask in his lily-white innocence.

The veteran opportunist—he was rooting for controls and restrictions on economic growth literally a few days before Narasimha Rao made him Finance Minister—who saw the Harshad Mehta and Ketan Parekh scams under his direct watch, continues to believe that his own financial integrity is reason enough for him to go unscathed. Frankly, he is not the only clean politician around. Why, even the Congress had honest leaders such as Gulzari Lal Nanda, U.N. Dhevar, Lal Bahadur Shashtri, to name but only the three that come to mind. Of course, the non-Congress bloc boasts of a large contingent, from L.K. Advani, Nitish Kumar, M.M. Joshi, to a host of others. Moreover, none of them had personally glossed over corruption so that they could be allowed to retain their senior ministerial posts. Why, then, should anyone make special allowance for someone who though financially clean was responsible for running a corrupt finance ministry and, later, prime ministry?l

The other way to respond to the Congress criticism of Modi’s raincoat remark is, of course, to hold the mirror to the loudmouths. Rajiv Gandhi had publicly dismissed Manmohan Singh and his fellow members of the Planning Commission as “a bunch of jokers”. Rajiv Gandhi’s promising son, Rahul, in fact, had gone a step further in showing respect, as multi-faced Chidambaram demanded in the Rajya Sabha last Thursday, 9 February, for the office of the Prime Minister of India. The ordinance issued by the Singh government, the Congress heir had called “nonsense”, while dramatically tearing it up at a news conference. Was, according to Chidambaram, Rahul being dignified and respectful towards the PM, a PM who belonged to the party virtually owned by him?

The larger point, of course, is the generally low-level of public discourse. The Vajpayees and Hiren Mukherjees, Ambedkar, Mahajan etc alas, are no longer around. Now parliamentarians on both sides of the aisle no longer debate policies, programmes, ideology et al. It is unremitting mud-slinging and distasteful tu, tu, mein, mein both inside and outside legislatures. Now with The advent of Arvind Kejriwal has only further sullied the atmosphere. Easily, the most obnoxious politician around, he sleepwalks through the day and night hurling abuses at all and sundry, including the Election Commission—virtually, anyone whom he might suspect of thwarting his prime ministerial ambitions.

Let's end the blog on a sarcastic note.

The late Feroze Gandhi was known for his ready repartee and saucy sarcasm. Prior to the elections in Bihar in the late 1950s, there were reports of how Morarji Desai, a Gandhian to the core and the Congress “observer” had made it clear that party nominees had to only don khadi. Such was the extent of his zeal that to ensure that it was khadi all the way, he would insist on the nominees he interviewed to even show him their vests under their kurta to ascertain if that that too was made of the same material. Feroze, who had a rather bland opinion about Morarji, called out to his friend Tarakeshwari Sinha, then an upcoming politician from the state and politely asked her in the presence of many others in the Central Hall whether Morarji was similarly examining the petticoats of women to confirm their khadi fabric. Veterans till this day have a hearty laugh while recalling what came to be known as the “baniyan petticoat joke in the Central Hall”.

Why is freedom of artistic expression always at the expense of Hindu sensibilities

After Bajirao Mastani, director Sanjay Leela Bhansali is making another period drama film, Padmavati, this time about Rani Padmini, the queen of Chittorgarh, and Alauddin Khilji, the ruler of Delhi. According to media reports, the film will feature a love story between Padmini and Khilji.            

On Friday afternoon, members of the Rajput Karni Sena assaulted Sanjay Leela Bhansali. The attack occurred on the sets of Bhansali’s period drama Padmavati in Jaipur’s Jaigarh Fort. Scores of Rajput Karni Sena protestors breached the private security of the set before proceeding to assault the director and vandalise the film’s set. As usual the entire Bollywood fraternity, Several “liberal” columnists have expressed anguish at this Their defence of the film-maker and demonization of the protestors involves the following ‘liberal’ arguments such as;

1. Cinema is a form of creative expression and artistic license permits historical reinterpretation, even if devoid of historical merit.

2. What about freedom of expression? If you don’t like the movie, do not watch it, or just make your own movie on the subject.

Here lies the hypocrisy and double standards of  Bollywood  and  the liberals, see how Shabana Azmi exposes herself , here she strongly defends SLB and calls the mobs as goonda etc. I agree with her here. But she immediately changes her defence and stand when it comes to AR Rehman; He was supposed to compose the music for the movie "Muhammad: The Messenger of God" and then a fatwa was issued post which he had to succumb to this pressure and give in. In this case the goondaism and open threat to  AR Rehman  from these Mullhas is completely fine because “that is inflammatory and would hurt sentiments of Muslim community”.

The analysis of each of these positions reveals the problematic nature of contemporary Indian “secular-liberal” discourse, its bias, duplicity, mendacity and lack of sensitivity, while exploring Hindu culture, history and traditions. Every Islamic tyrant, fanatic and mass murderer from Khilji to Tipu to Aurangzeb is being glorified under d label of 'artistic rebelling' but my question here is, Why is freedom of artistic expression always at the expense of Hindu sensibilities? If SLB or any other director in Bollywood makes anti-Muslim films he would have been dead by now and not just thrashed.

The history about Padmini is far more complex than the rude and vulgar “secular” fictionalization of a legendary figure whose sacred memory is alive in the hearts and minds of millions of Hindus. In the land of Chittor, century old temples and shrines dedicated to the memory of the legendary princess continue to be active sites of devotion. Therefore, there is clearly an element of traditional religiosity in the Padmavati saga, which has over time acquired a graceful sanctity.  Any attempt, to apparently violate the sacred memory of Padmavati built through centuries of cultural memory and oral tradition through a reckless act of commercial Bollywood cinema could be interpreted as an act of perversion, at least by those who believe and identify with her.

The same “secularists” who demand historical evidence enthusiastically while considering respect for tradition fulminate against the idea of historical evidence documenting large scale pogroms, genocides, forced conversions and temple destructions during the medieval age by Islamist invaders.

Nevertheless, purely from a historical perspective, it is true that there is no contemporary account, which corroborates the legend of Padmini, the beautiful Rajput princess who along with thousands of other women defied the will of the Muslim ruler, Alauddin Khilji through the act of Jauhar (mass immolation) and frustrated his designs of possessing her. This significant omission was observed by the preeminent historian of medieval India.

Anyway this is an opportune time to re-visit our history and set the perspective right about our history and rich heritage. Let me walk you through the history of  Khilji.

Alauddin Khilji the Sultan ascended the throne by murdering the emperor Jalauddin Khilji. His expeditions against Hindu kingdoms resulted in at least three instances of Jauhar or mass immolation by thousands of Hindu women in order to protect their honour both in life and death. At Chittor, Amir Khusrau found the emperor to ‘have cut the Hindus like dry grass’ by ordering a general massacre of the population, a feat, which was replicated by the great Mughal emperor Akbar almost two centuries later.  During his tyrannical rule, Alauddin was barbaric as other Muglas was also very ambitious. He expanded his kingdom across India and during this expansion he attacked on Chittor in 1303 CE to capture the queen of Chittor, Rani Padmini, the wife of Rawal Ratan Singh and the subsequent story have been immortalized in the epic poem Padmavat, written by Malik Muhammad Jayasi

Jayasi wrote this poem almost 237 years after Khilji's attack on Chittor. The literature of that era is full of highly imaginative narratives, and poets were known to gleefully use metaphors, alliterations and imaginary personifications. There is also a reference in Padmavat to a sorcerer called Raghav Chetan, who is believed to have been personified as a parrot.

According to Jayasi’s poem Rani Padmavati of Chittor was the wife of Raja Ratansen (a name invented by Jayasi with no reference in Mewar history) of Chittor during the reign of Allauddin Khilji. The correct name of Chittor's then ruler was Rawal Ratan Singh, the thirty-fourth descendant of Bappa Rawal.

What Jayasi’s poem says.

There were many talented artists in the court of Ratansen, one of whom was a musician named Raghava Chetan. He was a sorcerer who used his magical powers to target rivals. Once, he was caught red-handed while trying to invoke evil spirits, after which Ratansen banished Raghava from the kingdom after blackening his face. Raghava ran away to Delhi and decided to take revenge by provoking Khilji to attack Chittor.

Raghava knew of a forest near Delhi where Khilji went hunting. One day, he played his flute while Khilji was out hunting. The alluring notes emanating from his flute attracted the attention of Khilji, who then asked his soldiers to fetch the flute player. Thus, Raghava was taken to Khilji's court.

After reaching Delhi, Raghava told Khilji about the unparalleled beauty of Rani Padmini. That prompted Khilji to attack Chittor, ( quite a lust full character ) but he found the fort to be heavily defended. So he laid siege to the fort and forced Ratansen to negotiate with him.

Desperate to capture the beautiful Padmini, Khilji sent a word to Ratansen about him wanting to meet her. The Raja asked Padmini, who flatly refused. However, on being persuaded by her beleaguered husband, Rani Padmini agreed to let Khilji see her in the mirror.

The sex maniac that he was could not control his lust and cunningly went ahead and ordered his army to storm Chittorgarh. However, the army could not break into the fort. Due to a prolonged siege, food supplies for the troops were running out. So Ratansen opened the fort gates, and Rajputs rode out to fight. They were overpowered, and achieved martyrdom. Rani Padmini and wives of thousands of warriors preferred jauhar (fire is lit, and women jump into the flames) over losing their honour to Khilji's army. When Khilji entered the fort, all that he found were ashes of these brave women.

Credits: India Facts.com, Swarajya Magazine,Wikipedia.  

Nero Fiddled While Rome Burned

I will come to the real story once we read a little history. Nero was Roman Emperor from 54 to 68 AD, and the last in the Julio-Claudian dynasty. The source of this phrase is the story that Nero played the fiddle (violin) while Rome burned, during the great fire in AD 64.

In 64 AD, most of Rome was destroyed in the Great Fire of Rome. Suetonius,(Ram Ghua or Rana Ayyub  of those days) writing a generation later claims that many Romans believed Nero himself had started the fire, in order to clear land for his planned palatial complex, the Domus Aurea. In 68, the rebellion of Vindex in Gaul and later the acclamation of Galba in Hispania drove Nero from the throne. Facing a false report of being denounced as a public enemy who was to be executed, he committed suicide on 9 June 68 (the first Roman emperor to do so). His death ended the Julio-Claudian dynasty, sparking a brief period of civil wars known as the Year of the Four Emperors. Nero's rule is often associated with tyranny and extravagance. He is known for many executions, including that of his mother, and the probable murder by poison of his stepbrother Britannicus. Nero was rumoured to have had captured Christians dipped in oil and set on fire in his garden at night as a source of light. By modern-day standards Nero certainly appears a bizarre character, but that doesn't make this story true. Roman scholars differ over interpretations of events surrounding the fire.

Coming to the present day, the above story is very relevant because this is the kind of filth most of the media in India spreads. Today I will expose the hypocrisy of this so called Liberal and main stream media journalist Shekhar Gupta.

In the back drop of the recent incidents that happened in Chennai on Jallikattu. When the police wanted to the protesting crowd to clear site and went on to evacuate forcefully. This action by police led to serious law and order situation where bus, shops etc. were burnt during the unfortunate incident. Read this tweet by him.

This thug who cunningly tries to instigate the Muslims and law and order situation with this kind of instigating tweet where he compares the action of police with the stone palters of Kashmir. He finds the people of Chennai as so called freedom fighters or demanding Azadi from India. Mr. Gupta let them do it for 20 years. Pellet guns will appear in Chennai too. Here lies his hypocrisy in the tweet above he mentions “Tough question, but needs to be asked: a police station/vehicles are burnt in the heart of Chennai” this provokes me to ask him; Mr Gupta where were your tough questions when very recently The anti-Hindu riots in Deganga to the recent Dhulagarh one have been quietly covered up by the MSM. Not just cover up but the media-mafia even certifies these are just rumours being spread on Twitter as the street-thug consistently informs on anti-Hindu riots, here is another liar Rajdeep who goes on to the extent of certifying it as a rumour.

Fortunately, individuals still stand out and investigate and bring us the truth of the anti-Hindu violence in Bengal. These communal riots are not even “incidents” anymore. They are well-organised cleansing of Hindus from Muslim towns or areas with a clear plan of another exodus like the Kashmir one. Coming to the main topic forget about the tough questions by Mr. Gupta this is what he tweets.

Tough questions indeed!! Mr Gupta?? This is here were I compare Mr. Gupta to the story of Nero. When the Hindus were being killed, raped and looted in broad day light by the goons of the “Trinamullah Goons” lead by the jigadi CM. (I don’t see any difference between the culture of the murderous ISIS and the goons of Trinamullah Congress or the CPM or CPI in India) He wines and dines with the criminals and corrupt and when there is a genuine uprising against the illogical ban in Hindu festivals and traditions by SC he wants Pellet guns.

Let me expose his another lie, where he famously earned a title “Coupe Gupta”  the story goes as

April 4, the Indian Express splashes a front page story with screaming headlines: “The January night Raisina Hill was spooked: Two key Army units moved towards Delhi without notifying Govt.” This is about the night of January 16 when the Army chief and the govt. were in a confrontation over the General’s age issue.

On January 16 the army chief had filed a petition in the Supreme Court in the issue of his date of birth. But the mischief is not in the event or the incident of January 16 itself. The mischief is in the headline of IE, especially when read in the background of recent bad-blood between the Army and the Defence Ministry and the govt. It clearly led all other news outlets and the general public to believe that there was a possible ‘coup’ attempt that night.

Given that the Army chief has had confrontations with the defence ministry, there is a stinging letter by him to the PM which was leaked (and exposed by DNA), and this has resulted in the govt. cutting a sorry figure in the continuing episodes, something had to be done. That seems to be the motive behind the sensational headline by Shekhar Gupta which makes it sound as if the Army had nearly run over an elected govt. in India. Secondly, the article also clandestinely casts a shadow over Gen. VK Singh and makes it sound like he may have gone to the extent of over-throwing the govt. on account of his fight with the govt. Of course, it doesn’t say all this in so many words but let’s you draw that conclusion.

Once upon a time the IE was the second most read newspaper in Bombay and in many other cities. It has sunk without a trace in many cities and survival against competition can only be with putting out lousy stories with screaming headlines. By evening today, Shekhar Gupta is the laughing stock of the nation.