Archive for the ‘Babri historians’ Category

The Indian woman who went to Korea and became the Queen – the Korea-Indian connection – Do the pro-Tamil groups want to communalize it? [3]

May 24, 2018

The Indian woman who went to Korea and became the Queen – the Korea-Indian connection – Do the pro-Tamil groups want to communalize it? [3]

 Prof Nagarahan - korea - India

The claims of V. Nagarajan and Antartica Tamizhan: Nagarajan’s paper continues, “The materials gathered from multiple sources which includes intentional and unintentional resources related to the first century CE. Reveals that there was no kingdom by name Ayodhya in north India.  Further the cartographic maps particularly the Greek cartography highlighting the Eastern Hemisphere clearly showed the existence of Ay kingdom in south India and not in north India.

http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_100bc.jpg

http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_050bc.jpg

http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_001ad.jpg

http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_050ad.jpg

http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_100ad.jpg

http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_200ad.jpg

http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_300ad.jpg

http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_400ad.jpg

The visual pattern clearly shows the evolution of Gaya kingdom in Korean peninsula over a period from BCE 100 to 400 CE.  The maps also clearly indicate the change in Tamilnadu all the kingdoms including the Ay kingdom were replaced by the Kalabras.  The presence of Ay and Kongu in Tamilnadu when the Gaya kingdom emerged will help the researchers to formulate a hypothesis to establish the Korean Queen Indian princess connection. The present paper goes to prove that historizing  the legend may lead to a tenable hypothesis that the princess be from south India particularly from Pandiya kingdom than from the Ayodhya kingdom”. Then, he concluded with, “The present paper further points out the direction for future research initiatives by proposing a new paradigm with new hypotheses, methodologies and new models”. Ironically, all these narratives are available in “Mintamil” website, where  one “Antartica Tamilan” has posted in Tamil. Though, we do not know whether Nagarajan has copied from “Antartica Tamilan” or both are one and the same person, it is evident that the “research” has been biased, preconceived and concocted much against the research methodology.

Korea Queen - tamilachi ruled

The aggressive U-tube propaganda on “Sembavala Rani”: As pointed out, the same stuff is converted into U-tube with photos and circulated. Particularly, they chose to praise heavily Kannan and Orissa Balu for the excellent, marvellous and extraordinary discover made[1]. Suggestuve narrative,  prompting description and story-telling pattern expose the propagandist nature. Particularly, these videos have been with same photographs, same narratives with male and female voices[2]. “Coral Shree” consolidated all stuff available in “Mintamil” in another video[3]. She claims that she has only discovered the tortoise route, similar jewelry worn by Tamil and Korean women, the fish symbol, “Sembavalam” and so on. Thus, it is evident that these have been “stage managed” and aimed at propaganda and self-promotion using their expertise. Under the banner of “Tamil Heritage Foundation,” they have brought a book “Historical, archaeological, linguistic, cultural and biological links between Korea and India – Kaya and Pandya” by Kannan and obviously translated in Tamil “Koreavin Tamil Rani”.

Korea Queen -RJB-photo

Provocative captions chosen for U-tubes: Some of the captions chosen for U-tubes have been following:

1.       The Korean goddess was a Tamil woman – the Korean embassy has been in confusion because of plot hatched by India. This has been blatantly anti-Indian nature, as if India tries to confuse the origin of the queen, tracing Ayodhya instead of ancient Tamizhagam.
2.      The goddess of the Korean people was a “Tamlilachi” – a suppressed History of Tamils. Note, here “Tamlilachi” connotes a fanatic and fundamentalist expression for Tamil woman. The “suppression” of Tamil history and such other accusations have been absurd and meaningless. Just claims are not enough, unless, historical evidences are produced.
3.      The “Tamlilachi” who ruled Korea. The fanatic and fundamentalist expression “Tamlilachi” has been mischievous and unhistorical.
4.      The other side of History – The Korean goddess was a Tamil woman [With the background photo of demolition of disputed structure at Ayodhya]. This also proves the pro-Tamil, anti-north, anti-BJP propaganda, smacks any worth of research.
5.      The Tamil Empress / Queen of Korea.

 

Whatever may be the origin, the claim of queen, empress, ruling Korea etc, have been far-fetched and unwarranted.

Korea Queen - Tamil history suppressed

What the videos want to convey?: The tone and tenor of the narratives, the way they are presented with photographs, the expressions used “suppressed history of Tamils,” “hidden truth of Tamil queen,” “the lot of India” etc., shows the intention of the U-tubes in circulation. Generally, in Tamilnadu, the Tamil linguistic chauvinism has been order of the day and such groups could exploit people easily under one or the other pretext.  Though, the concepts of race has been proved myth, they have been continue to stick to such unhistorical race hypotheses and theories exhibiting their attitude of racism and racialism. Such ideologists and promoted experts still talk, interpret and write in terms of “Aryan” and “Dravidian” races and so on. The Tamil diaspora, where pro-Tamil, former LTTE associates, radical Tamil activists and such groups have been active with resources, they have been carrying out such propaganda with ulterior motives. At any cost, the “Tamil chauvinism” cannot be boiled, super-heated and turned to “Tamil separatism” with this type of propagandist attitude. So under such circumstances, the videos and related contents with intent, purport and purpose raise many serious questions in the Indian context.

Korea Queen - Indias plan

Researchers cannot be partisan, anti-Indian and separatist activist: Researchers do not accuse each other or present unhistorical narratives with emotional inducement and excitement for any linguistic group with racial tinge. Particularly, Kannan like experts living in Germany, Germany citizen knows very well how racism works in European countries and Tamilnadu. The “Dravidastan” / “Thani-Tamilnadu”claims are made still here in Tamilnadu lon every pretext. Therefore, the narrtives, symbols, photos, used show anti-India propaganda also. Why then these researchers indulge in such activities?  Incidentally, just last month, their associate and partner, Subashini Tremmel[4] indulged in promoting “thomas myth” through a video[5], that has been blatantly unhistorical and supporting church frauds. Former Archbishop was involved with forged research with Achya Paul and the cae went to Madras high court. Though, the case was settled out of court to save the honour of the church and the bishop, it exposed the dubious research, manufacture of forged evidences and fabrication of copper plates. Though, it was pointed out to her, she kept silent. Therefore, definitely, a doubt arises as to what exactly these researchers want to do with Indians and India? As they have been well-resourced, well-placed and well-informed persons, it is unbelievable that they could have involved in such activities.  As few suggestions are added to conclude:

Suro and Heo ok

  1. Historical research should be free from bias, prejudice and preconceived ideas.
  2. As “Aryan-Dravian race” hypotheses and theories have been declared unhistorical, such interpretation would not do any good in research.
  3. Indians cannot be divided on the basis of linguistic interpretation, excessive repetition of myth-making without any regard for history, historicity and historical evidences.
  4. “Kumarikkandam” hypothesis cannot be a basis for historiography disregarding historical evidences and chronology.
  5. In SEA, the lengends, myhistory and narratives have been more in Sanksrit [not that with any bias], supported by inscriptioonal evidences.
  6. The pre-Pallava inscriptions of SEA should be an eye-opener for Indian researchers, as their Pallava inscriptions are dated later.
  7. As people of Bengal, Orissa, Andhra and Tamilnadu interacted with the SEA countries, all of their influences could be found, but, without any linguistic bias.
  8. In act, the contacts of Bengal, Orissa, and Andhra have been more than Tamilnadu, however, during the medieval period, the Cholas had indelible impression on many factors.

©Vedaprakash

24-05-2018

Akanda dravidastan

[1] கண்ணன் மற்றும் ஒரிசா பாலு – போன்றோரைக் குறிப்பிட்டு உலா வரும் வீடியோ –

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Wu5gucJMLs

[2] Inside Tamil, Published on Oct 1, 2017; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3nzzYP4w6c

[3] coral shree, 2ஆம் உலகத்தமிழ் எழுத்தாளர்கள் மாநாடு, Published on Jun 15, 2017; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWJwATMVlag

[4] https://www.facebook.com/subashini.thf

[5] See her Facebook, U-tube etc., in fact, in “Mintamil” her friends have warned about the myth and advised not be part of such frauds. I have sent an e-mail pointing out the facts, though, she replied he first one, she did not reply to my second e-mail.

Advertisements

The Indian woman who went to Korea and became the Queen – the Korea-Indian connection – Was she from Ayodhya or Dravidanadu? [2]

May 24, 2018

The Indian woman who went to Korea and became the Queen – the Korea-Indian connection – Was she from Ayodhya or Dravidanadu? [2]

Stone pagoda brought by Heo Hwang Ok

The Pagoda in front of tomb of Queen Hur Hwang-ok was made with stones brought from Ayodhya[1]: In South Korea, her tomb is located in Kimhae and there is a stone pagoda in front of it. It is said that the pagoda is made of stones that she brought from Ayodhya. Describing how she landed in Gaya when she first met the king, she said that the heavenly lord (Sange Je) appeared in her parents’ dreams and told them to send her to the Korea as the king had not found a queen yet. Legend states that the queen died at the age of 157. During PM Narendra Modi’s visit to South Korea in May last year 2014, the two countries agreed that a bigger monument of the princess will be built in Ayodhya. Recently, during a meeting with the Korean delegation, Uttar Pradesh CM Akhilesh Yadav said that the memorial would be constructed according to the Korean architecture. He asked Kim Ki-jae, President of Central Karak Clan Society, to provide the design of the monument so that the government can proceed.

Fishes in Korea in the entrance of Kim Suro (King - husband of Heo Hwang Ok_s) tombstone.

The linkage between Korea and India from Ancient tines seminar on 06-11-2015 at Chennai[2]: Interesting facts came to light at the day-long International Conference on Cultural Exchange between India and Korea in Antiquity, organized by the Consulate General of Republic of Korea and the International Institute of Tamil Studies at Hotel Crown Plaza, Chennai on 06-11-2015[3]. Evidently, to compensate or satisfy the “Tamil groups,” this “day-long International Conference” was organized. In the Republic of Korea (South Korea), Tamil words resonate in homes. And many of the native speakers do not realise they are using Tamil words. For, these words are a part of the Korean language. Amma and appa — denoting mother and father in the Korean language too — are among the first words Korean children learn. These are among the thousands of Tamil words that are part of the Korean language. This surprising and interesting fact came to light at the day-long International Conference on Cultural Exchange between India and Korea in Antiquity, jointly organised by the Consulate General of Korea and the International Institute of Tamil Studies here on Friday. Jung Nam Kim, president, Korean Society of Tamil Studies, said there were words found both in Korean and Tamil and in both these languages, they meant the same thing and were pronounced the same way.

Korea Puzhou Queen mother Huagyu Xu native place.Tamil newutting

Linguistic connection between Korea and India[4]: Other Tamil words found in Korean with the same meanings are: naal (day), uraam (manure), pull (grass), pudhu (new), sourru (rice) and yerru (plough). There are more – vanakkam in Tamil is Vankkaamtta in Korean. Bambu denoting a snake, in Tamil, is Bambu-baem in Korean. Santhosham (happiness) in Tamil is Shantutham in Korean. Recently, the State government started translation of Tirukurral into Korean. “We have a shared heritage. The tomb of Queen Suriratna, an Indian princess, in Gimhae in Korea is a symbol of our shared heritage. In fact, Chennai has the largest Korean population — 4,000 — in India,” Kyungsoo Kim, Consul General of Republic of Korea, said. Rathina Pugalenthi, a scholar from Viruthachalam near Cuddolore district, said that dance forms such as Korean drum dance and Thappaattam in Tamil Nadu had at least 12 similarities in terms of movements, and composition of eight members in a group, including two drummers.

2015 IITS, Taramani conference

“…….mounting evidences to indicate that she was from Tamil Nadu, in particular Pandyan or Aai kingdom”: Rathi Jafer, Director at the InKo Centre, points out that there is the historical journey of Bodhidharma, the monk believed to be from South India who spread Buddhism to China and Korea[5]. We aim to initiate a research project soon to examine the historic links between South India and South Korea, both the ancient trajectories and the contemporary manifestations of this inter-cultural exchange. Of particular interest will be the Buddhist links that existed between the Pandyan, Pallava and the Gaya kingdoms, the manner in which Buddhist scriptures, iconography, language and the introduction of iron and steel are credited as having been transferred from South India to South Korea,” she says. Kannan Narayanaa[6] of Tamil Heritage Foundation claimed that “Researchers thought that Ayuta is actually Ayodhya in India. But there has been mounting evidences to indicate that she was from Tamil Nadu, in particular Pandyan or Aai kingdom. Recent genetic studies by researchers Jeong-Sun SEO and Kim Jong-il on the remains of her tomb revealed genetic similarities between Indians and Koreans……. a lot more research needs to be done”. Without giving historical evidences, he made such claims and ended with apologetic note that “a lot more research needs to be done”! However, his intention has been different as revealed later. P. Banumathi, assistant professor, Department of Tamil in Valliammal College for Women, spoke about how the traditional weaving technology of the State was meritoriously followed in the interior parts of Korea even now.

Akanda dravidastan-balu, kannan

Orissa Balu inventor of “Sembavala Rani” who became goddess of Korea: A Malaysian friend sent a video about a “World Tamil Conference” held May 19th and 20th at Cambodia and asked me to go through and opine. When I watched the video carefully, I could understant that the same Kannan Narayanaa was talking in a different tone. Kannan has already uploaded his paper[7] in 2011, in which, repeating the researches of  Professor Kim Byeongmo and  Parthasarathi, suddenly asserts that she started at Nagapattinam or Mamallapuram, touching Sri Lanka, Nicobar Islands, Java (Bali) and finally reaching Guang-Zhou in China. Without giving any historical evidence, he concluded with “Substantial research is due.” In research, the researcher has to bring out his conclusion based on primary evidences, or secondary evidences with new interpretation. He cannot present the stuff that has already been presented, published etc. Here, the pattern note is that one researcher put forward one hypothesis without any historical evidences, but, linguistic with comparing here and there few words. This is picked up by another as concluded “history,” and adds his hypothesis. In short, the same old stuff, well-known stuff is repeated and and again with embellishment and internet bombardment of U-tubes and so on.

Delegates from Malaysia, May 20-05-2018

Orissa Balu’s old linguistic and racial studies promoting emotional Tamil separatism: Ironically, now he revealed the “inventor of Tamil lady who went from Tamilnadu to Korea” instead of Ayodhya. He was referring to “Orissa Balu” who asserted that the lady was from “Ay kingdom.” S. Balasubraminan from Orissa has been obsessive nationalist enthusiast turned Tamil propagandist. He started telling everybody that Tamil was the first language, from which all languages originated, “Kumarikandam” was there under Indian Ocean, he had gone under ocean and sea portions and so on. Though, he has not been telling anything new, for current generation, such stuff would exite them. Thus, he has become popular amongst the “pro-Tamil” groups and even DK invited him to talk about “Kumarikandam” at Periyar Thidal. The problem with this type of “Tamil researchers” have been that they read and interpret every non-Tamil word as Tamil without caring for other evidences. In 1960s one Arunagiri Nadar was doing that by bringing out small booklets showing all words of world were etymologically derived from Tamil. Later in 1980s, it was picked up, but claimed as his invention by one Sattur Sekaran. Now perhaps, Orissa Balu has come. Ironically, already there has been one Blalakrishnan from Orissa, an IAS officer has also been doing similar type of research, however, methodological.

Korea Puzhou Queen mother Huagyu Xu native place.Tamil Heritage foundation


Nagarajan’s paper on the Korean Queen of Tamilnadu[8]: One Prof. Nagarajan sent a paper to “Mintamil” group for the 2015 one-day-seminar, but, not presented or accepted. The following narrative is taken from his paper. “Though Korea has a long history of its own, until 1300 CE Korea remained as unknown and forbidden land to western world. The first publication of its history ‘Samguk Yusa’ or ‘The Heritage History of the Three Kingdoms’, a treasured work in Korea which was written in the 13th century enabled the Koreans to understand their longstanding history, heritage and legacy.  Based on the premise, Korean scholars believed that their first queen has come from a far of land known by the name Ayuktha.  When they commenced the research they first identified Ayuktha Kingdom of Thailand and subsequently reached Ayodhya of India.  Prima facie they believed that sufficient materials are available to accept the premise that their first queen was the Princess of Ayodhya. According to their sources,the princess from India travelled by boat having red colour flag with twin fish. She was accompanied by her brother and a team of 22 members as an embassy to meet the King Suro of Kaya Kingdom.  She travelled for two months and reached the Koean shore and she married King Suro on 27th July CE 48.  She carried with her valuable presents such as precious stones, tea plants, seven storm preventing stones and 12 stringed musical instrument………………[continued]

 

©Vedaprakash

24-05-2018

Subashini, Orissa Balu, Kannan

[1] https://www.thebetterindia.com/48519/ayodhya-south-korea-queen-hur-hwang-ok/

[2] The Hindu, Words that speak of an enduring link between Tamil and Korean, D. Madhavan, NOVEMBER 07, 2015 00:00 IST; UPDATED: NOVEMBER 07, 2015 09:05 IST.

[3] As per the brochure issued by the organizers and available in the “Mintamil” group website.

[4] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/words-that-speak-of-an-enduring-link-between-tamil-and-korean/article7853212.ece

[5] DTnext, Tracing ties between Tamil Nadu and South Korea, Published: Nov 06,201506:42 PM.

[6] https://www.dtnext.in/News/City/2015/11/06184227/Tracing-ties-between-Tamil-Nadu-and-South-Korea.vpf

[7] N. Kannan, The Tamil-Korean Relatioonship, Proceedings on the International Seminar on the Contributions of Tamils to the Composite Culture of Asia, Institute of Asian Studies, Chennai, India. 16th-18th January 2011.  – https://www.academia.edu/16555174/Tamil_Korean_relationship

[8] Prof.V.Nagarajan, The legend of Queen Heo Hwang-ok – the first queen of Korea. Historizing her as the princess from India, Virtual freelance researcher; Email: professor.nagarajan@gmail.com, Mobile: 09003271687

 

Richard Huckle, Vijesh Kooriyil and Hasan Suroor: How these pedophiles are different to be treated variously under secularism or otherwise by the British and Indian media?

June 9, 2016

Richard Huckle, Vijesh Kooriyil and Hasan Suroor: How these pedophiles are different to be treated variously under secularism or otherwise by the British and Indian media?

Pedophiles connected with India are prosecuted in London CourtsJune 2016 flooded with pedopphile cases adjudicated in London, but connected with India: In June 2016, pedophile cases are adjudicated and decided in London courts prosecuting various categories, as reports appearing in the media. They are first Richard Huckle, second Vijesh Kooriyil[1] and then, columnist Hasan Suroor. Indians really have to wonder as to how all these pedophiles have been connected with India, particularly South India. Indians do not know as to such pedophile cases would be decided in June one by one.  Richard Huckle was visiting Bangalore Christian orphanage,   Vijesh Kooriyil hailing from Malappuram and Hasan Suroor, the famous columnist of “The Hindu”! As Indians are imbibed with secularism, western and leftist ldeologists, they are made to think as this prosecution has been of the British type or secular type. Richard Huckle has been Christian, Vijesh Kooriyil obviously Hindu and Hasan Suroor Muslim! Whether the court cases are timed, reporting coincidental or assumed pattern incidental would be decided in due course. However, the accelerated interest, swift attention and rapid curiosity exibited by certain Indian media makes Indians to concentrate in the news. Yes, the Hasan Suroor has been picked up by “The Hindu”, “Outlook, “Scroll.in” etc., to come out with response evidently heaving a sigh of relief. First look at the news appearing in the media.

hasan-suroor-muslim-apologetic-columnistCharged Hasan Suroor found not guilty: A UK court on Tuesday (07-06-2016) dropped a case of “sexual grooming” against an Indian-origin British journalist, London-based Indian journalist and columnist Hasan Suroor for lack of evidence and declared him not guilty[2]. Suroor was ‘trapped’ by a vigilante group at a spot in south London and subjected to aggressive and threatening questioning by the group. The Crown charged Mr. Suroor with violating Section 16 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (sexual grooming of a child) and Section 1(1) of the Criminal Attempts Act (1981)[3]. The Crown formally withdrew charges as its chief witness Jonathan Clark, a member of the vigilante group, withdrew his support for the prosecution and failed to appear. Further, Mr. Suroor has no digital footprint of grooming, which is common marker of online sexual grooming, his lawyer Paul Mason told The Hindu[4].

hasan-suroor-muslim-apologetic-columnist-supporting-isSerious allegations were sought to be pursued on the basis of a “telephone call” from an “unregulated” vigilante group: Suroor, who was arrested by British Transport Police (BTP) last November 2015 after an anti-paedophile sting operation in London, is now planning to sue the vigilante group, Unknown TV, behind the sting for damages[5]. “Following a further review of the case there is now no longer a realistic prospect of conviction,” the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) told Blackfriars Crown Court in a written submission on Tuesday (07-06-2016). The judge ruled that he had decided to return an “unequivocal verdict of not guilty”. The judge ruled he had decided to return an “unequivocal” verdict of “not guilty” and criticised the prosecution’s handling of the case[6]. He said he was “extremely concerned” that such serious allegations were sought to be pursued on the basis of a “telephone call” from an “unregulated” vigilante group[7]. But, Indians wonder as to such an advanced country could have such “unregulated” vigilante group moving all over the London city prouling on alleged pedophiles and the CPS to book case pursued on the basis of a “telephone call” from them.

hasan-suroor-leftist-is-supporter-hindutwa-opponent-twitters-2A written order declaring Suroor innocent is to be issued on 24 June 2016: A written order declaring Suroor innocent is to be issued on 24 June 2016 along with a ruling on his application for his legal costs to be reimbursed. Suroor’s lawyer Paul Mason said: “The robust stand we took has paid off.” The CPS is yet to officially comment on the case[8]. Suroor had been caught on camera as he was confronted by members of Unknown TV, organisers of the sting operation who alleged he was waiting for a 14-year-old girl[9]. A member of the anti-paedophile vigilante group had allegedly posed as a 14-year-old and allegedly solicited Suroor on social media[10]. Groups such as Unknown TV pose as minors on dating and social networking sites in an attempt to catch adult men who solicit sex with minors[11].

Parvathi Menon, The Hindu columnistParvathi Menon expert on “Ayodhya related secular issues”[12] reports about the case: It is intriguing that the “Outlook” has come out with apologia sort of support to Saroor[13], that too, an article type written by[14]Dipsikha Thakur is a trainee journalist with Outlook. She graduated from Cambridge earlier this year with a BA in English and Classics.” She has written a lengthy story, as if, she was writing for her examinations. But, “The Hindu” has been more professional, as it has bandwagon of historians category of columinists (Bangalore’s residential editor of The Hindu). Thus, Parvathi Menon came for resucue[15], “The charges of sexual-grooming filed …have been withdrawn for lack of evidence, although the judge hearing the case at the Blackfriars Crown Court has set the date for formally declaring Mr. Suroor, “not guilty” on June 24…….”. She has been so faithful and loyal to mention him as “Mr.Suroor was ‘trapped’”……….. subjected to aggressive and threatening questioning by the group. …….. as its chief witness Jonathan Clark, a member of the vigilante group, withdrew his support for the prosecution and failed to appear……… Further, Mr. Suroor has no digital footprint of grooming, which is common marker of online sexual grooming, his lawyer Paul Mason told The Hindu……..”. Paravthi Menon as been a vigorous writer on Ayodhya related issues[16] commenting upon the Supreme Court judgment and so on, particularly criticizing Hindutwa[17].

Vijesh Kooriyil Crown Court“….chief witness Jonathan Clark, a member of the vigilante group, withdrew his support for the prosecution and failed to appear….”: The proceedings, as reported by the British media has been intriguing, for the following reasons:

1.       The CPS is yet to officially comment on the case.

2.      The written order to be out on June.24, 2016.

3.      The complaintant / witness did not co-operate or became hostile.

4.      That is, the chief witness Jonathan Clark, a member of the vigilante group, withdrew his support for the prosecution and failed to appear…

5.      The Vigilant group may appeal.

Why then, the particular Indian media houses react differently for Hasan Surror, but keeping silence on the first two pedophiles ant the related issues. When India has already been affected by the pedophile menace, how they could react with bias towards Hasan Suroor alone without caring for thousands and perhaps, lakh of Indian children, young boys and girls, teenage girls and others. Really, it is ironical that they play “communal card” under the guise of “secularism”!

© Vedaprakash

09-06-2016

[1] Kerala Paedophile failed to turn up at Oxford Crown Court on Tuesday to face trial for repeatedly raping a young boy in Oxford between 2010 and 2011. The court heard the 29-year-old business manager was on unconditional bail when he told his solicitors he was going to attend court, before boarding a plane to Delhi from Heathrow on Monday night (06-06-2016). But a jury of seven women and five men unanimously found Kooriyil guilty of both rapes on the boy who was aged six or seven at the time.

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/14536619.International_manhunt_launched_for__dangerous__child_rapist_who_fled_on_the_eve_of_his_trial/

[2] Firstpost.com, Indian-origin UK journalist Hasan Suroor found not guilty in paedophile sting case, PTI  Jun 8, 2016 07:25 IST

[3] The Hindu, Crown Prosecution withdraws charges of sexual grooming against journalist Hasan Suroor, Parvathi Menon, London, June 8, 2016 Updated: June 8, 2016 19:12 IST

[4] http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/crown-prosecution-withdraws-charges-of-sexual-grooming-against-journalist-hasan-suroor/article8705923.ece

[5] http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2016/06/08/hasan-suroor_n_10349758.html

[6] The Hindusthan Times, Case against Indian-origin scribe Suroor dropped in UK, Updated: Jun 08, 2016 10:42 IST

[7] Scroll.in, Not enough evidence against journalist Hasan Suroor in child abuse case, says UK by Scroll Staff

[8] http://www.hindustantimes.com/world/case-against-indian-origin-scribe-suroor-dropped-in-uk/story-NF7rt7o8aoStnOxb6ZvdcK.html

[9] The allegations are related to a sting video shot by the group, in which a group of men are heckling Suroor and accusing him of paedophilia. According to Outlook, the 65-year-old journalist did not deny the group’s allegations that he had met a 14-year-old girl online and that they exchanged sexually suggestive messages. They agreed to meet, and while he was waiting for the girl to show up, the group members appeared with a camera and cornered him. http://scroll.in/latest/809547/not-enough-evidence-against-journalist-hasan-suroor-in-child-abuse-case-says-uk

[10] The Huffington Post, Indian-Origin Journalist Hasan Suroor Found Not Guilty In Paedophile Sting Case, Posted: 08/06/2016 13:41 IST Updated: 08/06/2016 13:42 IST

[11] http://www.firstpost.com/india/indian-origin-uk-journalist-hasan-suroor-found-not-guilty-in-paedophile-sting-case-2822400.html

[12] http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1809/18090790.htm

[13] Outlook, Hasan Suroor and the question of culpability, Thursday, 09 June, 2016.

[14] http://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/hasan-suroor-and-the-question-of-culpability/295868

[15] http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/crown-prosecution-withdraws-charges-of-sexual-grooming-against-journalist-hasan-suroor/article8705923.ece

[16] http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2019/stories/20030926005613100.htm

[17] http://www.countercurrents.org/comm-menon300304.htm

Malda IHC conference, communal fire and blaspheme riots – were they incidental, coincidental or ancillary (4)?

January 14, 2016

Malda IHC conference, communal fire and blaspheme riots – were they incidental, coincidental or ancillary (4)?

Where Heroin is villain-Vast fields of illegal poppy crop at Gopalgunj in West Bengals Malda district

The region is an epicentre of illegal drug trade’: Kaliachak is India’s Afghanistan where poppy farming, weapons smuggling and radicalisation make a lethal cocktail: As Soudhriti Bhabani reports[1], “A vast, green expanse dotted with mosquito net covered plots along the serpentine road near Malda’s Golapganj stands as a forbidden land for the outsider. Narcotics money is at the heart of lawlessness in this West Bengal district bordering Bangladesh. So can anybody deny that such money had not gone into the lavish hospitality extended to the thousands of delegates of IHC assembled there from December 27th to 31st, 2015? The police say a large portion of this drug money goes into buying sophisticated weapons smuggled through the porous Bangladesh border and running hundreds of un-recognised madrassas in the Muslim-dominated (a little over 52 per cent, on last count) district. Why then, IHC had not thought about to pass resolution requesting them to be “nationalists or patriotic”. “It is true that the region is an epicentre of illegal drug trade and a counterfeit currency racket because of its strategic location along the international border,” West Bengal director general of police, Intelligence Branch, Raj Kanojia told Mail Today.  “The district administration is looking into it, especially after the Kaliachak violence. It has taken enough action and now it will get doubled following the police station ransacking incident.” 

 Malda Kaliachak polic  station

The Kaliachak violence on January 3, 2016 was a pre-planned attack by Muslim groups under the garb of protesting against the hate speech of Kamlesh Tiwari: Local officials say the Kaliachak violence on January 3, was a pre-planned attack by Muslim groups under the garb of protesting against the hate speech of Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha leader Kamlesh Tiwari, thus noted Soudhriti Bhabani. Mamta also says it was between the police and the local people, that is all very simple. Why then, innocent hindus, who are not at all connected with all these crimes, should have been attacked? More than 35 vehicles were torched, government properties ransacked and the Kaliachak police station set on fire. “The entire violence was carried out to terrorise the local administration which is trying to crack down on the poppy empire, take revenge against the police and destroy crucial evidence at the police station,” a police official said, requesting anonymity. Barely 8 km from the border, even children and youngsters collect white latex from the opium poppy (Papaver somniferum) – a mother product for producing heroin. It shows that the involved have been manufacturing drugs and they do not any people to come there to know.

Jan.3 rioters start

IHC historians are more worried about stones going to Ayodhya than the extraction of Opium in Malda: Border areas like Golapganj, Baliadanga, Kaliachak, Mohabbatpur, Mothabari and Danga are now the epicentre of anti-national activities, thanks to the flourishing drug trade. Yet, the IHC historians were worried about the stones going to Ayodhya. Senior officials of the excise department told The Hindu[2] on Wednesday 13-01-2016 that poppy cultivated on nearly 500 acres had been destroyed in Kaliachak and adjoining areas over the past one week. “The drive started on January 5 and till today evening (January 13), 1,500 bighas (495 acres) of poppy cultivation has been destroyed in a joint operation where the police, BSF and excise department are involved,” the official said. As the burnt police stations have been repaired, painted and renovated hurriedly to wipe out all the evidences, perhaps, here, also, all the opium crops were destroyed, there would not be any evidence. Then, Mamta happily declare nothing happened here, it is only the media hype about small skirmishes taken place.

Tiwari protest turned riot

While several theories are floating about the January 3 violence in the Kaliachak area, it is also believed that illegal poppy cultivation could be one of the reasons behind the incident: “We have also registered cases against the owners of the land where it has been cultivated. While several theories are floating about the January 3 violence in the Kaliachak area, it is also believed that illegal poppy cultivation could be one of the reasons behind the incident. Several police vehicles were torched and the local police station was attacked during the violence. So when all these activities have been going on, are the eminent, intelligent and progressive historians fools to pretend and pass resolutions about the stones coming to Ayodhya, instead of worrying about the place, where, they conduct the tamasha for second time?  The 71st session of IHC was also held here in February 2011 instead of December 2010. Thus, in five years, they could not assess what has been going on in Malda? Why not they encourage some crackpots to present papers on Opium manufacture in Malda, Poppy Cultivation in the Northern west Bengal and so on!

Fake currency, arms-smuggling in / through Malda: Other than poppy cultivation, smuggling of fake currency is also a major concern for law enforcement authorities in the district which shares a border with Bangladesh. Fake currency notes amounting to Rs.3.08 crore were seized in the district in 2015 and 105 cases were registered. Also, 187 cases of possessing illegal arms were registered in the district in the same year[3].  Be it peddling of Fake Indian Currency Notes (FICN) involving the local youth, illegal migration, drug and arms supply or smuggling, Malda is a bustling hub. “The place has become a mini Afghanistan. It is a very sensitive matter and the assembly election is knocking on the door. All I can say is that the situation in Kaliachak is really alarming,” said a senior Trinamool Congress leader, requesting anonymity for political reasons. He said recently, a car had been caught in the area packed with cash, but had to be released after officials got a call from somebody influential.” When the eminent historians of IHC knew that the stones were coming to Ayodhya, definitely, they knew that Islamic fundamentalists had also been attending the IHC session there in Malda. As they have been Communist card holders, professed-confessed Marxists and well-known leftists and spreading such ideology in the IHC sessions, they also know very well about the narcotic nexus of their Marxists political masters of Malda and the operators working in the northern parts of West Bengal. Earlier, the courts proved as to how the very same eminent historians deposed as witnesses for the cause of Muslims.  And thus, now, it is interpreted[4] that “Malda Violence is a Result of “An Opium War”, Not communal”!

Kalpataru Day and the Day of riots: So the IHC was concluded on December 30th 2015 and the delegates started moving out of Malda from 30th– 31st night onwards. Some delegates were visiting Dakshineswar Kali Temple, and other places. First January though happened to be Kalpataru Day and the Bengalis fervently pray to Kali for their wishes to be fulfilled, as it was also a Friday for the Muslims to get gathered at mosques. So after Friday prayers, they started their riot. And by January 3rd, it became national news. Thus, none bothered about Kalpataru Day, but talked about Kaliachak and not about Kalighat! As Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa has been secularized by “M” by making him to drink like Christian and eat like Mohammedan etc., Kalpataru Day has been completely secularized. IHC delegates would be only thining about the figure of Romila Thapar instead of Kalimata. She has been the centre of attraction and the youngsters virtually prostrate before her! Perhaps, even AMMA could not get such status!

© Vedaprakash

14-01-2016

[1] Soudhriti Bhabani,The region is an epicentre of illegal drug trade’: Kaliachak is India’s Afghanistan where poppy farming, weapons smuggling and radicalisation make a lethal cocktail, PUBLISHED: 23:33 GMT, 9 January 2016 | UPDATED: 00:20 GMT, 10 January 2016.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3392013/The-region-epicentre-illegal-drug-trade-counterfeit-currency-racket-Kaliachak-India-s-Afghanistan-poppy-farming-weapons-smuggling-infiltration-radicalisation-make-lethal-cocktail.html

[2] The Hindu, Crackdown on poppy in Malda, Shiv Sahay Singh, Kolkotta, January, 14, 2016.

[3] http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/crackdown-on-poppy-in-malda/article8103838.ece

[4] http://caravandaily.com/portal/malda-violence-is-a-result-of-an-opium-war-not-communal/

Malda IHC conference, communal fire and blaspheme riots – were they incidental, coincidental or ancillary (2)?

January 14, 2016

Malda IHC conference, communal fire and blaspheme riots – were they incidental, coincidental or ancillary (2)?

Eminent historians, IHC, resoltion mughal tombs to be protected

Unblushing, spineless and biased historians stroking the fire of communalism (30-12-2015): Eminent historians like Irfan Habib, Aditya Mukherjee, Shireen Mousvi, and BP Sahu Indu Banga were present at the 76th nsession, when the resolutions were passed. The resolution recalled that the IHC had said since 1984 that the Babri Masjid was “entitled to protection both as a medieval monument built in 1528 and as an example of Sharqi architecture.” …..“However, it was allowed to be destroyed in 1992 — an act which provoked national condemnation,” the resolution said. “That destruction was planned to enable the ground to be cleared to build a modern temple.” When UPA was in power, they did not worry about the stones coming to Ayodhya, as the work has been going on for many years. Virtually, it is a small factory, where all the tourists can go inside and see the processes carried on without any restriction. About recent happenings of other things (in the name of tolerance etc.,), these historians were keeping quiet, why then suddenly in Malda, they started to give political discourse about the Babri Masjid? How can they forget that they have been condemned by the Allahabad High Court for misleading the Court?

Harbans Mukhia, Suvira Jaiswal, Indu Banga, Rajan Gurukkal, Romila, Shereen Ratnagar

The way the eminent historians deal court cases: Though Romila Thapar roared that they would file an appeal, she kept quiet and disappeared, perhaps, to save her honour. Whenever, Rama comes in the news, she used to come and say something against and disappear. But, she never goes to court, as she threatens. Irfan Habib chose to reply in his own way[1], but, none cared for. Thus, the recent war of words between eminent professional historians and Sangh Parivar outfits reached a new high on Tuesday (30-12-2015), with the Indian History Congress (IHC) passing a resolution against the arrival of engraved stones in Ayodhya, for a future Ram temple at the site where the Babri Masjid once stood[2]. In fact, there was no discussion and the resolutions were passed just like that[3]. On December 23, 2015, The Hindu cleverly carried an editorial to bat for the “eminent” historians, who have been the witnesses for the Muslims in the Babri case in the courts[4]. Not only that they were exposed by the High Court during the cross examination[5], about their spreading lies, planting biased articles in newspapers and deposing without visiting Ayodhya!

Gyanendra Pandey, Suraj Bhan, Indu Banga, D N Jha, K M Srimali, Satish Chandra

The eminent historians as witnesses of Muslims in the Babri Masjid case[6]: It is not known how they agreed to lend their names or ready to be witnesses in the Babari case to support Muslim cause. The eminent historians, historical experts and leftist manufacturers never bother about their secular credentials.  It is not known as to why these coteries should always support for the Masjid or Muslim cause. But, as the Muslim groups have been dominating the IHC sessions and sponsorship provided, they were obliged to act as witnesses. Ironically, the following have been the witnesses of the case in question:

Sl.No Witness no Name of the witness
1 Witness No. 63 R.S. Sharma
2 Witness No. 64 Suraj Bhan
3 Witness No. 65 D.N. Jha[7]
4 Witness No. 66 Romila Thapar
5 Witness No. 70 Irfan Habib
6 Witness No. 72 B.N. Pandey
7 Witness No. 95 K.M. Shrimali
8 Witness No. 99 Satish Chandra
9 Witness No. 102 Gyanendra Pandey

Unfortunately, in the 2012 Allahabad court judgment, when were exposed, they got wild. So they started criticizing the judgment to save their faces. Then, where is their loci standi in criticising the judgment and Court? As witnesses, definitely, they could have deposed before the judges presenting their “historical facts” as they only know how to interpret! The public perhaps, even today do not know that in secular India, these historians stood witnesses to the Muslims! Why none has appeared for Hindus or temple cause? When the cold-blooded terrorist and heinous killer like Kasab is given legal aid, why none appeared for the non-Muslim and non-mosque group? Where is secularism? Would they come out in the public what they told to the judges in the Court? However, the poor show showed in the court by them raises many questions.

Eminent historians, Arun Shourie

How eminent historians made their elite historians to lie before the Court: Let us see, what these eminent historians deposed before the court and offered their expertise during the cross-examination:

  1. Supriya Verma an, “expert” who challenged the excavations done by the ASI, had not read the radar survey report on ground penetration that led to the court order for excavation.
  2. Verma and Jaya Menon, another “expert,” were not present at the time of actual excavations but alleged that pillar bases at the excavated sites were planted.
  3. Suvira Jaiswal says: “Whatever knowledge I gained with respect to the disputed site is based on newspaper reports or what others told.”
  4. She also confessed that she “prepared a report on the Babri dispute after reading newspaper reports and on the basis of discussion with my medieval history expert in my department”.
  5. Jaiswal made an important clarification: “I am not giving (my) statement on oath regarding Babri Mosque without any probe and not on the basis of my knowledge; rather I am giving the statement on the basis of my opinion.”
  6. When opinion can be history why are they all screaming that “faith” cannot be an equally relevant criterion?
  7. Archaeologist Shereen Ratnagar admitted she did not have any “field” experience as far as Babri was concerned and had written an “introduction” to the book of another “expert” who deposed before the court, namely Prof D Mandal.
  8. Suraj Bhan was providing evidence based on medieval history but another expert of Muslim parties, namely Shireen Musavi, says that Bhan is an archaeologists and not a historian.

Is this the way that they should have confessed? Why then pretend as the expert of experts, scholar of scholars etc?

Allahabad High Court judment, eminent historians

“The Communist Party issues a red card, and I am its holder. It is true that I have no faith in religion.”:

  1. Prof Mandal retired from the Department of Ancient History and Archaeology, Allahabad University. He was appointed on an ad hoc basis as Lecturer in 1972 but prior to that he claimed to have worked as exploration assistant since 1960.
  2. Initially he appeared as an expert to depose that there was no archaeological evidence to show either the existence of any temple at the disputed site or that a temple was demolished before construction of the disputed structure.
  3. The statements made by him in cross-examination show the shallowness of his knowledge and provide a sample about all these “eminences”. A few of his quotes:
    1. “I never visited Ayodhya”.
    2. “I do not have any specific knowledge of the history of Babur’s reign.”
    3. “Whatsoever little knowledge I have about Babur is only that Babur was the ruler of the 16th century.
    4. Except for this I do not have any knowledge of Babur.
    5. I do not have knowledge of anything in 2nd Para of the editorial preface to my book (exhibit 63) in which Romila Thapar has written that Vishwa Hindu Parishad, BJP and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, for the first time, raised the issue of the Babri Masjid being located on the place which was earlier Rama’s birth place.
    6. I also do not know whether or not it is correctly written on page 10 of the aforesaid preface that Ayodhya is a site of pilgrimage for adherents of Ramanand school.”
    7. “The Communist Party issues a red card, and I am its holder. It is true that I have no faith in religion.”

So when they were torn into pieces exposing their expertise, professionalism, peer-group review and appreciation etc., how they still hold their heads high and gather courage to pass such resolutions?

  • Can Romila Thapar forget this?
  • Can Supriya Verma, Jaya Menon, Suvira Jaiswal, Shereen Ratnagar, Mandal etc., deny their role in spreading falsehood?
  • Then, what position, they have to pass resolutions at IHC in this cowardly fashion, instead of going to court?

© Vedaprakash

14-01-2016

 

[1]https://ia700408.us.archive.org/32/items/HistoryJudgementOfAllahabadHighCourtInRamjanmabhumibabriMasjidCase/HistoryJudgementOfAllahabadHighCourtInRamjanmabhumibabriMasjidCase.pdf

[2] http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/historians-condemn-buildup-in-ayodhya/article8042477.ece

[3] When Prof Grover, ICHR chairman (former) was there, he used to question their audacity to propose such resolutions, leave alone getting passed in this way. Now, the enjoying members did not know any implication of such resolutions passed, might feel heat now or later, when they realize.

[4] http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/editorial-on-ayodhya-temple-ominous-signals-from-ayodhya/article8018720.ece?ref=relatedNews

[5] http://www.firstpost.com/india/babri-demolition-how-hc-verdict-discredited-eminent-historians-547549.html

[6] https://vedaprakash.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/ramajanmabhumi-babarimasjid-evidences-and-court-or-hisorians-as-witnesses-and-sunni-wakf-board-experts/

[7] http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/stories/20101022272113200.htm

Malda IHC conference, communal fire and blaspheme riots – were they incidental, coincidental or ancillary (1)?

January 14, 2016

Malda IHC conference, communal fire and blaspheme riots – were they incidental, coincidental or ancillary (1)?

Azam Khan

Malda, IHC and resolution passed on Ayodhya-stones: The speeches of Azam Khan in November 2015 and the resolutions passed by IHC in December 2015 have been the ignition for the Muslims to run riot. “The collection of stones at Ayodhya raises the suspicion of another breach of law.  The Indian History Congress urges the Central and State governments to ensure that religious sentiments are not incited to play with monuments and break the law with impunity,” noted the IHC[1]. It is ironical that the eminent historians, who were indicted by the Allahabad High court for giving false evidences on historical and archaeological facts pertaining to Ayodhya have audacity to talk about law, breaking law etc. At the IHC session itself, many Malda Muslims attended to observe the proceedings of the Conference and they were very happy to note that the dominant coterie of IHC has been favouring for the cause of Muslims. Many papers read there have been in support of the Muslim-cause in many aspects. Of course, the AMU group conducted separate session, as usual, to kindle fire.

Ayodhya stones IHC resolution

Unblushing historians plan riot again in 2015: During the 76th session of the IHC held at the University of Gour Banga in Malda from December 27 to December 29, the Congress passed resolutions on the need to prevent the formulation of uniform syllabi across all universities, protect monuments, and stop the utilisation of monuments destroyed illegally (such as the Babri Masjid) for political gains. The IHC was established in Poona in 1935 at its first session under the name Modern History Congress, which was altered to its present name in 1938 at its second session at Allahabad. It was consciously organised as a forum for Indian historians and has held its annual sessions regularly since 1938. It has regularly considered issues of historical and national interest, and passed resolutions. In 1975 and 1976 it was the only Indian academic organisation that criticised the imposition of the Emergency in its resolutions. Since 1984 the IHC began to raise its voice against the threat to monuments, posed by the agitation against the Babri Masjid and agitations, both from different groups, demanding the Right of Worship in different monuments. It condemned the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, and its present resolution is consistent with the standpoint it has consistently taken as the main body of India’s professional historians[2].

Eminent historians, IHC, resoltion

Flexibility needed for History Syllabi in Universities: The Indian History Congress is deeply concerned by the decision of the University Grants Commission (UGC) to introduce a uniform syllabus across universities in the country. Such a measure does not do justice to the differentiated nature of universities in different parts of the country. They adversely affect all of them by not allowing them to make use of their natural potential. Conceding a latitude of 20 to 30% will not address this problem. The work of regulatory bodies such as UGC should normally be to monitor the implementation of minimum standards and the basic principles enshrined in the constitution. Creating a homogenous syllabus from the whole country goes beyond this mandate and will strike at the roots of the autonomy of universities. Imposing a syllabus necessarily created by those who are unaware of the ground realities of particular universities will be tantamount to downgrading universities to the level of primary schools, defeating the purpose of higher education, and denying universities a chance to develop the resources available to each.

Eminent historians, IHC, resoltion mughal tombs to be protected

Resolution 2Protecting Monuments: The Indian History Congress has been constantly drawing the attention of the Archaeological Survey and other authorities towards the deteriorating condition of several monuments in the country, and their poor present state of preservation and lack of proper repair. At its 75th session (2014) at JNU, Delhi, it cautioned all concerned against the kind of restoration work by the Aga Khan Trust, which has gravely imperiled the status of Humayun’s Tomb — a world-heritage site. There are reports in the press of a crematorium affecting the Taj Mahal, and a fly-over dominating Akbar’s tomb, Sikandra. There are fears that Ajanta frescoes are getting affected. It is necessary to develop and enforce a rigorous system of protection and preservation on the strict established principles, so as to save our great national heritage.

IHC resoltion, ram-mandir, stones

Resolution 3No permission must be given to utilise the illegal destruction of monuments such as Babri Masjid for political gains: The Indian History Congress had strongly urged at its sessions from 1984 onwards that the Babri Masjid was entitled to protection both as a medieval monument, built in 1528, and as an important example of Sharqi architecture. However, it was allowed to be destroyed in 1992, an act which provoked national condemnation. That destruction was planned to enable the ground to be cleared to build a modern temple. Now the collection of stones at Ayodhya raises the suspicion of another breach of law. The Indian History Congress urges the central and state governments to ensure that religious sentiments are not incited to play with monuments and break the law with impunity.

Destruction_of_the_Temple_of_Baalshamin

IHC, ISIL and destruction of historical monuments: However, they are not worried about the artefacts, archaeological and historical evidences are being destroyed in Afghanistan, Syria and other places by Taliban, ISIL etc. It is not that they are not not connected with India and Indian history. Not only now, many Muslim boys and girls with all their engineering and other professional degrees have been sneaking to Syria and ready fight for ISIL and of course against India also. The Taliban, ISIL and all other jihadi groups have already declared that they would invade India and establish an Islamic State there or annexe it to Global Islami State to be formed. Then, what would happen to the historical monuments, toms etc., in India, about which the eminent historians have been so worried to pass resultions!

UGB_Main_Building

Malda-IHC manipulated to suit the Islamic fundamentalism: The IHC has been systematically promoting absurd papers submitted by some crackpot-writers like “Ayodhya was in Afghanistan” and so on. Though, majority believers of India and the members of IHC have been Hindus, the IHC coterie never bothers about Hindus, but promote only Islamic fundamentalism. If any one goes through proceedings volumes, she / he can find out easily as to how they have been biased against Hindus. As IHC has been a registered society and most of the members have been Hindus, the selected coterie cannot manipulate the proceedings in this way.  the As most of the right-wing and other neutral historians stopped attending the IHC, because of the manipulative, authoritarian and fascistic attitude of these so-called eminent, elite and emeritus historians, it has been working unquestioned by anybody. Of course, for them, there is no provision in MRTP ACT[3] to impose restrictions or conditions to contain their fascist monopoly activities. Recently, lakhs of rupees were pumped to accommodate and feed lavishly the delegates and hence, none even think of such things happening in IHC. The delegates were describing as to how many sweets were provided and so on at the Malda session!

RSS parivar IHC

Eminent historians, RSS and calling names: Azam Khan called RSSwalas homosexuals and one Hindu activist called Mohammedans also homosexuals and perhaps their leader also. So also IHC used to call RSS in different names. It is just like “tu-tu-me-me” [you scold, I scold; you abuse, I also abuse], as they used to tell in hindi.  However, why the eminent historians have been so allergetic, nervous and afraid of RSS is not known. From Romila Thapar to Irfan Habib, they are so worried about RSS and they take every opportunity to call RSS with names. Just one month back to IHC-Malda, when Intellectuals, scholars, academics, authors, scientists and artists gathered in New Deelhi here on Novemver 1, 2015 and called upon President Pranab Mukherjee to advise the government to ensure the freedom of life, faith and expression, in his speech, historian Irfan Habib said[4], “………There is not much difference between Islamic State (IS) and the RSS as far as intellect goes.” However, he could not condemn any of the Malda anti-national groups viz., Ittehad-e-Millat, Idara-e-Shariya and other leftist gangs involved in opium cultivation, drug manufacturing, arms-smuggling, fake-currency circulation and other illegal activities reported in the media openly. Jyoti Punwani notes[5] that “It’s the RSS for whom India’s senior most historian is an object of hate” under the caption “A history lecture under the shadow of thugs”. Ever since, they were indicted in the Allahabad High Court judgment, they became uncomfortable, as the English knowing readers have realized their double-game of supporting fundamentalist, radical and terrorist Muslims under the guise of promoting Marxist historiography and secularism with scientific temper and so on. Thus, to hide their motive, they try to attack RSS for their folly. Thus, now, they mention about Akhil Bharatiya Itihas Sankalan Samiti also in their writings and speeches.

© Vedaprakash

14-01-2016


 

[1] http://www.thecitizen.in/NewsDetail.aspx?Id=6447&Of/Lahore/and/Ayodhya%E2%80%A6.

[2] http://indianculturalforum.in/index.php/2016/01/11/indian-history-congress-dont-break-monuments-dont-incite-religious-sentiments/

[3] The Monopolistic and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969.

[4] http://www.thehindu.com/news/not-much-difference-between-is-rss/article7832322.ece

[5] Jyoti Punwani, A history lecture under the shadow of thugs, October.29, http://thewire.in/2015/10/29/a-history-lecture-under-the-shadow-of-thugs-14369/

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/saffronising-textbooks-where-myth-and-dogma-replace-history/story-CauM4dmmsPGrjZ3APAvNxO.html

The 10th National Conference of ABISY was held at Mysore from December 24th to 26th 2015 on “Women in Indian culture: From ancient to Modern” (3)

December 29, 2015

The 10th National Conference of ABISY was held at Mysore from December 24th to 26th 2015 on “Women in Indian culture: From ancient to Modern” (3).

RSS briefed about the conference earlier - Indian Express, Aug 17, 2015

ABISY, RSS and women: In August itself, the RSS briefed about the conference[1] as could be noted from the Indian express. From December 24 to 26, Akhil Bharatiya Itihas Sankalan Yojana (ABISY) will hold a three-day conference in Mysore, where around 1,000 delegates will discuss “Women in Indian culture: through the ages”. “We will discuss their strength and their importance in various phases of Indian history. Women in Rig Vedic times enjoyed a high status in society but due to several reasons their status began to decline,” said Balmukund, an RSS pracharak working with ABISY. Sources say an RSS meeting in Nainital discussed the gender ratio in RSS affiliates (see chart). “Representation of women is gradually increasing in our organisations. At the Ahmedabad conclave, we will discuss several aspects of women empowerment and their role in our organisations,” said Mahila Samanway chief Geeta Tayi Gunde, who coordinates among the affiliates on women’s issues. Though RSS shakhas don’t allow women, a separate organisation called Rashtra Sevika Samiti holds women’s shakhas on the lines of RSS shakhas[2]. But, RSS has been having dialogue with Christians and Muslims. However, they are not able to counter negative reorting of media, whenever, it is mentioned that they are against so-and-so and so on[3].

Aggressive left historiansThe aggressive domination of the Leftist and Muslim historians: The excessive, extreme and unnecessary domination of the leftists and Muslim groups over the proceedings of IHC has been resented, questioned and examined by neutral historians, archaeologists and other connected experts many times. The way they have been projecting the medieval and modern periods and suppressing the ancient period and also the interpretation of national, social, religious and political issues, problems and controversies in a biased manner much against the interests of common Indians[4]. The IHC coetrie have been authoritatively imposing such one-sided view for the last 60 years, as could be noted not only from the yearly proceedings volumes, but also their interviews, views and comments registered in the media on various occassions. Ironically the charges of so-called elite, eminent and emeritus hisorians have been proved baseless even at the level of Supreme Court, when their own engaged experts filed petitions alleging the saaffronization of educational curriculum, academic and social institutions, the Hon’ble Court ruled out dismissing them. Romila Thapar agitated and openly questioned the judgment dubbing as “Hindutwa judgment” and declared that they would be appealing against the judgment, but noting happened. So in a democaratic country, all views have to be accommodated, naturally, the so-called rightist, nationalist and hindutwa views also be provided space equally. As the dominant leftist and Muslim coetrie does not relish this, the ideological struggle has now been turned into political one and for which they are responsible. This was revealed even during the IHC-2014 jeld at JNU taking the issue of “glorification of Nehruvian era”[5].

marxist-historian-work-together-ideologicallyABISY, RSS and IHC: RSS and IHC were having ideological struggle over Indin history, historiography and methodoloy for the last three decades. While the IHC dominant groups have been moving ahead with the current topics, recent issues and contemporary problems, the rightist, nationalist and patriotic counterparts have not even realized their exisence. Most of them have been almost The IHC ideological bandwagon and aggressive coetrie many times do not recongize peer group experts, only because of the reason that they might be against their ideology. Thus, many prominent, professional and secialized historians, archaeologists, epigraphists, numismaticians and others were / are never invited or allowed to attend the conference by their own “rogue mannerism” but showing off as “expertized professionalism”.  Though RSS has been trying to counter them through ABISY and BISS, their heads, zonal heads and members have been –

  1. Not matching with the professionalism of the leftist and Muslim ideologists.
  2. The vigour started in 1980s died down with changed persons heading[6].
  3. Instead of “offensive”, “defensive” position is taken in the match, however, there have been some individual fighters, but they are ignored by the rightists.
  4. In spite of the judicial victory[7], they could not continue the academic struggle with proficiency, professionalism and practice[8].
  5. inexperienced in preseting papers, if at all, they come forward to present.
  6. read and understand Indian history any perspective.
  7. Ameteurish, unprofessional and incompetent in dealing with their ideological opponents.
  8. Dormant because of excessive patriotism and refused to look at other ideologists in right perspective.
  9. Ignore, sideline and even disregard the exerienced who come to join, work with and get along the ABISY and BISS.
  10. Active only when BJP or NDA is in power and latent during other periods.

Unless, the rightists do not revaluate, reassess and reorganize themselves, they cannot win the battle.

Nehruvian era, IHC, ICHR and RSS (2014): Even as Madan Mohan Malaviya and Shyamaprasad Mookerjee continue to make news headlines, Jawaharlal Nehru dominated a day in New Delhi where historians praised his role, at an event that was sponsored among others by the state governments of Kerala, Karnataka and Assam, all Congress-led administrations. The three-day long Platinum Jubilee edition of the Indian History Congress (IHC), which concluded in JNU last year, also counts the Union government bodies ICHR andUGC among its main sponsors. The IHC Association, which organizes the meet, had set a broad direction for the annual event with the theme ‘Humanism, Tolerance and Reason: Defining the Contours of History’. But two panels under the auspices of the left-leaning JNU and Aligarh Historians’ Society (AHS) expressly focused on discussions and paper presentations concerning the Nehruvian Era and its current relevance, and the past and present forms of inequality in India, respectively[9]. But Dr Rakesh Batabyal, Local Secretary of the IHC, said there was nothing much political to read into the event. “We had written to all state governments for sponsorship and received from these three. Also, the HRD Ministry through UGC and ICHR has also sponsored the event, so there is nothing political about it,” he said. Batabyal pointed out that ICHR head Y. Sudharshan Rao – an appointee of the BJP-led Central government[10] – had also been invited and he attended the event. “The reason for focusing on Nehru was on account of the commemoration of the ex-PM’s Golden death anniversary. Also, we have voices from the economic right to left, it was an open field, he added. He also conceded, though, that finding historians from cultural right was difficult, and thus no presence could be seen,” he said. On its part, the RSS-affiliated history research organization was not too impressed with the event. “We used to go for the event in the past, but now none of our office bearers goes. The IHCA is a communist-leaning organization,” Mukul Pandey (sic), General Secretary of the ABISY, told ET[11].

© Vedaprakash

29-12-2015

[1] New Indian Express, Gender balance: RSS working to get more women in its ranks, Written by Shyamlal Yadav | New Delhi | Updated: August 17, 2015 2:27 pm.

[2] http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/gender-balance-across-organs-rss-looks-to-get-more-women-in-its-ranks/

[3] The ABISY is working on several projects to rewrite history. Last year the outfit organised a function at National Museum to pay homage to the “last Hindu emperor of Delhi Hemu Vikramaditya”. From December 24 to 26, ABISY will hold a three-day conference in Mysore, where around 1,000 delegates will discuss “Women in Indian Culture: Through the Ages.” – See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/tatya-tope-rss-linked-outfit-backs-descendants-theory-on-his-death/#sthash.KZjgannq.dpuf

[4] The Proceeding volumes sprak the truth and the papers chosen to include expose their bias, prejudice and hatred against others. Many times, very good researched papers, eventhough recommended by the sectional presidents after much appreciated discussion, were not included brcause of such professional, ideological and regional bias.

[5] The Economic Times, Historians praise Jawaharlal Nehru at annual Indian History Congress Association meet,AKSHAY DESHMANE, ET Bureau Dec 30, 2014, 09.33PM IST.

[6] During the New Delhi session, many of the faithfuls simply sent the life membership money with the note, “As per the directions of Mananiya Moropant Pingely, I hereby send the fees”. Alerted and bewildered by them, the ruling IHC bandwagon simply rejected their membership. However, both had been proved wrong, as the Delhi High Court decided differently, when they went to court.

[7] The so-called “Hindutwa” judgment consequent to the NCERT issue and coupled with “saffronization of academic curriculum”, the rightwing ideologists did not pursue the issue professionally.

[8] Note below what Balamkund says about it! . On its part, the RSS-affiliated history research organization was not too impressed with the event. “We used to go for the event in the past, but now none of our office bearers goes. The IHCA is a communist-leaning organization,” Mukul Pandey (sic), General Secretary of the ABISY, told ET.

[9] IHC dominat ideologists manipulate the session by bringing some unassuming paper presenters to force their views on others. This they have been doing in the case of RJM controversy also, making one fellow to present a paper “Ayodhya was in Afganistan”!

[10] This way of reporting has also been biased, because during the non-BJP regimes, the members were only the “appointees” of Communist, Muslim and Congress parties. In fact, the media should be balanced enough to address the issues properly without any pre-conceived notions.

[11] http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-12-30/news/57528747_1_ichr-jnu-event

Ramajanmabhumi-Babarimasjid, evidences and Court or Hisorians as witnesses and Sunni Wakf Board Experts!

October 16, 2010

Ramajanmabhumi-Babarimasjid, evidences and Court or

Hisorians as witnesses and Sunni Wakf Board Experts!

Vedaprakash

Ramajanmabhumi-Babarimasjid and eminent hisorians: The eminent historians would appear immediately, whenever “Rama” appears in the headlines of Indian media. They start interpreting historicity of “Ramayana” according to their own way without any regard for the other view or perspective[1]. Even in the case of Sethu-samuthram, they started writing in “the Hindu” and EPW grinding their mills as usual[2]. Of course, the left media does / did not want the opinion of the others[3]. They vociferously lecture and write that they would appeal against the judgment and so on, but disappear thereafter. They exploit every forum like IHC etc., only to project their viewpoint[4]. Romila Thapar roared, “We would appeal against this jugment”, when the so-called “Hindutva judgment” came[5], but nothing happened! And the faithful readers of “The Hindu”, Frontline, EPW and the devoted members of IHC etc., also do not bother as to why their eminent historians tell lies or play such dubious games? Why they believe the eminent historians, because of their eminence or for their duplicity? Have they ever thought about them as to why they behave like that? Now, again these left / eminent intellectuals / historians have been busy with issuing statements. Besides, historians and experts others too join!

130 experts sign – ASI report should be made public, says appeal to Chief Justice[6] (14-10-2010): Now 130 experts have come out with an open letter addressed to the Chief Justice of India! The news reports say like this, “The Allahabad High Court based a significant part of its judgment in the Ayodhya case on the evidence provided by the Archaeological Survey of India’s report on its excavations at the site, submitted to the court in 2003. They accuse that the report is still hidden from the public eye, and a virtual gag order placed on archaeologists who acted as observers during the excavation[7]. Now that the judgment has been pronounced, a group of 130 academics, activists and intellectuals have demanded that the ASI report be published. In an open letter[8] to the Chief Justice of India and the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, they urged that the report “be made available for scrutiny in the public domain, especially to scholars, as it is now a part of the public judicial record.” The ASI report, which concluded that a temple had existed at the site, has been criticised by many archaeologists for ignoring evidence such as animal bones, which would not have been found in a temple for Ram, and the existence of glazed pottery and graves at all levels which indicated Muslim residence”[9].

Shereen Ratnagar and D. Mandal were slapped with contempt of court charges by the Allahabad High Court: “In May, archaeologists Shereen Ratnagar and D. Mandal were slapped with contempt of court charges by the Allahabad High Court for sharing their observations in a book, titled “Ayodhya: Archaeology After Excavation”, published by Tulika in 2007. The orders in that case have been reserved”. That means they know the implications of the law. That is why they have been keeping quite since 2003!

The open letter and signatories: “The open letter notes that, “the world at large is equally constrained to silence. Such a judicially ordained zone of uncertainty curbs freedom of expression and fair comment.” Indians have never seen them in other caes where such issues have been involved. Thus, they want to selective!

Signatories: “The letter was signed by well-known Indian academics such as Sumit Sarkar, Uma Chakravarti, K.N. Pannikkar, K. Satchidanandan, Ajay Dandekar and filmmakers such as Anand Patwardhan, as well as less well-known Indian citizens – a software engineer, a textile design consultant, a teacher[10]. Academics from abroad – including those from universities in London, Chicago, Stockholm and Copenhagen – have also signed the letter, as friends of India”. This type of letters have been issued since 1992 and many times, the so-called signatories say that they have simply agreed to include their names in such letters. In some cases, they did / do not know also about the inclusion of their names!

Romila Thapar and others: Statement issued through Sahamat (01-10-2010): Another report goes like this: “Questioning the verdict of the Allahabad High Court on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suits, a group of left-leaning intellectuals on Friday said the judgment was “yet another blow to the secular fabric of the country” and the “repute of our judiciary”.  The scholars, including Romila Thapar, K M Shrimali, K N Pannikar, Irfan Habib, Utsa Patnaik and C P Chandrasekhar, said in a statement through the platform of Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust (SAHMAT) that the verdict had raised “serious concerns” because of the way history, reason and secular values had been treated in it. “The view that the Babri Masjid was built at the site of a Hindu temple, which has been maintained by two of the three judges, takes no account of all the evidence contrary to this fact turned up by the Archaeological Survey of India’s own excavations — the presence of animal bones throughout as well as the use of ‘surkhi’ and lime mortar (all characteristic of Muslim presence) rule out the possibility of a Hindu temple having been there beneath the mosque,” the statement noted.

The verdict on Ayodhya: a historian’s perspective[11] (01-10-2010): Under this caption, the view of romila thapar appeared in “The Hindu”. It goes like this, “It has annulled respect for history and seeks to replace it with religious faith.

“The verdict is a political judgment and reflects a decision which could as well have been taken by the state years ago. Its focus is on the possession of land and the building a new temple to replace the destroyed mosque. The problem was entangled in contemporary politics involving religious identities but also claimed to be based on historical evidence. This latter aspect has been invoked but subsequently set aside in the judgment.

“The court has declared that a particular spot is where a divine or semi-divine person was born and where a new temple is to be built to commemorate the birth. This is in response to an appeal by Hindu faith and belief[12]. Given the absence of evidence in support of the claim, such a verdict is not what one expects from a court of law. Hindus deeply revere Rama as a deity but can this support a legal decision on claims to a birth-place, possession of land and the deliberate destruction of a major historical monument to assist in acquiring the land?

“The verdict claims that there was a temple of the 12th Century AD at the site which was destroyed to build the mosque — hence the legitimacy of building a new temple.

“The excavations of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and its readings have been fully accepted even though these have been strongly disputed by other archaeologists and historians. Since this is a matter of professional expertise on which there was a sharp difference of opinion the categorical acceptance of the one point of view, and that too in a simplistic manner, does little to build confidence in the verdict. One judge stated that he did not delve into the historical aspect since he was not a historian but went to say that history and archaeology were not absolutely essential to decide these suits! Yet what are at issue are the historicity of the claims and the historical structures of the past one millennium.

“A mosque built almost 500 years ago and which was part of our cultural heritage[13] was destroyed wilfully by a mob urged on by a political leadership. There is no mention in the summary of the verdict that this act of wanton destruction, and a crime against our heritage, should be condemned. The new temple will have its sanctum — the presumed birthplace of Rama — in the area of the debris of the mosque. Whereas the destruction of the supposed temple is condemned and becomes the justification for building a new temple, the destruction of the mosque is not, perhaps by placing it conveniently outside the purview of the case.

Has created a precedent[14]: The verdict has created a precedent in the court of law that land can be claimed by declaring it to be the birthplace of a divine or semi-divine being worshipped by a group that defines itself as a community. There will now be many such janmasthans wherever appropriate property can be found or a required dispute manufactured. Since the deliberate destruction of historical monuments has not been condemned what is to stop people from continuing to destroy others? The legislation of 1993 against changing the status of places of worship has been, as we have seen in recent years, quite ineffective.

What happened in history, happened. It cannot be changed[15]. But we can learn to understand what happened in its fuller context and strive to look at it on the basis of reliable evidence. We cannot change the pas[16]t to justify the politics of the present. The verdict has annulled respect for history and seeks to replace history with religious faith. True reconciliation can only come when there is confidence that the law in this country bases itself not just on faith and belief, but on evidence”.

Earlier stand – Irfan Habib (01-10-2010): “With the three judges pronouncing differing opinions on the historical and archaeological aspects of the case in the Allahabad High Court’s judgement on the disputed land in Ayodhya, many leading historians have been left bemused. “It’s not a logical judgement with so many parts going 2-1. One does not accept the logicality of the judgement,” said Irfan Habib, a noted historian and a former Chairman of the Indian Council of Historical Research who earlier taught at the Aligarh Muslim University. He noted that the verdict seemed to legitimise the events of 1949[17], when an idol was placed inside the mosque, by constant references. On the other hand, by minimising any mentions of the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, the court seemed to be disregarding it, he said. He also expressed surprise that two judges questioned the date of construction of the Babri Masjid, as well as the involvement of emperor Babar or his commander Mir Baqi, since there had been clear inscriptions to this effect before the demolition. “Things that are totally clear historically, the court has tried to muddy,” he said[18].

D. N. Jha: “The historical evidence has not been taken into account,” said D.N. Jha, history professor at the Delhi University. Noting the judgement’s mention of the “faith and belief of Hindus” in reference to the history of the disputed structure, Dr. Jha asked why the court had requested an excavation of the site.“If it is a case of ‘belief,’ then it becomes an issue of theology, not archaeology. Should the judiciary be deciding cases on the basis of theology is a question that needs to be asked,” he said.

Supriya Verma, one of the observers: Professional archaeologists also noted that the judges did not seem to rely heavily on the Archaeological Survey of India’s court-directed excavation of the site in 2003, at least in the summaries of their verdict available on Thursday evening. “Somewhere, there is doubt about the credibility of that report,” said Supriya Verma of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, who acted as an observer during the ASI excavation. She noted that neither Justice Sudhir Agarwal nor Justice Dharam Veer Sharma even referenced the ASI report to support his conclusion on the existence of a temple on the site before the mosque was built. “It is almost as though they themselves were not convinced by the evidence. They are clearly conceding that there was no archaeological evidence of a temple or of its demolition…It is a judgement of theology,” she said.

Jaya Menon, one of the observers: Another observer of the ASI excavation, Jaya Menon of the Aligarh Muslim University, noted that the ASI report itself did not provide any evidence of a demolition, and only asserted the existence of a temple in its conclusion. “So I don’t know on what basis they made their judgements,” she said. The ASI report had been criticised by many archaeologists for ignoring evidence such as animal bones, which would not have been found in a temple for Ram, and the existence of glazed pottery and graves which indicated Muslim residents.

The eminent historians as witnesses of Muslims in the Allahabad case: The eminent historians, historical experts  and leftist manufacturers never bother about their secular credentials.  It is not known as to why these coteries should always support for the Masjid or Muslim cause. Ironically, the following have been the witnesses of the case in question, which is criticised by them:

Sl.No Witness no Name of the witness
1 Witness No. 63 R.S. Sharma
2 Witness No. 64 Suraj Bhan
3 Witness No. 65 D.N. Jha[19]
4 Witness No. 66 Romila Thapar
5 Witness No. 70 Irfan Habib
6 Witness No. 72 B.N. Pandey
7 Witness No. 95 K.M. Shrimali
8 Witness No. 99 Satish Chandra
9 Witness No. 102 Gyanendra Pandey

Then, where is their loci standi in criticising the judgment and Court? As witnesses, definitely, they could have deposed before the judges presenting their “historical facts” as they only know how to interpret! The public perhaps, even today do not know that in secular India, these historians stood witnesses to the Muslims! Why none has appeared for Hindus or temple cause? When the cold-blooded terrorist and heinous killer like Kasab is given legal aid, why none appeared for the non-Muslim and non-mosque group? Where is secularism? Would they come out in the public what they told to the judges in the Court? However, the poor show showed in the court by them raises many questions.

HC judge exposed experts espousing Masjids cause: Waqf Board Line-Up Accused Of Having Ostrich-Like Attitude:  The role played by independent experts, historians and archaeologists who appeared on behalf of the Waqf Board to support its claim has come in for criticism by one Allahabad High Court judge in the Ayodhya verdict. While the special bench of three judges unanimously dismissed objections raised by the experts to the presence of a temple, it was Justice Sudhir Agarwal who put their claims to extended judicial scrutiny. Most of these experts deposed twice. Before the ASI excavations, they said there was no temple beneath the mosque and, after the site had been dug up,they claimed what was unearthed was a mosque or a stupa. During lengthy cross-examination spread over several pages and recorded by Justice Agarwal, the historians and experts were subjected to pointed queries about their expertise, background and basis for their opinions.
To the courts astonishment, some who had written signed articles and issued pamphlets, were withering under scrutiny and the judge said they were displayed an ostrich-like attitude to facts. He also pointed out how the independent witnesses were connected one had done a PhD under the other, another had contributed an article to a book penned by a witness.

The vociverous historians could not give evidences properly as witnesses with all their extertise[20]: Some instances underlined by the judge are[21]:

  • Suvira Jaiswal[22] deposed whatever knowledge I gained with respect to disputed site is based on newspaper reports or what others told (other experts). She said she prepared a report on the Babri dispute on basis of discussions with medieval history expert in my department.

  • Supriya Verma[23], another expert who challenged the ASI excavations, had not read the ground penetration radar survey report that led the court to order an excavation. She did her PhD under another expert Shireen F Ratnagar.

  • Verma and Jaya Menon[24] alleged that pillar bases at the excavated site had been planted but HC found they were not present at the time the actual excavation took place.

  • Archaeologist Shereen F Ratnagar has written the introduction to the book of another expert who deposed, Professor Mandal. She admitted she had no field experience.

Normally, courts do not make adverse comments on the deposition of a witness and suffice it to consider whether it is credible or not, but we find it difficult to resist ourselves in this particular case considering the sensitivity and nature of dispute and also the reckless and irresponsible kind of statements…[25] the judge noted. He said opinions had been offered without making a proper investigation, research or study in the subject. The judge said he was startled and puzzled by contradictory statements.When expert witness Suraj Bhan deposed on the Babri mosque, the weight of his evidence was contradicted by anotherexpert for Muslim parties, Shirin Musavi, who told the court that Bhan is an archaeologist and not an expert on medieval history[26]. Justice Agarwal noted that instead of helping in making a cordial atmosphere it tends to create more complications, conflict and controversy. He pointed out that experts carry weight with public opinion.

When the matter is subjudice, one has to obey law: It is a simple matter that whenever, any issue / case is pending with the Court, as the matter is subjudice, it should not be discussed or the decisions cannot be drawn in favour of anybody. However, these left historians etc., have been always speaking and writing supporting for Muslim cause or against Hindus, as is evident from their own recorded / printed statements / articles always published in the selected in few journals / ndewspapers. Unfortunately, they have even agreed to be witnesses for the Wakf Board in the Allahabad Court as their names are figuring. Ironivcally, they are called as Sunni Wakf Board experts![27]

When religions rely upon belief system, so also secularism historians too belive so ignoring objectivity: Like believers and dis-believers historians too believe and compel others to believe their perspective without any objectivity. As their objectivity differes, their perspective also differ, but try to argue with ideology, as could be understood by others. With belief system, no two ideologists could come together; with objectivity no two historians could accept the same historical event in the same view or pwerspective; here, the media has been projecting only one view. So what about the other view and why the media does not provide opportunity to accommodate their view? Should “audi alteram partem – hear the other side and decide” be applicable only to the Courts according to the principle of natural justice or the historians do not want to follow?

The same pattern as noted in the case of DK, DMK and other rapid atheists and radical experts is noted in the case of these eminent historians or Sunni Wakf Board experts: As it is pointed out in the case of DK[28]-DMK[29] radicals and rabid atheist groups that they do not come to Courts or face courts, though, they used to cry and roar that they are not afraid of Courts and so on. Here, also, suppressing the facts, these historians talk and write one thing in the dailies and cover up their mumbling and bungling in the court. The court recordings of the witnesses have been actually exposing their hollowness of expertise, deceptiveness of historical knowledge and their dubious role as witnesses. That they accuse even without seeing, even without reading or just discussing with others etc, prove their capacity of manoeuvring and manipulation of academics. How they get PhDs etc., only prove such academic degradation and professional pampering without any shame or remorse. It is open secret that the JNU, AMU, DU, IHC, ICHR and others at one side and BMAC, Sunni Wakf Board, AIMPLB at the other side have been playing communalism under the guise of secularism. Just by accusing others they cannot live, survive and continue their careers in this competitive world.

Why the eminent historians and Sunni Wakf Board experts did not respond to the remarks of the Judge? Definitely, the remarks of the Judge have been questioning the integrity of the eminent historians and Sunni Wakf Board experts, who deposed before the court as witnesses! They cannot simply brush aside such exposure, as it casts aspersion on their position. The English reading Indians and Indian students may doubt their veracity, reliability and uprightness, as they read their writings or listen to them. Therefore, they should go to court to clear the mess instead of shooting out letters to the Chief Justice just like politicians.

Indians and Indian youth should note as to whether these Sunni Board experts should teach history. Very often, it is said, claimed and propagated that India is / has been secular. Yes, how then the eminent historians professional archaeologists acted as Sunni Wakf Board experts and deposed as witnesses to the Muslims? Why these retired historians, senile professors and their working agents always make clamor about history, historicity and historiography in India, as if they are the sole selling agents of such stuff? Nowadays, the fact is that a few have been takers for history and most of the universities have dispensed with history subject. Definitely, the so-called historians have lost their importance and thus they tried to struggle for survival with the political and communal support. Now, the documents are available to all and the facts are known to everybody who access them through internet or otherwise. Common people may not know or understand the deceptive talkings and writings of the eminent historians or Sunni Wakf Board experts, but slowly they come to know. They easily understand that who want to settle the dispute and who want to continue the dispute for their stakes. Definitely, Muslims and Hindus want to settle the issue once for all, but these history gamblers and politicians want to continue. Therefore, the will of people prevail.

Vedaprakash

16-10-2010


 

[2] Romila Thapar, “Where fusion cannot work – faith and history” (the Hindu, dated September 28, 2007).

…………………., Historical Memory without History, in Economic and Political weekly, VOL 42 No. 39 September 29 – October 05, 2007, pp.3903-3905.

K. N. Panikkar, Myth, history and politics, Frontline, October 5, 2007, pp.21-24.

Suraj Bhan, “Government should have stood by ASI”, Ibid, pp.19-20.

[4] During the 2007-IHC session, Suvira Jaiswal was making such satatements. Then, in Delhi also they tried take up the matter. Now, in February 2011 at Malda, they may raise the issue. However, the Indians have to weait and see.

[5] In “the Hindu”, as usual, the news appeared with her photo and all, but after that everbody would have forgot about it! However, their warrior-like talk, veiled threatening and tactics of suppression of facts cannot be acquired by others.

[6] The Hindu, ASI report should be made public, says appeal to Chief Justice, Published: October 14, 2010 01:54 IST | Updated: October 14, 2010 02:03 IST; http://www.hindu.com/2010/10/14/stories/2010101464751800.htm

[7] How this has been a blatant lie has been exposed by the judge and that is why these guys have now tried to save their image by writing such letters. Of course, the media gives due publicity to such hypes and gimmicks.

[8] However, their mumbling, jumbling and bungling deposes before the Court have been kept as closed secret!

[9] Thus the eminent historians look for a non-vegetarian kitchen of Muslims there instrad of a temple. The same experts declared that the 16” inscription was planted by the Karsevaks in 1992.

[10] When Bharatiya Itihasa Sankalana Samiti works on the same lines, the same eminent historians make fun of having such diversified experts, but now they themselves have such signatories, just to project their strength.

[11] The Hindu, Published: October 2, 2010 00:41 IST | Updated: October 2, 2010.

[12] There is nothing new in Romila’s argument, as she repeats the same matter again and again. The unfortunate thing is that she like her friends always want others should accept their views!

[13] How they contradict in their views legally can be noted in such statements. When convenience comes, they forget law, when law is against them, they start talking generalization or raise the bogey of “Hindutva”!

[14] Law precedence is created in the Court. Yes, definitely, the judges are the persons to create and others have to accept. Of course, the appealable legal remedy is there.

[15] But whatever happened also cannot be forgotten. When the same historians want to whitewash the temple destruction of the Muslims and accept only the Muslim contribution, such type of exclusivist logic is not explained. Why the students should not know the facts? In law it is said audi alteram partem – hear the other side and decide. How then historians want to decide without knowing the other side?

[16] Why then the interpretation of the past is always different for different historians? Nowadays, historians do not want objectivity also. How then they woerry about accuracy, when they themselves are not worried about it?

[17] Acts and Rules are within the time frame work. All know that Places of Worship Act is there and it e3xempts only this place and not others. Why then they talk about pre-1947 and after 1947, when law its4elf  cannot do so?

[18]The Hindu, Historical evidence ignored, say historians, dated October 1, 2010, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article805087.ece

[23] It is interesting to note that the ASI report talks about a shrine followed by a temple with different structural phases, it also talks of “animal bones recovered from various levels of different periods”. If any shrine and a temple existed how can anyone account for the animal bones, Supriya Verma asks? She also maintains that stones and decorated bricks could have been used in any building, not necessarily only in a temple. Also, the carved architectural members have come from the debris and not from the stratified context.

[24] She got appointment in the AMU after she started supporting the cause of mosque and appeared as Sunni Wakf Board expert!

[25] The historians who deposed as witnesses and as well as others should carefully read this and understand their postion. They cannot pretend as if nothing happened or pose as great authorities and roam here and there in historical forums and conferences. Now Indians have also understood their double-games, double-speak and double-standards.

[26] Nowadays, just like medical experts or specialized doctors, these historians ad archaeologists trading charges like this – so-and-so is an expert in that field and he alone can know the truth and others cannot know the truth. Such type of exclusive mind-set exposes their arrogance and weakness and not the real expertise.

[27]Asghar ali Engineer, Archaeological Excavations and Temple, September 1-15, 2003,  http://www.csss-isla.com/arch%20150.htm

[28] Vedaprakash, Old Judgments and  New thoughts in the present context: S. Veerabadran Chettiar vs E. V. Ramaswami Naicker  others., http://vedaprakash.indiainteracts.in/2008/08/09/old-judgments-and-new-thoughts-in-the-present-context-s-veerabadran-chettiar-vs-e-v-ramaswami-naicker-others/