Commie Media's Anti-Hindu Poison - Part 2

(Read Part-1 if you haven’t already)

In 1976, African-American Alex Haley published “Roots: The Saga of an American Family”, a novel based on his family's history, starting with the story of Kunta Kinte, who was kidnapped in the Gambia in 1767 and transported to Maryland to be sold as a slave. Haley claimed to be a seventh-generation descendant of Kunta Kinte. He went to the village of Juffure, where Kunta Kinte grew up and which is still in existence, and listened to a tribal historian tell the story of Kinte's capture. Haley also traced the records of the ship, The Lord Ligonier, which he said carried his ancestor to America. Haley has stated that the most emotional moment of his life occurred on September 29, 1967, when he stood at the site in Annapolis, Maryland where his ancestor had arrived from Africa in chains exactly 200 years before. A memorial depicting Haley reading a story to young children gathered at his feet has since been erected in the center of Annapolis. The official page of Haley’s book notes:

“Alex Haley's Roots is the monumental two-century drama of Kunta Kinte and the six generations who came after him. By tracing back his own roots, Haley tells the story of 39 million Americans of African descent. He has rediscovered for an entire people a rich cultural heritage that ultimately speaks to all races everywhere, for the story it tells is one of the most eloquent testimonials ever written to the indomitability of the human spirit”.

Haley’s memorial has him reading a story to young children. What would he have told them about his history? What would he have told them that they could learn from his? History is written not because we would like to change it. We obviously cannot. History is written so that we discover and learn the truth about our past and who we were and why we are the way we are. And in learning those truths we hope to undertake a better journey than the one in the past and retain the best from what our ancestors left us. The “indomitability of the human spirit” equally applies to Hindus and the other natives of this land (Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists etc). It is probably the only race of people and culture that murderous invaders couldn’t wipe out. That’s half the story. But when you have crooks who constantly distort and lie about history and have been doing so unchecked then your future is likely to be just as distorted and painful. That is how India got here. That is what the Commies were and are doing, as is the MSM that is infested with them. Nothing would please the Commies and the Congis (and DMK types) for the Hindu identity to completely disappear. Their consistent actions have proved that they would rather have Yadavs, Brahmins, Rajputs, Ezhavas, Dalits, Jats, Gujjars, Harijans, OBCs, Tribals etc. as identities rather than anything that is remotely called “Hindu”. 

In the introduction to my book “Social Media as watchdog” I wrote: “One of the biggest challenges for students coming out of schools and colleges in India is not remembering what they learnt but unlearning what they did. This is particularly true of history courses. Much of our history taught in schools cannot exactly be described as accurate. Designed as they were by left-leaning historians, the courses use an abundant dose of imagination and distortion. Thus, students have to learn true history and facts only outside of schools. The same experience is true for the whole population when they encounter Mainstream Media”.

Till after the 2007 elections in Gujarat I had no idea what caste or tribe Narendra Modi was from. I didn’t know YSR Reddy, the late Andhra CM, was a Christian. Frankly, I couldn’t have cared less. Guess who educated me? It was NDTV, CNN-IBN and other similar channels that ran bios of Modi and educated me that he was an OBC, a Ghanchi (supposedly the Barber clan). Was there any purpose to it? His victory hurt Barkha Dutt so much that she tagged all Gujjus as “effete” people. Such tagging is one of the most important features of the Commies. Anyone that challenges their incestuous circle will be tagged with unthinkable names and adjectives even if that person is holding evidence of unshakeable truth. Lavrentiy Beria, Security Head under Stalin is credited with the line “You bring me the man, I’ll find you the crime”. To put it more bluntly, I love the James Hadley Chase title: “You find him, I’ll fix him”. They will negate everything about a person or an organisation. They will manufacture crimes. RSS runs “Bomb-making” factories! Ring a bell? Here’s something I’ve written before:

Negationism is defined as denial or distortion of historical facts, especially those relating to crimes against humanity. Dr. Koenrad Elst, a Belgian, is a Hinduism scholar who has written much about this negationism and concealing of Islamic record in India. Here’s what Elst has to say (Wiki): Historians of the Aligarh school (e.g. Irfan Habib) or Indian Marxists (e.g. Romila Thapar) have resorted to history-rewriting: "Therefore, in 1982 the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) issued a directive for the rewriting of schoolbooks. Among other things, it stipulated that: "Characterization of the medieval period as a time of conflict between Hindus and Muslims is forbidden." Under Marxist pressure, negationism has become India's official policy”. It actually recommends dumbing down of students. Effectively, it meant the horrors of Indian Islamic history must be hidden from our students. Students who cared were able to get to the real history but our MSM still follows that diktat. So is it a surprise that Muslim violence is covered up and mostly turned into ‘victimhood’ or an Anti-Hindu rant? Did such a “cleansing” really happen? Well, here are facts produced by Arun Shourie in Eminent Historians:

Under the CPM govt in Bengal a circular dated 28 April, 1989 is issued by the West Bengal Secondary Board. It is in Bengali, and carries the number "Syl/89/1" (For Class-9. Here “Aushuddho” supposedly means “impure” and “Shuddho” is “cleanse” by alteration or by deletion)

Book : Bharatvarsher Itihash, by Dr. Narendranath Bhattacharya, published by Chakravarty & Son:

Page 89 : Aushuddho - "Sultan Mahmud used force for widespread murder, loot, destruction and conversion."

Shuddho - "There was widespread loot and destruction by Mahmud." That is, no reference to killing, no reference to forcible conversions.

Page 89 : Aushuddho - "He looted valuables worth 2 crore dirham from the Somnath temple and used the Shivling as a step leading up to the masjid in Ghazni."

Shuddho - "Delete 'and used the Shivling as a step leading up to the masjid in Ghazni.'"

Page 112 : Aushuddho -- "Hindu-Muslim relations of the medieval ages is a very sensitive issue. The non- believers had to embrace Islam or death."

Shuddho -- All matter on pages 112-13 to be deleted.

Page 113 : Aushuddho - "According to Islamic law non-Muslims will have to choose between death and Islam. Only the Hanafis allow non-Muslims to pay jaziya in exchange for their lives."

Shuddho - Rewrite this as follows : "By paying jaziya to Allauddin Khilji, Hindus could lead normal lives." Moreover, all the subsequent sentences "Qazi...", "Taimur's arrival in India..." to be deleted.

Page 113 : Aushuddho - "Mahmud was a believer in the rule of Islam whose core was 'Either Islam or death'.

Shuddho -- Delete.

Mind you, what I provided above is just a sample. You can go through the whole set of “cleansing” that the CPM’s education board ordered at this page. What’s the logic behind such cleansing other than killing history? If at all there is some belief that kids may not be able to absorb such a violent history, which is not a stated objective, then it’s better to choose a higher age when they can be taught this rather than giving them half-truths. In reality, when kids discover the truth at a later age they hold in contempt the schools which taught them bogus history when it was neither the fault of the school nor the teachers. The danger is, someday some Indian kid might grow up to write a book like the one some American has written.

The root of any good or bad ideological practice is usually found in the precedents set by the founding fathers of a nation. India doesn’t really have founding fathers except her Hindu culture. But post-independence some like to give that honour to some people. MK Gandhi was called the Father of the nation. Jawaharlal Nehru is often referred to as the ‘Architect of modern India’. In his book on Negationism, Koenrad Elst recalls Nehru’s admiration for Mahmud Ghaznavi

The best-known propounder of negationism was certainly Jawarharlal Nehru… his writings contain some crude cases of glorification of Muslim tyrants and concealment or denial of their crimes. Witness his assessment of Mahmud Ghaznavi, who, according to his chronicler Utbi, sang the praise of the temple complex at Mathura and then immediately proceeded to destroy it. Nehru writes: "Building interested Mahmud, and he was much impressed by the city of Mathura near Delhi". About this he wrote: "There are here a thousand edifices as firm as the faith of the faithful; nor is it likely that this city has attained its present condition but at the expense of many millions of dinars, nor could such another be constructed under a period of 200 years." And that is all: Nehru described the destroyer of Mathura as an admirer of Mathura, apparently without noticing the gory sarcasm in Ghaznavi's eulogy. Moreover, Nehru denied that Mahmud had committed his acts of destruction out of any religious motive: "Mahmud was not a religious man. He was a Mohammedan, but that was just by the way. He was in the first place a soldier, and a brilliant soldier."  

You will hear the same nonsense that for much of the killings and brutality religion was not a motive. They would like us to believe that the crazy guys just wanted to demonstrate their martial skills. But MK Gandhi set the example of covering up and white-washing such crimes. The Moplah murderers of Kerala and the Khilafat movement ended up killing thousands of Hindus but what did MKG think about it? Here’s what:

“The Moplah revolt is a test for Hindus and Mussulmans. Can Hindus friendship survive the strain put upon it? Can Mussulmans in the deepest recesses of their hearts approve of the conduct of the Moplahs?.... The Hindus must have the courage and the faith to feel that they can protect their religion in spite of such fanatical eruptions.... The Mussulmans must naturally feel the shame and humiliation of the Moplah conduct about forcible conversions and looting, and they must work away so silently and effectively that such things might become impossible even on the part of the most fanatical among them. My belief is that the Hindus as a body have received the Moplah madness with equanimity and that the cultured Mussulmans are sincerely sorry for the Moplah’s perversion of the teachings of the Prophet.”

The article I linked goes on to ask of Gandhi: He fails to state the extent of Hindu losses once again. He believes that ‘Hindus have received Moplah madness with equanimity’. How can you receive acts like ‘rape’, ‘murder’, ‘forcible conversions’ etc with ‘equanimity’? He states that cultured Mussulmans are sincerely sorry for the acts. But our question is this: Did he find out why this revolt was so inhuman and why it was committed in the name of religion? Did he try to understand the Moplah point of view? Did he find out why the anti-British agitation turned into ‘anti-Hindu’? The answer to all these questions is a resounding ‘NO’.

In Kerala we had a CPM politician openly declaring political murder was a natural practice of the party. MM Mani just gets suspended for six months when he should have been in jail. What about the killings under the CPM itself in Bengal? Here’s an interesting read that is fairly reliable given the violent and criminal nature of Commie politics:

55000? That’s like one “Gujarat 2002” for every year of CPM in Bengal, isn’t it? But which one gets the most noise in our media? To avoid interpreting selectively I recommend reading the full story which is even more damning. Did you ever see such an important story being discussed in any news channel or newspaper? Did you see a debate anywhere? Stupid channels spend hours discussing a stray comment of some Cleric called Madani but never in the last 20 years has any channel discussed the crimes of the Commies. Why? Because they ARE the Commies! In quite a similar fashion our media also “cleanses” the violence of Muslims whether it’s Deganga or over the 100 riots in UP. They report it only when it becomes absolutely inevitable. The Muzaffarnagar riots wouldn’t have been on air if not for a reporter being killed. And for every single incident everywhere else the “Big Bindis” of the Commies come out crying and wailing. If they can cleanse history from our schools they can also cleanse the truth from our news media. No matter what happens, stick the “Convict” badge on the Hindu. No matter what the terrorist act or killing, find the Hindu and they will find his crime. Are sympathies of NDTV, CNN-IBN to the murderous Commies a lot clearer? Is it also any surprise why NDTV loves separatists? Lord Macaulay had a dream of creating English speaking interpreters and intellects and most of them are the current day Commies.

Call Malini Parthasarthy a Commie and she will be very offended. Most liars in the media don’t like to be called Commies. They prefer the more stylish “fiberal” tag. Her silly tweet is factually wrong but it still helps to explain why you are a worthless piece of junk if you don’t speak English. The toiling villagers and many Indians who can just speak their own dialect is a nuisance in their lives. Educate yourselves on their expectations! If you think Lord Macaulay didn’t finish his job then I have good news for you. He wanted a nation so steeped in the English language and belief that Indians think very lowly of themselves. Macaulay may have been buried in history but his dreams are alive. At the very least Macaulay could admit that the backbone of India is her spiritual and cultural heritage. What Macaulay couldn’t finish off, the Commies, their historians and their counterparts in our MSM are desperately trying to finish off. Stick a post-it on your TV screens or papers when you watch or read them: “Shuddho: Poison”.

To be continued…

PS: Notes of Koenrad Elst in this post were previously carried in my post “In denial”

    

When The 'Blue Turban' Is 'Allowed' To Speak

So the unthinkable happened. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh finally decided to speak to the nation. Good! I suppose shop keepers, farmers and word-count specialists in the media have finally understood why the diesel price hike and FDI in retail are good for this country. The men and women in our MSM could hardly hide their delight and rushed to gloat over the PM’s speech and how he defended his spectacular decisions and cut the Opposition to their pygmy size. Mercifully, the media stopped at calling it the “Big Bang” reforms and didn’t venture to call it the “Higgs-Boson” of reforms. But there are a few questions that our ever probing media never asked. We will get to those questions in a while.

The best article on the FDI I have read so far is once again from the online news media and not MSM. R. Jagannathan writes in FirstPost: “If these are reforms, I am Amitabh Bachchan”. He explains well that the latest actions by the UPA are nothing more than desperate measures. Of course, nobody has written with convincing data on whether FDI will benefit the ‘Aam aadmi’ or not very conclusively. But there is no doubt in my mind that the decision is not inspired by the urge to “big bang” but by a lot of unfulfilled commitments to investors and lobbyists abroad.

In the meantime, here’s a small conversation between two ladies from the MSM. This was on September 14. What is striking from P. Malini of The Hindu is that she states: “IF the PM is ALLOWED….” The PM, as head of the govt, is the most powerful man in the country. Does he need to be allowed to follow his light or convictions? But her statement does make sense because it indicates the PM hasn’t been making decisions based on the country’s needs or situations but on what he’s allowed to do by Sonia Gandhi and her private club. Cleverly, Sonia Gandhi’s club is divided in two parts as under:

Club-1: A coterie consisting trusted darbaris who help her manage the difficult and troublesome political aspects of running a govt through MMS. If good comes out, she gets the credit. If the opposite happens, MMS or any minister takes a beating.

Club-2: This is an exclusive group of people assembled under a kiosk called NAC. This kiosk is a vending machine for legislations of populist, welfare schemes. Schemes like NREGA, Right to food, Right to this, Right to that. Right to drain the economy!

The reward for MMS is that he gets to be the PM for all the beating that he takes. If courage, light and convictions were to drive him, as the two media ladies were negotiating, he would have resigned on the 7th day after the first month of his job on getting his pay-check. I read somewhere that the most common reason people quit their jobs is because their ‘boss’ is terrible. A real-life Hari Sadoo! In contrast, there are bosses who are with their people most times. In times of personal grief they comfort them. They help resolve work related issues. They seem to know when to intervene and when to keep off. A nation expects the same from its boss. It’s no big secret that MMS simply lacks leadership skills and people skills. Where a warm hug is required he would typically mostly do an “aerial survey” from a distance. I quoted Marcus Buckingham, a Gallup poll researcher, in one of my earlier posts and repeat that quote:

"What a leader does for followers is turn anxiety into confidence. They’ve always done that throughout time and in every different society and situation. When leaders lead well, it’s because they’re able to rally people to a better future and make people spirited when they were previously anxious." Problem is, MMS, not having won a single public election, doesn’t have any followers. He only has a lot of bosses. Which explains Malini’s “if allowed” tweet. And people, as they become more and desperately thirsty, see the mirage and ‘drink the sand’ hoping it would quench their thirst. Nothing does this better than this scene from the movie ‘The American President’(0.36 secs):

Presidential aide Lewis Rothschild (Michael J. Fox): …People want leadership, Mr. President, and in the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. They want leadership. They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand.

The President (Michael Douglas): Lewis, we've had presidents who were beloved, who couldn't find a coherent sentence with two hands and a flashlight. People don't drink the sand because they're thirsty. They drink the sand because they don't know the difference.

That would seem right. A huge population in India isn’t drinking the sand because it quenches their thirst; they seem to do so because they can’t tell the difference. And when they want water what our boss offers is FDI in retail. Drink that! And then he comes out of his slumber to speak to them on TV. No, not because he owes them care and understanding but because the Opposition is supposedly misleading them. If at all he wanted to attack the Opposition he was neither forceful nor convincing. If he wanted to separate people’s concerns from the political ones of his detractors he failed again. In ‘The American President’ the opponent, Bob Rumsen, is constantly attacking the President’s personal life and the bills his girl-friend is championing. After a long silence, like MMS, Michael Douglas chooses to address the issue (3.07 mins):

It’s just a movie. Yes it is. And the bills that the President mentions in his speech mostly didn’t make it. But we have known leaders from time to time to stand up and talk to people and assure them that their leadership is in good hands. They stand up and talk to people and not offer defence for some policy decisions. Did MMS manage to do that? Clearly not! From once being considered an emerging super-power comparable to the league of US and China, a pathetic PM has reduced India to being compared to Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh. Sure, that is going to bring a lot of comfort to people. What next, will we be comparing ourselves with Somalia in the next speech? Ever heard the US compare itself with Brazil or Sudan? So Indians can drink the sand in the comfort that they’re better off than Pakistan and Bangladesh.

As for the political aspect of it, the media simply didn’t ask the right questions. Hillary Clinton met Mamata Banerjee in May 2012 to persuade her on FDI. That’s not me but a CNN-IBN report that stated it. Oh yeah, the same CNN-IBN whose Chairman recently wrote a book “Superpower”. Mamata’s reaction to FDI last time was no different from now when the UPA brought it up during a parliament session in November 2011. Did they expect her to revolt and even walk out of UPA? Soaked in the dirtiest waters of politics the Congress would have damn well expected it and planned for it. Isn’t that why the cabinet approved the policy last week even when the TMC minister and some Kerala ministers were absent?  Did the media ask them if they had spoken to SP and BSP prior to this latest cabinet decision? They did not. And CNN-IBN did have the greatest economist we have as a panellist to discuss the reforms and PM’s speech. Haha! If he sees the Bimboesque tweet from the Social Genius he will be pleased, everything’s fine.

It would be foolish to even assume remotely that Congress would have not taken the SP and BSP into confidence prior to introduction of the policy. All the charade of Mulayam Singh “keeping out communal parties” is just more sound-bites he feeds the stray dogs of the media whose editors then present it as gospel to their audience. MMS did tell the cabinet "The time has come for big bang reforms. If we have to go down, we have to go down fighting". After his speech, let’s just be thankful. I don’t think anyone would really want to see the spectacle of MMS fighting.