Friday, July 3, 2009

OPEN LETTER BY AN INDIAN TO US PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

Dear Mr. President,

First and foremost, I take this opportunity to compliment you for initiating a dialogue with the “Muslim World” in a bid to restore peace across the world. But after reading the text of your speech at the Al Azhar University, Cairo, on 4th June 2009, I was greatly disappointed because it contained no reference, absolutely none, to the rampant discrimination practiced in Islamic countries and Muslim societies against non-Muslims, especially the one billion strong Hindu community and millions of Buddhists – the so-called “kaffirs”, uniformly considered as children of a lesser God by Islamic societies. In every Muslim country, they are denied the freedom to practice and preach their religious beliefs. There is no tolerance for the religious beliefs and sacred shrines of Hindus in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia and most other Muslim countries. In sharp contrast, the Muslims have always enjoyed complete religious freedom in India and most Buddhist countries, nay, in almost all non-Muslim countries. Mr. President, during the last 50 years, there has been a systematic ethnic cleansing of Hindus and Buddhists from two Islamic countries, namely, Pakistan and Bangladesh. While the international community slumbered, Islamists continued to kill, convert and drive out millions of hapless Hindus. Their share in the population has come down to barely 2 percent in Pakistan from 23 percent in 1947, while in Bangladesh their proportion is now down to 8 percent from nearly 27 percent in 1947. This ethnic cleansing of millions of innocent Hindus and Buddhists is far worse than the suffering of the people of Darfur! Unfortunately, the world leaders took no notice of it ! On top of it, in most Muslim countries no temple or place of worship for Hindus and Buddhists is allowed. One is left wondering how such diabolical discrimination has been ignored in your Cairo speech?

May I remind you, Mr. President, that it was in the same historic city of Cairo, where you decided to launch your overture to woo the Muslim world , that the Organization of Islamic Countries unveiled in the year 1990 their version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, known as the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, categorically stipulating in Article 24 that in Islamic countries, “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration” will be subject to the Islamic Shari’ah. Article 25 of that Declaration further asserted that “The Islamic Shariah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration”. The Preamble of that Declaration stated that its objective was to reaffirm “the civilizing and historical role of Islamic Ummah which God made the best nation” for guiding the humanity.

Mr. President, you cannot be unaware of the fact that Islam has very little tolerance even for the Christians and the Jews with the result that their proportion in population is dwindling fast across the Middle East and most other Muslim countries, a fact to which the present Pope, Cardinal Ratzinger, drew pointed attention during his recent visit to the Middle East. It would have surely enhanced your prestige if you had called upon the Islamic world to respect the religious beliefs of non-Muslims and grant equal rights to them in the same measure and on the same scale in which Muslims have been enjoying civil rights in secular societies like India and other non-Muslim countries.

One is left wondering at your polemical pronouncement that America is not at war with Islam. The ongoing war against civil society was declared first by the Islamists on February 23, 1998, by making a declaration in the London-based Arabic newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi calling upon all Muslims worldwide to kill the Americans and the Jews. That historic call for global jihad against the crusaders and the Jews was signed among others by the Al Qaeda ideologue Ayman al-Zawahiri, Sheikh Amir Hamza, Secretary of Jamiat-ul-Ulema, Pakistan, and Fazlur Rehman of the Jihad Movement of Bangladesh. It was followed by the 9 /11 carnage which gave a rude shock to the Americans and compelled George Bush to join the war against radical Islam. Soon thereafter in October, 2001, Al Qaeda added the name of “Hindu India” to the list of enemies of Islam. In a video-taped message released through Al Jazeera television channel in October 2001, an Al Qaeda spokesman blamed the Hindu India for oppressing the Muslims of Kashmir with the help of the USA. Fairly soon, the two Pakistan sponsored jihadi outfits, Lashkar-e- Tayyeba and Jaish-e Muhammad, brazenly attacked the Indian Parliament on December 13, 2001. And since then innumerable jihadi attacks on India have continued with impunity. Please understand that the global jihad today is being waged against three important civilizations, namely, the Christians, the Jews and the Hindus. Kashmir is only an excuse. Pakistan sponsored Islamists have made that clear more than once.

While seeking peace with radical Islam, you should not forget that peace is not, repeat not, a one-way street. The USA must avoid following the appeasement policy of Neville Chamberlain (the then Prime Minister of U.K), who signed the Munich agreement in 1938 with Germany in the vain hope of securing peace. That notorious treaty further whetted the ambitions of Hitler and ultimately led to the second World War. No wonder, Chamberlain was forced to resign after Germany invaded the Netherlands, France and Belgium on May 10, 1940.

Mr. President, your speech has completely ignored the aspirations and geopolitical concerns of the one billion strong peace-loving Hindus - an iconic civilization, perhaps the oldest one in the world. As a statesman, you cannot be ignorant of the fact that the Islamists operating through Pakistan have a global design of establishing a ‘seamless caliphate’ from Indonesia to the Balkans by overrunning and subjugating India, which is the only bulwark of democracy and secularism in this part of the world. Pakistan has been waging a gory jihad against India now for more than 50 long years the most morbid instance of which was the notorious Mumbai Massacre of November 26, 2008. Unfortunately, the USA and international community have singularly failed to take cognizance of Pakistan’s perfidy by failing to force Pakistan to punish the perpetrators of Mumbai 26/11. You are aware that the mastermind of Mumbai carnage, Pakistan-based Hafeez Saeed has been let off by Pakistan. The release of Saeed will surely lead to many more dastardly attacks on India, which threat perception is shared by more than one strategic thinktank and security analyst! Meanwhile, after being let off by the Pakistani establishment, Hafeezz Saeed made an inflammatory speech at Lahore in a compound owned by Jamaat-ul-Dawa calling upon the USA to withdraw from Afghanistan and stop drone attacks on jihadis. He had the gall to advise you and the American people to embrace Islam!
And to rub salt into India’s wounds, your government appears to be trying to pressurize India for starting peace talks with Pakistan. William Burns, the visiting U S Under Secretary of State and Hillary Clinton are actively working towards that goal, just to placate the Pakistani establishment. It is a classic instance of rewarding the criminal at the cost of the victim!

We Indians are truly amazed that while Americans have not forgotten the bloodbath of 9/11, you want Indians to forget Mumbai 26/11 as if it was some sort of a petty picnic organized by the ISI of Pakistan? On behalf of all right thinking Indians, I implore you to stop pampering Pakistan at the cost of India. Prima facie, Hillary Clinton’s message conveyed through William Burns that “India was a priority nation” sounds hollow and unconvincing!

Mr. President, I must remind you of the glorious tribute paid by the celebrated American thinker and historian, Will Durant, to the Indian civilization (read Hindus). He candidly admitted that “India was the mother of our race and Sanskrit the mother of Europe’s languages. She was the mother of our philosophy, through Arabs much of our mathematics, through Buddha, of the ideals embodied in Christianity, mother through village communities of self-government and democracy. Mother India is in many ways the mother of us all.” You may also recall what another American historian hailed as the greatest historian of the twentieth century Arnold Toynbee has said, “It is already becoming clear that a chapter which had a Western beginning will have to have an Indian ending if it is not to end in the self– destruction of the human race.... At this supremely dangerous moment in human history, the only way of salvation for mankind is the Indian way – Emperor Ashoka's and Mahatma Gandhi's principle of non–violence and Sri Ramakrishna's testimony to the harmony of religions. Here we have an attitude and spirit that can make it possible for the human race to grow together into a single family - and, in the Atomic Age, this is the only alternative to destroying ourselves.”

It is indeed extraordinary that while trying to please the ‘Muslim world”, you have completely ignored the Hindus.

Please don’t forget that the Hindus of India can and will surely play a pivotal role in the maintenance of peace in South Asia. In this part of the world, they are a force to reckon with. Here is a community whose members possess a high Intelligence Quotient, a very high Knowledge Quotient and whose civilizational ethos are guided by their superb Spiritual Quotient. Additionally, Hindus hold a centuries old world record of tolerance and multiculturalism despite India’s blood-soaked history of fighting against the jihadi onslaught for nearly one thousand years. Mr. President, the voice of Hindus needs to be heard more attentively by you and the American people for addressing their geopolitical concerns, if peace is to be restored in this part of the world.

Thanking you for your attention and with regards,

Yours sincerely,

(R.K. Ohri)
Secretary General , Patriots' Forum

New Delhi; June 20, 2009

Copy to:
Mr. Timothy J. Roemer,
U.S. Ambassador to India, U.S. EmbassyShantipath, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi – 110021, Tel: 011-2419-8000, Fax: +91-11-2419-0017

OPEN LETTER BY AN INDIAN TO US PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

Dear Mr. President,

First and foremost, I take this opportunity to compliment you for initiating a dialogue with the “Muslim World” in a bid to restore peace across the world. But after reading the text of your speech at the Al Azhar University, Cairo, on 4th June 2009, I was greatly disappointed because it contained no reference, absolutely none, to the rampant discrimination practiced in Islamic countries and Muslim societies against non-Muslims, especially the one billion strong Hindu community and millions of Buddhists – the so-called “kaffirs”, uniformly considered as children of a lesser God by Islamic societies. In every Muslim country, they are denied the freedom to practice and preach their religious beliefs. There is no tolerance for the religious beliefs and sacred shrines of Hindus in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia and most other Muslim countries. In sharp contrast, the Muslims have always enjoyed complete religious freedom in India and most Buddhist countries, nay, in almost all non-Muslim countries. Mr. President, during the last 50 years, there has been a systematic ethnic cleansing of Hindus and Buddhists from two Islamic countries, namely, Pakistan and Bangladesh. While the international community slumbered, Islamists continued to kill, convert and drive out millions of hapless Hindus. Their share in the population has come down to barely 2 percent in Pakistan from 23 percent in 1947, while in Bangladesh their proportion is now down to 8 percent from nearly 27 percent in 1947. This ethnic cleansing of millions of innocent Hindus and Buddhists is far worse than the suffering of the people of Darfur! Unfortunately, the world leaders took no notice of it ! On top of it, in most Muslim countries no temple or place of worship for Hindus and Buddhists is allowed. One is left wondering how such diabolical discrimination has been ignored in your Cairo speech?

May I remind you, Mr. President, that it was in the same historic city of Cairo, where you decided to launch your overture to woo the Muslim world , that the Organization of Islamic Countries unveiled in the year 1990 their version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, known as the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, categorically stipulating in Article 24 that in Islamic countries, “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration” will be subject to the Islamic Shari’ah. Article 25 of that Declaration further asserted that “The Islamic Shariah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration”. The Preamble of that Declaration stated that its objective was to reaffirm “the civilizing and historical role of Islamic Ummah which God made the best nation” for guiding the humanity.

Mr. President, you cannot be unaware of the fact that Islam has very little tolerance even for the Christians and the Jews with the result that their proportion in population is dwindling fast across the Middle East and most other Muslim countries, a fact to which the present Pope, Cardinal Ratzinger, drew pointed attention during his recent visit to the Middle East. It would have surely enhanced your prestige if you had called upon the Islamic world to respect the religious beliefs of non-Muslims and grant equal rights to them in the same measure and on the same scale in which Muslims have been enjoying civil rights in secular societies like India and other non-Muslim countries.

One is left wondering at your polemical pronouncement that America is not at war with Islam. The ongoing war against civil society was declared first by the Islamists on February 23, 1998, by making a declaration in the London-based Arabic newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi calling upon all Muslims worldwide to kill the Americans and the Jews. That historic call for global jihad against the crusaders and the Jews was signed among others by the Al Qaeda ideologue Ayman al-Zawahiri, Sheikh Amir Hamza, Secretary of Jamiat-ul-Ulema, Pakistan, and Fazlur Rehman of the Jihad Movement of Bangladesh. It was followed by the 9 /11 carnage which gave a rude shock to the Americans and compelled George Bush to join the war against radical Islam. Soon thereafter in October, 2001, Al Qaeda added the name of “Hindu India” to the list of enemies of Islam. In a video-taped message released through Al Jazeera television channel in October 2001, an Al Qaeda spokesman blamed the Hindu India for oppressing the Muslims of Kashmir with the help of the USA. Fairly soon, the two Pakistan sponsored jihadi outfits, Lashkar-e- Tayyeba and Jaish-e Muhammad, brazenly attacked the Indian Parliament on December 13, 2001. And since then innumerable jihadi attacks on India have continued with impunity. Please understand that the global jihad today is being waged against three important civilizations, namely, the Christians, the Jews and the Hindus. Kashmir is only an excuse. Pakistan sponsored Islamists have made that clear more than once.


While seeking peace with radical Islam, you should not forget that peace is not, repeat not, a one-way street. The USA must avoid following the appeasement policy of Neville Chamberlain (the then Prime Minister of U.K), who signed the Munich agreement in 1938 with Germany in the vain hope of securing peace. That notorious treaty further whetted the ambitions of Hitler and ultimately led to the second World War. No wonder, Chamberlain was forced to resign after Germany invaded the Netherlands, France and Belgium on May 10, 1940.

Mr. President, your speech has completely ignored the aspirations and geopolitical concerns of the one billion strong peace-loving Hindus - an iconic civilization, perhaps the oldest one in the world. As a statesman, you cannot be ignorant of the fact that the Islamists operating through Pakistan have a global design of establishing a ‘seamless caliphate’ from Indonesia to the Balkans by overrunning and subjugating India, which is the only bulwark of democracy and secularism in this part of the world. Pakistan has been waging a gory jihad against India now for more than 50 long years the most morbid instance of which was the notorious Mumbai Massacre of November 26, 2008. Unfortunately, the USA and international community have singularly failed to take cognizance of Pakistan’s perfidy by failing to force Pakistan to punish the perpetrators of Mumbai 26/11. You are aware that the mastermind of Mumbai carnage, Pakistan-based Hafeez Saeed has been let off by Pakistan. The release of Saeed will surely lead to many more dastardly attacks on India, which threat perception is shared by more than one strategic thinktank and security analyst! Meanwhile, after being let off by the Pakistani establishment, Hafeezz Saeed made an inflammatory speech at Lahore in a compound owned by Jamaat-ul-Dawa calling upon the USA to withdraw from Afghanistan and stop drone attacks on jihadis. He had the gall to advise you and the American people to embrace Islam!

And to rub salt into India’s wounds, your government appears to be trying to pressurize India for starting peace talks with Pakistan. William Burns, the visiting U S Under Secretary of State and Hillary Clinton are actively working towards that goal, just to placate the Pakistani establishment. It is a classic instance of rewarding the criminal at the cost of the victim!

We Indians are truly amazed that while Americans have not forgotten the bloodbath of 9/11, you want Indians to forget Mumbai 26/11 as if it was some sort of a petty picnic organized by the ISI of Pakistan? On behalf of all right thinking Indians, I implore you to stop pampering Pakistan at the cost of India. Prima facie, Hillary Clinton’s message conveyed through William Burns that “India was a priority nation” sounds hollow and unconvincing!

Mr. President, I must remind you of the glorious tribute paid by the celebrated American thinker and historian, Will Durant, to the Indian civilization (read Hindus). He candidly admitted that “India was the mother of our race and Sanskrit the mother of Europe’s languages. She was the mother of our philosophy, through Arabs much of our mathematics, through Buddha, of the ideals embodied in Christianity, mother through village communities of self-government and democracy. Mother India is in many ways the mother of us all.” You may also recall what another American historian hailed as the greatest historian of the twentieth century Arnold Toynbee has said, “It is already becoming clear that a chapter which had a Western beginning will have to have an Indian ending if it is not to end in the self– destruction of the human race.... At this supremely dangerous moment in human history, the only way of salvation for mankind is the Indian way – Emperor Ashoka's and Mahatma Gandhi's principle of non–violence and Sri Ramakrishna's testimony to the harmony of religions. Here we have an attitude and spirit that can make it possible for the human race to grow together into a single family - and, in the Atomic Age, this is the only alternative to destroying ourselves.”

It is indeed extraordinary that while trying to please the ‘Muslim world”, you have completely ignored the Hindus.

Please don’t forget that the Hindus of India can and will surely play a pivotal role in the maintenance of peace in South Asia. In this part of the world, they are a force to reckon with. Here is a community whose members possess a high Intelligence Quotient, a very high Knowledge Quotient and whose civilizational ethos are guided by their superb Spiritual Quotient. Additionally, Hindus hold a centuries old world record of tolerance and multiculturalism despite India’s blood-soaked history of fighting against the jihadi onslaught for nearly one thousand years. Mr. President, the voice of Hindus needs to be heard more attentively by you and the American people for addressing their geopolitical concerns, if peace is to be restored in this part of the world.

Thanking you for your attention and with regards,

Yours sincerely,



(R.K. Ohri)
Secretary General

New Delhi; Dated June 20, 2009

Copy to:

Mr. Timothy J. Roemer, U.S. Ambassador to India,
U.S. Embassy Shantipath, Chanakyapuri,
New Delhi – 110021,
Tel: 011-2419-8000,
Fax: +91-11-2419-0017


Wednesday, June 17, 2009

DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE

On 26 March 2009, the Geneva based U N Human Rights Council adopted a resolution moved by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Countries condemning “defamation of religion” as a violation of human rights. Twenty three of the 47 member body voted in favour of the resolution, 11 voted against while 13 abstained from voting. Although India expressed its opposition to the resolution on the floor it abstained from actual voting..

" Defamation of religions is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of their adherents and incitement to religious violence," says the Resolution adding that "Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism." It calls on states to." ensure that religious places, sites, shrines and symbols are protected, to reinforce laws “to deny immunity” for those exhibiting intolerance of ethnic and religious minorities ,and “ to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and beliefs Pakistan, speaking for the 56-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said a "delicate balance" had to be struck between freedom of expression and respect for religions.

Earlier, on 24 Nov 2008, the UN general Assembly had adopted a similar OIC sponsored resolution calling on all countries to alter their legal and constitutional systems to prevent "defamation of religions," asserting that "Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism." Among other things, the resolution "urged states to take actions to prohibit the dissemination ... of racist and xenophobic ideas" and material that would incite to religious hatred. It also urged states to adopt laws that would protect against hatred and discrimination stemming from religious defamation.

BACKGROUND

The resolutions are plainly an effort by the Muslim member countries of the United Nations and its bodies to put Islam and many of its beliefs and practices beyond criticism. Reacting to the deteriorating image of Islam and its followers in western countries the sponsors are seeking to present Islam as an innocent party needing protection of the international organizations against unmerited criticism. There is also an implied threat that if criticism is not kept within acceptable limits, those exercising their freedom of expression by criticizing Islam may face violent protests from those whose feelings are hurt by their criticism.

Criticism of Islam and its alleged association with terrorism started figuring prominently in international media following the devastating Al Qaida attacks on vital targets within USA on 11 Sept 2001 and gathered strength with the spate of terrorist attacks in UK, Spain, Indonesia, etc. The gruesome murder of the Dutch film maker Theo Von Gogh in Amsterdam in November 2004 (for having produced a short documentary film entitled “Submission”), and the widespread disturbances across the Muslim world in protest following the publication of some blasphemous cartoons of Prophet Mohammed in a Danish paper Jyllands- Posten in September 2005 led to a prolonged controversy in the international media on the subject of freedom of expression and hurting of Muslim sentiments. The recent effort of Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders to screen his film “Fitna” in UK and USA has served to revive the controversy.

A SERIOUSLY FLAWED CASE

The case of the sponsors of the resolutions seems to suffer from several serious and obvious flaws which for some reason or the other do not appear to be visible to the sponsors. An extremely wide and possibly unbridgeable gulf seems to separate the fundamental perceptions of the proponents of the resolutions from those of the opponents. Let us examine the justifications quoted and the objectives sought to be achieved by movers of the resolution.

1. “Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism.” : That Islam is frequently associated with human rights violations and terrorism is a fact. But to say that it is wrongly blamed is simply not true. Reports of cases of human rights violations and acts of terrorism perpetrated by the followers of Islam figure frequently in the world media, including the media of some Islamic countries giving rise to the cliche “All Muslims are not terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims” All these acts (involving human rights violations and terrorism) are committed by their perpetrators invoking the authority of Islam for their actions. The e-mail warning sent by the Indian Mujahideen quoting copiously from the Quran and the Hadith just before the terrorist attacks in Ahmedabad is just one example. While the Islamic apologists argue that the aggressors are misguided individuals who are wrongly interpreting Islam the overwhelming majority of practitioners of Islam plainly disagree. Human rights violations of minority citizens or women routinely receive quiet approval/acceptance of the Muslim majorities. Many have been seen rejoicing after successful terrorist attacks carried out against infidels. Neither the arguments of Islam’s sophists nor the speeches of the suave and sophisticated OIC diplomats during the sessions of international bodies reflect the true fate of the victims of Islam’s prejudices against unbelievers, minority sects and women. One has only to look at the actual condition of the minorities and women in Pakistan to realize the pervasiveness and frequency of violations of human rights of these unfortunate members of Pakistan’s population. The situation in other Islamic countries is not much better.

2. “Defamation of religions is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of their adherents and incitement to religious violence”: There are several elements in the above statement of which two need to be examined here. Firstly, what is meant by defamation of religion and secondly, why should criticism of religion lead to incitement to religious violence? Defamation essentially involves making a false allegation with the intent of injuring someone’s reputation. The clinical, objective examination of the tenets of a religion and exposing its shortcomings can by no means be called defamation. A religion after all is a product placed before the humanity with a claim of possessing certain virtues and inviting outsiders to embrace it. The virtues claimed have to be, in all fairness, investigated and appraised and the appraisers’ view made available to all concerned. In fact it is necessary for the good of humanity that all religions are subjected to a deep and dispassionate scrutiny so that the people are enabled to make a free and informed choice.

The second point for examination is the link between the alleged defamation and incitement to religious violence. Promoters of many religions have at times been guilty of presenting intentionally distorted pictures of the beliefs and practices of other religions, particularly if they seek to win converts. Intentional, malicious misrepresentation of any religion from whatever motive deserves to be condemned. Misrepresentation proceeding from ignorance will be a shade less blameworthy. Those whose feelings are hurt by misrepresentation or even by exposure of faults in the religion held dear by them have always the liberty of expressing their unhappiness through legitimate means. But use of violence as the means of expressing protest is neither legitimate nor indeed allowed under the law of any country. It is also seen that protests against alleged insults do not generally lead to religious violence except in the solitary case of Islam. Even there the violence is not usually a spontaneous reaction but on most occasions is the result of incitement by clerics. It indeed needs to be examined as to why, among all the religions of the world, do the Muslims alone express their protests by resorting to violence. It also needs to be considered whether the clerics who incite their congregations to violence should be made liable to penal action.
3. Exhortation to states to ensure that religious places, sites, shrines and symbols are protected, to reinforce laws” to deny impunity” for those exhibiting intolerance of ethnic and religious minorities, and "to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and beliefs."

While the steps recommended by the resolution, to be taken by the governments of the member countries, are indeed laudable, the irony of the proposition is really astounding. Protection of religious places, tolerance and respect for religions of the minorities is most conspicuously absent in the leading Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and even the smaller Islamic states like Bangladesh, and Malaysia. What kind of tolerance or respect does the leader of the Islamic bloc, Saudi Arabia, show for other religions? What kind of record does the frequent spokesman for the block, Pakistan, have in the matter of protection of religious places ,sites shrines, and symbols of non –Muslims or for tolerating ethnic and religious minorities? The Hindus and Sikhs, subjected to unremitting oppression, have been reduced from 24% in 1947 to 1%.The Baluchis (an ethnic minority) have revolted repeatedly against the tyranny of the Pakistan government. Christians, who started as equal citizens have been facing the heat for decades. The Ahmadiyyas who gave Pakistan their first Foreign Minister (Sir Zafarullah Khan) and several war heroes and distinguished civil servants have not only been declared Non-Muslims but are liable to be jailed if they call themselves Muslims or refer to the places of their community prayers as “mosques”. Even the Shias have been targeted by aggressive Sunnis who demand that they be declared Non -Muslims . Having consistently oppressed and decimated the religious and ethnic minorities within their own territories, it is the height of hypocrisy for these countries to ask other countries to take steps for the protection of the religious symbols etc. of the minorities. What the sponsors of the resolution seem to be seeking is that irrespective of what Islamic countries do to their minorities, the rest of the world must be protective and respectful of the beliefs, practices and persons of Muslims minorities in the non-Muslim world !!

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE FUNDAMENTAL PERCEPTIONS OF THE TWO SIDES

Differences in the thinking of the Muslim countries and the rest of the world on the subject of human rights surfaced soon after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations GA in December 1948.While most of the Muslim countries signed the non-binding declaration, Saudi Arabia refused to do so on the ground that the provisions of the declaration were in conflict with the shariah. With the increase in their strength and influence in international affairs the Islamic countries kept pursuing the objective of evolving an Islamic version of UDHR and in 1990 came up with the Cairo Declaration of human Rights in Islam (CDHRI). It will be instructive to compare the provisions of the two Declarations dealing with human rights.

The Preamble to the Universal Declaration (UDHR) opens with the following statement -
“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,….”
Compare this with the opening statement of the Preamble to the Cairo declaration ;

“Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which God made the best nation …….; and the role that this Ummah should play to guide humanity …………..
“Wishing to contribute to the efforts of mankind to assert human rights, to protect man from exploitation and persecution, and to affirm his freedom and right to a dignified life in accordance with the Islamic Shari’ah ..”

The articles of the two Declarations specifically dealing with human rights and freedoms are equally illustrative.

The UDHR provides;
“Article 18.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
“Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers…”

The Cairo Declaration CDHRI
Article 24

"All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah."
Article 25
It likewise declares that "The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration."

The above extracts illustrate the reason behind the queer logic of the OIC members. In deciding what is right and what is wrong the Muslims have necessarily to follow the instructions handed down to them by Allah through His Messenger. There is no scope whatsoever for independent thinking beyond the confines of the Holy book and the shariah. And therein lies the crux of the problem. The Muslim countries have been commanded to believe not only that their religion is the best but that the Umma has to play the role of the guide for the rest of the humanity. The Qur’an divides human beings into three categories- (
(1) the Muslims (the believers and therefore the best),
(2) the Christians and the Jews (the other People of the Book, but misguided and therefore second class, only to be tolerated if they willingly accept their status as Dhimmis ) and
(3) the unbelieving rest (accursed, destined to roast for ever in hellfire, and deserving to be put to sword if they do not accept conversion to Islam).Women too are condemned to a God ordained inferior status. While the Muslims are entitled to hold whatever beliefs they want to (howsoever wrong or outrageous in the eyes of others) they are by no means right or logical in expecting that those who are abused by Islam’s scriptures would or should respect Islam.
The simple solution to the acrimonious debate between those demanding respect for Islam and those insisting on freedom of expression would be the acceptance of the golden rule—do unto others what you would like others to do unto you. But reciprocity would imply acceptance of equality. Unless those crusading for respect for Islam come round to showing respect to others, the resolutions and discussions in the international for a are unlikely to lead to any satisfactory solution.
……..J P Sharma
(copyrights author)







Wednesday, April 22, 2009

An open letter to Gen Kayani

View from the other side
Col (Retd.) Harish Puri
Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Dear Gen Kayani,

Sir, let me begin by recounting that old army quip that did the rounds in the immediate aftermath of World War - II: To guarantee victory, an army should ideally have German generals, British officers, Indian soldiers, American equipment and Italian enemies.

A Pakistani soldier that I met in Iraq in 2004 lamented the fact that the Pakistani soldier in Kargil had been badly let down firstly by Nawaz Sharif and then by the Pakistani officers' cadre. Pakistani soldiers led by Indian officers, he believed, would be the most fearsome combination possible. Pakistani officers, he went on to say, were more into real estate, defence housing colonies and the like.

As I look at two photographs of surrender that lie before me, I can't help recalling his words. The first is the celebrated event at Dhaka on Dec 16, 1971, which now adorns most Army messes in Delhi and Calcutta. The second, Sir, is the video of a teenage girl being flogged by the Taliban in Swat -- not far I am sure, from one of your Army check posts.

The surrender by any Army is always a sad and humiliating event. Gen Niazi surrendered in Dhaka to a professional army that had outnumbered and outfought him. No Pakistani has been able to get over that humiliation, and 16th December is remembered as a black day by the Pakistani Army and the Pakistani state. But battles are won and lost – armies know this, and having learnt their lessons, they move on.

But much more sadly, the video of the teenager being flogged represents an even more abject surrender by the Pakistani Army. The surrender in 1971, though humiliating, was not disgraceful. This time around, sir, what happened on your watch was something no Army commander should have to live through. The girl could have been your own daughter, or mine.

I have always maintained that the Pakistani Army, like its Indian counterpart, is a thoroughly professional outfit. It has fought valiantly in the three wars against India, and also accredited itself well in its UN missions abroad. It is, therefore, by no means a pushover. The instance of an Infantry unit, led by a lieutenant colonel, meekly laying down arms before 20-odd militants should have been an aberration. But this capitulation in Swat, that too so soon after your own visit to the area, is an assault on the sensibilities of any soldier. What did you tell your soldiers? What great inspirational speech did you make that made your troops back off without a murmur? Sir, I have fought insurgency in Kashmir as well as the North-East, but despite the occasional losses suffered (as is bound to be the case in counter-insurgency operations), such total surrender is unthinkable.

I have been a ‘Signaler’, and it beats me how my counterparts in your Signal Corps could not locate or even jam a normal FM radio station broadcasting on a fixed frequency at fixed timings. Is there more than meets the eye?

I am told that it is difficult for your troops to "fight their own people." But you never had that problem in East Pakistan in 1971, where the atrocities committed by your own troops are well documented in the Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report. Or is it that the Bengalis were never considered "your own" people, influenced as they were by the Hindus across the border? Or is that your troops are terrified by the ruthless barbarians of the Taliban?

Sir, it is imperative that we recognise our enemy without any delay. I use the word "our" advisedly – for the Taliban threat is not far from India's borders. And the only force that can stop them from dragging Pakistan back into the Stone Age is the force that you command. In this historic moment, providence has placed a tremendous responsibility in your hands. Indeed, the fate of your nation, the future of humankind in the subcontinent rests with you. It doesn't matter if it is "my war" or "your war" – it is a war that has to be won. A desperate Swati citizen's desperate lament says it all – "Please drop an atom bomb on us and put us out of our misery!" Do not fail him, sir.

But in the gloom and the ignominy, the average Pakistani citizen has shown us that there is hope yet. The lawyers, the media, have all refused to buckle even under direct threats. It took the Taliban no less than 32 bullets to still the voice of a brave journalist. Yes, there is hope – but why don't we hear the same language from you? Look to these brave hearts, sir – and maybe we shall see the tide turn. Our prayers are with you, and the hapless people of Swat.

The New York Times predicts that Pakistan will collapse in six months. Do you want to go down in history as the man who allowed that to happen?

The writer is a retired colonel of the Indian army who lives in Pune.
Email: hbpuri@hotmail.com

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Please find below the statistics of the Criminal background of the leaving Parliament Members.

Party Total MPs Criminals % Grade in %
1 Jharkand Mukti Morcha 5 5 100%1
2
Shiv Sena
12
7
58.3%
2
3
NCP
9
5
55.6%
3
4
Akali Dal
8
4
50.0%
4
5
Rashtriya JD
24
11
45.8%
5
6
BSP
19
8
42.1%
6
7
Janath Dal United
8
3
37.5%
7
8
Forward Block
3
1
33.3%
8
9
Samajwadi Party
36
11
30.6%
9
10
CPI
10
3
30.0%
10
11
BJP
136
39
28.7%
11
12
DMK
16
4
25.0%
12
13
AIADMK
4
1
25.0%
12
14
Lokjan Sakthi
4
1
25.0%
12
15
Congress
145
26
17.9%
13
16
CPM
43
7
16.3%
14
17
Biju JD
11
1
9.1%
15
This is the picture of our Parliament. We are going to face another election now. Election, yes, it is the only chance we can Think and Decide about our beloved Country's future. In a Democratic Legislature the decision is in our hands and we have another chance only after 5 years. Therefore we should not loose our change due to the mesmerization of this type of 'Leaders'.
Looking into the table above, we may be in the point of thinking that "Thank God the significant big parties are in the last corner of criminalism with 30 to 16%". No, the so called Local and Small Parties make big influence to make the decisions towards their interests. The criminalization among the total population is still merely 1 to 2% (please see the attached).
Yes, here we should decide that whichever our Party is; our candidate should be a Well Behaving Gentleman who value principles in his personal and social life.