Are Missionary Schools different from Madrassas?

On August 29, 2008, all Roman Catholic educational institutions across India remained closed for the day. The decision to close down all catholic-run schools was taken on the directives of the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) after consultation with different churches.

August 29 was Friday, and no national holiday was declared on that day. Then, why did CBCI decide to give a holiday to the school children?

It was "protesting the communal violence on Christians" in the Indian state of Orissa.

Yes, Orissa is undergoing communal tension and violence and Hindu-Christian riots after the murder of 80 year old Hindu monk Swami Lakshmanananda Saraswati allegedly by a group of armed Christian terrorists.

Although it is a law and order problem of the Orissa state government, missionaries have every right to express their views. Everybody in India, a liberal democracy, has a right to register his or her peaceful protest on any public matter. CBCI missionaries could register their feelings about the communal violence in hundreds of other ways. But why did they chose to involve innocent children in this highly poilitical and religious exercise?

What if missionaries own a big airlines company, road transport network, shipping unit, postal network etc.? Would they have stopped all of these services to "register their protest"?

Yes. that is the typical missionary mind! Most of the missionaries are experts not only in converting people but also in converting every situation to their advantage by crying wolf and unleashing huge, systematic propaganda. History is full of such stories.

Just one example. Some years ago, two nuns were allegedly raped in Jabua of Madhya Pradesh state. The nuns complained that some local Hindu activists had raped them. Immeadiately senior missionaries screamed that Hindus were raping nuns all over India. The news got international attention and very soon became a hot topic all over the world. Big protests were planned and undertaken. Later, after the investigation, it was turned out to be a fradulent charge. The nuns were actually molested by some local Christian activists, over an internal issue. But Hindus got all the blame! That is the typical missionary-bluff.

What happened in Orissa? Swamy Lakshmananannda, a well-known, highly respectable Hindu spiritual leader of Orissa's Kandhmal district, who also belonged to Vishva Hindu Parishad, was preventing Hindus from becoming Christians. He was a big threat to missionary campaigns.

On August 23, a Krishna Janmashtami Day, Swamiji was preparing to worship Lord Krishna in his ashram. According to reports, "a group of 30-40 armed assailants surrounded the place. Eyewitnesses said about four of the assailants carried AK-47s and many others had revolvers. The assailants tied down the two guards, and gagged them. They then sought out the Swamiji within the premises and opened fire on him. The recovered bullets show they were from an AK-47, the police said. The assailants then warned the guards not to raise an alarm and fled the scene."

Police initially suspected Maoist- terrorists. But nobody in the area believes that. It was a known fact that the Swamiji had a threat from the local Christian conversion-mafia. He had repeatedly lodged police complaints about his threat perceptions. Hindu-Christian communal clash has started after his brutal murder.

Missionaries have a right to tell their own version of the story. But they do not have any right to politicize the innocent school children for their own religious purposes.

Karnataka Government has already issued notices to aided Christian institutions for the illegal closure of schools. But the state's Congress leaders have come to the rescue of missionaries. Their take: You cannnot issue notices to missionary schools just beacuse they take aid from the state. They can do anything. They have every right to register their protest even by closing the schools they run.

The law is very clear. According to the landmark judgment given by the Supreme Court on October 31, 2002, the right to administer minority educational institution is not absolute. The court has held that all aided institutions could be subject to regulatory measures by the state. It was a 11-judge Constitution Bench, headed by the then Chief Justice, B.N. Kirpal, and also, an unanimous verdict. The apex court had also said that states could apply regulations even to unaided minority institutions to achieve educational excellence. As per the law, all aided minority schools should take non-minority students as well. The percentage of such students is fixed by the concerned state or university. But the Congress Party, headed by a Roman Catholic, wants to find itself with the law-breakers!

It is highly condemnable act on the part of the Catholic Church. Nobody with clear conscience and morality would use children to register a sectarian protest, for that mater, any protest. At this age, they have a right to receive non-partisan education in a scietific way.

A child's mind should not get corrupted. But CBCI is behaving like Jamat-e-Islami and Tablig-e-Jamaat. After turning St. Stephen's College of Delhi into a Christian Deoband, the emboldened CBCI is perhaps getting ready to create Christian Madrassas out of Catholic Schools.

(c) G. ANIL KUMAR, 2008

Free Blog Counter

When you do nothing about the evil...

Why Indian government and a section of the media give importance to the voice of Hurriyat leaders, who do not represent any of Indian citizens in any way?

India is liberal, secular, democratic country. It offers wide choices before everybody to gain legitimacy. But Hurriyat Conference never takes the electoral route to gain true representative status. Still, our establishment respects its “sentiments” and some media persons virtually crawl to get Hurriyat leaders to the studios.

The very idea behind the formation of All Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC) on March 9, 1993Kashmir that are hell-bent on vivisecting India, once again, on religious lines. was secession. It is a bunch of 26 secessionist organizations of In Urdu language, Hurriyat means “freedom”, and APHC was created to further the cause of Kashmir separatism, as designed by Pakistan.

According to the constitution of APHC, its objective is to endeavor to promote Islamic predominance and its majority character in Jammu and Kashmir state, which is against the secular and democratic character of our national constitution.

APHC does not recognize the Indian constitution. It has stayed away from all the elections held in the state. The hardcore faction of APHC, Tehrik-i-Hurriyat, headed by hardcore Islamist Syed Ali Shaw Geelani, openly declares that it wants complete independence from India.

It is evident that Pakistan is behind the Hurriyat. Still we fail to expose the machinations of Pakistan. Still, we sheepishly appease the traitors as if they command the great power on earth, as if they represent the sizable chunk of the population.

Current uprising of Jammu citizens over the denial of pilgrim’s rights on the Amaranth temple lands is an unprecedented revolt of the people against the separatist, highly communal machinations of some Islamist politicians. A great polarization of nationalists against anti-nationals is taking place in the state and all over the country. This is a natural, yet rare, phenomenon, that happens when the concerned governments repeatedly fail to protect the interests of the nation and its patriotic people.

Still, our ruling coalition leaders shifting the blame on the Jammu protestors, who are chanting the hymns about “Mother India”.

They are maintaining a studied silence over the acts of hurriyat separatists, who are openly hailing Pakistan on the roads.

This reminds me of the famous statement of Albert Einstein, that “the world is dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”


(C) G. ANIL KUMAR, 2008

Free Blog Counter

"Secular" writers suggest Balkanisation Of India - Govt. tolerates sedition - Is tolerating anti-national elements greatness?

On 18 August 2008, Monday just three days after India celebrated its Independence Day, noted anti-national activist of India, Arundhati Roy, a Booker Prize winner, opined that Kashmir should secede from India.

After participating in a rally to the UN office (organized by the pro-Pakistan elements) in Srinagar, she said, "The reaction of the people in Kashmir is actually a referendum. People don't need anyone to represent them; they are representing themselves. India needs freedom from Kashmir as much as Kashmir needs freedom from India."

Reacting to it, the Congress party’s spokesperson on Wednesday said she was a "loose cannon" who had "abused the liberal traditions of India".

"She (Roy) is a loose cannon who has abused liberal traditions of India to its fullest. It is a great tribute to the tolerance of India's ethos that a person who openly calls for Balkanization of country is not being locked up and the keys are not being thrown away," said Congress spokesperson Manish Tiwari.

Is it the great tradition of India to tolerate anti-national elements?

Recently Vir Sanghvi, a self-declared "secular" journalist preached India that the right of self-determination should be given to Kashmiri Muslims.

“If you believe in democracy, then giving Kashmiris the right to self-determination is the correct thing to do” he said in an article. Why? Because, “there is active hatred of India.”!

Some pen-pushers in India are now openly suggesting (and, demanding) the Balkanization of the country. But our government is showing its "greatness" by ignoring them!

Are we duty-bound to prosecute these worthies for what they are? let us examine the official position and legal aspects.

First, let us see the the state-constitution of Jammu and Kashmir itself. In part II, Article 3, it says: "The State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India." Since Pakistan has illegally occupied more than one third of the state through aggression in 1947, which parts of the state that the constitution is referring to? Article 4 answers this: "The territory of the State shall comprise all the territories which on the fifteenth day of August, 1947, were under the sovereignty or suzerainty of the Ruler of the State."

On February 22, 1994 Indian Parliament has passed a resolution, which, once gain, declared in clear terms that the state was, is, and shall be an integral part of India. This resolution was passed by the whole house unanimously. BJP member Atal bihari Vajpayee was keen on introducing the resolution in Lok Sabha. But the then prime minister P. V. Narasimha Rao suggested that this should a national resolution. Hence, it was introduced by the then speaker of the house Shivraj Patil (now, incidentally, the insensitive home minister, who is fomenting trouble), and cutting across party lines, the entire house voted in favor of it and adopted it unanimously.

The resolution firmly declared that: (a) The State of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is and shall be an integral part of India and any attempts to separate it from
the rest of the country will be resisted by all necessary means; (b) India has the will and capacity to firmly counter all designs against its unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity (c) Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu & Kashmir they have occupied through aggression.

We have Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act - 1967, that clearly states that asking for secession and even suggesting somebody to secede amounts to treason.

The Act clearly defines “unlawful activities” in Section 2 thus: “‘unlawful activity’, in relation to an individual or association, means any action taken by such individual or association (whether by committing an act or by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise),- ; which is intended, or supports any claim, to bring about, on any ground whatsoever, the cession of a part of the territory of India or the secession of a part of the territory of India from the Union, or which incites any individual or group of individuals to bring about such cession or secession; which disclaims, questions, disrupts or is intended to disrupt the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India."

Now come to the IPC. According to Section 124-A of Indian Penal Code, "Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine."

You see, Indian laws are very clear about this issue. Only issue that remains is that you do not have a government that applies them in the interest of the nation.
This is not the first time that Arundhati is acting against the interests of India. When India conducted nuclear tests on May 11, 1998, she declared that she was seceding from India and called herself a "mobile republic". On Narmada issue she openly challenged the authority of the Supreme Court of India and even got a "token" punishment from the court for contempt of court.

The time has come to show Arundhati and others their right place in jail. Tolerating anti-nationals is not greatness. The government is duty bound to prosecute them on the charges of sedition and treason.