Home Blog Page 5816

Udta Punjab? Ministers in Congress govt seen joking about opium consumption in viral video: Reports

The Congress party’s dedication towards curbing the drugs menace in Punjab appears to be as credible as Rahul Gandhi’s leadership. After much hue and cry were raised by the party regarding the drug crisis ahead of the Assembly elections in 2017, all the enthusiasm appears to have run out of steam two and a half years later.

In a video that has reportedly gone viral in Punjab, which was apparently released by the PR department inadvertently, some Cabinet Ministers in the Congress Punjab government were seen engaging in banter while referring to opium (drugs) as “kali dawayi” (black medicine). The video reportedly shows the Ministers casually talking about the drug.

A senior Minister from Malwa is said to be clarifying to Chief Minister Amrinder Singh his position on the use of Opium. Another Minister, also from Malwa, is heard telling the former that he would have to get the drug from Rajasthan. Then a third Minister, again from Malwa, asks him where could he get it from. Then the Minister who initiated the discussion listed the benefits of the drug, which triggered a round of laughter.

Read: Have been warning since day one, Pakistan has hidden agenda: Punjab CM Capt Amarinder on Bhindranwale pic in Pak govt’s Kartarpur Corridor ad

The Congress government in Punjab is now being attacked by both the Aam Aadmi Party and Shiromani Akali Dal over the video. “The casual manner in which the Ministers are seen talking about drugs in the video is unfortunate. It only shows their non-seriousness towards the drugs problem. Also, the talks reveal that Ministers were aware of where opium is available,” Leader of Opposition in Punjab Assembly and senior AAP leader Harpal Singh Cheema said on Thursday, according to The Hindu.

“The menace of drugs continues unabated in the State while the Congress is in deep slumber. A sitting judge of High Court should investigate the matter related to drugs menace and it should take cognizance of the Cabinet meeting video,” he added. Shiromani Akali Dal senior leader and former Minister Daljeet Singh Cheema said, “They have been exposed before the public through this video and public is the best judge. Such a casual discussion on a serious issue of drugs by Ministers shows that the government is not concerned about eradicating the drugs menace.”

Read: If AAP Punjab is flirting with Khalistani elements, again, it is all Kejriwal’s fault, again

The Drug Crisis in Punjab was the talk of the town ahead of elections, especially after the movie Udta Punjab featuring Shahid Kapoor as the lead was released. The ruling BJP-SAD government had to face a lot of flak for the drug crisis in the state. Since then, however, not much appears to have improved and the drug crisis has apparently been reduced to a joke.

Malda shocker: Charred body of a woman found, rape suspected

0

Days after the gruesome rape and murder of 27-year-old veterinarian in Hyderabad shook the nation’s conscience, a body of a young woman burnt beyond recognition has been found in West Bengal’s Malda. As per reports, a woman’s charred body was found in a mango orchard in Malda, West Bengal early this morning. Police suspect that she was raped and killed.

According to reports, the body had suffered severe burns because of which it was difficult to ascertain her identity. The charred body was discovered by local farmers who informed the police. While a probe has been initiated, the police believe that she must be in her early 20s.

Read: Uttar Pradesh: Rape survivor set on fire by her out-on-bail rapists in Unnao, victim suffers 90% burn

The police found injury marks on her body and a pair of slippers and matchsticks were also recovered nearby. Citing sources, Times of India says that the police believe the woman was raped before she was murdered and had her body set on fire.

The news comes just days after the Hyderabad horror where 27 year old Dr Preeti Reddy (name changed) was gang-raped and murdered and then had her body set on fire. The incident created widespread outrage demanding stricter laws for women safety.

The New Yorker Report: A work or propaganda created to hurt US politicians as much as Narendra Modi and India

The American Mainstream Media, in recent times, has made it abundantly clear that Corporate Media is little more than the propaganda wing of the USA’s political establishment. It has led to the coinage of the term ‘Military-Industrial-Media complex’ to describe the intimate relationship that the corporate media in the USA shares with the War Machine in the United States.

The Corporate Media, for its part, has performed in an exemplary fashion to justify the coinage of the term. One of the most obvious examples of it is the alleged chemical attack in Syria by the Assad regime. The War Machine in the US bayed for blood and the entire mainstream media called for Donald Trump to launch a new wave of military operations against Assad. Trump, however, was remarkably restrained in his response and did just enough to get the warmongers off his chest. Now latest revelations by WikiLeaks reveal that the entire thing may have been staged and Assad may have been wrongly blamed for the chemical attack.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsMd3harFO0]

The New Yorker Report: A Work of Fiction

It is under these circumstances that we need to look at the report by Dexter Filkins for The New Yorker titled ‘Blood and Soil in Narendra Modi’s India’. The report is littered with every manner of conspiracy theory under the Sun and indulges in complete distortion of historical facts. For instance, the ‘journalist’ says that Pakistan was created because Muslims of pre-partition India were too scared to live in a Hindu majority country. This is a shameless genocide denial of the highest order.

Read: From ridiculous conspiracy theories to incredulous lies: 12 lies spread by The New Yorker in its anti-Modi propaganda piece

The ‘report’ also gives air to fantastical theories such as ‘The legend of Ram Janmabhoomi grew after independence’. Given the nature of such lies, it can be safely said that it’s completely a work of fiction, not journalism. We have published a comprehensive report detailing all the lies that Filkins has spread in the report but even then, we cannot say for certain that we managed to capture all of them. It can be read here.

The Hatred for Donald Trump and ‘Howdy Modi’

Readers would remember that the Indian Prime Minister during his visit to the US earlier this year heaped praises on Trump, which had raised quite a few eyebrows at the time. Trump, as we are well aware, is loathed by the political establishment of both parties in the US and the mainstream media, with the exception of Fox News, has been plainly hostile to him.

Moreover, the profuse praise for Trump was interpreted by many as an endorsement of the President, which undoubtedly irked many important elements in the US War Machine and their cronies in the Democrat Party. It is pertinent to mention here that Donald Trump has consistently shied away from giving in to the clamouring for war around him. For instance, when Iran allegedly shot down an American Drone, Donald Trump as President called off a military attack at the last moment because he believed that the estimated 150 Iranian casualties were a disproportionately large price to pay for shooting down an unmanned drone.

Read: OpIndia investigation: Tentacles of radical Islam, Pakistan, Khalistan in Houston anti-Modi protests ahead of ‘Howdy Modi’ event

At that precise moment, when the entire military-industrial-media complex (MIMC) was baying for Iranian blood, POTUS Trump demonstrated more integrity and humanity than his predecessors, Bush and Obama, had shown at any moment during their presidency. Thus, it is understandable that the bloodthirsty MIMC is extremely unhappy with Trump and is currently engaged in a coup attempt to remove him from office. It’s also important to remember that Trump’s aversion towards initiating another war is precisely the same reason why US Congresswoman and Democrat Presidential Aspirant for 2020, Tulsi Gabbard, is hated so much by the establishment.

Notorious Allegations against Tulsi Gabbard

Tulsi Gabbard is a military veteran who has made ‘End the Regime Change Wars’ the flagship policy of her presidential campaign. She has a history with the Democrat National Convention as well. In 2016, she had resigned from the DNC to endorse Bernie Sanders as the nominee of her party, for which she incurred the wrath of the party establishment and continues to face. Due to her anti-war stance and her opposition to Hillary Clinton, she has been labelled a ‘Russian Asset’ despite the fact that she is a serving Major in the US Military and a War Veteran.

The Congresswoman from Hawaii, due to her Hindu faith, has also been falsely accused of being hand in gloves with ‘Hindutva fascists’ merely because she wants the US and India to share a warm relationship and is known to share her a cordial relationship with the Indian Prime Minister. However, since she is a Hindu and is dedicatedly an anti-war veteran, her political opponents in the Democrat primaries have slandered her for merely being warm towards Narendra Modi and India. They forget that even Barack Obama displayed great friendship with Narendra Modi during his Presidency and numerous political luminaries in recent times have warmed up the current Indian administration.

Read: Watch: Tulsi Gabbard shuts down ‘Gujarat riots’ lies against PM Modi with one epic reply

The report by Dexter Filkins for The New Yorker, in which he relies greatly on a thoroughly discredited ‘journalist’ Rana Ayyub, comes across as another disgraceful attempt by political players in the American Corporate Media Establishment to use foreign leaders to settle personal scores with political opponents in their own country. Of late, it has almost become a fashion in the United States to slander and demonize leaders of foreign nations so that politicians could score brownie points over their opponents in domestic politics.

Narendra Modi: The Third Leader who was slandered

Narendra Modi is the third leader who is being subject to slanderous accusations by the American Corporate Media so that their friends in the political establishment could benefit from it politically. The first was, of course, Vladimir Putin of Russia. The Russian Collusion Delusion was nothing more than an attempt to undermine the Trump Presidency and in the process, violate the Democratic Will of the American electorate. After spending years investigating the so-called collusion and exhausting huge resources in the charade, Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller failed to produce a single shred of evidence to suggest any collusion between the Russian Government and the Trump Campaign.

That hasn’t stopped the media, however, from continuing to spread the utterly delusional conspiracy theory that Donald Trump is, somehow, a Russian Puppet. The media-political establishment did not stop there and proceeded to label Tulsi Gabbard, a serving member of the US Military and a Congresswoman, an asset of the Russian government. All of this, without a single shred of evidence of course. No less than Hillary Clinton herself accused Tulsi of being a Russian Asset, to which the Hawaiian responded in kind by labelling her the ‘Queen of Warmongers’.

The second foreign leader to be used to settle domestic political scores was Bashar al-Assad of Syria. Tulsi Gabbard was labelled an ‘Assad-apologist’ for the crime of meeting the Syrian President. The principled stance of the Congresswoman has been that she will be always willing to engage even the worst of her country’s enemies diplomatically because the alternative to that is War.

She risked immense political capital by meeting Assad, just as she risked a great deal by endorsing Bernie Sanders in 2016 and meeting Donald Trump after he was elected President in an era of hyper-partisanship. Donald Trump has also been accused of being soft towards Assad because he has always prioritized withdrawing forces from Syria. One could debate the manner in which he ordered the withdrawal of US forces from the country but one cannot argue that it was something the American electorate voted for.

The third in line is our own Prime Minister, Narendra Damodardas Modi. Slandering Modi gives the political opponents of Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard another stick to beat them with. It is with this purpose that the American political establishment appears to have renewed its attack on Narendra Modi. Despite the utter lack of factual rigour, Dexter Filkins’ report has been plugged by the usual suspects in the MIMC. Former staffers in the Obama administration, New York Times journalists, BBC correspondents, CNN reporters, WashingtonPost journalists and every other typical establishment media-political figure.

Rana Ayyub smuggled in the reporter, violated Indian Laws

It is rather interesting that Rana Ayyub, who is thoroughly discredited across all sections of the Indian Media, is suddenly finding traction in the United States. One could, of course, attribute it all to coincidence, however, in an age of chaos in the world of Geopolitics, such developments cannot be dismissed as such. Furthermore, Rana Ayyub illegally smuggled in the foreign journalist in Kashmir in violation of Indian laws. The Indian government can afford to ignore such transgressions but it would do so at its own peril.

What are the motivations of the protagonists?

Although we can only speculate about the actual motivations of Filkins, there are some clues to be found regarding Rana Ayyub’s motivations in the report. “Indians have a weakness for being recognized in America,” she told Filkins. “The idea that they would be famous in the United States—it was irresistible to them.” It appears Rana Ayyub was subconsciously projecting her own desires on to others when she made that comment. And it’s the hallmark of the Left that whatever wrongdoing they are guilty of, they accuse others of it.

As for the motivations for Filkins’ work, we can only rely on the conduct of the American Corporate Media in recent times to make satisfactory speculations. The media-political establishment in the US has fanned crazy conspiracy theories about foreign leaders in recent times to settle scores with domestic political opponents. And the discerning would have noticed, it is always designed to attack those who threaten the status quo. Not even a military veteran such as Tulsi Gabbard is spared from vicious accusations of being a foreign asset. Donald Trump has constantly battled such accusations from the first day of his Presidency.

The Churn in American Politics

The two politicians in question, Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard, belong to the opposite ends of the political spectrum. But even so, both of them are representatives of populist sentiments that has gripped the American electorate. It is not a surprise then, that Tulsi Gabbard enjoys huge popularity among significant sections of the electorate predisposed towards Donald Trump. Some of them might even switch over to her in 2020 should she become the Presidential nominee of the Democrat party, however, that appears impossible as of now.

Similarly, Donald Trump enjoys significant support among ‘Bernie Bros’ and it is widely believed that a significant chunk of voters, who would have otherwise voted for Bernie Sanders, chose to vote for Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton in 2016. Bernie Sanders is, perhaps, the third most hated candidate in the fray for 2020 even though he can boast of great support within the party. Among the three of them, as of now, only Bernie has not been accused of being a foreign asset. However, the way things are currently unfolding, it won’t be long before someone accuses him of working for foreign interests.

The Great Divide in American Media

The divide can also be observed in the media space. For instance, Tucker Carlson and Jimmy Dore, who disagree on a great many things, still agree on the fundamental issue that the status quo is destroying the country. For instance, although Jimmy is a hardcore progressive, on matters such as Syria and foreign wars, he regularly cites shows clips of Tucker Carlson Tonight at Fox News to his audience and says that American citizens can learn more about the authentic reality of the Middle East by watching the Conservative populist’s show than spending their time on MSNBC, CNN or other such establishment media platforms.

Jimmy Dore, despite being a progressive, does not believe that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians or there’s any good reason to impeach him. Similarly, Tucker Carlson recognizes that the status quo is clearly not working for the average American and certainly appears to reserve a special hatred for the political establishment of both parties which is destroying the lives of Americans according to him as well. Under such circumstances, it can be safely said that The New Yorker report by Filkins is an establishment initiative to slander Narendra Modi so that his warm relationship with Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard could then be used to undermine the two biggest political threats to the Military-Industrial-Media Complex.

Rana Ayyub: The Chosen One?

In the report, Filkins also laments the fact that there are no ‘aggressive voices’ in the media apart from The Caravan and The Wire that question the government. Quite clearly, he is either trapped in an alternate universe of his own making or is lying on purpose to peddle his agenda.

Read: Supreme Court trashes Rana Ayyub’s Gujarat book, says it is based upon surmises, conjectures, and suppositions

It also appears to be a subtle hint at people abroad that there’s a need to invest in more such ‘aggressive voices’ in the Indian digital space. The manner in which Filkins has propped up Rana Ayyub, the ‘aggressive voice’ of his choice is clearly the Queen of Islamist herself. Therefore, it won’t be too much of a surprise if we see Rana Ayyub running a media venture of her own in the near future. And it won’t be a surprise either if her media venture is heavily funded by money from abroad.

The Establishment Strikes Back?

The Modus-Operandi behind the report on Narendra Modi bears all the hallmarks of the propaganda that was so evident during the Russian Collusion Delusion and the narrative around the Middle East. Filkins level a serious of utterly discredited accusations so confidently that he would even make the most politically aware individual double-check the facts. The report was nearly 10,000 words long, probably even longer, and it was horribly wrong on all the major issues. The purpose of it was, clearly, to organize all the bizarre conspiracy theories against Narendra Modi under one single banner.

There is another distinct possibility that cannot be overlooked. A significant section of the US political establishment is subservient to Chinese interests. It is this faction, of which Michael Bloomberg perhaps is the most popular face after Joe Biden, which stood by silently while China managed to make significant inroads within US interests. Bloomberg, recently, joined the Democratic Presidential Race. Earlier in September, he had declared that Xi Jinping is not a dictator and the Communist Party of China actually ‘listens to its people’.

Under the Trump Administration, ties between India and the US have grown manifold as Donald Trump ramped up his trade war against China. It’s only natural for ties between India and the United States to strengthen at such a time as the US needs India on its side if it wishes to fend off the strategic threat posed by the Chinese. Under such circumstances, it does appear that an organized effort is currently underway to portray India as the ‘Great Other’ so that US-India ties never reach their full potential. Who benefits from it? China, for one, and the faction of the media-political establishment that is in China’s pockets.

Who benefits the most when India is slandered?

The most obvious beneficiaries of the biased report by The New Yorker is obviously the establishment of the Democrat party. It helps them take down two threats simultaneously: Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard. It also helps in generating enthusiasm among the Muslim voter-base of the party. Thus, there are great electoral benefits to be gained by slandering India and demonizing Narendra Modi in US soil.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that foreign leaders are being used to settle scores with domestic political opponents and gain electoral benefits in the process. It’s a tried and tested trick in the US. For instance, the grand Democrat plan to defeat Donald Trump in 2020 involves Vladimir Putin to a great degree. Not a day goes by without the US media spreading Xenophobic hatred against Russians and portraying Vladimir Putin as the greatest global threat after Adolf Hitler.

Amusingly enough, China does not receive even an ounce of the scrutiny that Russia or India receives. For instance, Michael Bloomberg did not have to experience much criticism at all for his defence of the atrocious Chinese regime and Xi Jinping. It’s understandable as Big Business in the United States has great financial interests in China and they do not want to risk offending the Communist Party there.

The Indian Equivalent of the Steele Dossier

Dexter Filkins, through his mammoth report on The New Yorker, only attempted to document all the conspiracy theories against Narendra Modi and the BJP at one single place so that the magnitude of it hits his readers with the force of a rampaging truck. From Loya to whitewashing the genocidal nature of Pakistan’s creation, every loony story finds a place in it. Filkins has not even made any serious effort to hide his agenda. He knows that his readers already have a negative perception of India, so they will hardly bother to verify the lies that he spoonfed them.

The New Yorker Report is the most obvious example of a political hit-job if there were any, and its targets are not just Narendra Modi and India but also US politicians who threaten the status quo the most. The report, in fact, reminds one of the now-infamous Steele Dossier that was concocted by political hacks to take down Donald Trump. After an insane degree of political drama, the Steele Dossier was exposed as the work of propaganda that it was. Of course, not even Narendra Modi’s worst enemies could ever be convinced of the kind of allegations that were contained in the Steele Dossier, therefore, what was needed was the traditional approach.

Like the Steele Dossier, the report by The New Yorker too demonstrated an organized effort by all of Narendra Modi’s political opponents in the media. From Rana Ayyub who smuggled Filkins into Kashmir, violating Indian laws in the process, to the likes of Harsh Mander, Ashish Nandy, Pratik Sinha, S. Varadarajan, a lot of the traditional opponents of the BJP in the media contribute prominently to The New Yorker’s work of fiction.

The New Yorker’s report comes across as an organized attempt to undermine the Indian government. Under the current climate of chaos in the arena of Geopolitics, such works of propaganda should be viewed with great suspicion.

Lies, deceit and threat: Read how Indira and Sanjay Gandhi pulled off the Maruti scam

Sanjay Gandhi, the reckless, vainglorious, and utterly reprehensible in his conceited actions, had wrecked India’s democracy from within when in 1975 he, in large part, influenced his mother Mrs Indira Gandhi to impose the emergency and supplant the rule of law with that of corrupt and lying men. The commentariat is, from time to time, abuzz with sordid sagas of his draconian forced nasbandi (sterilization) programme or his authoritarian ways of mindlessly demolishing Jhuggi-Jhopris in Delhi or how he controlled censorship of the fourth estate through VC Shukla.

An oft-overlooked piece of Sanjay’s public life is the Maruti scandal in which he and his mother, then PM of India, were the main perpetrators in hoodwinking an unsuspecting and innocent nation.

Sanjay Gandhi, Mrs Gandhi’s younger son, was of the rather boisterous sort, who, foregoing a university education decided to do a student apprenticeship with Rolls Royce and a course on vocational mechanical engineering, both of which he failed to complete. The late Vinod Mehta, the former editor of the Outlook, noted in his autobiography: “Back in India, Sanjay deftly manipulated his mother, sowing in her a guilt complex about him coping alone with the after-effects of a broken home.”

Eventually, and ultimately tragically, under the munificence of Mrs Gandhi, Sanjay set out to ostensibly make a low cost ‘people’s car’, the Maruti, and with many a government favours filling his sails, he had progressed to putting together his prototype in a huge facility in Gurugram, which is presently occupied by Maruti-Suzuki.

Read: The making of Maruti: A sordid history of Congress scams

Mrs Gandhi, in a calculated show of approval, publicly stated that she commended the enterprising spirit of her son in putting forward a proposal for a small car that is completely Indian, and that her son was a ‘delicate young man’ and with whatever money and energy he had, he had modelled a car, not a posh one, but fairly comfortable, and suited to Indian conditions and the middle class.
The Maruti scandal was just beginning to unfold and the full extent of the chicaneryand underhand pressures officially exercised, and the cravenness of the officials and policy-makers in high places were subsequently revealed in the 141-page report of the Commission of Inquiry on Maruti Affairs, 1979 sanctioned by the Janta Party government in 1977.

The commission’s report makes sad reading and exposes not only Sanjay but also Mrs Gandhi’s complicity in this fraud. Below are the salient points of the report.

  1. At every stage, issues were fudged, rules bent, rivals frustrated, records fabricated, officials subjected to pressure or victimised if they refused to comply.
  2. The PMO was used to orchestrate efforts to secure an industrial license for Sanjay’s Maruti with an approved capacity of 50,000 units per annum.
  3. The issues of land acquisition, facilities, and clearances in Gurugram were taken care of by the then Chief Minister of Haryana, Bansi Lal, who was a Sanjay loyalist.
  4. The car was to be built completely indigenously, without any utilization of foreign exchange or foreign technical assistance. Sanjay violated both stipulations by engaging a German designer Willy Muller, who brought with him two NSU German engines as ‘personal baggage’, one of which was fitted into the ‘indigenous’ prototype.
  5. In the course of reliability tests at the Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (VRDE) of the defence ministry at Ahmednagar, Sanjay’s prototype suffered a failure in its steering rod and fell into a ditch. At that time, it had covered 19,376 km as against the stipulated test run of 30,000 km. Yet, officially it was said that the prototype was all right, and it was, in fact, the VRDE’s test driver’s carelessness and inexperience that had caused the car to fall in the ditch.
  6. The then minister for heavy industry, TA Pai, complained to Mrs Gandhi about Sanjay’s failure to comply with the requisite test stipulations, but to no avail as he did not receive any response, not even from Mrs Gandhi.
  7. The government was unconcerned about the production facility of Sanjay’s Maruti coming up in a prohibited zone next to an Air Force facility. Some ‘remedialmeasures’ were proposed and the file sent to Mrs Gandhi who first kept the file forfour months and gave a noting that the matter is kept pending for six months or so.
  8. The company’s minutes books were cooked up and action sought on the basis of bogus resolutions and alleged bank clearances that were never obtained.
  9. Automobile dealers were coerced into buying shares to raise capital for Sanjay’s Maruti venture, and were threatened with demolition of their shops on non-compliance.
  10. Maruti Technical Services and Maruti Heavy Vehicles were floated as private enterprises in which Sonia Gandhi, then still a foreign national, was made a director.
  11. Banks were coerced to bend regulations and the then chairman of Central Bank was hounded and his term not renewed because he did not find it possible to approve Sanjay’s proposal for a loan of Rs 1.5 crores to help his Maruti Limited.
  12. Quite a few of the applications that Sanjay Gandhi made and the letters he wrote to the authorities asking for something for Maruti, were undated or did not contain proper signatures. In some of them, a scratch of the pen or a tick mark was his signature.
  13. Sanjay did this because he was convinced that making these applications was a mere formality and it was pre-determined that all he wanted would be granted to him.In its damning conclusion, the report states: “The affairs described have brought about a decline in the integrity of public life and sullied the purity of administration.

Legal and other requirements were brushed aside and accepted norms of behaviour were forgotten…..There was an atmosphere of fear… the threat of detention under MISA or a CBI inquiry or other forms of harassment made it hazardous for officers to insist on rules. Shri Sanjay Gandhi exercised only a derivative power, the source of authority was the Prime Minister herself”.

This incident shows that when Congress speaks on Rafale or makes unsubstantiated allegations of corruption (or otherwise) on PM Narendra Modi or HM Amit Shah, it indulges in doublespeak and a Janus faced behaviour that can only be described as Machiavellian skulduggery of the worst sort.

From ridiculous conspiracy theories to incredulous lies: 12 lies spread by The New Yorker in its anti-Modi propaganda piece

Dexter Filkins’ anti-Modi report for The New Yorker requires the reader to engage in a suspension of disbelief. Unless the reader is willing to enthusiastically endorse the ridiculous proposition that every single institution in India has been compromised, from the Police to the bureaucracy, from the smallest of courts to the highest court of the country, the report would be perceived as a monumental exercise in peddling rabid conspiracy theories akin to the Russian Collusion Delusion, which is exactly what it is.

It is a testament to the report’s lack of journalistic rigour that throughout its gigantic length of nearly ten thousand words, possibly more, it is nearly impossible to read through a couple of sentences without stumbling across a factual inaccuracy. Dexter Filkins in The New Yorker regurgitates crazy conspiracy theories, that have been spoonfed to him by Rana Ayyub, with an air of authority that only a toxic combination of arrogance, ignorance could and unbridled anti-Modi hate ever hope to provide.

In this report, we shall take a look at the major canards he has spread in The New Yorker. However, we have to say from the very outset that we might have missed a few because there’s simply too many of them in one place.

1. Pakistan was created because ‘Muslims were scared’

Dexter displayed obnoxious levels of insensitivity when he writes, “As the British Empire prepared to withdraw, in 1947, Muslims were so fearful of Hindu domination that they clamoured for a separate state, which became Pakistan.” It is not merely a spark of insanity, it is a deliberate attempt at genocide denial.

Was the call for Direct Action Day by Muslims of the time an indication of fear? Was the genocide they perpetrated against Hindus during partition an indication of fear? What does Pakistan represent now? Does it demonstrate any fear? Is the organized persecution and rapes of Hindus that occur to this day in Pakistan indication of the same fear that gripped their ancestors in 1947? Only a fool or a sociopath would say such a thing, it’s obvious to everyone with a two-digit IQ that it’s motivated by xenophobia and religious hatred. Pakistan is a terror state founded by genocidal maniacs in 1947 but here we have Filkins engaging in a blatant distortion of history. That sentence alone should serve to explain the kind of biases that are embedded in the report which sinks further downhill from there.

2. ‘RSS believes many Muslims were descended from Hindus’

Insinuations and loony lies abound in the report. At one point, he says, “Members of the R.S.S. believed that many Muslims were descended from Hindus who had been converted by force, and so their faith was of questionable authenticity.” These are facts, Mr Filkins, not mere beliefs harboured by the RSS. These are not even debatable.

3. ‘Legend of Ram Janmabhoomi began after independence’

Dexter Filkins says, “After independence, locals placed Hindu idols inside the mosque and became convinced that it had been built on the former site of a Hindu temple. A legend grew that the god Ram—an avatar of Vishnu, often depicted with blue skin—had been born there.”

The ‘legend’ did not grow after independence. If Filkins had only bothered to read the Ram Janmabhoomi verdict delivered by the Supreme Court, he would have known that Ram Janmabhoomi has always been held sacred by the Hindus and Rama has been cherished by Hindus since eternity. But Filkins does not trust the highest court of India, he only trusts Rana Ayyub for reasons known best to himself.

4. ‘Psychology says Modi is a fascist’ ft. Ashish Nandy

Another individual who Filkins appears to trust greatly is Ashish Nandy, another discredited partisan hack. Describing Nandy as a ‘trained psychologist’ who wanted to study the psychology of Hindu Nationalists, he wrote, “Nandy interviewed Modi for several hours, and came away shaken. His subject, Nandy told me, exhibited all the traits of an authoritarian personality: puritanical rigidity, a constricted emotional life, fear of his own passions, and an enormous ego that protected a gnawing insecurity.”

“Modi was a fascist in every sense,” Nandy is quoted as saying in The New Yorker article, “I don’t mean this as a term of abuse. It’s a diagnostic category.” This is precisely why nobody should trust psychologists, and I say this as a person who holds a Masters Degree in the subject. Psychologists, too often, cloak their political agendas under the garb of ‘science’ and use their positions to achieve political objectives.

People would remember that psychologists in the United States have also issued public sermons against Donald Trump, clearly motivated by their personal political biases. If professionals in the subject had an ounce of integrity, they would have come out and slammed the psychologists for using the subject to peddle their political agendas. Donald Trump was mentally unfit for the presidency, ’eminent psychologists’ said, without ever having the opportunity to examine him.

5. The Godhra Carnage lies

Dexter Filkins in his The New Yorker article fails to inform his readers about what really happened in Godhra when the CM of the state was Narendra Modi. He says that the coach of the Sabarmati Express was ‘possibly’ set on fire by a Muslim when there’s incontrovertible evidence on record that it was definitely, not possible, set on fire by a Muslim mob. The guilty have even been convicted by the Judiciary of this country and yet, The New Yorker journalist does not believe this is a relevant piece of information his readers should know.

Dexter Filkins wrote, “While the train sat at the station, Hindu travellers and Muslims on the platform began to heckle one another. As the train pulled away, it stalled, and the taunting escalated. At some point, someone—possibly a Muslim vender with a stove—threw something on fire into one of the cars. The flame spread, and the passengers were trapped inside; when the door was finally pushed open, the rush of oxygen sparked a fireball. Some fifty-eight people suffocated or burned to death.”

6. The Gujarat Riots lies

Writing on the Gujarat riots, Filkins says, “According to eyewitnesses, rioters cut open the bellies of pregnant women and killed their babies”. While violence was committed during the riots which were indeed unfortunate, this particular bit is sheer fantasy. None of this happened.

He writes further down the line, “The Chief Minister of the Gujarati government was Narendra Modi, who had been appointed to the position five months before. As the riots accelerated, Modi became invisible; he summoned the Indian Army but held the soldiers in their barracks as the violence spun out of control.” Filkins, presumably, borrowed this from the series of allegations levelled by Naseeruddin Shah’s brother, Zameer Uddin Shah, which does not hold any water and has been debunked on several occasions previously.

Noted political hack Harsh Mander, who is a prominent member of a foreign-funded NGO and was part of Sonia Gandhi’s National Advisory Council on the Communal Violence Bill, also found mention in the anti-Modi New Yorker report. “No sectarian riot ever happens in India unless the government wants it to,” Mander is quoted as saying. “This was a state-sponsored massacre.” Harsh Mander is the kind of person who will never blame the Congress party for the hundreds and thousands of riots that have occurred under its watch or ‘secular parties’ such as Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party for the numerous riots that have occurred in Uttar Pradesh under their watch.

7. Persecution of Political Opponents Conspiracy Theory ft. Sanjiv Bhatt, Haren Pandya

Perennial hatemonger Sanjiv Bhatt, who is contemptible on his best days, was also used by Filkins to peddle his agenda. He wrote, “After Bhatt made his accusation, he was charged in the death of a suspect in police custody—a case that had sat dormant for more than two decades—and sentenced to life in prison.” What is this if not a conspiracy theory? Filkins wants his readers to believe that every institution in India is corrupt, including the Judiciary. He will clearly not trust anyone or any institution apart from Rana Ayyub, an utterly discredited ‘journalist’ who sympathizes with terrorists. Filkins appears to be the kind of person who genuinely believes Jeffery Epstein killed himself and at the same, dismisses the credibility of institutions when it suits himself.

During the course of the report, Filkins used every conspiracy theory that has been used to target Narendra Modi over the years. The death of Haren Pandya, the Sohrabuddin encounter, both of which have been utterly discredited by the highest court of the county feature prominently in the report. Again, he does not trust the institutions of the country but he does trust Rana Ayyub.

8. Great Reliance on Rana Ayyub’s fiction novel The Gujarat Files

Filkins in his The New Yorker article also places great trust in Rana Ayyub’s book ‘The Gujarat Files’ which was trashed by the Supreme Court itself and was a lie-laden attempt to tarnish the then CM of Gujarat, Narendra Modi. The Court observed while dismissing a review petition filed in the Haren Pandya murder case, “The Book by Rana Ayyub is of no utility. It is based upon surmises, conjectures, and suppositions and has no evidentiary value”. It added, “The opinion of a person is not in the realm of the evidence.”

The Court also observed while hearing the petitioners, “The way in which the things have moved in Gujarat post-Godhra incident, such allegations and counter-allegations are not uncommon and had been raised a number of times and have been found to be untenable and afterthought.”

Filkins quotes Tarun Tejpal, the editor of Tehelka at the time, who also believes that Rana Ayyub’s ‘stings’ did not pass the necessary journalistic standards despite being a rabid political hack himself. However, The New Yorker journalist continues to place immense trust in one single person. “The fundamental ethics of the sting is that a sting is no good if a person doesn’t indict oneself,” Tejpal told Filkins. “If you come to me and say, ‘I had a conversation with someone, and he told me that Tom, Dick, and Harry are fuckers, and he knows that Tom is taking money from So-and-So, and Harry really fucked So-and-So,’ it means nothing. That’s just cheap gossip.” So, according to Tarun Tejpal of all people, Rana Ayyub’s book amounted to cheap gossip. And yet, it does not cause Filkins to reevaluate his assumptions about Ayyub.

9. The Judge Loya Conspiracy Theory ft. The Caravan

When all crazy conspiracy theories gathered under one umbrella, how could Judge Loya’s death be far behind? He wrote about the deceased judge, “He told his family and friends that he was under “great pressure” to dismiss the case, and that the chief justice of the Bombay High Court had offered him sixteen million dollars to scuttle it. (The chief justice could not be reached for comment.) Loya died not long after, in mysterious circumstances. The coroner’s report said that he had suffered a heart attack, but, according to The Caravan, a leading Indian news magazine, details in the report appeared to have been falsified.”

Filkins conveniently forgot to mention that Judge Loya’s own family members came out at the peak of the controversy to state firmly that they do not believe that his death was a consequence of foul play and appealed to NGOs and politicians to not harass them. The journalist also did not mention that Loya’s sister whose statement formed the basis of the current spate of allegations accused the Caravan Magazine of misquoting her and claimed that she was deceived into doubting the circumstances of her brother’s death. These are important facts that Filkins conveniently ignored.

10. ‘Media Under Attack’ Trope ft. NDTV

The familiar trope of the ‘media under attack’ was also used abundantly in the report. Filkins relied greatly on the plight of NDTV to further the narrative that every institution in India has been compromised. He says, “In 2016, his administration began moving to crush the television news network NDTV.” He continued, “According to two people familiar with the situation, Modi’s administration has pulled nearly all government advertising from the network—one of its primary sources of revenue—and members of his Cabinet have pressured private companies to stop buying ads. NDTV recently laid off some four hundred employees, a quarter of its staff. The journalists who remain say that they don’t know how long they can persist. “These are dark times,” one told me.”

The ’eminent’ The New Yorker journalist again, very conveniently, fails to inform his readers in his anti-Modi propaganda article that NDTV and its founders are accused of corruption. Not too long ago, the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) had upheld two orders of SEBI imposing a penalty of ₹2 crores on NDTV and ₹20 lakh on the company and its directors Prannoy Roy, Radhika Roy and Vikramaditya Chandra. It has become extremely commonplace for journalists to hide behind the cloak of ‘freedom of the press’ every time they are accused of corruption or some crime. Journalists want everyone to believe that they are somehow morally superior to every one of us and they are incapable of committing any crime. In case they are accused of misconduct, we should never fall prey to the assumption that they might have committed some wrongdoing because of their moral fibre, obviously, is made of pristine material.

Propaganda websites such as The Caravan and The Wire and characters of questionable repute such as Pratik Sinha received thumping endorsements from The New Yorker. It is not unexpected since Filkins’ journalistic aptitude greatly resembles that of the two propaganda websites mentioned. In the report, he also claims that Republic T.V. was founded with support from the BJP, another piece of fiction in the report.

11. Lies on The Balakot Airstrikes ft. Pratik Sinha

As is to be expected, the Balakot Strikes conducted by the Indian Army was questioned as well. Filkins wrote, “On February 26th, Modi ordered airstrikes against what he claimed was a training camp for militants in the town of Balakot. Sympathetic outlets described a momentous victory: they pumped out images of a devastated landscape, and, citing official sources, claimed that three hundred militants had been killed. But Western reporters visiting the site found no evidence of any deaths; there were only a handful of craters, a slightly damaged house, and some fallen trees.”

Conveniently enough, Filkins in The New Yorker propaganda article ignored the plethora of evidence that confirmed the success of the attack which was authorised by Prime Minister Modi. He also ignores the reports of various observers that the airstrikes were a success. Even the residents of the area confirmed it. Moreover, the conduct of Pakistan was a sufficient indication of the consequences of the strikes. Over time, the Indian government has released numerous evidence that confirmed it. However, as he demonstrates throughout the course of the report, Filkins ignores facts that do not suit his narrative.

Again, Dexter Filkins places a great deal of trust on another individual of questionable repute, Pratik Sinha of AltNews. Given the manner in which Dexter Filkins has lied throughout the article, it’s no surprise that Pratik Sinha is the kind of person he finds trustworthy. He received generous assistance from the AltNews founder in his initiative. We have published a detailed report on the matter that can be read here.

12. The Kashmir and the NRC lies

The New Yorker report began with the abrogation of Article 370 and naturally, it also included the NRC, the two agendas of the PM Modi led Indian government. The author, quite clearly, does not understand the difference between citizens and illegal immigrants. It is not surprising considering the fact that in the USA, Democrats can’t distinguish between the two either. If one reads the report, one would assume that Kashmir was paradise until the Indian government decided to abrogate Article 370. However, as every ordinary Indian knows, Jammu & Kashmir was basically an Islamic state within the Secular State of India. Any country should naturally obliterate such an anomaly. However, the Indian government tolerated it for years.

Kashmir was no paradise before the abrogation of Article 370. Terrorism was rampant, numerous Jihadist organizations were operating in the valley, even ISIS had begun baring its fangs, child marriage was legal, homosexuality was still criminal and an Islamic constitution operated in the state. India is under no obligation whatsoever to tolerate such a monstrosity within its territory. Surely, Filkins will not demand that White Supremacist states be allowed to exist within the United States, why does he then expect India to tolerate an Islamic State within its own territory?

Conclusion

The report by Dexter Filkins for The New Yorker is an exquisite work of propaganda against India and Prime Minister Modi. The sole purposive of it appears to be the documentation of all the myriad of conspiracy theories and ridiculous lies under one umbrella. The New Yorker article is a disingenuous attempt at undermining the current Indian government led by PM Modi. This is clearly an organized effort that was assisted by all the usual suspects. The great length of the report, which is nearly 10,000 words long, possibly more, only confirms the number of lies that have been spread against Narendra Modi and the Indian government since the NDA alliance came to power in 2014.

The New Yorker lies about 2002 Gujarat riots and former Gujarat minister Haren Pandya to defame PM Modi

Repeat a lie often and it becomes the truth. That is how the illusion of truth works. One of the favourite such lies is often peddled as the ‘truth of Gujarat’ (pun intended) is about the 2002 Godhra carnage, the riots that followed and the politics around it.

It is often repeated that former Gujarat Home Minister Haren Pandya was a ‘witness’ in a meeting where Narendra Modi, who was the chief minister of Gujarat in 2002, asked police to ‘let people vent their frustration’. The New Yorker, in its article titled “Blood and soil in Narendra Modi’s India” which portrays ‘journalist’ Rana Ayyub as some sort of superhero taking on the ‘big bad guys’, repeats the same lie, amongst many, many other such lies.

The New Yorker on Haren Pandya nad 2002 riots.

The New Yorker names Pandya and disgraced ex-IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt being part of one meeting on the night of 27th February, 2002, the day the Godhra carnage happened, where Modi allegedly let the rioters have a free hand to ‘vent their frustration’. Bhatt even claimed to have attended a meeting where Modi had said he hoped ‘Muslims are taught a lesson’ so that such incidents (Godhra carnage where almost 60 karsevaks returning from Ayodhya were burnt alive in a train compartment by a mob) do not recur.

Read: The real whitewashing – how the crime of burning 59 Hindus alive was covered up

The New Yorker refers to Haren Pandya’s interview to Outlook which was published in the magazine in its 3rd June, 2002 issue which the publication had published without naming Pandya. The Outlook reported in this article that,

The minister told Outlook that in his deposition [to the CCT], he revealed that on the night of 27th  February, Modi summoned DGP (i.e. Director General of Police) K. Chakravarthy,  Commissioner  of Police, Ahmedabad, P.C. Pandey, Chief Secretary, G. SubaraoHome Secretary, Ashok  Narayan, Secretary to the Home Department, K. Nityanand  (a serving police officer of IG rank on deputation) and DGP (IB) G.S. Raigar. Also present were officers from the CM’s office: P.K. Mishra, Anil Mukhim and A.K. Sharma. The minister also told Outlook that the meeting was held at the CM’s bungalow.

The minister told the tribunal (CCT) that in the two-hour meeting, Modi made it clear there would be justice for Godhra the next day, during the VHP-called bandh. He ordered that the police should not come in the way of “the Hindu backlash”. At one point in this briefing, according to the minister’s statement to the tribunal, DGP Chakravarthy vehemently protested. But he was harshly told by Modi to shut up and obey. Commissioner Pandey, says the minister, would later show remorse in private but, at that meeting, didn’t have the guts to object…”

In this report, disgraced ex-IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt (also mentioned in New Yorker in above screenshot) is nowhere in the picture.

Now, there are a few factual errors in this Outlook report. The Outlook report names Chief Secretary, G. Subba Rao and an officer in the CM’s office, A.K. Sharma, as among those at the meeting. Neither were present in that meeting. That day, Subarao was on leave abroad [the SIT too mentioned this on page 312 of its report]  and instead it was acting Chief Secretary S.K. Varma who participated in that meeting.

SIT Report excerpt

One may argue you cannot dismiss the claims just based on one factual error (d-uh). Since Pandya is no more to give further clarifications on the 2002 Outlook reports which are passed around as gospel truth, one must rely on Outlook itself which has acknowledged the error in its subsequent report. In a report published on 19th August 2002, Outlook has named Haren Pandya as the mystery minister it had interviewed in previous edition where Pandya (now named) acknowledges he had got the names wrong, but the place and meeting right.

Read: Supreme Court trashes Rana Ayyub’s Gujarat book, says it is based upon surmises, conjectures, and suppositions

Now, Pandya has said that the meeting lasted for two hours. However, the SIT has acknowledged the meeting lasted 30-45 minutes. Now in this report, too, where Pandya says he got the name of Chief Secretary wrong ‘but everything else is correct’, is factually incorrect.

Not only was the chief secretary not there (he was on leave abroad), another officer, A.K. Sharma was also not present. This was admitted by Outlook, not by the Minister. And sadly for Outlook, there was a third blunder in this allegation even in the 19th August issue, which is that DGP (IB) G.C. Raigar (correct name G. S. Raigar) was also not present in this meeting. Turns out neither Outlook nor Pandya knew this. So even in the 19th August issue, when they admitted mistakes in the 3rd June 2002 issue, they stuck to their story saying ‘rest all information is correct’, but the information in the 19th August 2002 was also wrong since G.C. Raigar was also wrongly named as being present in the meeting.

Now, as we can see there are multiple factual errors in the Outlook report. Another name mentioned in the New Yorker article is that of Sanjiv Bhatt. Sanjiv Bhatt has claimed that he attended a meeting with the then Gujarat CM Narendra Modi where Modi said Muslims must be taught a lesson. Surprise, surprise, Sanjiv Bhatt was not part of any meeting held on 27th February. Even Haren Pandya in his interview with Outlook, which we have now settled has way too many factual errors to be believable, does not mention Bhatt.

Read: Anti-Modi cop Sanjiv Bhatt spreads muck about other Modi haters on social media

In another part of New Yorker, it mentions that the state government allowed the VHP to ‘parade the burned corpses’ through Ahmedabad, thereby flaring the communal tension. Most of the victims of the carnage were residents of Ahmedabad and Vadodara. The bodies were transported via matador along with police escort and were brought to civil hospital on the outskirts of Ahmedabad.

In fact, quite contrary to being ‘paraded’ the bodies were brought between 11:30 PM to 3:30 AM. The places where riots took place, like Naroda Patiya and Chamanpura are too far from Sola, where the bodies were kept. Moreover, the Supreme Court appointed SIT in 2013, before Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister, had claimed that there was no conspiracy in bringing the charred bodies of the Godhra victims.

The New Yorker further mentions that while the then Chief Minister of Gujarat Narendra Modi had called the Army, the soldiers were not allowed to take over. “As the riots accelerated, Modi became invisible; he summoned the Indian Army but held the soldiers in their barracks as the violence spun out of control,” the New Yorker reports.

The facts about army deployment following the Godhra carnage:

Following the Sabarmati Express carnage on 27th February 2002, where 59 pilgrims returning from Ayodhya were burnt alive, widespread riots broke out and escalated on 28th February. As reported by India Today in 18th March 2002 issue, Modi had called officially called for the Army by 4 pm on 28th February and by 6:30 pm a formal request for the Army landed in Delhi. On 1st March at 1 am, the then defence minister George Fernandes reached Ahmedabad and at 11:30 the Army was staging a flag march.

The Hindu reported on 1 March 2002 (Friday) that “The Army units, frantically called by the Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, as the situation seemed to slip out of hand, started arriving in Ahmedabad and are likely to be deployed in the city on Friday (1 March).”

Another 1st March The Hindu report from the front page says,

The Army began flag marches in the worst-affected areas of Ahmedabad, Baroda, Rajkot and Godhra cities and the ‘shoot at sight’ order was extended to all 34 curfew-bound cities and towns in Gujarat as the orgy of violence in the aftermath of the Godhra train carnage continued unabated for the second day today.

The report further stated,

He (then Gujarat CM Modi) claimed that despite the prevailing tension in the walled city and labour-dominated areas of Ahmedabad, the flag march had a “salutary effect”. He said one Army brigade, airlifted from the border areas and which arrived early this morning, began flag march later in the day while another brigade was expected to arrive in the night.

Rediff report from 1st March corroborated above claims of deployment of Army as well as shoot at sight orders on 1st March itself.

Modi has issued directives to the police to deal ‘strictly with arsonists and if need be shoot-at-sight any person indulging in rioting’, they added.

Meanwhile, the army staged flag marches in the violence-hit areas of Ahmedabad – Daraipur, Shahpur, Shahibaug and Naroda – to instill confidence among the people as unabated violence has claimed 111 lives in the city alone so far.

The army personnel were out in different areas like Daraipur, Shahpur, Shahibaug and Naroda, police said.

The same fact is also reflected in the note submitted by ACS (Home), Ashok Narayan as part of the investigation.

Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi requesting for Army on 28th February 2002

The note further states that in wake of the terrorist attack on the Parliament in December 2001, there was a war-like situation on the border. Hence, the whole force was deployed in the forward/border areas of the country. The state government then requested for Army personnel in the cantonment of Ahmedabad, but no force was available there either. Despite the fact that in such a scenario, withdrawing the Army from the border would require a high-level decision at the Centre, the decision to withdraw the same and deploy to Gujarat was taken without delay.

Note giving details of deployment of Army in Feb-March 2002 in Gujarat

The note says Army personnel were airlifted by using about 40 aircrafts from the border and landed in Ahmedabad by 28th February midnight. 6 buses, 9 trucks and 15 jeeps were sent for use by the Army by 2:30 am on 1st March 2002. During the day 39 additional vehicles were provided. A total of 131 vehicles were provided to the Army. Additional executive magistrates were provided to the Army. Escort officers from the police force were provided to the Army.

Personnel were airlifted to be deployed to Vadodara and Rajkot as well.

Details of Army deployment in Ahmedabad, Godhra and other parts of Gujarat

Within 16 hours of official communication, the Army was brought from forward/border areas and deployed in Gujarat.

Now if only the ‘investigative journalists’ had bothered to carry out an actual investigation instead of relying on clowns masquerading as journalists, things would have been so much better for humanity.

Note: Some parts of this report is based on extensive investigation by gujaratriots.com.

Food subsidy in Parliament canteen ends, MPs to now pay full price for food

In a significant decision, the Members of Parliament have unanimously decided to forgo the food subsidy that was made available to them in the Parliament canteen.

According to the reports, the Members of Parliament, by a consensus, decided to do away with food subsidy at Parliament canteen. The decision was taken after a suggestion from Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla.

Reportedly, members of all parties have agreed to do away with the food subsidy in the canteen. The discussion was held during a meeting of the Lok Sabha’s Business Advisory Committee.

With the decision, the Parliament secretariat will save Rs 17 crores annually, reports have said, as the food in Parliament canteen will now be sold at the actual cost. The Parliament canteen was subsidised to the extent of 80 per cent of its cost in 2015.

The Northen Railway runs canteens at Parliament House, Parliament House Annexe, Parliament House Reception and Parliament House Library Building. The food at canteens inside Parliament premises is provided at lower rates to MPs, officials and visitors.

Earlier this year, the Northern Railway had demanded Rs 16.43 crores from the Lok Sabha Secretariat as the cost for running four canteens in Parliament. The amount which Northern Railway claimed was towards subsidy and establishment cost.

The food prices in the parliament canteen were increased during the last Lok Sabha and subsequently, the government had also reduced the subsidy bill. However, this time, the government has decided to eliminate subsidy completely and all MPs have agreed.

AltNews’ Pratik Sinha helps New Yorker water down Pulwama attack, cast aspersions that Balakot airstrike was fabricated

The New Yorker magazine, in its article titled “Blood and soil in Narendra Modi’s India”, which is a ludicrous concoction of lies of fantastical proportions, downplayed the Pulwama Terror Attack and cast aspersions on the Balakot Airstrikes that followed. In its efforts, Dexter Filkins was assisted by none other than the founder of fake news portal AltNews, Pratik Sinha.

The journalist wrote, “On February 14th, a suicide bomber crashed a car laden with explosives into an Indian military convoy in Kashmir, killing forty soldiers. The attack energized Modi: he gave a series of bellicose speeches, insisting, “The blood of the people is boiling!” He blamed the attack on Pakistan, India’s archrival, and sent thousands of troops into Kashmir.”

Filkins thinly veils his insinuation that Pakistan-backed terrorism was not responsible for the Pulwama Terror Attack and it is only Narendra Modi who is blaming the terror state for garnering political mileage through the martyrdom of our soldiers. Furthermore, he insinuates that it’s Modi who insisted “The blood of the people is boiling!” It appears that the American journalist is living under the delusion that the people of India were not actually demanding revenge against Pakistan.

Extract from the New Yorker article

Dexter Filkins then proceeded to question the success of the Balakot Airstrikes itself. Of course, in his endeavour, he received generous help from rabid Modi-hater and propagandist Pratik Sinha. The New Yorker journalist wrote:

“On February 26th, Modi ordered airstrikes against what he claimed was a training camp for militants in the town of Balakot. Sympathetic outlets described a momentous victory: they pumped out images of a devastated landscape, and, citing official sources, claimed that three hundred militants had been killed. But Western reporters visiting the site found no evidence of any deaths; there were only a handful of craters, a slightly damaged house, and some fallen trees.”

Read: AltNews founder Pratik Sinha reached out to OpIndia CEO Rahul Roushan for ‘comments’. Here is what he said

Again, extremely conveniently, Filkins ignores the fact that the Pakistani government denied international media access to the sites of the Balakot airstrikes for days after the attack. The day of the Indian offensive itself, the Pakistan Army cordoned off the 60-acre compound, that is close to an area of 32-34 kilometre radius. No entry or exit of private vehicles was permitted. Even as late as the 8th of March, ten days after the event, Pakistan denied access to Reuters journalists.

Even a US-based activist from Gilgit, Senge Hasnan Shering, confirmed that Pakistan was definitely involved in a cover-up. He had said back then, “Pakistan continues to claim that the strike happened and it damaged the forest area and some farmland. But then there’s no reason for Pakistan to cordon off the area for such a long time and not allow the international media to have an independent opinion on the situation there.” But to Dexter Filkins, all of this is not enough evidence of a cover-up by the Pakistanis. It’s only Pratik Sinha and Rana Ayyub he trusts completely and unequivocally.

Read: AltNews lies in its response but IFCN declares political activists ‘neutral’: Here is how IFCN is a threat to Indian sovereignty

With Pratik Sinha in tow, Filkins engages in a remarkable sleight of hand. The New Yorker Report does not provide any good reason to doubt the assertions made by the Indian government. Consistent with the tone of the rest of the article, Filkins only furthers a preordained narrative through misrepresentation of facts, thinly-veiled insinuations and distortion of events.

Filkins wrote:

“Many of the pro-Modi posts turned out to be crude fabrications. Pratik Sinha, of Alt News, pointed out that photos claiming to depict dead Pakistani militants actually showed victims of a heatwave; other images, ostensibly of the strikes, were cribbed from a video game called Arma 2.” What The New Yorker journalist essentially says is that people posted fabricated videos of the airstrikes on social media. Pratik Sinha, too, says the same thing.

Therefore, the argument appears to be that since people, who are in no way associated with the Indian government in any manner, posted videos that were not authentic, the Indian government must have lied about the success of the Balakot airstrikes. This is a shameless claim of the highest order. It’s akin to claiming that Osama bin-Laden was not neutralized by American forces because some people on social media might have posted fabricated videos or photographs related to the military operation.

Read: No AltNews, Zakir Musa was not a ‘separatist’, he was a terrorist who wanted to establish an Islamic Caliphate in Kashmir

This is the most blatant evidence of a distortion of facts to suit a preordained narrative. It is even shameful that the American journalist was supported in his endeavour by an Indian citizen, Pratik Sinha of AltNews, who has been consumed by his morbid hatred towards Narendra Modi. The hateful nature of Pratik Sinha, the founder of AltNews is well known. Apart from his proclivity towards doxxing, he is known to target the families of those he disagrees with politically. AltNews is known to peddle fake news and engage in the misrepresentation of facts when it suits their agenda.

The entire article is laden with fabrications, lies and ridiculous fantasies. But the real distressing aspect about it all is the fact that Filkins was helped in his project to malign India by a certain section of Indians who hate Narendra Modi intensely. Rana Ayyub even violated Indian laws to help The New Yorker reporter. She smuggled Filkins into Kashmir, violating Indian laws in the process and all manners of decency.

Chidambaram violated bail conditions by claiming clear record as a minister: Prakash Javadekar

On Thursday, Union Information and Broadcasting Minister Prakash Javadekar hit out at senior Congress leader P Chidambaram saying the former Union Minister violated bail conditions by claiming clear record during his tenure as a union minister.

Speaking to the media, Prakash Javadekar accused Chidambaram of violating the bail conditions by claiming to have a very clear record as a minister despite being accused of involving in multi-crore scams during his tenure as a minister.

Javadekar said that the claim of Chidambaram, who was released on bail on Wednesday after spending 106 days in jail, amounted to “self- certification”.


“The Supreme Court had asked the Congress leader not to speak about the case against him while ordering his release on bail. What he said is in violation of this condition,” Javadekar said.

Earlier in the day, former Finance Minister P Chidambaram, who is out on bail in connection with multi-crore INX Media scam case, had addressed a press conference at AICC headquarters despite apex court’s order not to give statements to the media over the cases against him.

Chidambaram said, ”I am glad to speak to you exactly 106 days after I last spoke to you.”

In the press conference, P Chidambaram claimed that the government was incapable of reversing slowdown. “My record as Minister and my conscience are absolutely clear. Officers who have worked with me, business persons who have interacted with me and journalists who have observed me know that very well,” said P Chidamabaram while giving a clean chit to himself.

On his release yesterday, the Supreme Court had put up conditions ordering him not to give any press interviews or make public statements on the INX Media case. He was also asked to furnish bail bonds of Rs. 2 lakh.

Read: Chidambaram gets bail, to walk out after 106 days but can not talk to media

Apart from these conditions, the passport of the accused would remain confiscated and he would not be able to leave the country without permission. He was also directed to make himself available for interrogation. The court had also ordered him to not try to influence any case witnesses.

The former Union minister was arrested by the CBI after a high-level drama where CBI officials had to scale the walls of his residence on August 21. Later, the ED had taken the custody of Chidambaram on October 17, before his bail order came for the CBI case.

P Chidambaram is accused in the INX Media scam which involves charges of bribery and lobbying in granting foreign investments worth over Rs 300 crores to INX Media. INX Media, later known as NewsX, was owned by Peter and Indrani Mukherjee of the sensational Sheena Bora murder case. Chidambaram is accused of misusing his power as the finance minister to grant INX Media an FIPB clearance.

Cropped video circulated out of context to mock FM Nirmala Sitharaman over onion prices: Here is the truth

A cropped video of Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman saying that she does not eat much onion and garlic is being circulated across social media by supporters of opposition parties, to accuse the finance minister of being insensitive towards the issue of soaring onion prices.

In the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, NCP MP Supriya Sule had asked the FM about rising defaults in Mudra loans, about the soaring onion prices and the steps that are being taken by the government to tackle the shortage.

As the Finance Minister began to respond to Supriya Sule’s question, an MP intervened and asked her if she eats onions. To which, Nirmala Sitharaman replied, “I do not eat much garlic or onion, I come from a family where we do not bother much about onions.”

The cropped video of the same, without the questions and the context of the discussion, soon hit the social media platforms to mock her and convey to the public that the Finance Minister was being insensitive to them by stating that the price rise did not bother her as she does not consume onions or garlic.

However, the full unedited video of her address in the Lok Sabha on Thursday reveals that the minister was responding to a specific question asked by an MP, who had interrupted her as she stood up to answer Supriya Sule, asking if she ate onions.


Following the false allegations against her, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Thursday stated that her replies on the floor of the Lok Sabha are being quoted out of the context to mislead the public.

Minister Sitharaman also clarified regarding the controversy by stating that she was explaining to the house regarding the steps taken by the government to control onion prices and provide relief to the common man. “A part of this video clip is being quoted out of context and is misleading,” said the Finance Minister.


On Thursday, the Finance Minister has addressed the Lok Sabha on the issue of rising onion prices. She had said that the government has taken several steps to check rising prices of onion and has initiated steps to improve technology for better storage of the kitchen staple.

She added that the shortage of onions was due to low production and added that there were severe structural problems related to onions. She also said that the government has taken several steps to check rising prices of onion including a ban on exports, the imposition of stock limit, import and transfer of onion from surplus to deficit area.