On Tuesday, BJP MP Virendra Singh announced the construction of an auditorium in his constituency in the memory of late Samajwadi Party (SP) patriarch Mulayam Singh Yadav. The BJP MP has sanctioned Rs 25 lakh from his Member of Parliament Local Area Development (MPLAD) fund for the construction of the auditorium, which will be named ‘Dhartiputra Mulayam Singh Yadav’.
MP Singh has termed it as his tribute to Mulayam Singh Yadav’s contribution to national politics and his work for the upliftment of backward classes.
Virendra Singh recalled Mulayam’s contributions, saying that the SP patriarch was a leader with exceptional talent. He was hailed for being a grassroots-level leader who was sensitive to the public’s issues.
In a surprise move, #BJP‘s Ballia MP Virendra Singh has announced the construction of an auditorium in the memory of Samajwadi patriarch, late #MulayamSinghYadav in his constituency.
“He worked hard and served with dedication to Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia’s ideology. He carved out a niche in national politics. During the Emergency, he was an exceptional soldier. Mulayam Singh worked as Defence Minister to ensure the country’s security. He used to emphasize promoting national interest in Parliament,” he elaborated.
Notably, SP Rajya Sabha MP Chandrapal Singh recently announced that a museum and library will be built in Jhansi to commemorate the late SP supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav’s developmental work in Bundelkhand during his tenure as chief minister.
Mulayam Singh Yadav, the founder of the Samajwadi Party and former Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, died on October 10, 2022, at the age of 82, of an illness. Yadav was admitted to the Medanta Hospital in Gurugram, Haryana, due to ill health where he breathed his last.
On October 16, a violent mob killed two Rohingya community leaders in Bangladesh, the police said amid worsening security of the refugee camps due to internal divisions and conflicts.
Faruk Ahmed, a police spokesperson, stated that two Rohingya camp leaders were hacked to death on Saturday at Camp 13, describing the attack as one of the worst in recent months.
“More than a dozen Rohingya miscreants killed Maulvi Mohammad Yunus, 38, Camp 13’s head majhi.” Another majhi, Mohammad Anwar, 38, was also hacked. “Yunus died on the spot, and Anwar died in the hospital,” Ahmed informed. A Rohingya camp leader is referred to as a ‘majhi’ in the local language.
Some #Rohingya diaspora groups including @the_erc have called for a full investigation into the killing of Mohammed Anwar and Yunus in #Bangladesh.
The Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), a terrorist group fighting the Myanmar military, carried out the targeted killings, according to a senior officer of an “elite police unit” charged with overseeing security in the camps. The officer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, added that “internal clashes in Myanmar are affecting the security situation in the camps.”
Other Rohingya leaders, in addition to the nephew of one of the victims, blamed the attack on ARSA. “ARSA assassinated my uncle last night.” My uncle always warned them not to deal in drugs. He would voluntarily oversee patrolling the camps. “They killed my uncle,” the nephew told AFP, declining to be identified out of fear for his safety. Till now, ARSA has not commented on the incident.
The police have not yet arrested or charged any suspects in connection with the violence. However, since the attack, security has been tightened in the area.
The refugee settlements in the Cox Bazar area, which house over one million Rohingya refugees, have seen an increase in violence in recent months, with various gangs vying for control of drug trafficking operations, with a particular focus on yaba methamphetamine pills, methamphetamine, and caffeine. Civilian refugee leaders have been threatened and targeted, with some kidnapped and others killed.
Mahfuzul Islam, the police chief of the Cox’s Bazar district, commented on the increase in violence by telling AFP that “at least 14 Rohingyas have been killed in the camps in just the last three months alone. In comparison to last year, the number of murders in the camp has increased.”
Several Rohingyas were charged in September with the murder of top Rohingya leader Mohib Ullah. Although the ARSA has denied involvement, Bangladeshi authorities arrested at least 8,000 suspected ARSA members in connection with Ullah’s murder in a major crackdown.
Since Myanmar’s military crackdown on Rohingyas in 2017, millions of Rohingyas have fled to Bangladesh. In recent months, violence in the squalid camps has risen as a result of several local gangs clashing to establish control over drug trafficking at the expense of killings and abductions.
Notably, in September, Sheikh Hasina, the Prime Minister of Bangladesh who visited India, in a conversation with ANI had described the Rohingya Muslims seeking sanctuary in her country as a “big burden”. She stated that her country is in contact with the international community to ensure that the Rohingyas are repatriated to Myanmar.
Those who have seen the movie Uri must remember the child artist recreating the scene of the late Colonel MN Rai’s funeral, where his daughter shrieked an old Gorkha war cry to pay respect to her martyred father. Col Rai sacrificed his life in the line of duty in Tral, Kashmir, in January 2015. The child artist who recreated the scene in the film was Riva Arora. At the time of the film’s release, Riva was only nine years old.
Later she played the role of young Janhvi in the film Gunjan Saxena: The Kargil Girl. When the film was released, Riva was ten years old.
Apart from films, Riva appeared in several television commercials during her initial years as a child artist. The innocence and the aura of the child were visible on her face for some time. However, things took a weird turn in later years, and slowly her appearance became more glamorous. Riva started gaining popularity on Instagram and YouTube as her career as an influencer grew, she ‘grew’ much faster compared to other children of her age.
So much so that the latest Instagram reel that she has created with actor Karan Kundrra has stirred major controversy. Karan, who is 38 years old, plays the role of the boyfriend of Riva in the reel, who already has a relationship with another man. The idea behind the reel is to showcase that the actress in the reel has an affair with two men. Both the actors opposite Riva in the reel are adults, while Riva is not even a teen. The reel also contained a bar scene where the 12-year-old girl sits cross-legged wearing a very revealing dress. She even moves, talks and uses the facial expressions of an adult woman who is dating 2 men.
Source: Riva Arora’s Instagram profile.
Soon after the reel was released, someone on social media pointed out that Riva is just 12 years old and how inappropriate the reel was. As Riva has the features of an adult, those who followed her without much knowledge about her background were not aware of her age, and the revelation was not taken well by the netizens.
Concerns were raised not only about the comments and content but also about the possibility of Riva’s parents using hormone therapy or steroids to make her ‘appear as an adult’. Some rumours floated on social media that she went under the knife as well to enhance her breasts which would be highly unethical and problematic if true. OpIndia cannot independently verify these rumours at this stage as the parents of Riva have not released any statement.
Soon after it was revealed that she was only 12, many netizens raised objections not only in comment sections on her posts on Instagram but also on other social media platforms like Twitter.
Comments from Riva’s Instagram posts. Source: Instagram.
Reaction on Twitter
Many netizens raised concerns on Twitter.
Until 3 days ago, I hadn’t heard of Riva Arora. Now I know she’s a 12 year old who’s had natural or artificial precocious puberty and has been pushed by her ambitious parents to pose with men 3 times her age. This is the worst kind of exploitation.
I truely hope @NCPCR_ takes cognizance of everything disgusting that’s happened with Riva Arora and get the adults and parents involved in this mess to answer. https://t.co/Kr5C2Ps91j
Riva Arora’s parents hv special place reserved in hell.. hw can some1 do this to their own child, sexualizing at such a young age..may be she likes glitz and glamour now but eventually would put her in lot of mental stress in future. These kindof parents should be jailed fr
This Riva Arora story is much problematic, her parents are so disturbed that they uses steroids to a 12 years old to be looking 18 plus. This is cruelty
It is important to note that despite being aware that she was only 12, there have been many Instagram users who left lewd and sexual comments that could be termed as paedophilic in nature. While some users suggested men should masturbate on her images, others called her sexy and noted that her breast bounced when she danced.
Problematic comments under Riva’s posts. Source: Instagram.
So far, there has been no official complaint, and it is unclear if NCPCR has taken any cognizance of the matter.
Problematic reels of child artists
This is not the first time child artists have been used by parents to gain popularity on social media. When the movie Gangubai Kathiawadi starring Alia Bhatt in the lead role, was released, several child artists dressed as her character in the film and performed scenes. Notably, Alia Bhatt played the lead role of Gangubai Kathiawadi in the film based on a real-life woman named Gangubai Kothewali, who was a prostitute and madam of a brothel.
On Monday (October 17), Indian ‘journalist’ Rana Ayyub went on an unhinged rant against India and pleaded with other nations to act against the Indian government.
Ayyub made the contentious remarks in her latest propaganda piece for the American daily, The Washington Post. Titled ‘The World continues to ignore the radicalisation of India’, the ‘journalist’ lamented the positive outlook of global powers towards India.
At the very onset, she raked up the issue of ‘hijab’ in the hopes of making international readers, who are increasingly concerned about the killings of women in Iran over mandatory hijab, sympathetic to the cause.
Screengrab of the article by Rana Ayyub in The Washington Post
“In February, the southern state of Karnataka had banned women from wearing the hijab in classrooms — enraging Indian Muslims and delighting Hindu nationalists, who saw the state’s move as another triumph in their continuing campaign against Muslims in India,” she began setting the foundation for false equivalence.
Rana Ayyub then made a brief reference to the recent split Supreme Court verdict on the Karnataka Hijab row, with the false claim that one of the judges ruled the non-essentiality of hijab in Islam.
“One of the judges on the panel declared wearing headscarves a matter of personal choice; the other essentially dismissed the problem, saying that the hijab was not “essential” to Islam,” she wrote. This is despite the fact that none of the judges decided whether or not hijab was an essential practice.
Screengrab of the news report by Live Law
False equivalence between Karnataka hijab row and Iran’s anti-hijab protests
Of course, it was just the beginning of a series of lies. Rana Ayyub continued, “Muslim girls in India are fighting — just like their counterparts in Iran — for their fundamental right to dress and live on their own terms.” Nothing can possibly be further from the truth.
In the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is mandatory for all women to wear hijabs in public. One cannot take it off as per their whims and fancies. Women run the risk of being picked up by the regime’s moral police and tortured to death, as witnessed in the case of Mahsa Amini.
In India, there is no concept of mandatory hijab in public. Women can choose to wear or remove headscarves in public, at their own will. In either case, the police and the State administration will not stop, harass or torture them.
When it comes to the question of personal liberty, it is very much protected in India and not Iran. Hence, the comparison is not just bizarre but ridiculous. The issue that arose out of the Karnataka hijab row was that of the uniform dress code.
In secular institutions, the school administration has the right to determine whether religious clothing can be permitted within its premises.
The Karnataka High Court observed that the Hijab is not an essential practice in Islam (and more of a choice) and uniform (for all) is a reasonable restriction on the Right to Freedom of Religion.
The same girls, who wish to wear hijabs, can freely do so in public. They are restricted only within the confines of educational institutes, where the concept of uniform exists. This also applies to students belonging to other religions (provided that the practice is not essential in their Faith).
The perpetual tale of ‘Muslim victimhood’
Given that evoking ‘Islamophobia’ in any case draws instant eyeballs these days, it was obvious that Rana Ayyub would not miss out on such an opportunity.
“On the streets of India today, Hindu nationalists have been seen brandishing swords and chanting provocative slogans outside mosques,” she weaved the usual tale of Muslim victimhood.
OpIndia had reported in detail how Islamists ran riots, pelted stones at Hindu devotees and created mayhem on the streets during the festival of Ram Navami year. Stone pelting, arson and violence were witnessed in at least 5 States, namely, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand, West Bengal and Karnataka.
Similarly, a hanuman Jayanti procession was attacked by Islamists in Muslim-dominated Jahingirpuri. Stones and glass bottles were hurled at the procession. Islamists also fired gun stots amid the violence and injured police personnel.
— The Voice Of Citizens®️ (@tVoiceOfCitizen) April 16, 2022
Rana Ayyub continued, “And Muslim students and activists have seen their houses demolished by state officials without due process, clearly as retribution for speaking up against atrocities.”
This allegation is again not rooted in reality. The BJP government has been razing illegal structures, irrespective of the faith or political affiliations of the accused. It is curious that Rana associates only Muslims with illegal encroachment.
The illegally acquired properties of dozens of criminals and mafias have been demolished in UP, and the names include non-Muslims like Vikas Dubey, Yogesh Bhadora, Ramesh Pradhan, Badan Singh, Sundar Bhati, Vijay Mishra and many others. Rana has deceptively tried to claim that the action has taken place only against Muslims.
Recently, the Uttarkhand government demolished the resort owned by the son of ex-BJP minister Pulkit Arya in connection to the murder of 19-year-old Ankita Bhandari. Pulkit Arya is neither a Muslim student nor an activist but that did not stop the government from taking swift action against him.
Rana Ayyub further misled her readers by claiming that a mob barged into a mosque in Bidar and performed a Hindu ceremony within its premises, amidst chants of ‘Jai Shri Ram.’
Superintendent of Police (Bidar district) Dekka Kishore Babu had rubbished the claims. He had informed, “It is a regular practice from the Nizam period of performing Pooja during Dasara. There is a minar inside the mosque complex.”
“Usually, 2-4 people visit but this time there was more number of people who entered the place. Nobody illegally broke the lock to enter the mosque. We have registered an FIR and will be arresting the miscreants,” he further added.
“It is regular practice from the Nizam period of performing Pooja during Dasara. There is a minar inside the mosque complex. Usually 2-4 people visit but this time there were more number of people who entered the place.“ ~Dekka Kishore Babu Superintendent of Police#Bidarpic.twitter.com/u196WE5rr4
This was also confirmed by the Inspector General of Police (Gulbarga), who said that every year Hindus go near the Masjid to perform Puja on Vijaydashmi and this occurrence is not new.
Rana Ayyub shields co-religionists accused of crimes against Hindus
The ‘journalist’ then went on to downplay the crimes committed by her co-religionists. For instance, Ayyub labelled the stone pelting on a Hindu temple in Kheda by an Islamist mob, led by Congress leader Arif Sheikh, as “trespassing and disturbing a Hindu festival.”
She also resorted to false balance by suggesting that the carnage in Leicester was the “outpouring of communal violence between Hindu and Muslim communities.” This is despite the fact that only the Hindu community has been at the receiving end of violence.
“A BBC investigation has shown that the disinformation that led to the violence was inflamed by social media accounts from India,” Ayyub claimed.
The assertion was based on the fact that the majority of the tweets about Leicester violence, with hashtags such as #Leicester, #HindusUnderAttack and #HindusUnderattackinUK, originated from India.
Given that the Hindu population in India is close to a billion and that the community was concerned about the atrocities committed by Islamists in far-off Leicester, it explains why most tweets demanding justice for Hindus were from India.
A @LeicsPolice statement has confirmed that Majid Freeman lied about Hindus acting against Muslims in Leicester. Why are the BBC interviewing someone who has already been proven a liar? Why no interview of the Hindu community who suffered the attacks from #Islamists for weeks? pic.twitter.com/tBHDu9FkEz
OpIndia had reported how Majid Freeman, who was at the helm of the Leicester disinformation campaign, was interviewed by the BBC to set the narrative in favour of the perpetrators.
Rana Ayyub seeks global action against India
And then the journalist found a way to rope in the Indian Prime Minister as well. “Extremists clearly feel empowered, and it is not hard to guess why. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is at the peak of his power,” she insinuated.
“Modi, who has one of the biggest followings on social media of any Indian, has not called for inclusion or for an end to the violence against Muslims. Nor has he publicly reprimanded his lawmakers for speech that has further encouraged communal hate in India,” she alleged.
This is by far the most conventional, repetitive and overused tactic, employed by Islamists and left-liberals, to secure writing gigs in international publications. After all, the key to defaming India at a global level must begin with the leader, who has been democratically elected by the people.
Rana Ayyub was unhappy with the outside world for not ‘sanctioning India’ based on her dubious claims about the ‘persecution of Muslims and other minorities.’
“World leaders apparently prioritize maintaining strategic relations with India to counter China and Russia, not understanding that this willful and convenient ignorance is amplifying state-sanctioned violence against the 220 million Muslims in India,” she pleaded.
The Washington Post writer had pinned her hopes on the likes of Human Rights Watch (HRW) and international media, only to be disappointed by the overwhelming support for India among nation States.
Conclusion
Rana Ayyub is indeed an esteemed journalist, the type who does not bother to separate facts from fiction. Her book on the 2002 Gujarat riots has been junked by none other than the Supreme Court of India. She is a habitual fake news peddler and is now facing a probe for donation fraud because she had sought money from the public in the name of Covid relief and had deposited it in the personal bank accounts of herself and her family members.
Despite such dwindling credibility, she has been platformed by the likes of The Washington Post to amplify her lies and half-truths before a global audience. She also tried to use the stage of the International Journalism Festival (IJF) in Italy to cast aspersions on India’s democracy but to no avail.
As the evidence debunking The Wire’s preposterous claims against Meta piled up, the leftist propaganda website on Tuesday decided to “suspend the stories” until it carried out a “thorough internal review of all material and documents and sources”, an implicit admission that they have erred in the reportage.
The Wire released a statement saying, “In light of the concerns and doubts raised about our coverage of Meta, we are setting up an internal review of all documents, information, source material and sources used for these stories.”
Statement from The Wire on the Meta Investigation.
In light of the concerns and doubts raised about our coverage of Meta, we are setting up an internal review of all documents, information, source material and sources used for these stories.https://t.co/kpXXDqERewpic.twitter.com/X1zvdRvsIO
The leftist propaganda website has pulled down all the reports related to the Meta controversy as domain experts and independent researchers have refuted its claims and amidst reports that the organisation may have relied on forged documents to level the allegations it had made against Meta.
Soon after The Wire announced that it has erred and will be temporarily suspending its Meta stories, it started pulling down reports from its website.
Source: The WireSource: The Wire
While The Wire said it would conduct an internal review—a ruse often used by organisations to deflect criticism, avert critical scrutiny, and project oneself as a victim, it nevertheless is also an implicit admission of guilt, which the removal of the stories about Meta reaffirms.
Independent researcher says he never verified for The Wire, a primary reporter in Malviya story deactivates his Twitter account
The suspension of stories by The Wire came on the heels of official denial by one of the independent researchers it had listed as an expert who verified its story on DMIK verification. As threads of The Wire’s sloppy hit-job against Meta unravelled, an independent researcher stated that he has not done DMIK verification for The Wire.
Taking to Twitter, Kanishk Karan, a policy manager overlooking public safety on platforms, said that contrary to the claims made by The Wire, he has not verified their report on FB ‘XCheck’ in India.
“BIG: It has come to my attention that I’ve been listed as one of the “independent security researchers” who supposedly “verified” the Wire’s report on FB ‘Xcheck’ in India. I would like to confirm that I did NOT DO the DKIM verification for them.”
Source: Twitter
Independent expert Ujjawal Kumar refutes The Wire’s claims, denies having verified the Meta story for them
Earlier today, it was reported that another independent expert, Ujjwal Kumar, who is currently employed at Microsoft Asia and based out of Singapore, had denied having verified DKIM for The Wire.
Facebook uses Microsoft email services and if Ujjwal Kumar had indeed verified the emails for The Wire, it likely breached the client-confidentiality clause by abusing his privilege.
However, soon after the story was published and The Wire’s Founding Editor Siddharth Varadarajan boasted how a Microsoft employee, Ujjwal Kumar, too, had ‘verified’ their proofs, they claimed that Kumar no longer wants his name being made publicly available. Now, like a new twist in the tale, tech expert Pranesh Prakash has said that he reached out to both the ‘independent experts’ The Wire claimed to have consulted and both of them have denied having verified DKIM for The Wire.
OpIndia had reached out to Microsoft Asia for their comment on the same but has not heard back from them yet. We have sent a follow-up email, but Microsoft is yet to respond to our query on whether one of their employees had indeed verified DKIM for The Wire.
Manisha Pande, the Executive Editor at Newslaundry, said on Twitter that they had received a response from Microsoft. In its response, Microsoft said it had informed an Indian publication of an erroneously attributed commentary to a colleague and asked them for correction.
The Wire scribe, who claimed Amit Malviya enjoyed special privileges from Meta, briefly deactivates his Twitter account
With The Wire temporarily suspending its Meta stories, it is worth noting that the chief reporter who made wild allegations of the omnipotence of Amit Malviya on Instagram had briefly deactivated his Twitter account. Devesh Kumar, a reporter with The Wire who went by @onosmosis on Twitter, had deactivated his account.
Source: Twitter
However, he was back on Twitter after a while.
Nevertheless, the latest denial from another independent researcher is a death knell on a story that The Wire aggressively pushed even when the evidence suggested the opposite. With the unravelling of The Wire’s spurious claims about Meta and with the disappearance act of its reporter Devesh Kumar from Twitter, questions are being raised about the credibility of the leftist rag’s Tek Fog fiction, given that the same Devesh Kumar had co-written those reports too.
OpIndia had earlier this year debunked The Wire’s story on the Tek Fog app, an application that the leftist propaganda website claimed had superpower capabilities.
Meta vs The Wire
On October 10, Leftist propaganda portal The Wire published a report with the title ‘If BJP’s Amit Malviya Reports Your Post, Instagram Will Take it Down – No Questions Asked’ authored by Jahnavi Sen, deputy editor, and executive news producer at the portal.
In the report, The Wire claimed that Bharatiya Janata Party’s IT Cell Chief Amit Malviya has such power in Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, that if he reports any post on the platform, it gets removed by the system, no questions asked. It further claimed that even if the publisher of the post that was removed from Instagram appeals against the removal, it does not get accepted by the system as “Malviya has privileges of being on the XCheck list.”
XCheck is a “Meta Program” that allegedly provides special privileges to high-profile users like actors, politicians, and other influential personalities on the social media platforms under Meta. The said program was first ‘exposed’ by Wall Street Journal in September 2021.
But no sooner did The Wire levelled wild allegations against Meta than several domain experts and independent researchers poked gaping holes in the claims made by The Wire and highlighted how what the leftist publication alleged did not add up. The Meta also refuted the allegations made by The Wire, following which the leftist propaganda website doubled down on its efforts to defend the untenable. However, the official denial from the two independent experts has seemed to be the last straw on the camel’s back, establishing the credentials of The Wire as the propaganda peddling lie factory.
As if denying the reality of Lord Ram wasn’t enough, the grand old party of India has come up with fresh ways to ridicule Hinduism. As the Congress prince Rahul Gandhi embarked on his current political stunt called ‘Bharat Jodo Yatra,’ supposedly covering thousands of kilometres, his adherents brazenly began comparing him to Lord Ram in their attempt to glorify their leader.
On Tuesday, Maharashtra Congress chief Nana Patole in a statement compared Congress senior leader Rahul Gandhi to the Hindu Lord Ram saying that it is a coincidence that the names of both begin with “R”.
It’s a coincidence that Rahul Gandhi, Lord Ram’s names begin with R: Congress’ Nana Patole
“Even Lord Sri Ram walked (PadaYatra) from Kanyakumari to Kashmir and even Shankaracharya walked the same way, and so is Rahul Gandhi doing in the form of padayatra,” Patole added.
Nana Patole’s remark came after Rajasthan Minister Parsadi Lal Meena’s said that Rahul Gandhi is walking more than Lord Ram walked from Ayodhya to Sri Lanka.
“Rahul Gandhi’s padayatra will be historic. Lord Ram too had gone from Ayodhya to Sri Lanka on foot. Rahul Gandhi is walking even more than that, from Kanniyakumari to Kashmir,” Meena had said.
#WATCH | Dausa: Rajasthan Minister Parsadi Lal Meena says, “Rahul Gandhi’s padayatra will be historic. Lord Ram too had gone from Ayodhya to Sri Lanka on foot. Rahul Gandhi is walking even more than that, from Kanniyakumari to Kashmir….” (17.10.2022) pic.twitter.com/LPswB0Wh8e
While Congress leaders Nana Patole and Parsadi Lal Meena did not hesitate to use Lord Ram’s name to exalt their leader, another Congress leader ridiculed Bhagwan Sri Ram, Sri Lakshman, and Sita Mata by distorting Ramayana.
Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) President K Sudhakaran stated in a recent video interview with The New Indian Express (TNIE) that while returning from Lanka on the Pushpaka Vimanam, after defeating Ravana, Lakshman briefly entertained the thought of pushing his brother, Lord Ram, into the sea and go away with his wife Sita.
K Sudhakaran made these bizarre comments while stating that there are significant distinctions between lawmakers from Kerala’s northern and southern regions.
K Sudhakaran, President of Kerala Congress, a state Rahul Gandhi is MP from, and spent maximum days for BJY, insults Bhagwaan Ram, Maa Sita and also people of Southern Kerala. What kind of Hindu hating bigots are in places of prominence in the Congress? Or is it a qualification? pic.twitter.com/C5waQs2wez
“Yes, there are historical differences. I will share a story. Ram returned from Lanka after killing Ravana, his brother Lakshman, and his wife Sita, in Pushpaka Vimanam. When the vimana entered the southern part of Kerala, Lakshman thought of pushing his brother to the sea and escaping with Sita. When he thought of the consequences, they had reached Thrissur, and he changed his mind and felt guilty. Sitting in a corner, Rama patted him on the shoulder and said, “Yes, I read your mind. It’s not your fault. The fault lies with the land we covered”, Sudhakaran said.
This outrageous attempt to openly insult our gods and misrepresent one of Hinduism’s cornerstones is not surprising, given how the Congress party and its leaders have repeatedly abused the sensibilities of millions of Hindus by denying the existence of Lord Ram.
Congress denied the existence of Lord Ram, opposed Ram Mandir
In 2020, ahead of Ayodhya Ram Mandir Bhoomi Pujan on August 5, Zee News conducted a discussion on Ayodhya and Ram Mandir. In a shocking display of ignorance, Congress leader Kumar Ketkar denied the historical existence of Shri Ram and cast aspersions about the Hindu God being a creation of literature.
In September 2007, the Central government run by Congress-led UPA 1 had said that there is no historical proof of Lord Ram’s existence.
An affidavit filed by the Congress-led government read, “Valmiki Ramayana and Ramcharitmanas admittedly form an important part of ancient Indian literature, but these cannot be said to be historical records to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters and occurrences of events depicted therein.” The affidavit was filed to register the UPA government’s opposition to the demand to scrap the Sethusamudram project as it would damage the Ram Setu.
Senior Congress leader of the time, Kapil Sibal fought the Ram Janmabhoomi case for the Sunni Waqf Board opposing the building of a magnificent Ram temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya. He also employed dilatory tactics and asked the apex court to delay the decision in the Ram Janmabhoomi case till the 2019 elections. Another eminent Congress leader Shashi Tharoor had earlier claimed that no ‘good Hindu’ would want a Ram Mandir at Babri site. Tharoor urged that one should have the Ram Mandir in one’s heart.
A 25-year-old Hindu youth and Bajrang Dal member named Nitesh Chaudhary, a resident of the Shadipur area in Delhi, died on Saturday night after he was assaulted by Ufiza, Adnan, and Abbas on October 12. One more person named Alok was assaulted by the three accused on the same day. The police have made no arrests in the case and have denied communal angle in the case.
On Monday, team OpIndia travelled to the Patel Nagar area of Shadipur in Delhi to meet the family members of the deceased. All of the shops on the road were bustling with their business as usual, although they were aware of the incident. A man operating a paan store on the side of the road asked the team to walk because the lanes in the Patel Nagar locality are quite narrow and better traversed on foot. The team parked the car near the Patel Nagar Metro station and headed off on foot.
The narrow streets of Ranjit Nagar, Delhi
Police and paramilitary deployed at Nitesh’s house
The team, while on the way to Nitesh’s home spotted a flex board that read: “Kab-Kab bata Bharat (When was India divided)”. The board was placed in one of the corners of the lane. They continued via the same narrow pathways and travelled about 1 kilometre inside Patel Nagar Metro Station to Nitesh Choudhary’s residence. Delhi Police and paramilitary personnel were seen stationed about 50 meters before Nitesh’s house. However, there were no restrictions on anyone’s movement. Some Hindu organizations and media people had gathered outside the house. The team then reached Nitesh’s residence and met his uncle.
Paramilitary stationed at Nitesh’s house
The team was requested to wait for a while at the gate. Meanwhile, they had a glance around the locality to notice the normal atmosphere. People were seen peeping from other houses. Nitesh’s residence was like any other normal residence. Many electric cables were seen hanging tangled with each other in front of the house. Some women could be heard crying from inside the house.
Hindus here have given their houses on rent to the Muslims
Babita Choudhary, Nitesh Choudhary’s mother, spoke with OpIndia. She said that Nitesh, who was a member of Bajrang Dal, was supporting the family and looking after the family expenses after his father passed away. She told that her priority is not financial but judicial support and she wants to see the murderer of her son hanging on the gallows as soon as possible. She also advised her family to stick together and said that everyone should stick together in times of distress.
Hindu organizations and media persons gathered at Nitesh’s house
Nitesh’s mother described her locality as Jatt-dominated and stated that many Hindus had rented out their homes to Muslims. She stated that no Muslim had ever been hired by her family. According to Nitesh’s mother, several Muslims were staying in the locality of the Jatt people but no Jatts were allowed to stay in the Muslim-dominated areas. She said that all the members in her house are not only religious but are also associated with various Hindu organizations.
Police are also afraid of Muslims in the area: Bajrang Dal worker Nitesh’s mother
Nitesh’s mother told OpIndia that the Muslim territory begins from the place where her son was killed. She said that there is a mosque nearby and that Nitesh was murdered by a crowd of two dozen individuals who rushed from the mosque’s vicinity. Accusing the police of failing to take appropriate and adequate action, she stated that the police are also afraid of the Muslims in Patel Nagar. “This is the reason why the Police are denying communal angle and are labelling my son a criminal instead”, she said.
Nitesh’s mother, Babita Chaudhary
Nitesh’s mother further informed the team that the area where Nitesh was slain by the mob is populated entirely by Muslims. Sisters and daughters, she claims, are publicly abused by Muslims in that region, due to which girls shy away and fear going there. She went on to say that Hindus close their businesses on our side early in the evening, and Muslim-majority communities keep their stores open all night, especially for meat and fish. She also added that at night, several individuals ride their bikes around the same place and engage in terrible activities, and no one is there to stop them.
Delhi Police’s take on the murder of Bajrang Dal worker
As reported earlier, 25-year-old Nitesh, a resident of the Shadipur area in Delhi died after he was assaulted on 12th October 2022. Youths from the Muslim community have been accused of killing the young man, however, no arrests have been made so far. Nitesh and his friend Alok were beaten up by the assailants who have been identified as Ufiza, Adnan, and Abbas.
Shweta Chauhan, DCP of Central Delhi, stated that those who were murdered were ‘criminals’ themselves. While speaking to Aaj Tak Chauhan said that Nitesh and his companion Alok are themselves ‘aggressors,’ and had criminal charges previously filed against them. She further claimed that both of them attempted to beat up the accused but were beaten up even harder by the three.
The police have described the incident as a dispute between two groups of boys. According to Chauhan, two boys stopped the bike approaching from the front, dropped the people sitting on it, and began thrashing. According to the police report, the other gang led by the Islamists then beat them harder. The Police said that an FIR has been filed on October 13 under Section 308 IPC.
On Monday, October 17, Union Law and Justice Minister Kiren Rijiju stated that the people of the country are dissatisfied with the collegium system for the appointment of judges and that it is the government’s responsibility to appoint justices in accordance with the spirit of the constitution.
#WATCH | “If there is no way to bind the judiciary, words like ‘judicial activism’ are brought to use. Several judges pass observations which never become a part of judgement… As a judge you do not know practical difficulties, financial limitations,” says Law Min Kiren Rijiju pic.twitter.com/L12gCoU1L7
The minister was addressing the ‘Sabarmati Samvad’, an event organised by Panchjanya, the weekly magazine published by the RSS, which was held in Ahmedabad. Rijiju stated during his speech that he has observed that half of the time judges are “preoccupied” with deciding appointments, which causes their principal responsibility of delivering justice to suffer.
Law minister Kiran Rijiju advocates for central government’s intervention
The minister’s statements come after he stated at a conference in Udaipur last month that the collegium method of selection to the higher judiciary needs to be reconsidered.
Kiren Rijiju added that its the law ministry’s job is to see that the person whose name has been recommended for appointment by the collegium is fit to be a Supreme Court or High Court judge.
“We have three pillars — the executive, legislature, and judiciary. The executive and the legislature are bound and regulated by the judiciary, but if the judiciary goes astray, there is no mechanism to control it,” he said.
Allahabad HC judge writes to PM Modi about India’s Collegium system
Notably, in the year 2019, the then Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow Bench judge had also written to PM Modi alleging malpractices in India’s Collegium system. In his letter, Justice Rang Nath Pandey made some shocking allegations regarding the Collegium system for the appointment of judges. Referring to his personal experience of 34 years in the judiciary, Justice Pandey alleged that the only criteria for the appointment of judges in the Collegium system are casteism and nepotism.
Judicial appointment process in India
In India, a collegium consisting of the Chief Justice of India and four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court screens, scrutinizes, and recommends the candidates for appointments to the Supreme Court. The government cannot suggest any names to the collegium. In the case of High Courts, screening of candidates for appointment to high courts is done by a collegium of chief justices of respective high courts and four senior-most judges on the HC bench.
In addition to this, the deliberations of this collegium are mostly opaque and not disclosed to the public. There is high scope for nepotism and elite self-recruitment to top courts in this collegium system. The reason cited for this system is to ensure the independence of judges.
Many actresses have accused Bollywood filmmaker Sajid Khan of sexual harassment in the wake of the MeToo movement. There is also much resistance to Sajid Khan’s participation in Bigg Boss 16. Meanwhile, an old interview of Sajid is making the rounds on the internet. He is seen in this video chatting to Kiran Juneja on her show ‘Koshish Se Kamyabi Tak.’
In the popular video, he discusses his character, his engagement with Gauahar Khan, and his numerous relationships. When presenter Kiran asked him about his split with Gauahar Khan, Sajid answered, “I had a pretty loose character at the time.”
“I was hanging out with many girls and lying a lot,” he stated, adding that despite being engaged to Gauahar, he used to say ‘I love you’ to numerous girls and go out with them, with every lady proposing marriage and many girls becoming serious. “I might have had 350 marriages”, Sajid claimed.
Arranged marriages, according to Sajid, work in India because it takes time for two individuals to create a friendship after marriage, which helps them preserve their bond. Relationships, he asserted, inevitably have ups and downs and It is up to each individual.
Gauahar Khan, the winner of ‘Bigg Boss 7,’ got engaged to Sajid Khan, brother of Farah Khan in 2003. However, owing to personal circumstances, the two subsequently parted ways. She then began dating Kushal Tandon. However, their romance did not endure long. Gauahar Khan then married choreographer Zaid Darbar in December 2020.
Sajid Khan, a Bollywood filmmaker who was sidelined in the profession after sexual harassment allegations were levelled against him, is making a comeback on the reality show Bigg Boss. Following the news of Sajid’s participation in Bigg Boss, there has been much outrage, especially on social media and everywhere else.
During the 2018 MeToo movement, which saw women speak out about sexual harassment, Rachel White, Saloni Chopra, Sherlyn Chopra, Aahana Kumra, and Mandana Karimi, among others, made allegations against Sajid Khan. Sherlyn Chopra had levelled serious allegations on filmmaker Sajid Khan, such as being forced to touch his private parts.
Kanishka Soni, Sherlyn Chopra, and Mandana Karimi have publicly criticised the producers for putting Sajid Khan as a contender on ‘Bigg Boss 16’. Delhi Commission for Women chief Swati Maliwal also wrote to the Union Information and Broadcasting Minister Anurag Thakur requesting that Sajid Khan be removed from the reality show Bigg Boss.
In February 2020, Delhi was gripped with communal tension as Muslim mobs started running rampage, targeting Hindus, their houses and businesses. As is the nature of the Left and Islamist cabal, facts were discarded to peddle a narrative that the violence was perpetrated by the Hindu community specifically targeting the Muslim community. Today, Delhi High Court rejected the bail plea of former JNU student Umar Khalid in connection with a case pertaining to the bigger conspiracy in the 2020 anti-Hindu Delhi riots, involving offences under the Indian Penal Code and UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act).
“We don’t find any merit in bail appeal, appeal is dismissed,” the bench led by Justice Siddharth Mirdul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar said.
The division bench comprising Justice Siddharth Mirdul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar had reserved their decision on Khalid’s bail application on September 9. Khalid had moved to the Delhi HC after he was denied bail by the trial court on March 24. He was arrested on September 13, 2020, and has been in the custody since then. Umar Khalid had challenged the lower court’s order rejecting his bail application on the grounds that there is no evidence linking him to the violence that erupted in Delhi during the riots.
The conclusions drawn by the High Court while dismissing the bail plea of Umar Khalid reinforces the fact that there was indeed a larger conspiracy at play, to be carried out while the then US President Donald Trump was in Delhi, targeting Hindus. This reinforcement in turn busts the narrative that the Left cabal was trying to peddle for the two years about the violence being targeted specifically at the Muslim community, branding the anti-Hindu violence as “anti-Muslim pogrom”.
The court, in its conclusion, said, “As per the charge sheet as discussed above & the materials collated during the investigation, if taken at face value, there appears to be a premeditated conspiracy for causing disruptive chakka-jam and pre-planned protests at different planned sites in Delhi, which was engineered to escalate to confrontational chakka-jam and incitement to violence and culminate in riots in the natural course on specific dates. The protest planned was “not a typical protest” normal in political culture or democracy but one far more destructive and injurious and geared towards extremely grave consequences. Thus, as per the pre-meditated plan, there was an intentional blocking of roads to cause inconvenience and disruption of the essential services to the life of the community residing in North-East Delhi, creating thereby panic and an alarming sense of insecurity. The attack on police personnel by women protesters in front only followed by other ordinary people and engulfing the area into a riot is the epitome of such a pre-mediated plan and as such the same would prima facie be covered by the definition of a ‘terrorist act'”.
One of the operative portions in this part of the conclusion drawn by the court is not only the fact that if the charges are taken on face value, there was a premeditated conspiracy for causing chakka-jam, which was a disrupting and destructive protest, unlike usual protests in the normal course of politics, but also the fact that the attack on police personnel by women protestors, followed by others, was proof of such a premeditated plan. The court says in this portion that such a premeditated act would be prima facie covered by the definition of “terrorist act”.
The court further says, “Further, as per precedents, terrorism is an act done with a view to disturb the even tempo of society, create a sense of fear in mind of a section of society. The argument of the appellant is objectively that although there was a sense of insecurity instilled in public by his speeches but he had nothing to do with it and referred to the charge sheet to argue that there is no statement of any witnesses, which could be termed as inculpatory against him. However, this court has to see whether the perpetrators individually or in connection with each other are responsible for it. As already mentioned above, different roles were ascribed to different people (accused) in carrying out the said conspiracy. Different protected witnesses have stated the role of the Appellant and other accused persons and about the open discussion on violence, riots, finance and weapons. Further, the weapons used, the manner of attack and the resultant deaths and destruction caused indicates that it was pre-planned. Acts which threaten the unity and integrity of India and cause friction in communal harmony and create terror in any section of the people, by disturbing the social fabric is also a priori a terrorist act”.
In this portion, the High Court observes that while the defence has claimed that there is no statement by any witness which could be termed as inculpatory against him, the fact is that in the conspiracy, different people were ascribed different roles to carry about and that several witnesses have named Umar Khalid and other accused persons indulging in open discussion about violence, riots, financing the violence and acquiring weapons. The court also says that the weapons used and the manner of attack indicates that the violence was pre-planned.
The court said in para 65, The name of the appellant finds recurring mention from the beginning of the conspiracy till the culmination of the ensuing riots. Admittedly, he was a member of the WhatsApp group of Muslim students of JNU. He participated in various meetings at Jantar Mantar, Jangpura Office, Shaheen Bagh, Seelampur, Jaffrabad and Indian Social Institute on various dates. He was a member of the DPSG group. He referred to the visit of the president of USA to India in his Amrawati Speech. The CDR analysis depicts that there had been a flurry of calls that happened post riots amongst the appellant and other co-accused. The cumulative statement of the protected witnesses indicates the presence and active involvement of the appellant in the protests, engineered against the CAA/NRC. Admittedly these protests metamorphosed into violent riots in February 2020, which began by firstly choking public roads, then violently and designedly attacking policemen and random members of the public, whereat firearms, acid bottles, stones etc. were used, resulting in the admitted and sad loss of 53 precious lives and the destruction of property worth several Crores. These protests & riots prima-facie seem to be orchestrated at the conspiratorial meetings held from December, 2019 till February, 2020.
There are several important points made in para 65 that must be broken down for an accurate analysis:
The court categorically states that his name finds recurring mention from the beginning of the conspiracy till the culmination of the violence in February.
He was a member of the WhatsApp groups where violence and the conspiracy itself were being discussed, including the DPSG group.
He had referred to the visit of the President of the USA in his Amravati speech – it is a part of the conspiracy charge sheet that violence was planned to coincide with this day.
When the violence started, CDR shows that there was a flurry of calls to and from Umar Khalid and other co-accused.
Witness statements indicate the active participation of Umar Khalid in the protests.
These protests culminated in violent riots in February 2020, which began with choking roads and then violently attacking police personnel and random members of the public.
Firearms, stones, acid bottles etc were used.
These protests & riots prima-facie seem to be orchestrated at the conspiratorial meetings held from December 2019 till February 2020.
While saying that the court is not commenting on the merits of the case, the court also said that for the purpose of this bail application, the charges against Umar Khalid appear prima facie true.
“Further, on the in-depth and considered perusal of the charge- sheet, the accompanying documents and in view of the discussions herein above, only for the limited purpose of the present bail; this court expresses the inescapable conclusion that allegations against the Appellant are “prima facie true” and hence, the embargo created by Section 43D(5) of UAPA applies squarely with regard to the consideration of the grant of bail to the Appellant. Thus, the Appellant‟s application seeking regular bail is rejected”.
The entire premise of the Left and Islamist cabal, which has been repeated ad nauseam since 2020 is that the riots erupted specifically against the Muslim community at the provocation of BJP leaders like Kapil Mishra and Anurag Thakur. This conclusion was drawn even though the first murder that occurred during the riots was that of constable Ratan Lal. In fact, violence had erupted against the Hindu community ever since December 2019, as detailed in our report.
It is pertinent to note that one the chargesheets specifically says that the violence was initiated by the anti-CAA protesters and the Muslim community specifically against those who were protesting in favour of CAA.
Excerpt from Delhi Riots chargesheet
The first evidence of Umar Khalid’s role in the Delhi Riots came when a speech made by him surfaced. The speech was allegedly made on the 20th of February in Amravati. In the speech, he was clearly heard saying that on the 24th of February, when President Donald Trump visits India, Muslims should ‘show’ the visiting US president that the people of India are fighting against the ruling party of India.
The entire speech was about 17 minutes long where Khalid invoked the false narratives of ‘targeted mob lynching’ against Muslims and then went on to say that when the Muslims did not revolt against the Ayodhya judgement by Supreme Court, the government took it for granted that they can bring any law against Muslims.
Inciting the crowd further, saying the CAA has been brought to harm Muslims, Khalid says that the people should show the government its ‘Aukaad’, and take to the streets to throw it out. He further says that if enough people take to the streets, first the CAA will go, then the NPR and then NRC, eventually the government will also go.
It was 4 days after this speech, on the 24th of February, as Umar Khalid had predicted, that riots broke out. Ankit Sharma was stabbed over 50 times by the mobs of Tahir Hussain. Dilbar Negi’s arms and legs were chopped off and he was burnt alive by Muslims. Amidst chants of Allahu Abkar and Nara e Taqbeer, Hindus were specifically targeted.
In the chargesheet filed in FIR 114, the role of Umar Khalid in the conspiracy hatched is mentioned clearly. It says that Tahir Hussain was connected to Khalid Saifi of United Against Hate Group and through Saifi, he was also in touch with Umar Khalid. Khalid Saifi, it says, had arranged a meeting between Umar Khalid and Tahir Hussain on the 8th of January at Shaheen Bagh. In that meeting, it was decided to take ‘big action’ so the government gets shaken up on the issue of CAA and NRC and also, ensure that the international community takes notice of that action.
In the chargesheet, it is also mentioned that Umar Khalid had told Tahir Hussain not to be concerned about the funding for the riots as the Popular Front of India (PFI) would provide the funding as well as logistic support. It was categorically mentioned that the riots were to take place when President Donald Trump would visit India.
From everything that is alleged in the chargesheet, it is clear that Umar Khalid was perhaps one of the masterminds who was also constantly in touch with Pinjra Tod activists who are also accused of grave sections. Khalid Saifi of UAH, who is also a close associate of Umar Khalid was coordinating with Tahir Hussain after their initial meeting in Shaheen Bagh on the 8th of January. Further, Tahir Hussain was coordinating with other rioters and instigators.
In the court observations today, it is evident that the prosecution has made a strong case where there is ample evidence that goes to show that there indeed was a conspiracy hatched to target Hindus of North East Delhi, coinciding with the day that Donald Trump would be visiting, so as to maximise the attention the violence would get. In such a scenario, the narrative built by the Left cabal, alleging that this was violence against the Muslim community summarily falls flat, or at the very least, appears to be crumbling as facts that were long known are now being ratified by the court of law.
