Home Blog Page 3070

Boxer and Congress leader Vijender Singh defends secessionist lyrics of Sidhu Moosewala’s song ‘SYL’ released posthumously: What happened

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Boxer and Congress leader Vijender Singh defends secessionist lyrics of Sidhu Moosewala’s song ‘SYL’ released posthumously: What happened

A day after the deceased Khalistani sympathiser and Punjabi singer Sidhu Moosewala’s song SYL’ (Satluj Yamuna Link Canal) was released, many social media users pointed out the problematic lyrics of the song which centres around the long-standing river water dispute between Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh. Meanwhile, the celebrated boxer and Congress leader Vijender Singh used Facebook to defend Sidhu Moosewala’s song, which openly exalted Khalistani terrorists and called for the secession of Punjab from India.

Vijender Singh’s Facebook post

In his Facebook post, Congress leader Vijender Singh shared a few lines from the song by Moosewala, who had also joined Congress last year before the Punjab Assembly elections.

In the lyrics shared by Singh, Moosewala had said that after ‘returning’ Haryana and Himachal Pradesh to Punjab, complete sovereignty should be provided to Punjab else they will not give a drop of water to anyone. Although the song’s demand for state sovereignty essentially advocates for a separate Khalistan, Vijender Singh defended the song’s lyrics by asserting that Moosewala has spoken about the country’s unification in his song.

Singh further added that Moosewala used the word ‘sovereignty’, by which he meant uniting Haryana and Punjab whereas the truth is that Moosewala’s song discreetly echoes the call of pro-Khalistan groups for the separation of Punjab from India and the establishment of an independent state of Khalistan.

Singh further defended Moosewala by claiming that the deceased singer used the word “sovereignty” to indicate the union of Haryana and Punjab, whereas the truth is that Moosewala, in his song released posthumously, actually advocated the secession of Punjab from India as Khalistan.

As the Twitter user “The Hawk Eye” summarised on Twitter, the lyrics of the song glorified terrorists, provoked violence, and tried to fuel the fire of ‘self-determination’ for Punjab, talking about an independent Khalistan.

The song, in which Moosewala repeatedly says that forget water, we will not give even a drop of water to anyone, has problematic lyrics and visual imagery all the way through. Right at the start, Moosewala talks about giving Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and Chandigarh to Punjab. On 1st November 1966, post-independence Punjab was divided into 3 states, Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh on the basis of language.

The song then goes on to demand complete sovereignty for Punjab while also wishing for the return of Babbar Khalsa terrorist Balwinder Jattana.

In the text on-screen during the song, Sidhu Moosewala goes on to call SYL canal the causative agent of the Congress-led pogrom of Sikhs in Delhi in 1984. 

The Satluj Yamuna Link (SYL) canal

The Satluj Yamuna Link Canal is a proposed 214-kilometre-long canal connecting Sutlej and Yamuna rivers. It was planned in 1966 after the state of Haryana was carved out of Punjab.

While it was resolved to share resources, the conditions for sharing the waters of the Ravi and Beas rivers remained undetermined.

Punjab, however, opposed sharing water from the two rivers with neighbouring Haryana, claiming riparian principles, which indicate that a landowner who owns a piece of property next to a body of water has the right to use the water, besides arguing that it had no water to spare.

Notably, while Vijender Singh’s village in Rohtak, Haryana doesn’t need water from the proposed SYL, plenty of villages in neighbouring districts are totally reliant on rains and are waiting for the completion of Satluj Yamuna Link Canal to get regular water supply for their fields.

How burning of 59 Ram Bhakts led to 2002 riots, malicious campaign by Teesta Setalvad and pain of CM Modi: What Amit Shah said in his interview

OpIndia Staff
-
0
How burning of 59 Ram Bhakts led to 2002 riots, malicious campaign by Teesta Setalvad and pain of CM Modi: What Amit Shah said in his interview

Speaking in an interview about the 2002 Gujarat riots following the Supreme Court’s rejection of a petition opposed to the clean chit given to then-Chief Minister of Gujarat Narendra Modi in the 2002 unrest, Home Minister Amit Shah asserted that he saw Prime Minister Modi’s pain after the violence and that, despite knowing the truth, he continued to cooperate with authorities.

In an interview given to news agency ANI, Amit Shah said, “I have seen Modiji in pain after the riots. A national leader of such a stature kept mum even after such allegations. I have seen that all and we are now happy that the Supreme Court came with this verdict.”

Amit Shah also stated that the court observed the case to be highly politically motivated. When asked why the leaders in the BJP did not do a press conference and an interview then, Amit Shah said that he stayed silent because the matter was subjudice. “We could have done this interview back then but we refrained because justice was yet to be delivered. We wanted the truth to be out in the public domain,” Home minister Shah said.

Nexus of political parties, ideological journalists and NGOs

Amit Shah emphasised that the riots and circumstances were exacerbated by the efforts of a nexus, which included opposition political parties, politically driven media reporters and journalists, and certain non-governmental organisations. Also speaking about the Special Investigation Team, Amit Shah said that it was not something ordered by the court, it was actually consented by the state government when asked by the court.

Amit Shah stated that all the allegations against the government of Gujarat were fake and fabricated. He said that the sting operation by Tehelka was also fake and ideologically motivated. “All the sting operations were fabricated. The court has itself observed that efforts were made to put a bad tag on the state government. It was we who agreed to constitute the SIT. Why there was no SIT after the 1984 riots in Delhi?” Shah remarked fiercely when asked about the BJP’s denial of the SIT.

Amit Shah also named NGO activist Teesta Setalvad and her involvement in the case to defame the authorities and the government. “Even the affidavits of the victims were signed by the NGOs. Things were fabricated this way. Teesta Setalvad’s name is openly known to all. Everyone knows how she has been involved in this.”

Gujarat has adopted the model of development, not violence

Adding more to his response to the allegations made by people, Amit Shah said that Gujarat adopted the model of development and not violence. “What is significant is the Gujarat model of development and not violence. What is more important than the verdict of the court is the public’s mandate. We have continuously won elections in Gujarat and we know that the public trusts us. Gujarat had a 10% agriculture growth rate for several years and people talk about that. The truth of the riots is known to everyone,” Amit Shah said.

Expressing his pain for the incident, Amit Shah said, “I have seen a child of 16 days burnt completely. I have taken bodies and survivors to the hospital. I was there myself present at the ground.”

Amit Shah raised questions about the silence from Congress over the death of 59 “Ram Bhakts” who were burned alive at the Godhra railway station, that initiated the 2002 riots. Further, Amit Shah put to rest an oft-repeated lie that the dead bodies from Godhra were paraded in Gujarat to stir emotions and engineer the riots. 

He said that the main reason for the riot was the burning of the train in Godhara but no one speaks about it. “People alleged that we paraded the bodies to instigate mobs. No, that is not true. The bodies of the deceased were taken to Sola civil hospital and then they were handed over to their families. All such allegations were completely false.”

In his closing remarks, pointing at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, Shah said that Narendra Modi is not one who does drama and calls ministers and people to pressurize authorities. He said, “Narendra Modi is an honest person and he went all alone and faced all investigations. We believe in truth and we don’t fear anything.”

Amit Shah once again busts the myth of ‘Godhra dead bodies being paraded’ to instigate riots in 2002, here is what he said

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Amit Shah once again busts the myth of ‘Godhra dead bodies being paraded’ to instigate riots in 2002, here is what he said

2002 Gujarat riots are one of the most painful chapters of independent India’s history. Union Home Minister Amit Shah, who comes from the same state of Gujarat, has finally broken his silence over the issue and put to rest several myths circulating about those riots in an interview with Smita Prakash from ANI.

Amit Shah raised questions about the silence from Congress over the death of 59 “Ram Bhakts” who were burned alive at the Godhra railway station, that initiated the 2002 riots. Further, Amit Shah put to rest an oft-repeated lie that the dead bodies from Godhra were paraded in Gujarat to stir emotions and engineer the riots.

Amit Shah clarified that the burnt dead bodies from Godhra were taken to Sola Hospital in closed ambulances, on the outskirts of Ahmedabad, and were not paraded at all in front of anyone. While Amit Shah maintained that the massacre of Ram Bhakts returning from Ayodhya was the main reason for the state-wide riots, he categorically stated that none of the dead bodies was paraded to stir emotions.

The Civil Hospital in Ahmedabad, which would have been an obvious choice to bring home the deceased, was skipped. The Civil Hospital is situated in Asarwa, Ahmedabad which is a communally sensitive area. Years later, in 2008, the civil hospital in Ahmedabad was the target of a terror attack that claimed the lives of 56 people and left over 240 injured

Further, Shah said that a 16-days-old was burnt in her mother’s lap. Shah himself eventually cremated many of those who were burnt alive in Godhra. Amit Shah mentioned how people were angry after coming across this visual of nearly 5 dozen Ram Bhakts burnt alive, however, Amit Shah dismissed the allegations that the dead bodies were paraded around Gujarat to instigate anger.

It is notable that Amit Shah was not the Home Minister at the time of the Gujarat riots and the home ministry was with Gordhan Zadaphia. In the aftermath of the riots, Amit Shah was elevated to the post of the Home Minister of Gujarat.

Following the Supreme Court’s dismissal of Zakia Jafri’s petition against the then Chief Minister Narendra Modi, Amit Shah said, “The entire conspiracy was staged to tarnish the reputation of Narendra Modi but in the end, truth triumphed. It is wrong to use such communal riots for politics but still, allegations were leveled against Narendra Modi. People used to write op-eds against Narendra Modi before every foreign visit. However, now even Supreme Court has agreed that Zakia Jafri was acting at someone else’s behest.”

Apart from the Gujarat riots, Amit Shah addressed several issues during his interview with ANI including GST, surgical strikes, farmers’ protest, and Pakistan. Shah said that his party has fought many battles like GST and surgical strikes and their success on these fronts is a success for every party member, not just Narendra Modi.

With SC calling out Zakia Jafri, a look back at criminal Sanjiv Bhatt and how he was turned into a hero for lying about 2002 Gujarat

GujaratRiots.com
-
0
With SC calling out Zakia Jafri, a look back at criminal Sanjiv Bhatt and how he was turned into a hero for lying about 2002 Gujarat

Amidst the ongoing ‘The Kashmir Files’ movie issue, several far-left social media trolls and the Congress party supporters claimed in March 2022 that the disgraced cop Sanjiv Bhatt, who is in jail, also is a Kashmiri Pandit. Firstly this is absolutely wrong on facts, he is not. And secondly, even if he was, that makes no difference to the fact that he is and has been found guilty of criminal offences by the court, and his claims debunked by the SIT, which is now proven yet again by the recent judgement dismissing the Zakia Jafri petition by Supreme Court.

It is pertinent to note that the Supreme Court specifically said that Zakia Jafri was tutored and her claims do not hold water. In that backdrop, it is important to remember the crimes of Sanjiv Bhatt and how he was turned into a hero for lying about Narendra Modi and the 2002 Gujarat riots, so much so, that his own crimes and his reasons for going after Modi were brushed under the rug by sympathetic media.

After his conviction in one case in June 2019, more lies were spread by the self-proclaimed ‘liberals’, and media outlets like BBC, who tried to imply that the reason for his conviction was the anti-Modi stance taken by him and not this 1990 case. This included Manu Joseph, a former contributor at Outlook weekly, who had initially made the same false charge which was later made by Sanjiv Bhatt, on Narendra Modi giving ‘orders to the police to allow Hindus to riot the next day’ in a crucial meeting on 27 Feb 2002 held at CM’s Bungalow, Gandhinagar in weekly Outlook dated 3 June 2002. Manu Joseph said: “I also believe that he is in jail right now only because he tried to destroy Modi.” [Manu Joseph’s report of Outlook 3 June 2002 was as false as Sanjiv Bhatt’s claims, and he too can be prosecuted for it. To know the full truth of it, and the lies of Joseph in Outlook, click here.]

Let us see some more reasons why Sanjiv Bhatt was prompted to speak against Narendra Modi. The final SIT report says on pp 48-51:

“(Page 48) …a communication was sent to the (Gujarat) Government to make available the details of all complaints/ pending inquiries/ prosecutions/ departmental proceedings etc against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. A detailed reply has been received from the Govt. of Gujarat which shows that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has faced a number of departmental inquiries and he was granted three promotions of Junior Administrative Grade, Selection Grade and DIG Grade on one day i.e. 21-09-2007 after dropping of three departmental inquiries pending against him vide orders dated 06-08-2005, 03-09-2005 and 24-07-2006. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, who is eligible for the IGP grade has not been promoted because of the departmental inquiries and criminal cases pending against him. A chargesheet served upon him on 29-12-2010, for irregularities in police recruitment under his Chairmanship as SP Banaskantha, is still pending.

“While handling a law and order situation during his posting as ASP Jamnagar in the year 1990, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt committed atrocities on peaceful and innocent villagers belonging to a particular community at a place called Jam Jodhpur. In the beatings by police, one person was killed. The victims included a pregnant woman, two assistant engineers of the Irrigation department and one Circle officer of the Revenue Department. Shri Bhatt applied provisions of the draconian law TADA against innocent persons and arrested 140 individuals under this Act. Due to public pressure, the Government [Our comment: At that time, it was Congress ruling Gujarat. Janata Dal (70 MLAs) and BJP (67 MLAs) combine ruled Gujarat from 4 March 1990 to October 1990, but from 25 October 1990 it was again Congress rule when Janata Dal merged with Congress (33 MLAs out of a total 182) till 13 March 1995] got an inquiry conducted by a retired Judicial Officer into the incident and Shri Bhatt was found guilty of: (a) misuse of TADA (b) police atrocities (c) unnecessary (page 49 now) imposition of curfew for 70 hours leading to hardship and harassment to the people.

“The Criminal case of death of a person due to police atrocities in the incident was investigated by State CID (Crime) against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and others. After completion of the investigation, the IO sought prosecution sanction from the Government u/s 197 Cr. PC, which was declined and therefore, a closure report was filed in the competent court. However, the Court rejected the closure report on 20.12.1995 and took cognizance. The State Government filed a Criminal Revision Application in the Sessions Court, which was rejected.

The case u/s 302,323, 506(1), 114 of IPC has now been committed to Sessions Court, Jamnagar and is presently pending with the Fast Track Court, Khambhalia for framing of charges against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and others.

Significantly, Gujarat High Court awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the victim who had died due to police atrocities in the above case.

“Another criminal complaint was filed against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, while he was posted as SP, Banaskantha District in 1996 by Shri Sumersingh Rajpurohit, an Advocate practising at Pali, Rajasthan and a criminal case was registered against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt & others vide FIR No. 403/96 dtd. 18/11/1996 u/s 120B, 195, 196, 342, 347, 357, 365, 388, 458, 482 IPC and Sec. 58(1) & 58 (2) r/w Sec. 37 of NDPS Act in the court of Spl. Judge, NDPS Act, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. The allegations, in brief, are that the complainant Advocate was occupying a property as a tenant in Pali (Rajasthan), which was owned by a lady, who happened to be a sister of Shri R.R. Jain, a sitting Judge of Gujarat High Court. As per the said criminal [page 50 now] complaint, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and his subordinate police officers allegedly planted 1 ½ kg of Narcotic drug in one room in a hotel at Palanpur, Gujarat, which was shown as occupied by the said complainant, though he was at Pali (Rajasthan) at that time. The said Advocate was abducted at midnight on the instructions of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt by his subordinate Police officers of Gujarat police, who went from Palanpur, Gujarat to Pali (Rajasthan) to abduct him. The said advocate was brought to Palanpur, Gujarat and pressurized by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and his subordinate police officers to vacate the said property by showing him arrested under NDPS offence. The said Advocate, while in the custody of Gujarat Police and due to police torture, vacated the property and physical possession of the property was handed over to the sister of Shri R.R. Jain, Judge of Gujarat High Court. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and his subordinate police officers, thereafter released Shri Sumersingh Rajpurohit on 08-05-1996, by filling a report u/s 169 Cr. PC, in which it was mentioned that Shri Sumersingh could not be identified in the Test Identification Parade. Quashing Petitions were field in this matter by the accused persons in Rajasthan and Gujarat High Court, but the same had been dismissed. The matter is now pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

“In the meantime, on the complaint of Shri Sidheshwar Puri, Secretary, Bar Association, Pali (Rajasthan), National Human Rights Commission taking a very serious view of this false case under NDPS Act vide its order dated 15-09-2010 asked Govt. of Gujarat to pay a sum of Rs. one lakh as monetary relief to Shri Sumersingh, Advocate, Pali.

“Significantly, Gujarat Vigilance Commission recommended twice on 15-07-2002 and 19-10-2006 that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt should be placed under suspension for his professional misconducts, but the govt. of Gujarat did not do so.

“In view of the aforesaid position, it can be inferred that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt is facing a lot of problems in service matters and has [page 51 now] got an axe to grind against the Govt. of Gujarat and, therefore, his evidence is ill-motivated and cannot be relied upon.”

This shows that as the late Haren Pandya, Sanjiv Bhatt took on Modi for similar reasons. One, his promotion was due but could not be got due to departmental inquiries and criminal cases. And second, and most importantly, he took on Modi so as to become a ‘hero’, get the support of the mainstream media, the then ruling UPA, and then get out of the serious cases pending against him.

He hoped that with the national and international media raising his issue as a ‘cop who took on Modi’, the courts would not convict him, and his prosecution would be seen as ‘vindictive action by Modi Government on a whistle-blower cop’. This same is also the strategy of Teesta Setalvad, any prosecution of her is cried as ‘vindictive action’ and support is organized worldwide immediately for her. However, Sanjiv Bhatt did not succeed in courts, though he did in the media and political circles [political opponents of the BJP]. On 20 June 2019, he got life imprisonment in the 1990 Jamnagar case.

But he has supporters on Twitter, which include many mainstream journalists and political leaders and workers, who continue to demand his release, claiming that he was ‘framed’ for taking on Modi! What wonders his strategy of taking on Modi worked for him! Had he not taken on Modi, and been an unknown officer with criminal cases, who would have demanded his release, or immunity from prosecution?

He deserves to be in jail for far more crimes committed by him as well, primarily perjury. There is a truckload of evidence of Sanjiv Bhatt’s crimes, which has been covered up totally by the media.

Let us see how similar it is to the late Haren Pandya. Haren Pandya was accused of demolishing a dargah near his house on 1st March 2002 in anger against Godhra, a dargah which was on the roads causing inconvenience to traffic and may have had to be demolished by the municipal corporation anyway. The self-styled liberals were howling against Haren Pandya much before March 2002 itself owing to his alleged ‘anti-minority’ views. [In 2001 when the movie Gadar was released, he had said “There is nothing in it which would hurt an Indian Muslim. If there’s anything it’s against Pakistan”.] After the alleged role of Pandya in the dargah demolition, they were condemning Pandya even more.

There was a self-appointed Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal (CCT), headed by Retd Supreme Court judge Justice Krishna Iyer, which had no authority to do anything and gave a horribly biased report full of lies [e.g. it claimed that ’40 were killed in police firing in Ahmedabad on 28 February 2002 out of which 36 were Muslims’, while the fact is that 17 were killed in police firing on that day of which 11 were Hindus, as mentioned by the SIT report on page 210]. That CCT report was largely authored by Teesta Setalvad, many parts of that report are copy-pasted word for word from earlier articles of Teesta Setalvad’s magazine Combat Communalism of earlier months of 2002, and whose contribution in making of the report has been acknowledged by Justice Krishna Iyer himself in Volume 1, pp 5-6.

The CCT published its report in November 2002 in the form of a book titled “Crime against humanity” and made many charges against the late Haren Pandya himself for his alleged anti-Muslim statements and activities and severely criticized Pandya on Vol. I page 36, page 44, page 48, Vol. II page 48, page 49, page 52, page 77, page 87. The SIT report gives many quotes from that report against the late Haren Pandya on his alleged anti-Muslim statements and activities on pages 452-456.

But after Pandya started targeting Narendra Modi, they forgot all their charges on Pandya, and made him a hero! This also exposes the biased section of the media- that it will make a hero out of anyone targeting Narendra Modi, ignoring the merits of the case completely, and will forget all charges on that person targeting the big fish Narendra Modi. For the complete truth of the Haren Pandya issue, read this article.

Modi became Chief Minister of Gujarat in October 2001 and had to enter the Assembly. Till then he had never fought a single election in his life from a corporation to the Lok Sabha. Ellis Bridge seat is considered one of the safest for the BJP in the country. It was a part of Advani’s Gandhinagar seat till delimitation. Modi reportedly wanted Pandya to vacate this seat of Ellisbridge so that he i.e. Modi could enter the Assembly but Pandya who was then Home Minister refused. So Modi had to go for Rajkot II which he won by 14,000 votes on 24 February 2002, 3 days before the Godhra carnage.

Pandya was demoted from Home Minister to Revenue Minister and since then his resentment against Modi became even stronger. Pandya then resigned from the Ministry in August 2002 as MoS for Revenue too. Then when in December 2002 elections came Modi denied Pandya a ticket. The SIT also says on page 240 that: “Also relevant here is the strained relationship between him and Shri Narendra Modi, a fact revealed by late Pandya’s father late Vithalbhai Pandya.”

Similar was the case with Sanjiv Bhatt. Not merely was he in trouble with legal cases (the 1990 Jamnagar one, as well as the drug planting one of 1996), he had personal issues with his promotion. On page 518 the SIT said: “The view of the Ld. Amicus Curiae that it does not appear very likely that a serving police officer would make such a serious allegation without some basis appears to be erroneous in as much as Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been all along a delinquent in his career and had been trying to bargain with the government. The very fact that three departmental enquiries against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt were dropped in 2006-07 and he was given three promotions on a single day would by itself go to show his service career progression. Again, his promotion to the rank of IGP was due for quite some time but he did not get the same because of other departmental enquiries as well as court cases pending against him. The reason by itself is sufficient to bring a motive on part of Sanjiv Bhatt to make a statement against the Chief Minister…”

There is a lot of evidence to expose more of Sanjiv Bhatt’s lies, especially his claims of being present in that crucial 27 February 2002 meeting. A separate article is there to discuss that issue on merit. But here we will just give conclusive evidence that he was not present in that meeting. The SIT report says on page 427:

  • “That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has been maintaining a close contact with Shri Rahul Sharma, DIG of Gujarat Police and had been getting his mobile phone calls analyzed with a view to ascertain his own movements of 27-02-2002. This shows that Bhatt does not recollect his movements on that day. He has also been trying to ascertain the movements of Late Haren Pandya, the then Minister of State for Revenue on 27-02-2002, with a view to introduce him as a participant of the meeting of 27-02-2002 held at CM’s residence, but could not do so, as Shri Rahul Sharma had informed him after the analysis that there was absolutely no question of Late Haren Pandya being at Gandhinagar on 27-02-2002 night.

“From the study of emails, it appears that certain vested interests including Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, different NGOs and some political leaders were trying to use Hon’ble Supreme Court/SIT as a forum for settling their scores. This would also go to show that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been colluding with the persons with vested interests to see that some kind of charge-sheet is filed against Shri Narendra Modi and others.”

This makes things absolutely clear and also shows that many people were involved in this fraud, who knew that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present at the 27 February 2002 meeting, but far from bringing out the truth to the investigators, were helping in this false claim.

Haren Pandya (murdered in March 2003) of course, was not present in that meeting so his testimony does not have the slightest value. The SIT report also says on page 56 that Haren Pandya’s mobile records show that he was in Ahmedabad on 27 Feb 2002 at 22:52 hours, meaning that it was impossible for him to attend the meeting in Gandhinagar at 10:30 PM on 27 Feb. As we showed in Myth 19, he could not even name correctly the people present in the meeting.

This shows that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present at all in the meeting, and he did not even know basic facts about the meeting. It is known since August 2002 (when Haren Pandya’s errors in naming people in the meeting were admitted by him to Outlook and by the magazine itself, or at least after his murder in March 2003 after which Outlook reported that the minister giving the information was indeed Haren Pandya) that Haren Pandya was by no means present in the meeting. But Sanjiv Bhatt did not even know this and hence first asked Rahul Sharma to find out if Haren Pandya could be introduced as a witness-a participant in that meeting.

Most importantly, this conclusively shows that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present at all. If Sanjiv Bhatt was present in the meeting, wouldn’t he know if Haren Pandya was present or not? Why would he need to ask Rahul Sharma to find the call details? This also shows that Rahul Sharma also knew the truth, that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present, but did not tell the investigators.

Besides, Sanjiv Bhatt falsely claimed to be present in the 28 February 10:30 AM meeting at the CM’s Bungalow, Gandhinagar. The SIT says on page 45: “The claim of Sanjiv Bhat that he attended the said meeting at 1030 hours at CM’s location is proved to be false from the location of his mobile phone, which was at Prerna Tower, Vastrapur-I, Ahmedabad City at 10:57:43 hrs.” Sanjiv Bhatt was at Ahmedabad, more than 25 km away from Chief Minister’s Bungalow in Gandhinagar at that time. This conclusive evidence exposing his lies was conveniently ignored by the Leftist media.

(The writer is the author of book “Gujarat Riots: The True Story” which gives all details about the 2002 riots- Godhra and after, one of the admins of www.gujaratriots.com and one of the admins of the Twitter handle @gujaratriotscom)

Islamist Youtuber Wali Ahmed insults Lord Ram, issues death and rape threats to Nupur Sharma, calls for beheading of her Hindu supporters

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Islamist Youtuber Wali Ahmed insults Lord Ram, issues death and rape threats to Nupur Sharma, calls for beheading of her Hindu supporters

Although it’s been a month since former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma made certain innocuous comments about Prophet Muhammad, then apologised and retracted them, she continues to be on the radar of Islamists. Along with multiple death threats, several rabid Islamists have been taking to various social media platforms to openly vilify, humiliate and threaten the ex-BJP spokesperson.

In one such video uploaded on 16th June 2022 on the video-sharing and social media platform YouTube, an Islamist YouTuber Wali Ahmad not only went on a vile rant against the ex-BJP spokesperson but also went on to spread hate against Hinduism and insult Hindu God Shri Ram.

Sharing snippets from the video on June 24, a Twitter user Naveen Singh (@HeckIndia) requested Uttar Pradesh police, Bihar police and the NIA to take cognisance and demanded stringent action against the “Hinduphoic Jihadist” YouTuber Wali Ahmed from Patna, Bihar.

In his video that has now come to light, the Islamist YouTuber not only calls for the beheading of the ex-BJP spokesperson but also incites Islamists to brutally rape her. He audaciously goes on to mock Hindu god Ram by blatantly lying about the age of Lord Ram and Mata Sita at the time of their marriage. The Islamist YouTuber also openly calls for the beheading of Yati Narsinghanand and the death of Hindus who have come out in large numbers to support Nupur Sharma.

With 303k YouTube subscribers, the Islamist Youtuber seems to be quite popular amongst his brethren.

SS of Wali Ahmad’s YouTube page

The video, which is full of derogatory words and expletives against Nupur Sharma and her Hindu supporters was uploaded on Wali Ahmad’s YouTube channel on June 16. He began his video with a vile rant against the Hindus who have voiced their support for the ex-BJP spokesperson. He openly threatens Nupur Sharma’s supporters with death.

In the same video, he calls on Islamists to violently rape Nupur Sharma in retaliation for her comments on the Prophet Muhammad and Islam during a Times Now debate programme. “Nupur Sharma ko jaan leva na sahi, ga*nd leva sazaa toh milna hi chahiye,” said the Islamist using use extremely derogatory, abusive and sexually explicit words against the ex-BJP spokesperson.

He then goes on to call for the beheading of Dasna priest Yati Narsinghanand Saraswati for speaking out in favour of the former BJP spokesperson, who has been hounded and threatened by Islamists from all over the world for the past month.

Incensed by Nupur Sharma’s statement quoting Islamic Hadiths on Prophet Muhammad, the Islamist Youtuber went on to infer that Lord Ram is ‘characterless’ since he married Goddess Sita when she was 6 years old, a flagrant lie that Islamists and Hinduphobic pseudo-liberals have peddled for years to discredit Hinduism.

The Islamist YouTuber concluded his video by reiterating that the Hindu supporters of Nupur Sharma will have a similar fate to the latter. “Gustakh-e-rasool ko support karne wala bhi gustakh-e-rasool hota hain aur uski ek hi sazaa hoti hain…,” the YouTuber threatens while ending his extremely derogatory, abusive and sexually explicit video.

About Wali’s YouTube channel

The said Youtube channel in question started uploading videos on April 27, 2020. Wali’s uploaded videos provide insight into his Hinduphobic mindset. Be it on Yoga Guru Ramdev or the Dasna priest Yati Narsinghanand Saraswati or Uttar Pradesh CM Yogi Adityanath, most of his videos are about ridiculing Hindus and their faith.

Nupur Sharma, the former BJP spokesperson, has been caught in a dangerous storm after she made certain innocuous comments during a TimesNow debate. After Indian Muslims like AltNews’ co-founder Mohammad Zubair dog-whistled against her, she was declared a ‘blasphemer’ and several Islamist outfits, including Taliban and Al Qaeda, are now demanding her head on pike. Since the time Islamists have waged war against her, Hindus have also been coming out in large numbers to show solidarity with the ex-BJP spokesperson.

Prayagraj violence: Mastermind Javed ‘Pump’, whose house was demolished earlier, sent to two days police custody, no third-degree, orders court

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Prayagraj violence: Mastermind Javed ‘Pump’, whose house was demolished earlier, sent to two days police custody, no third-degree, orders court

Javed Ahmed alias Javed Pump, the primary culprit in the Prayagraj riots, has been sent to two days of police custody on orders of the court. After hearing the arguments of Prosecution Officer Kislay Pandey, Avinash Singh and the papers submitted by the police, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Amit Kumar issued this order on the police’s motion. The court has also ordered that no third-degree treatment be taken during the interrogation.

The court has ruled that the police application is admissible, and the primary accused of the rioting, Javed Pump, has been ordered to be held in police custody for two days, with the proviso that the police do not take any rigorous measures during the questioning. The police stated in their appeal that the investigation is still ongoing and that Javed should be taken into custody so that the evidence may be traced.

Javed was detained following the rioting that occurred in Prayagraj following Friday prayers on June 10. It appears that Javed and other anti-social elements used youngsters to throw stones at the police and the authorities. Javed Ahmed’s daughter, a student in Delhi, is also involved in similar activities, according to SSP Prayagraj.

The event occurred in the Atala Police Station region of the Prayagraj district’s Kareli Police Station. According to reports, the anti-Nupur Sharma rally swiftly became violent, with protestors pelting stones at security forces after chanting slogans. The Rapid Action Force (RAF) and Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) used lathi charges to disperse the crowd after the protests turned violent. Stone-pelting continued irregularly despite the security personnel’s best efforts. The Prayagraj ADG’s vehicle was also damaged during the stone-pelting.

Illegal house of Javed demolished

On June 12, 2022, the illegal house of Javed Ahmed, the architect of the violence in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, was bulldozed. The cops discovered illicit firearms in the residence during the demolition. Two pistols were retrieved from the residence by police. The two weapons are a 12-bore pistol and a 315-bore pistol. Aside from that, the accused kept other cartridges hidden in his home. In addition to the weapons and ammo, various offensive documents and posters were discovered on the premises.

From student protests that brought down Indira govt to opposition hoping same fate for PM Modi: How Congress hopes for Emergency 2.0

Jinit Jain
-
0
From student protests that brought down Indira govt to opposition hoping same fate for PM Modi: How Congress hopes for Emergency 2.0

25 June 2022 marks the 47th anniversary of one of the darkest chapters of Independent India’s history—The Emergency. It was on this day in 1975 that Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, the then President of India, under the auspices of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, announced a countrywide Emergency, plunging the country into an era of crushed individual freedoms, arbitrary arrests of dissidents and political opponents, and draconian centralisation of power.

The Emergency came into force on 25 June 1975 and remained in effect till 21 March 1977. To this date, it remains one of the highly contested chapters in the country’s modern history. The Emergency was marked by unchecked state incarceration of political dissidents who raised their voices against Mrs Gandhi or refused to comply with her autocratic impulses. There were reports of frequent human rights violations and widespread repression as the Indira Gandhi-led regime imposed sweeping measures to suppress criticism, jail political rivals and censor the press.

The genesis of The Emergency could be attributed to the Allahabad High Court order in 1975 that dismissed Indira Gandhi’s 1971 election victory against Raj Narain, following which she imposed a national emergency in the country to protect her political interests. Instead of accepting her defeat with all grace, Indira Gandhi imposed a draconian emergency and locked up her political opponents in 1975.

The Allahabad Court’s judgment to dismiss the electoral victory of Indira Gandhi from Rae Bareli came from the fact that she had indulged in corrupt electoral practices during the elections. The court had also barred her from contesting any Lok Sabha elections for the next six years, which led Indira Gandhi to subvert the country’s democratic procedures enshrined in the constitution.

While the trigger for Indira Gandhi to impose the Emergency was indeed the court order that invalidated her hold over the power, the seeds of the crisis were sown during the student protests movement that swept the country in the wake of unbridled corruption, deepening unemployment and acute food insecurity.

Students’ protests leading up to Emergency heralded the downfall of the Indira Gandhi government

In December 1973, students of L.D College of Engineering, Ahmedabad, went on strike in protest against a 20 per cent hike in hostel food fees. Similar protests erupted in January 1974 at Gujarat University that saw clashes between students and the police, touching off massive student protests across the state. As protests spread through different educational institutes across the state, middle-class citizens and factory workers joined the demonstrations, metamorphosing it into a socio-political movement whose widespread ramifications traversed state boundaries and jolted the Indira Gandhi government in New Delhi.

As protests in Gujarat started taking ominous proportions, students, professors, and lawyers came together to form a committee, later known as the Nav Nirman Yuvak Samiti, to voice grievances and shepherd protests. The Indira Gandhi government at the centre took notice of the Nav Nirman Andolan that was taking root in Gujarat and asked the then Gujarat CM Chimanbhai Patel to resign.

However, the fire of the protests in Gujarat did not just incinerate the Chimanbhai Patel government in the state. Its flames inevitably reached New Delhi, most notably after Jayprakash Narayan, inspired by the Navnirman Andolan in Gujarat, spearheaded a similar movement in Bihar that segued into a total revolution which later resulted in an Emergency.

Decades later, the Left intelligentsia is trying to instigate a similar insurrection against the Modi government. If the recent undertakings by the left-leaning liberals are anything to go by, they are desperately trying to inflame countrywide protests, hoping that the ensuing tumult would bring about the downfall of the Modi government just like the students’ protests heralded the undoing of the Indira Gandhi’s government.

It is to this end that every policy move made by the Modi government attracts sharp criticism from the usual suspects, who spare no time in hurrying to denounce them even before critically assessing them. Objectivity has never been the goal of this section of chronic critics, for whom each decision taken by the Modi government unlocks a vast array of opportunities to incite fears, exploit apprehensions and fan misgivings that could result in a countrywide insurrection against the government.

Congress, opposition parties instigate nationwide student rebellion to fuel perpetual sense of resentment against the Centre among the masses

For instance, earlier this year, large-scale protests swept India as students, instigated by political parties and dubious elements with vested interests, took to the streets demanding the postponement of NEET PG 2022 examinations. The opposition leaders saw an opening to prey on the resentment among NEET aspirants and use it as an instrument to chart their path to power. Politicians who thought piggybacking on the protests could earn them political mileage eagerly co-opted the demonstrations and vilified the government as anti-students.

Earlier this year, protests against the Railway Recruitment Board (RRB) roiled the country as protesters took the streets alleging discrepancies in its Non-Technical Popular Categories Exam 2021. The protesters are unhappy over the “inaccurate exam results”. The opposition, which is always ready to pounce on the opportunity to corner the Centre, jumped the railway protests bandwagon to capitalise on the disgruntlement of the railway aspirants and use it as a springboard to mobilise people and incite further protests against the government.

While the opportunist politicians and professional troublemakers aka “andolanjeevis” as PM Modi famously termed them were always on the prowl to sow anarchy and revel in the ensuing mayhem, they were profoundly encouraged in their nefarious designs by the Centre’s rollback of the farm laws after monthslong protests. They believed that protests could be employed to bend the government to their will. They realised that mobilising protesters against every government decision would not only instil a perpetual sense of resentment against the government but also undermine its credibility.

So when the detractors resorted to inflaming protests over the Centre’s Agnipath recruitment drive, it was quite evident that the objection was not rooted in logic or rationality but in a deep desire to discredit the government. No sooner did the government announce its plan of providing youth with an opportunity to know and work with the Indian Armed Forces, than the restive opposition backed by motivated propagandists made a beeline to induce protests and hold the government of the day to ransom. Even though the senior officers of all three streams of the Armed Forces backed the move, the propagandists continued to peddle misinformation about the recruitment scheme.

Without delving into the details of the Agnipath programme, those who are pathologically opposed to the Modi government fanned unfounded rumours and misgivings about the scheme, inciting people to take to the streets as a part of their grand plan of shaping a popular rebellion against the Centre that they hope is potent enough to topple the government. A raft of left-leaning liberals created fear psychosis among the agitating ‘aspirants’, which turned the protests violent as protesters resorted to rioting, vandalism, and arson. Public properties across the country were damaged while the mob at places across the nation burnt down trains.

The unrestrained claims of “undeclared Emergency”, “Emergency 2.0” shows the opposition wants Modi govt to meet a similar fate as the Indira govt after the Emergency

In their desire to subject PM Modi to a similar fate that befell Indira Gandhi, the opposition has also leaned on Khalistanis, as witnessed during the last year’s farmers’ protests, when Khalistani supporters actively participated in the protests against the three farm laws. In fact, Khalistanis openly issued death threats to PM Modi for passing the three agriculture bills that would have ushered the country into the era of modern farm practices. Indira Gandhi, during her time, was also up against Khalistanis, who eventually took away her life. However, the symmetry cannot be starker as Khalistanis are now let loose against PM Modi for his commitment to alleviating the problems ailing the country’s agriculture sector and providing farmers with their due.

The unabashed weaponisation of the student protests, the propping up of Khalistanis against PM Modi and the constant pursuit of keeping the pot boiling is why the Congress party and other opposition leaders ceaselessly throw around claims of “undeclared Emergency”, “Emergency 2.0” and similar such insinuations. By loosely throwing around references to the Emergency, the Congress and other opposition parties seek to undermine the electoral mandate that vested power in the Modi government, not once but twice. The goal for such an endeavour is pretty straightforward: to discredit the government by linking it to the autocratic rule of Indira Gandhi during the Emergency and hope such an association would result in the government’s undoing.

Maharashtra crisis: Uddhav Thackeray whines again, talks about the legacy of Balasaheb Thackeray while sitting in alliance with NCP and Congress

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Maharashtra crisis: Uddhav Thackeray whines again, talks about the legacy of Balasaheb Thackeray while sitting in alliance with NCP and Congress

Amidst the ongoing political turmoil in the State of Maharashtra, Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray addressed his supporters in the hopes of getting their sympathies.

He lamented how the rebel leader Eknath Shinde had ‘betrayed’ Shiv Sena while the party continues to enjoy the support of Sharad Pawar’s Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and Sonia Gandhi’s Congress.

“We gave tickets to people who could not have won and we made them victorious. Those people have backstabbed us today,” Thackeray pinned the blame on Shinde while the latter had categorically pointed out how the Sena deviated from the ideals of Balasaheb Thackeray. Interestingly, in this statement, Uddhav Thackeray seems to reduce the entire fiasco merely to politics, however, the fact that he allied with NCP and Congress, betraying the Hindutva ideals of Balasaheb Thackeray, finds no consideration in his monologue.

Thackeray then claimed to have discussed the matter with Eknath Shinde. “He told me NCP-Congress are trying to finish us and MLAs want us to go with BJP. I told him to bring to me MLAs who want it,” he remarked.

The Maharashtra Chief Minister alleged to have given Shinde the freedom to go wherever he wanted along with rebel MLAs, only after consulting the party high command.

“BJP, that defamed our party, my family, is the one you are talking about going with. Such a question doesn’t even arise. If MLAs want to go there they can, all of them can. I won’t. If someone wants to go – be it an MLA or someone else – come & tell us and then go,” Thackeray added.

In this segment of his monologue, Uddhav Thackeray seems to forget that it was Shiv Sena who broke the alliance with BJP for their want of power. Uddhav Thackeray wanted to become to Chief Minister so desperately that he allied with Congress and NCP, who have campaigned against Hindus. At that time, several Shiv Sainiks were also miffed with the ideological betrayal of Uddhav and had quit the party.

Uddhav Thackeray also sought to stir sympathy by evoking the legacy of the Shiv Sena’s founder.

“If you think I’m useless and incapable of running the party, tell me. I’m ready to separate myself from the party, you can tell me. You respected me so far because Balasaheb said so. If you say I am incapable, then I am ready to quit the party right at this moment,” he was heard as saying.

Thackeray also claimed that Shiv Sena, a regional party limited to only the State of Maharashtra, has suffered electorally for aligning with a pan-India party such as the BJP.

“When BJP and Shiv Sena were considered untouchables in the name of Hindutva and nobody was ready to go with BJP, Balasaheb said there shouldn’t be a division of Hindutva votes. We remained with BJP and we are suffering its consequences now,” he said.

The incumbent Sena chief also accused the saffron party of trying to exterminate its existence.

“Shiv Sena like a sword, if you keep it in sheath, it rusts. If you take it out, it shines. It’s time to shine,” Thackeray tried to invoke hope among the Shiv Sainiks awaiting an impending collapse of the Maha Vikas Aghadi government.

Meanwhile, rebel Shiv Sena MLA Eknath Shinde informed the media that he has the support of 50 MLAs, which is enough to oust the incumbent Maharashtra government from power.

Shinde confirmed that about 40 of the MLAs are from the Shiv Sena. It implies that the rebel leader has the numbers to bypass disciplinary action under the anti-defection law.

“About 40 of them are from Shiv Sena. Those who have faith in our role will join us. We want to carry the legacy and ideology of Balasaheb Thackeray forward.” he emphasised.

Besides the Shiv Sena MLAs, about 60 Members of the Legislative Council (MLCs) from Thane are also set to join Eknath Shinde’s rebel camp.

In a bid to save its face, Sena leader Sanjay Raut announced that the party is willing to break its alliance with Congress and the NCP. He added that such a demand will only be entertained if a formal request is made to Uddhav Thackeray.

Hyderabad: BJP leader files case against Ram Gopal Varma for his derogatory tweet on NDA’s presidential candidate Draupadi Murmu

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Hyderabad: BJP leader files case against Ram Gopal Varma for his derogatory tweet on NDA’s presidential candidate Draupadi Murmu

Telangana’s senior BJP leader G Narayan Reddy has registered a police complaint against film producer and director Ram Gopal Varma for his derogatory tweet on NDA’s presidential candidate Draupadi Murmu. Following the complaint and the outrage by netizens, Varma furnished a tame apology from his Twitter handle.

On 22nd June 2022, Ram Gopal Varma tweeted, “If DRAUPADI is the PRESIDENT who are the PANDAVAS? And more importantly, who are the KAURAVAS?” It is notable that Pandavas and Kauravas were from the royal family of Hastinapur as described in Mahabharata and Draupadi was married to the Pandavas.

Ram Gopal Varma’s derogatory tweet.

G Narayan Reddy, a senior member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) from Telangana, filed a complaint with the Abid Road Police Station alleging that the director had tweeted a disparaging comment about Draupadi Murmu. Reddy said in his complaint that Varma’s remarks on Twitter were extremely insulting and degrading for an experienced female politician and former governor of Jharkhand. Along with the police complaint, the BJP politician provided the tweet as proof. He insisted that the SC/ST Act should be invoked by the police and that the director should get harsh punishment. The police stated that the required action will be done once a legal opinion was available.

Bollywood actor Gulshan Devaiah joined Varma and contributed to the derogatory remarks against Draupadi Murmu by wondering who is Duryodhana in this story. It is notable that Duryodhana, in Mahabharata, ordered his brother Duhshasana to disrobe Draupadi.

Bollywood actor Gulshan Devaiah also made derogatory remarks against Draupadi Murmu.

Ram Gopal Varma later furnished a lame apology on his Twitter handle. He wrote, “This was said just in an earnest irony and not intended in any other way. Draupadi in Mahabharata is my favorite character but since the name is such a rarity I just remembered the associated characters and hence my expression. Not at all intended to hurt sentiments of anyone.”

Ram Gopal Varma furnished an apology after a case was registered on June 24.

BJP MLA from Goshamahal T Raja Singh said that Ram Gopal Varma tweets in a drunken condition. He said that Ram Gopal Varma always tries to be in the news by making such controversial statements.

US Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade, eliminates constitutional right to an abortion

OpIndia Staff
-
0
US Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade, eliminates constitutional right to an abortion

In a historic decision, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned Roe v Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that established the constitutional right to an abortion in the country. The ruling was 6-3 in favour of overruling the judgment.

Justice Samuel Alito backed by 5 other justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

The three democrat-appointed justices, Stephen Breyer (appointed by Bill Clinton), Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan (both appointed by Barack Obama) have opposed the move but they were in minority.

After the Court’s decision, individual states are free to set their own abortion laws in the United States, without the fear of running afoul of the federal government. Since 1973, abortions during the first two trimesters were permissible following the Roe v Wade judgment. This verdict has made it possible for individual states to ban abortions even before the completion of the first trimester.

Announcing the decision, the court said, “The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion, Roe and Casey are overruled, and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”

The decision, which was leaked in early May by someone working within the Supreme Court, means that abortion rights will be rolled back in nearly half of the states immediately. The much divisive issue of abortion is now set to become the focal point of the mid-term elections later this year, and indeed during the next presidential elections.

What was Roe v Wade verdict

n 1973, The U.S. Supreme Court in the Roe V Wade case made a landmark decision protecting a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction. The decision struck down many U.S. federal and state laws relating to the abortion of the foetus. In this case, ‘Roe’ is the listed name of the 22-year-old pregnant Norma McCorvey whereas ‘Wade’ was the defendant Henry Wade, the district attorney from Dallas, Texas.

With abortion for pregnant women becoming legal, several laws that made abortion illegal in states across America were struck down by the Supreme Court decision. At the time of the Roe v/s Wade Judgement, the foetal viability was around 28 weeks or 7 months. With advances in medical science over time, the threshold has now been brought down to 23 or 24 weeks (around 6 months) in many cases. 

1...3,0693,0703,071...7,583Page 3,070 of 7,583