This has reference to the double-standard adopted by a section of the English media. When VHP had announced it’s intention to conduct shilapoojan at the Ramjanmabhoomi some months back, they raised a hue and cry that the Supreme Court verdict had to be enforced at any cost. They argued that the pooja should not be allowed even in the undisputed area. They suggested that if the State Government refused to co-operate, then the Central Government should send the military and guard the site. Sanctimonious editorials were written every other day. But compare this with their attitude towards the brazen behaviour of S.M. Krishna, the Congress Chief Minister of Karnataka, who is openly defying the Supreme Court verdict forgetting that he has taken the oath to protect the Constitution of India under all circumstances. The phoney reason for his action is the threat of a section of Karnataka farmers. The ‘secular’ sabre-rattlers were vehement that only the deployment of the army could be a guarantee against the crores and crores of Hindus taking over the sacred site. But cannot the same army protect the dams from the people of two or three districts? There has not been a single forthright

V.P. Bhatia in “Portents of Secular-Islamic Axis” (Organiser, 6-10-2002) has done a unique service to those, who care to think about the country and its interest in exposing the secular-Islamic axis formally launched at the initiative of Jamat-e-Islami, at Banglaore recently. It is surprising that the high priests of media, judiciary, human right, civil liberties and the rejected politicians are so easily and un-disguisedly courted by Jamat-e-Islami. No doubt the precedents of marriages of convenience do exist. Capitalism of western allies and Communism of the Soviet Russia embraced each other, when fascism of Hitler invaded the latter. Similarly America which is up in arms at the moment against Iraq’s Saddam Hussain clandestinely helped him in his war against Iran. But these were wartime dictates and the stakes were too high, i.e., “perish or survive”. But are stakes that high for secularists? One does not think so. Their survival is not threatened because India is an all-accommodating, pluralistic democracy. The myopic eyes of the servile gathering was able to focus on no other subject than “Gujarat Tragedy and Media”, since the massacre of Hindus in Kashmir, Pakistan and Bangladesh or the terrorists attacks at the Red Fort, Parliament and a host of other places and the resulting bloodshed were declared out of bounds for the jamboree’s deliberations. The poor participants could not budge from the given agenda of their masters. The faithfuls are reported to have thoroughly discussed Gujarat tragedy, minus the insignificant, the unmentionable and the ‘self-inflicted’ Godhra carnage. The forebodings are quite ominous. The country can ignore this Muslim-Media (English) axis at its own peril.

Apropos of “Fidayeen attack on temple is Proxy War II” (Organiser, 6-10-2002). Killing innocent women and children devotees in a temple with a deliberate motive is unthinkable in the civilised tenets of the humankind. The daring and “damn care” attitude of the jehadis is due to the week-knead policy of our Government in tackling these terrorists. After Parliament, the attack on Gandhinagar temple is a challenge and opportunity for the Government to act. The NDA is doomed if it fails the nation at this critical juncture.

Apropos of “Sri Lankan Peace Process” (Organiser, 20-10-2002). The Information given in the article is quite valuable. However, the views that “India should support the peace-process in view of the stability in the region and extradition of V. Prabhakaran, proclaimed offender in the assassination case of Rajiv Gandhi, should be India’s main aim”, are illogical and not in our national interests. First, supporting peace process, in which LTTE is a vital factor, and punishing its supremo Prabhakaran are self-contradictory proposals, and cannot be possible simultaneously. Secondly, if Sinhaleese could make peace with LTTE, then there is no reason, why India should not do so. India is ready to make peace with Muslim terrorists in Kashmir and Christian terrorists in the North-East, then why not the same policy towards LTTE’s Hindu terrorists?

Apropos of “Plans to target pilgrim centres foiled” (Organiser, 27-10-2002). When the bodies of terrorists were buried in Madurai, some local Muslim flew ‘flack flags’ and mourned the death of these terrorists. Ali and his associates were responsible for the death of over 70 innocent citizens of Coimbatore when they exploded bombs with the object of killing Shri L.K. Advani. Whenever it is said that the terrorists are Muslims, the ‘secularists’ especially the Communists and the Congress vote-harvesters abuse the Sangh for demonising Muslims. The mourning and the unashamed flying of black flags by the Muslims in Madurai clearly show that almost all of them are in sympathy with the Muslim terrorists.

Apropos of “Democracy wins; Pak-sponsored terrorism defeated” (Organiser, 20-10-2002). BJP’s humiliating defeat in Jammu has climaxed its earlier drubbings in the Assembly elections of Assam and Uttaranchal besides Delhi Municipal Corporation. But has it awakened the party stalwarts to the utter futility of some of its recent policies? To be called a secular party it has given up many of its distinctive characters. But what has been the outcome? The ‘secularists’ and the media still brand it as communal. All its endeavours to cajole the Muslim vote-bank’s support have been re-buffed and no change is likely in future also. While not bringing in any Muslim votes, its policy of appeasement has resulted in antagonising its traditional Hindu votes. In this way it has lost both Hindu and Muslim votes. Unless it realises this blunder and adopts radical corrective steps even now, it will be doomed to similar defeats in other States also.

Apropos of “Governor’s rule clamped in J&K” (Organiser, 27-10-2002). With hung-assemblies being a common trend in India, Chief Minister should be elected by secret voting through absolute majority at the floor of the house with nominations signed by at least one-third legislators. Such an elected Chief Minister may have ministerial team with maximum ten per cent strength of the lower House. No-confidence motion may be accepted for secret voting on written demand of at least one-third members of the house. System will ensure full terms of assemblies with more stable governments on highly reduced legislative expenses.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *