‘A Commie Pack of Lies’

Dear Sir,

Reference the ‘ pack of lies ‘ -  ” Reservation is axiomatic in plural societies ” -  (TNIE-10 FEB).

The writer is a well known defender of the ‘ human rights’ of ‘thugs, desperados, terrorists aka Veerapan & ilk ‘. The TNIE OF 09’ FEB (PP-7), carried a report headlined ” PUCL activist among 11 Maoists arrested in U.P. ” !! We are also very well aware of the ‘symbiotic relationship’ between the PWG and PUCL in Andhra Pradesh !! A wikipedia entry on the PUCL stated :

” However at present the organisation at least in some states like Kerala has been hijacked by people with links to Muslim terror groups like SIMI and has been acting as a mouth piece for them “. To put it bluntly: The PUCL is an out-and-out ‘Red Brigade’ organization. No more, no less.

History bears testimony to the fact that the ‘ commies ‘ and the ‘ Believers of Allah ‘  made strange bedfellows. Journalist (late) Hamid Dalwai, in his most readable ” Muslim Politics in Secular India ” wrote :

” Muslim communalists in India and Indian communists have always remained strange, but inseperable bedfellows. There are significant resemblances between the communist movement and the Muslim communalist movement. Both movements are international in scope and character, Both aim at establishing an ideological state and neither cares for the means employed in achieving its ends”.

However, history also tells us that once the Islamists gain power, the first to fall victims to the ‘Sword of Allah’ are the ‘commies’. Pakistan post Partition and Bangladesh bear ample testimony !! Kanabiran probably is ignorant of this aspect of History !!

Onto the falsehoods perpetrated by this PUCL ‘ WORTHY ‘. He wrote :

” The contention that Muslims as a minority must have access to avenues of reservation – – – is supported by International Law on various aspects of minority rights”.
Patent ‘ commie falsehood ‘ !!

In an insightful treatise ” Insight into Minoritism “, the author Muzaffar Hussain wrote:

” With the appointment of the U.N. Human Rights Commission, the word minority has lost its relevance. After the submission of the sixth, seventh and eight reports of the U.N. Human Rights Commission, a new section has been added which says: ‘ The rights related to minorities shouldn’t be classified as a right of any group residing in the territory of a state especially in the contexts of these laws which constitute seperate community within the state weakening the National unity. Thus it has this intepretation that the minorities have the right to propogate their language, their religion or their custom and more than this, not any other special right can be given to them”. Simple and straightforward English to demolish the ‘commie’s’ statement !! The author of the book, further states, that all over the world, minorities are recognized by their ethnicity. It is ONLY in India, do we have ‘religious minorities’. And are we not aware of the problems created by such recognition?

The next ‘commie LIE’.“  – – -.Sachar Commission which has national approval “.

The ‘Myths & Lies’ perpetrated by the Sachar ‘ KHAN ‘ Committee is currently being heard by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court. The next hearing is slated for the first week of March 2010. The ‘Patriot’s Forum’ has challenged the Sachar ‘Khan’ report !!

Shri R.K. Ohri, a retired I.G. Police had written numerous Articles on the subject. In one of them, he wrote:

” According to National Family Health Survey-2 (held in 1998-99) there were 107 cases of Child Mortality per 1000 births among Hindus compared to a meagre 83 such cases among Muslims which indicated an adverse differential of 29 per cent against Hindus vis a vis Muslims. It is a universally recognised truth that higher incidence of Infant and Child Mortality is a direct consequence of poor nutritional intake caused by acute poverty and inadequate access to medical care “.

Further. ” The degree of urbanisation, or the proportion of a community?s population living in urban areas is another important globally recognised human development indicator. According to Census 2001, barely 26 per cent Hindus live in urban areas (i.e., only 21,63,15,573 out of a total of 82,75,78,868 Hindus), while the Muslim percentage of city-dwellers is much higher at 36 per cent, i.e. nearly 10 percent higher than Hindus. Among Muslims there are 4,93,93,496 urban dwellers out of a total population of 13,81,88,240 showing that only 64 per cent Muslims are agriculture dependant, as against 74 per cent Hindus “.  

Again. ” The average life expectancy at birth is yet another globally recognised development indicator of socio-economic status of a community. In this, too, the Muslims are much better off than Hindus. According to the calculations made by two reputed demographers, Mari Bhat and Francis Zavier the average life expectancy at birth for Muslims is 1.2 years higher than that of the Hindus – the respective averages being 62.6 per cent for Muslims and 61.4 per cent for Hindus”.

And.  An analytical Paper presented by Shri Sanjay Kumar (Fellow, Centre for Study of Developing Studies) in a Seminar held on September 2, 2006, at the prestigious Indian Institute of Public Adminstration, New Delhi, highlighted the fact that a survey of the National Election Study, conducted by CSDS after interviewing 27,000 respondents, revealed that there is hardly any difference among the level of educational attainments among Hindus and Muslims. It further asserted that contrary to the common belief that Muslims are poorer compared to Hindus, the findings of the NES revealed hardly any difference in the level of economic prosperity . More importantly, it highlighted the fact that at the national level the proportion of those who would fall in the very poor class is more among the Hindus compared to the Muslims. Interestingly Shri Sanjay Kumar’s Seminar Paper was co-authored by the well-known secular psyphologist Prof. Yogendra Yadav who heads the Centre for Study of Developing Societies.

If the foregoing was not enough, the financial daily – The Economic Times – in its edition of 12 Jun 2009, had a ‘revealing’ Article entitled : ” Muslims spend more than Hindu
peers “. Sailesh Dhobal & Bhanu Pande wrote : ” Forget all half-baked opinions you may have heard on the economic state of religious communities in India. Truth be told, at the national level, Hindus and Muslims are closer than you thought as far as average household income, expenditure, savings and even ownership of select consumer goods go. In fact, in rural India, the gap between the two communities’ narrows appreciably and even reverses in some cases in favour of Muslims”.

Again. ” If you thought Muslims alone were steeped in poverty, read on. Hindus and Muslims, at a national level, run neck-and-neck on average annual household income (AHI) of Rs 61, 423 and Rs 58,420, respectively. Or, to put it differently, an average Hindu household has an income of Rs 168 per day, while an average Muslim household earns Rs 160 a day. In rural India, an average Hindu AHI is Rs 49,077 with Muslim close behind with AHI of Rs 47,805. On income parameters, at least, Hindus and Muslims are, indeed, bhai-bhai”.

Further. ” At the national level, Hindu and Muslim households virtually mirror each other on ownership of a host of products—cars ( 5.1% and 4.3%), two-wheeler (35.3% and 31.3%), refrigerator (17.9% and 15.9%) and radio (49.5% and 51.3%). Turn to rural India and Muslim households have an edge on not just AHRE, but even car ownership (2.6% versus 2.4% of Hindu households) “.  The E.T. Article was based on the findings of the NCAER.

Lastly, on the subject of the Sachar ‘Khan’ Committee , has been the timely publication of a book authored by Dr. Rakesh Sinha, and aptly titled : ” Sachar Committee – Conspiracy to Divide the Nation “. The book makes certain disturbing revelations.During his study of the Sachar papers, sinha found that Saiyed Hamid, Abusaleh Shariff and some others worked on subjects which had no direct or indirect relationship with the terms and references of the committee, all with the explicit permission of the chairman Rajinder Sachar. The composition of the committee itself spoke volumes of its character – it was completed dominated by Muslims. Sinha’s careful scrutiny of the Sachar papers revealed that one member of the committee Dr Rakesh Basant actually aired his misgivings to Rajinder Sachar; “If you look at the allocation of work, it is completely lopsided. Several of us are assigned that are a very small part of the Terms Of Reference [e.g. mine], some of us have tasks that have not been mentioned in the TOR (e.g. Saiyed Hamid)” .

Sinha further brings to light the hidden agenda of the committee was aimed at dereserving SC/ST communities where there is a considerable Muslim population. Saiyid Hamid in an email to Justice Sachar wrote “A large number of parliamentary and assembly constituencies with substantial Muslim population have been reserved under the category of SC and ST. Consequently the representation of the Muslims in the legislatures has been adversely affected. The reserved status of all these constituencies which has proved detrimental to minority interests needs to be withdrawn before next LS elections so that justice is restored to the Muslim across the country” .

From the foregoing it is amply clear, and as Sinha brings out in his book, the modus operandi of the Sachar committee had been to treat the Muslims as another caste and fraudulently contrast them against some relatively well off Hindu OBCs. Legitimization of reservation for Muslims was the ultimate goal of the ‘Sachar Khan Committee’.

And the same fraud has been now re-enacted by the PUCL Commie !!

JAI HO !!

VANDE MATARAM

Responses